If we deny the hadiths, how do we know that the Quran we are holding in our hand
-
Peace Makaveil,
The usurious concept of money making money is ingrained against reason, yet dominates, money could be usuriously ?risked? to ?make? money on stocks with no guarantee of gain, therefore the logic goes, a potential loss is suffered by lending it.
This logic applies within a usury system, the monopoly on money creates scarcity, this means one must lose for another to gain, and all models of usury steal an increase from the extortion of money monopoly, through all usury forms, ownership, taxation, profit, interest, and rental.
Fiat devalues as time passes due to the usurious debt based Ponzi economic model of modern banking, therefore to lend your money incurs an increasing loss as time passes.
All fiat currencies devalue as the doubling of debt dilutes their value through the expansion of the debt.
The loss of value would however happen even if you held onto your money, as fiat endlessly devalues. $100 in the year 1906 is worth in buying power $2,528.09 in 2016.
?Interest Is Theft, Rent Robbery, And Profit Only Another Name For Plunder.? Ezra Heywood
Usury is the ultimate centralisation of power, hierarchy is birthed its conjoined twin. For the usurious, usury is perceived as free money, extracted extortionately; for the extorted victim they perceive no alternative.
?Usury is a certain benefit which is received for the use of the thing lent beyond the return in full of the thing lent, and is not lawful.? Definition Black?s Law Dictionary.
Would you like to know - "The Difference Between Trade and Usury"?
Peace Good logic,
I have tried, however the level of interest even to understand the model is lacking, the majority are not interested in escaping the slavery and exploitation of their masters, I travelled to the uk and gave a full day seminar on the model, but got no audience, without interest islam will remain dead.
-
The usurious concept of money making money is ingrained against reason, yet dominates, money could be usuriously risked to make money on stocks with no guarantee of gain, therefore the logic goes, a potential loss is suffered by lending it.
As far as I know many muslim are very careful of how they go about money, such as they refuse to run non-halal businesses (alcohol related etc.) or play forex. But I agree there are many muslims and organizations including so-called Islamic banks which invest into projects, but again there is no interest involved and the monetary outcome is always based on adequte measures invested, i.e. how much force or finances is actually invested in the project. Or at least they like to say so. There are those who buyout entertainment businesses and make them 'halal' such as stop selling alcohol there but in reality these are just as bad, in my opinion. Nothing halal in the hotels or tourist stuff.
Regarding your idea, you will be assassinated sooner or later by the elite or demonized as a pyramide scheme, in case your stuff works. But then again, I am not an economist, I do believe in community owned enterprises and some of them work, including in the U.S. and Spain. Each worker is also a part of the enterprise and gets return based on the actual financial outcome of the enterprise and not based on his/her wage. Everybody is equal. Every votes and decision matters. This works and this I believe every community which is united with common agenda should start with. Monetary revolution is just too much of a concept let alone a project, it is better to start with community owned enterprises, something which IS real and may work out. In fact there are only several major problems, which stop people from doing more of those, these are laziness, financial instability (which forces people to work for wages) and lack of confidence.
-
And there lies the problem. People will gladly try new ideas from well known companies/leaders/brands...
But ordinary people ,with the best ideas ,are not trusted or given any chance/interest.One has got to keep setting the alarm, waking the people up is a hard task.
By the way,there are some communities who are trying to live "moneyless" all together. The systems are making their life hell and making them dependent on them/like taxing them/making them integrate the learning of their children etc... In other words the world s system or the "leach" will get hold of you somehow!!!
You are right you need the "masses" behind you.
GOD bless.
Peace. -
Anarchic community is not a moneyless model, it requires a medium of exchange, just not a usurious one, the medium of exchange is very important, it generates abundance, it is resource scarcity that presently holds the majority in poverty.
The problem the elite would have with my model would be it has no hierarchy to dominate, and no head to cut off, if i was murdered it would have aero effect on the model, once it was released nothing would stop it, it has no hierarchy need to control it, it is polycentric.
The model removes taxation, ownership, rental, employers and employees, the legal system, government, middle men, banks, money, and replaces all these things with anarchic alternatives.
The model generates abundance for all users, it gives protection and relief for wrongs, it removes resource monopoly, it removes constructed legal fictions which are used presently to avoid accountability.
