2012 and the policestate (1)

we live in a policestate, for those of you that never involved in political activitys, and never voiced the opinion unwanted by the elites and their industrys it may not be so obvious, so let me tell you about yesterday, the story may get a little dense, the abuse of law and police comes with a lot of detail and i tend to be serious about law and justice so i have a lot to tell on the topic, that besides the example is slightly complex even if it is actually rather plain. law should serve equality, and serve justice, not arbitrarity and corruption.

but it has never yet happened, so far in history the policestate allways served the criminals, the polluters, the overpriviliged, the greedy, the ones in the big well payed chairs, the ones that actually think they are better and deserve better then others.

for that, first an example. in netherlands refugees are forced to do a 'dutchness test'. i am against it, the natural flow of integration is good enough for me, in my experience just talking to people in dutch made every difference, the only reason i saw people did not integrate was in the distance people kept for racial reasons, reasons of fear, and reasons of discrimination.

so just as it came as a xenophobiac idea of the reactionairy (self declared liberals), that needed a bigger share of the election pie to explain their total rule against equality and environment and came up with the all-old fraude (fake elections) under a more fascistoid and expressly discriminating covert, ofcourse the idea was suspect for starters.

like i said , being an anti-racist i never had any problem with anyone not originally from here, all i met were quite eager to learn dutch, communicate and be friends.

nevertheless under the pretence of unwill (instead of the valid argument that the discrimination and segregation caused a discrepancy among foreign born or culturally differently raised), these people were forced to do a course.

the fascists (calling themselves the opposite ofcourse) the elitarist mainstream of netherlands saw an opportunity for indoctrination , and so it went.(1)

when i was young, you had these diehard reactionairys insisting on authoritarian speach, instead of "je" or "jij" they wanted to be called "u". people that had that trait invariably disappointed when it it was about content (justice, rights, compassion), for them it was only about position.

well they thought, now we have an opportunity to force these differently colored people all to adapt "u". the sharia word for you. and unsurprisingly but pukable, so it went.

the colored people, the muslims, they were forced to say 'u'. all my life i had practised the emancipatory, and it was succesfull, before this event i met noone in their right mind that still insisted on this archaic fossil of a class-society seriously. yet.. colored people failed their dutchness tests if they didnt accept this antiquated value.

what a waste of emancipation. surprised with this anti-equality result of a xenophobiac project? ofcourse not, but it remains a sticky "sick" to encounter all to frequent.

that is an example of how the powers that be are actually an elitist clique that want to pervert justice into still more class justice for their personal gains and priviliges. not shunning to create anti egalitarian and fascistoid laws to have the means.



--------


so when i was a child, i observed much of this, injustice, the destruction of nature, the culpable and scary power of the nuclear industry, the pharmaceutic industry and the tool, not anymore a achievement, of law. i thought: i will be a lawyer and represent the disadvantaged, try to make it matter.

as a result i scanned the papers for legal incident, procedure and precedent, why not? obviously i would need to be rather 'good', proficient, so much wrong, so many wronged.

then, not many years later, when i was 11 (i think, 1974), so 4 -6 years later, there was some benchmark proces, i do not remember anymore about what it was, probably it had a do with either labour rights(2) or corporate responsability for pollution because the lawyer involved, that surprisingly made and won the case was one that had once worked for 'shell' the oilcompany, or perhaps it was philips, i dont remember the actual detail anymore.

however i had seen a few similar procedures, quitte incomprehensibly lost over the past few years, so i went through it all really thoroughly to see what made this lawyer, or actually jurist, win the case, one that made some sense.

i discovered that his virtue was acclaimed by the oil industry, he had been working his whole life for the big industrys, oh i could guess, made them millions, billions perhaps, to the cost of lives of poor, labourers, underdeveloped nations, etc., etc. that was obvious, i was rather into the job, and had no high estimate of the procedings in economic justice, actually i researched that even, what and when a lawyer could win an even slightly controversial case, because i realised defending the poor and disadvantaged would allways be that, controversial.

