Why are people happy to be ruled by Kings and Queens from FOREIGN countries?

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Its how royalty operates.

Spain had Hungarian royalty. The Spanish queen is Romanian if I'm not mistaken.

Its a way to strip power from the local populace by denying them what was their CHOSEN leader from their blood and customs. Once you make a crown interchangeable between royalty all you have to do is usurp one throne and eventually you can get your family into them all.

Current royalty is all related because of not only intermarriage but from being behind the greatest usurping of power never told by a single family line.

Ancient kings that created kingship differ greatly from modern royalty. They came from the people they ruled exclusively. They also were CHOSEN for their excellence and ability to rule.

EDIT TO ADD:
Anyone saying royalty doesnt rule anymore is wrong. They just dont have to answer to anyone anymore. enough revolts and beheadings at the whim of a mob have taught them that much. If bad policy is overturned and a government is overthrown, no one will think royalty was to blame as well. No one will question where the spirit and guidance for leadership comes from.

Political leaders are puppets to a very real extent. WHO are the puppet masters? There is no greater secret society than that of royalty. Forget the illuminati, the Masons LOL, and every other nonsensical idea behind the power elite. Royalty didnt just become noble one day and stop hungering for power because the people asked nicely.

They set up Stewards to their power is all.

originally posted by: Telos
Here in Canada we're not happy to be enslaved to a British queen either.
Whether is British or German is irrelevant.

Of course, nobody would be happy to be ruled by some foreigner, that's why, at least in the UK, they have to claim that she is not really ruling, only there as a mascot.

Those who say this were either brainwashed or they are the brainwashers.

originally posted by: tadaman
They also were CHOSEN for their excellence and ability to rule.

Chosen by whom?

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

She's not a foreigner (any more than everyone else in Britain is) and she doesn't rule us.

Whether you've been brainwashed is a moot point. Maybe you're just trolling given that you've not exactly presented any evidence to support your assertions.

Or maybe you're just jealous?

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Chosen by whom?

By the people.

Someone who expelled an invader would probably be made king. Someone who was intelligent, strong, and noble in the true sense of the word would naturally be made king by naturally being a leader of men.

Perhaps someone who saw a coming famine and worked to save lives by planning ahead for his people. Maybe someone who was good at negotiating with foreign peoples and avoided wars or conflict would be made king.

Maybe he or she would simply be savvy in the ways of commerce and brought wealth and prosperity to his people would be raised up.

Being born to royalty by divine right is the ultimate cop out forged in the dark corners of empires by people like constantine or other "God" rulers who claimed divine right.

Spirituality can be a tool for mass control. We know this very well. Usurping a peoples spiritual identity and using their mythology and beliefs is a common practice to being raised up without having to earn it the natural and democratic way.

"Who says you are king?"

"GOD does...and he says my brothers, uncles, and cousins too"....

"oh ok."

I am "GOD" or "a god" was replaced by "GOD said." after already replacing "WE SAY".

It is a natural transition really. The larger a population gets the less sense it makes to have many gods.

SO if you want your whole bloodline to be secured in power you cant have them all be gods or they run the risk of warring and killing each other off in the long run while vying for supremacy since any other god is a threat to your own claim of divinity.

instead of many gods, you then must have one "GOD" who no one can ask and test who gives your entire bloodline "divine right"

Consequently, being in a position of "divine right" to rule gives you the access and so the right to tell others what GOD said.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Chosen by whom?

By the people.

Silly me, I thought there had been dynasties in Egypt, and every empire ever since, that survived longer than one generation.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Silly me, I thought there had been dynasties in Egypt, and every empire ever since, that survived longer than one generation.

yes,

God kings who claimed outright divinity.

That model proved to be detrimental as those dynasties grew and were forced to face off with other "divine rulers" who either accepted anothers supremacy or usurped his crown proving they were TRUE gods.

Usurpers usurp my friend. They are their own worst enemies.

If a population grows, and a ruling party grow, conflict erupts. No one likes to be "less divine" among "gods".

Our current model avoids all that.

They lived through the age of "god said" and are now coming into "your chosen leader said".

They no longer even have to claim right to rule having all the access already cornered. They claim natural right to exist out of being ingrained in a peoples identity. They chose leaders without having to face the consequences of a more educated and capable populace who has learned of science and the fallacy of "divine right to rule". A little farce of an election from their already chosen leaders within a select political class related to them and voila! Unchallenged Rule without consequence.

Imagine....could the monarchies of Europe EVER be discarded now? No. They can not.

originally posted by: AndyMayhew
Whether you've been brainwashed is a moot point.

Moot? Then tell ATS to scrap this forum entitled "Deconstructing Disinformation"

a reply to: ThinkingHuman
You mistake happiness for systemic conditioning and social control of the human resources of the monarchist afflicted nation.

here is a video of the king of Spain pulling the president aside during a parade and scolding him for his position of trying to "spaniardize" Cataluña (providence proposing independance.) in response to a separatist movement that spurred up there. He tells him that the leader of the separatist movement is just campaigning and that once he won the elections the views would be less radical.



So the king knew what the deal was with the separatists in Cataluña. He was TELLING THE PRESIDENT of Spain to stop opposing him for positioning since it was detrimental to their good old boys campaign effort and the overall game only the King was privy too.

It should be noted that the king has over arching veto power to anything the elected government does. He doesnt ever exert it publicly but does privately ALL THE TIME.