-
Anarchic community is not a moneyless model, it requires a medium of exchange, just not a usurious one, the medium of exchange is very important, it generates abundance, it is resource scarcity that presently holds the majority in poverty.
Say I have a cow a you are running metal work. You need milk, but I don't need nails or any other kind of metal work. How can we go about this situation without having middle men in between our exchange?
-
You need a middle man to trade?
No.
With the software platform you freely advertise your goods and trade them, either for the medium of exchange or other goods or services, their is no middle man to take a cut, a middle man is for example a car dealer who sells new cars, he is the middle man and takes plenty of "profit", profit is the interest demand for the use of money beyond the cost of the trade, meaning after the cost of production wages for the labour and transport you add interest on the money you have invested, in the anarchic the medium of exchange invested is often a shared burden and there is no need of profit, as there are no employees to ride.
Another example of a middle man, is a tax man, he stands between a trade and demands a cut for nothing at the point of a gun or club.
-
You need a middle man to trade?
No.
With the software platform you freely advertise your goods and trade them, either for the medium of exchange or other goods or services, their is no middle man to take a cut, a middle man is for example a car dealer who sells new cars, he is the middle man and takes plenty of "profit", profit is the interest demand for the use of money beyond the cost of the trade, meaning after the cost of production wages for the labour and transport you add interest on the money you have invested, in the anarchic the medium of exchange invested is often a shared burden and there is no need of profit, as there are no employees to ride.
Another example of a middle man, is a tax man, he stands between a trade and demands a cut for nothing at the point of a gun or club.
I understand regarding the middle men the interest or money out of thin air. But, your system implies that everyone in it is providing a good or service in exchange for medium of exchange, which means that there is no welfare state and parasites who live off of welfare. That is good, but then we need strong family institutions which would be a substitute to welfare state, such as families who will provide for their disabled relatives who have no means of providing goods and services, and that means we need culture and a family institution, which is beyond financial system. So the concept is super large and will take years of conceptualization, preparation and then integration (through revolutionnally means, for instance) as a final step. Integration would also imply to take a lot from Marxist and Libertarian ideas, such as worker solidarity and the free market. Free markets however implies that people are divided by groups and protect themselves from agressors, which are other groups (looters, thugs, mafia's etc.), because the world is never safe, and if there is no power and hierarchy there is no police too.
Worker owned enterprises are easier to create and is overall quite an achiavable goal. Quran alone community + productive enterprise = people work, do not exploit each other, are lesser of slaves and preserve their cultural norms at the same time.
-
There in reality is never a welfare "state", presently for example we have the Prussian school of education, this is based on authoritative indoctrination using memorization and regurgitation, with certification of conformity to that indoctrination, it at all costs does not teach reasoning, it destroys independent thought, imaginative creativity, and has an objective of turning out people with enough ability only to function as a waged slave trained to arrive and leave at set times and be content to be bored all day.
Take the medical system, allopathic medicine is a travesty of utter quackery, it was invented just over a hundred years ago and has caused vast numbers of death by what could only be described as murder, hundreds of millions, it does not cure but maintains disease, it suppresses real cures and effectively poisons populations for profit.
The anarchic model uses bonds to form independent medical, educational, or whatever service is needed.
-
Abdun Nur to each his own I guess. I stopped being an idealist a while ago after learning from evidence that idealism these days is a discussion club rather than doing. I have checked on various communistic, socialistic and anarchisitc communities in the past, and some futuristic/utopian projects, like the Venus project. These are all but discussion clubs. Many of them are backed by capitalist money, such as the Venus project is based on the multimillion dollar investment for their researches, capitalistic investments. I have few hypotheses, which made me stop pursuing an idealistic regime or society
-
World is not a safe place. Everything good will come to an end despite how noble the idea was in the first place. Liberating will turn into tyranny as soon as one achives power, if not by the initial leader then by his followers = works all the time in history, after any revolution.
-
World is fundamentally not fair. Well, that's a huge topic, but we are born into an unfair world to challenge it and become righteous, but fundamentally the place is not righteous and the environment is agressive towards righteous people and will always stay this way. Examples are countless politicians, labour exploiters and usurers live unrighteous life but achieve more in life from materialistic standpoint. It ruins them or their families in the end and all evil Empires eventually fall, but that's how it always works.