well it was a great disappointment. the comments showed he won that case because of his celebrity as a jurist for a multinational, also he was already somewhat older, nearing a pension, and for reasons of fraternality apparently the judges , and by extension (wrong-wing) politics decided to have him ('us') win for once. i "worked" at the case, opiniated, made my opinion known (and (usually) 'count').

so much for my carreer as a jurist, a lawyer, i was not going to slave for a polluter, a representative of the classsystem all my life contrary to ethics, contrary to nature, contrary to humans. no way. end of file.

i never had an idea of a future again, never respected any 'paper', in the sense of certificate anymore. not that i much had, but it was the absolute deathstroke. what a farce.

and that in what i considered the only chance, the only most essential aspect of society, justice.

ofcourse i was right, malpractice, abuse, and utter contempt of law have been my and our daily due, not only before but very much since.

there is not one single fundamental law, (constitutional paragraph) i have seen respected. upheld.

i also lost all interesse, i saw no professional future, if it was not possible to achieve justice within the system, i would try without. and so i did.

my life has been one rich in experience, and poor due injustice as a result.

it is the daily characteristic of my life and (not only my) problems still.


tbc.



(1)in few cases usefull changes to that curriculum have been made, like informing about administrative procedures, however i wonder to what end, probably selfrighteous ones, the administrative systems in netherlands surely do not stand the test for unbiasedness or objectivity, let alone lawfull exercise of human rights, however i write about the whole of the project and the whole of the politics and not about the peculiar details of improvement i and my fellows of (color) other roots achieved notwithstanding, another one being that the complaint about lousy translators has been taken (dunno if that is still, i hardly believe that) somewhat serious at (at least) one moment in time.
(2) a subject i stringently followed

collective resource (4b)

restructuring earths wastefull economy. destruction of a capitalist and elitist system.

the juridical plan i keep unpublished for now, alltho perhaps i will need to expose more if the legal proceedings don't take some quick turns for the better. just in case.. for now i will rely on the oral tradition.

so.. just today the usian 1 percent admitted to be taxed, to actually say the least.. because to get back to a situation where taxation was in the high 90 percents for them... as opposed to the opposite at the moment...(that's herstory)

a nice start. what definitily has to change, and is more fundamental than how we fill in the exact circumstance of individuality and merit, is to abolish the right of inheritance.
-----------------------------
'largely abolish the right of inheritance'


similarly land ownership is a doubtfull one. but when starting out trying to reward still iniative but to no further expense in social circumstance, wellbeing or overall chances and prosperity,
so not in terms of 'austerity for the poor', it was striking to meet a friend that pointed out that simple point.

the standard of inheritance must be abolished. because if there is merit in accumulation of capital, as opposed to perhaps literature, or ideas, or even friendship and an occasional helping hand (..)

it would be an individual. next to the wacky royalty's and other despotes, the class of "have's" has throughout history persistently rewarded and protected only it's own claims, to the greatest misery of mankind (the have-not's).

in a world with equal rights for any none need to be feared and the merit would be in anyone's hands. obstructing the realisation of a sustainable and sustaining world by taking and keeping the bulk of the wealth and resource in few hands is definitily senseless, but worse, dangerous by now.

however little i sympathise with ideas about investments, resources need to be applied, and the collective reserve not only recaptured, but be selfexplanatory.

the huge administrative overload or, overhead, the juridical wiggling for bits and more , enough to corrupt the legal and administrative system, not to mention burden it with ambiguity, will be gladly missed.

corporations would be submitted to legal , taxing, insured (don't let them steal it through a new hoax of ww2 compensation eg., cus it is hard to maintain with the current predation by the privats) and scientifically valid. no backward produce for poor regions, but just up to date undertaking.