I cant find the videos now, but it is a well known and a repetitive plugin to comedy shows where they will show the king scolding presidents of Spain in little outbursts. The presidents always cower back and respond like their father was about to take off his belt.

Royalty still rules.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

Oh come on you obviously don't have a clue about our royals....we have a consitutional monarchy which was put in place in in the late 17th century.
They do not have any power the public saw to that and If they tried again to take control we would sort it out again.
This isn't the 12th century when Kings and queens were only 2nd to God.

I think the other poster is right you are jealous...or why would you care so much?
Also you are wrong about the people in the UK caring If she has german blood or not...we are a nation of mongrels whom have accepted people from all over the world....Thats why we are called GREAT BRITISH.

originally posted by: tadaman
here is a video of the king of Spain pulling the president aside during a parade and scolding him for his position of trying to "spaniardize" Cataluña (providence proposing independance.) in response to a separatist movement that spurred up there. He tells him that the leader of the separatist movement is just campaigning and that once he won the elections the views would be less radical.

Actually that is a video of them discussing a football match!

originally posted by: tadaman
Royalty still rules.

I like the way you outline your point. Can you tell me what mechanisms, ultimately which weapons, provide them this power? Your example suggests that they are well connected with the intelligence community. Where are the secret laws that the President has to cower down to the King?

a reply to: hellobruce

Lol...that made me drop my custard cream in me brew lol.

a reply to: hellobruce

LOL I wish.

You would think they would cover their mouth considering lip reading is an accurate science.

a reply to: ThinkingHuman

thats a complicated subject.

The mechanisms have changed over years but basically its a new religion infused into the core of persons of interest and used by them to control subordinates as was done to the plebe before.

I think only the most naive among them actually believe it. The young and uninitiated perhaps. The blind? You never know how a young person will turn out.

The intelligence community is absolutely part of the over arching strategy of control and subversion. They do serve actual defence and their respective mission statements. We think espionage is a recent invention of the last century but if we even just glaze over history we find that is just not the case.

Nations need spies like leaders need their nations defence forces at their command. Intelligence services fall under a form of defence.

A king, especially a false king needs readily available forces to eliminate threats to his rule.

In that position everything is a possible threat. That lessens as time passes without your rule actually being directly challenged. The reason we see increased heavy handed tactics from leadership unto its civilian population is because those threats have reared their head once again. There is a real challenge to the power of our day and they have become complacent and all too comfortable in their percieved security and they know it. High towers and all that.

These things arent usually taken lightly.

The internet. More dynamic and educated populations. Better access to alternative sources of wealth and power not in line with the path of access established by the power elite. New resources, populations, areas of influence, evolving philosophies..These things are threats to the centralized rule of our day. In short everything. Paranoia is actually well justified. Its still as useless though.

The sad reality for them is that there is no solution. They were given kingship, such was their destiny, everlasting dominion is not their destiny.

We live in a world where a boy can develop a game changing technology or source of power and wealth in his garage and topple hundreds of years of near pristine succession of power in a single night.

You have too many rogue elements to control. Too many factors. Your only hope then is to stagnate actual progress and proceed with a fevered pitch to demoralizing, disempowering, and culturally shattering the people you wish to rule.

Its a death spiral. I assure you. We should wait it out and not worry too much about dream technologies making their continued dominion possible in spite of fate. As they develop their abilities to cope other abilities will be created to oppose those. All we must do is simply prepare ourselves to be risen up to power once again.

It is the nature of things. Those who resist find oblivion. Those who adapt find peace. They could withdraw and continue: forgiven and unnoticed. Those they usurped did. They seem to find themselves ingrown with their crowns though and think removing them would be like ripping flesh from their bodies.

I would recommend to them a rediscovery of purpose. All things considered the entire human race is transitioning into a new era. A return to the golden ages of old? Who knows. A new era none the less. They too are "human" I suppose. If they were willing to try they could make it. Trying to usurp that change as is their custom will not end well for them. There is no substitute or variation from the true form of that change that will be tolerated. Its the very nature of the change which if they were to understand they would see for themselves as self evident.

It shows a lack of understanding as to the nature of the change. No need to get too philosophical about it to grasp it. Perhaps this will sound familiar to them.

A people suffering long will be outraged once conditions improve and they realize how much they were actually suffering. Things are unalterably better for all.

I would like to slip out from behind the curtain unnoticed so that my blood can live for another day....but thats me.

originally posted by: tadaman
a reply to: ThinkingHuman
thats a complicated subject.

It sure seems to be. Thanks for that amazing input.

originally posted by: ThinkingHuman

originally posted by: tadaman
Royalty still rules.

I like the way you outline your point. Can you tell me what mechanisms, ultimately which weapons, provide them this power? Your example suggests that they are well connected with the intelligence community. Where are the secret laws that the President has to cower down to the King?

Why the ultimate weapon, of course.

The richest woman in the world owns the lions share of the worlds uranium.

ER.

originally posted by: Psynic
The richest woman in the world owns the lions share of the worlds uranium.

Care to back that claim up with some facts?

originally posted by: hellobruce

originally posted by: Psynic
The richest woman in the world owns the lions share of the worlds uranium.

Care to back that claim up with some facts?

Not to mention more real estate than any other person on Earth.

1/6 of the planet belongs to Her Royal Highmess.

www.whoownstheworld.com...