-
We die eventually. So it is better to leave some productive and righteous deeds behind us before we leave, rather than keep chasing the ideal, which cannot be achieved. And if it does, see #1.
So yeah, worker owned enteprises is both an achiavable goal and there are many examples of how communities start them, and they work just fine .
-
-
Peace,
it has nothing to do with being an idealist, it will be coded eventually with luck, and when people use it they will see the huge advantages, from example, of those using it will show the advantages to others who will quickly follow suit, and it would quickly spread, if the religious want to remain in the riba of hierarchical sovereign slavery it is a free choice, my model does not impose on anyone, it is a free choice without compulsion.
The world would stop spinning when hierarchy was removed, and the Earth could recover, community could return.
Hierarchy is designed to drain the resources from those lower in the pyramid, and to remove accountability for anyone higher in the chain of control, that is unfair, the legal system is designed to ignore the victim and extract revenue for the owners, the medical system is designed to generate profits for vast corporation with legal protection from the murder, injury or suffering they inflict, the education system teaches lies as truth across many areas of study, so no within a hierarchical model fairness is definitely removed.
The objective of this short life is to "ESTABLISH" Islam, you are not interested in that, but I am, I will attempt to reintroduce Islam, i will not use the name islam, as it has terrible connotations now, but the model would be the original nature and intent.
-
If you can outline your system in two sentences so that it is easy to understand and a five year old can understand it the same as a full-grown (read brainwashed by capitalism) individual then it might work for some time I guess. But judging from your posts you seem to go 'around the circles' without clearly stating your agenda, based on my aguments above. And I am not trying to be mean here, just stating logical facts.
And going around the circles without clearly outlining the way this system would work means either you do not have a clear system in mind or we are talking about a huge revolutionary concept, which would suggest not only change in the system as a whole (which means huge socio-political-economic reforms, reforms in education and other fields), but also paradigmatic shift. In either case it is near to impossible to create paradigmatic shift in the age of informational imbalance that we have now. People 1400 years ago probably did not consume that much information for their whole lifetime that we now consume DAILY, merely from reading newspapers.
Why do you think they do not block unfavorable information as they did during the Soviet era? Because the system is now more cunning than it was before. It is way more cunning and vile to allow all sort of information, good and bad, evil and righteous, because in the end it is just a melting pot of information, or a huge rubbish dump of infromation, where it is near to impossible to find truth or to change something to better. It was way easier to establish faith 1000's years ago because people probably had one or two concepts in mind and they went for a better one once they had an alternative, but yet in many cases not without another bloodshed.
And even then most people were illiterate and were easily manipulated. Now average invidiual can have 100's of different concepts yet like you said he spends of his time going to work to pay his rent. You say it has nothing to do with being an idealist, but all I hear from you is an idealistic concept, the concept of an ideal society based on the fair system of exchange and the lack of hierarchy. But unless it is a simple mechanism, which can be easily described in a few sentences, it is a huge work which does not end with the code. Plus the code is nothing once there is no one controlling the Internet.
That is why I repulse from what I believe is fundamental to the world and what can be done righteous in a sense of a community rather than personal development.
-
You have to learn the anarchic models, it is not a quick fix, it requires re-educating yourself to grasp an alternative model, if you want a quick fix join a pyramid scheme, or religion, otherwise you have to spend a little time learning the aternative to hierarchical extortions.
It is not for people who don't reason, or those who love riba, government, corporations, states, caliphates, or any other hierarchical construct.
-
You have to learn the anarchic models, it is not a quick fix, it requires re-educating yourself to grasp an alternative model, if you want a quick fix join a pyramid scheme, or religion, otherwise you have to spend a little time learning the aternative to hierarchical extortions.
It is not for people who reason, or those who love riba, government, corporations, states, caliphates, or any other hierarchical construct.
You just placed a label on me without thoroughly understanding my points. I came up with reason, and you came up with idealistic plea to change people's mind in accordance with what you feel is right. My proposal is also something we all could create, yours, however, is about becoming idealists. I know what anarchy is, truth is, it is either an economic/educational utopia (which itself isn't necessarily bad as a concept, but cannot be recreated without a certain paradigmatic shift, which goes beyond any reserach or a code) or a worse of free market where each group preys for loot of another group.