it is a crying shame how for example a national bank with 5b in unclaimed contos could be 'bought', in some stocks ofcourse, for 1b. and it went like that on countless occassions in netherlands, like with eg. transportation and energy and communication networks including the media.

so for the sort of services we need an international standard, not so hard, people have a right of water, roofing and food, by extension they have a right on information and education.

internet and computers offer the most comprehensive of those technology's and it must be rapidly provided, allthough at better energy expense than is now the case. it must be considered a right for all purposes, after children to start with prisons btw. the most dramatic expression of 'education'.

people also have a right on heating and other general needs, however for that perhaps we need to try to find more collective ways to provide, watching tv with more then a few people for example is a weirdly rewarding expense of energy compared to a flatscreen each.

thats all getting a bit sideways.
------------------

'cap wealth'


theoretically politics is supposed to equal philosophy, and philosophy equals the highest a human can obtain, 'spiritual' and social development.

so it makes sense to regard merit and reward in such terms. you could measure funds , developments , sales and trends as a function of personal functionality, if you could guarantee objectivity and reason, wich we cannot from here.

psychological factors and the predatory trend owing to recent neocon and older capitalism, forms of corporate imperialism, is much in the way of a clear analyses of real merits.

so my idea is to cap personal wealth. at say 1million euro , in cash and 1 million in property.

after all if you cannot spend it at your random will the use of accumulating it in heaps is less of a personal satisfaction.

that would leave the average dentist or other stressed group all the room to enjoy life, provide education and support for the kids, live in a nice place and have great hollidays, and so it would for everyone doing a respectable job.

i suppose i will freeze inflation one of these days to make sure the nrs remain simple;)
anyway..

since the greedy bastards pose such would be no incentive at all to perform, alltho i wonder if they would not for a medal;) besides dedicating corporate reserves to 'branded' provision,
and the reward of claiming science ofcourse.. we surely need more medals there;)

actually it is not hard to think of a system that such income overflows (automatically referred to destined 'funds/reserves/liabilitys' ofcourse in a transparant manner, how about people that perform overaverage get a say in the respect of their professional activity or personal interesse?

like a set percentage to a dedicated (relative to their 'work') project, or social projects that they, probably or actually hopefully with some 'intelligent' reason think worth managing.

assuming financial control and scientific approach, there is plenty lobbied that is not scientifically relevant, like eg. gun laws, or security industry etc., etc., people would actually be in a position to mean more for what they know and enact. despite, contributing largely to a wider and more social development.

all in all there is some juridical detail;) as usually and it can be an interesting testcase.

there is huge problem in the current legislature, here in usia and everywhere, in that it is strongly biased towards the interests of the proprietary class. the mechanisms through wich this performs are elitist and arrogant in nature, the focus on the intention of the law 'to protect',

is confused with an intention of the law "to manipulate", and the drawback is we do not at the moment have a valid legal check, except a dissident system within international and criminal legal representation.

for now this seems like enough ideas, obviously from this point on a lot needs to be reviewed anyhow, and allthough the difficulties with the legal systems partiality and partisan bias, for example seen how easily ridiculous arguments have industry's escape responsability's in economical as well as criminal law (bp, nigeria, gentech, bigpharm, hormonemeat, tobacco etc, etc, etc)

for now it is impossible to trust the courts and judges. our supposed representation, lawyers and jurist is usually bought, persee held to defend the prerogative, or actually the status quo, dependend of the will or unwill of the magistrates, depending likes, and not in the least part and parcel in the upper middleclass and upperclass abundance,

especially for a just legal system and justice we will have to work hard, take nothing for granted, and actually even.. start from scratch.

as a servant of the people, what the strong arm is trying to beat into our autonomous brains is not another message at all.. may it suffice.


note: it is interesting to reflect what the right of housing would amass with the no inheritance thing, you see that?

note 2: i think stocks should be abolished. attracting investment can be based on merit, need and science. stocks are another burocratic, criminally opportune, and pretty expensive overhead.