I remember watching the Walking Dead. If we remove all this zombies bs, what is left is ideally an anarchistic free market. People divide into small groups and try to surive in the harsh world without police. If all groups of people would a) unite under a common discourse such as Quranic discourse and b) won't impose their egocentric will on others and create tyranny based on the initial concept, then it could work as a more or less peaceful society. But the truth is, it never works that way. Never. Once you establish good system you do it through revolution, which is bloodshed. And after that there is a power vaccum. And after that there is a tyranny. Compare communistic/bolshevik movements in 19th/early 20th century Russia and their ideas and what has transpired in the form of the USSR.
How old are you Abdun Nur, by the way?
-
Peace Makaveli,
you are assuming things that are not true, it does not require a shift, people are lazy, selfish, and greedy, therefore if they see a software platform that allows them to gain huge advantages, that pander to their greedy, and are easy to learn for selfish advantage, then they will from the example of others use that platform also.
The hurdle is not people using the platform, it is coding the platform, because unlike other platforms the advantages are not riba based.
If you know the anarchic models, give a brief explanation of the allodial model, terrente model, the model that removes the need for rental, hierarchical services such as education, medical, insurance, etc., if you do not need to be educated in the anarchic models I?m waiting to see what you know.
You do not know the anarchic, you know the propaganda of what the hierarchical system wants you to believe is the anarchic.
As i said previously these models functioned in a more basic nature for centuries in beautiful harmony, that reality is hidden, as if people watched a TV show that presented the true anarchic community model it would make people realise what a load of complete shit the hierarchical systems are, all of them, it matters little which form, the very worst form of hierarchy is communism for example. Communism is the extreme of hierarchy, the wet dream of the owners.
-
Peace Makaveli,
people are lazy, selfish, and greedy, therefore if they see a software platform that allows them to gain huge advantages, that pander to their greedy, and are easy to learn for selfish advantage, then they will from the example of others use that platform also.
You have huge misconceptions. Why do you think people are like that in the first place and why do you think it was THIS system which was established in the first place and not "Heaven on Earth"? Because usury, taxation, protection rackets and other stuff is just a primitive economic form of our instincts, namely instinct of domination and pack instincts. The only way to 'escape' it is to become personally righteous, because you can't lead people without them going astray or becoming dogmatists, in which case it becomes a regular religious tyranny. You seem to critisize faith, but that is exactly what you are doing, being a dogmatic and saying people are lazy because they fail to believe in the anarchic code system.
As i said previously these models functioned in a more basic nature for centuries in beautiful harmony, that reality is hidden, as if people watched a TV show that presented the true anarchic community model it would make people realise what a load of complete shit the hierarchical systems are, all of them, it matters little which form, the very worst form of hierarchy is communism for example. Communism is the extreme of hierarchy, the wet dream of the owners.
What is your source that refer to the system in the history of mankind which worked under these principles?
-
Riba only exists because there is no alternative, the alternative is much better, it is easier, in return, in access, in application, in all elements it is easier, that gives selfish advantage.
I know people love riba because they think it is good to gain without effort, they are lazy, and they feel money should generate money, when in reality money only gains through someone?s labours ultimately, and if your not investing the labour you are robbing the labours of others.
History is corrupted, the powers that be do not want you to know real history, the example I have based the model of anarchy on was the model that existed in Albien (not Albion) before the genocide inflicted by the Vatican and their imposing of the hierarchical slavery on the survivors.
As for misconception you argue against a system you know little about, to what end?
I do not really criticize faith I expose it for exactly what it is, religions are blood baths of horrors historically, why anyone in their right mind would want to join one is a baffling idea, it takes little effort to expose the histories and the nature of these religions, which are universally based on faith, have faith in the god in the sky, in the hierarchy of the religion, in the dogma of the book, whatever it is the devotees are required to do, they have faith as even a cursory investigation using reason exposes all as lies, so the criticism as you state, is well deserved.
-
Riba only exists because there is no alternative, the alternative is much better, it is easier, in return, in access, in application, in all elements it is easier, that gives selfish advantage.
That's dogma and nothing to do with reason. There were countless of attempts to overthrow previous regimes in history (French and October revolutions plus countless of serf uprising in the past are just some of examples), yet they all ended up with another sort of tyranny. In the given age we experience the overflow of information and there are thousands of theoretical alternatives, yet none work. Again, why are people imprisoned by unfairness of the wordly? To change something you need to look deeper, as to what causes it, fundamentals, foundation of the system, and that is our human nature, which besides mind is not so far away from animals.
I know people love riba because they think it is good to gain without effort, they are lazy, and they feel money should generate money, when in reality money only gains through someones labours ultimately, and if your not investing the labour you are robbing the labours of others.
If they love riba (and I agree, many do), will you prohibit it once your system becomes popular or you will let others to decide which model to use?
History is corrupted, the powers that be do not want you to know real history, the example I have based the model of anarchy on was the model that existed in Albien (not Albion) before the genocide inflicted by the Vatican and their imposing of the hierarchical slavery on the survivors.
What makes you believe it worked the way as you percieve, if that is beyond your romantization? There probably were months (not even years) of socialistic periods in every culture, including Christianity and post-october revolution in 1918. But it did not last for long, until some empire or a local feudal lord wouldn't extort these communities, or bad fruits inside the communities wouldn't ruin it from the inside.
Celtic and Danish (Scandinavian) histories are full of endless wars.
As for misconception you argue against a system you know little about, to what end?
I know enough to make conclusions before you get tired of concinving me of your idea. There are countless of analogues, each promising just society, yet I am not an idealist. I prefer reason and my own experience. Everything I said so far was based on reason and funamental logic (logic about how world works fundamentally and why people and society is like that and not any other way). If you want to preach, go ahead, you will end up preaching. I'd rather strive to become a righteous person without exploiting anybody, or work on the worker's owned enterprise, which, unlike your concept, is a logical, working and, what is more important, possible solution for contemporary communities.
I do not really criticize faith I expose it for exactly what it is...
You cannot even outline your concept in a few logical sentences without trying to convince me that it takes EDUCATION. If it is education, nobody in the right mind will invest in it, and not because people are lazy, or rather not only because people are lazy. Because everyone needs to provide food on the table and they have no resources to educate themselves into the new economic concept and later invest into it so as to make it work. People have to work or they will die out of hunger. Not to mention the fact that most of these are utopian anyways. They concentrate only on exchange, trade and production for the most time, but they do not overwrite whole economy.
Just like flat earthers who like to speak about conspiracies of austranauts and physics, yet they are not trying to overwrite physics and create their own scientific concepts.
-
I am not talking about a revolution, which is the revolving of one hierarchical mafia system to another, where often huge numbers are murdered. Revolutions are worthless, I do not want to establsih any revolution, if you read my posts i want to provide a free choice, they may keep their hierarchy and riba if they want, but if they want to use the models they may.
Riba would reduce in relation to the rise of the alternative, that is not important, unless you own a bank or government, as for those who love riba it is not my concern if they find it increasing difficult to practice it.
You claim I am stating dogma without understanding the system i am proposing.
The allodial system, the terrente system, the polycentic structure are not romance, they are systems that existed in the past, what is romanitic about that?
I know historicall that from at least 758 until 1066 these models were in place and the nature of these models is self policing for want of a better word, they had very little conflict internally only external attacks by hierarchical elites and their brainless slaves.
Most history before the 13th century is very dubious, and has been heavily rewritten in many cases
-
History is rewritten even now with the media changing their articles and web archives often removing pages. Not to mention previous century, so much information yet way more disinformation.
I can't understand your theory (because it is a theory and not a system in itself) if all I hear is you going around the circles without saying anything specific. I even tried to present some examples regarding monetary system, welfare and non-monetary exchange, yet I did not see you explain any of it from methodological point of view, except of saying that your 'system' provides answers for the new understanding of medicine, economy and everything else what matters. It does not matter in the end. If it works the way you describe, or at least close to this point, that will obviously be great and I will support it. But there are many theories out there, hundreds and the world is still ran by fundamental injustice. Yet personal development as a righteous person can be done by anyone. It won't change the world but it is the change in you that matters.