Novus Ordo Humanae Libertas - New Order of Human Liberty

Originally posted by Cassius666
As long as a certain standard of living can be provided, most people will gladly work away for their house and to eat chickenwings in front of wrestlemania, rather than go out on the streets rioting. I agree, abuse is abuse and slavery is slavery, even if the slave is well kept, but as long as they keep the stomaches of their subjects full and their minds sufficiently entertained, none will act against the status quo.

Ah, the good old "bread and circuses" tactic.

Yeah, I wonder often what it would take to wake up the masses. Maybe nothing, as long as the bread (food stamps?) and circuses (TV - virtually any channel) keep coming.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
The Ethical Planterian Party shall have one mission and one mission only :

Advance the ideals and agenda of Novus Ordo Humanae Libretas and nothing else. No more "Left-v-Right" or "Us-v-Them" paradigms as well as no more infighting between the faiths as that would have to be banned. All political parties would be effectively ended and revoked. All hate groups would be banned.

So under this new system I would not have the liberty to join a political party, or to start my own midget hating discussion group? Alcohol should be banned under this system too, alcohol makes people disagreeable and argumentative.

reply to post by cavrac


Its ok to do that because you still have your freedom of speech ...

But not two political parties that do nothing than fighting eachother and making promises they can't comply. If you want to change the system then you need to become part of the current system.

Originally posted by cavrac

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
The Ethical Planterian Party shall have one mission and one mission only :

Advance the ideals and agenda of Novus Ordo Humanae Libretas and nothing else. No more "Left-v-Right" or "Us-v-Them" paradigms as well as no more infighting between the faiths as that would have to be banned. All political parties would be effectively ended and revoked. All hate groups would be banned.

So under this new system I would not have the liberty to join a political party, or to start my own midget hating discussion group? Alcohol should be banned under this system too, alcohol makes people disagreeable and argumentative.

edit on 11-4-2011 by cavrac because: (no reason given)

All political parties would be banned as too many people continually put party above and before nation and leaves too many avenues for infiltration of corrupt individuals. Ban political parties and watch how much quicker things will get done as you would not have someone spend $2 Billion on lobbying firms just to defeat one bill.

Lobbying groups would be severely restricted and subjected to an incrimental review process.

I am just not sure why you have the word Libertas in the name.

Liberty should be about the rights and freedoms of the individual, not "the will of the order be dictated by the will of the majority"

The words "banned" and "restricted" usually do not go along well with liberty.

If you want to start a movement that replaces the current corrupt system, that is fine, just don't try to sell it as liberty.

reply to post by cavrac


And do you want some killing unrestricted with that? ... Don't even try to troll this topic, please.

This movement is to get things moving in a different way, not resetting the old ways ..

Originally posted by cavrac
I am just not sure why you have the word Libertas in the name.

Liberty should be about the rights and freedoms of the individual, not "the will of the order be dictated by the will of the majority"

The words "banned" and "restricted" usually do not go along well with liberty.

If you want to start a movement that replaces the current corrupt system, that is fine, just don't try to sell it as liberty.

Political parties at one time were a good idea but not anymore. This is a proactive stance.

Would you really want a Global Tea Party trying to impose their will whenever and however they can? Would you want racist groups being able to form parties?

Another thing that would be banned is privitazation of any key, crucial elements of the infastructure as those companies would forever put profits before people.

If there were no political parties there would be no mainstream media and no one to manipulate.

Poltical parties cause way more problems then they solve. In every nation with them has been problematic. They are a threat to humanity and have been for more then 300 years. Humanity has suffered enough under political infighting. No more oppourtunities for private interest to infiltrate and take the world hostage. They have caused all of the problems we currently face. Delete and ban them and watch how fast and easier we all can come together.

Look at the current budget debate stateside, do you want more of this?

reply to post by AlexIR


I don't recall saying anything about killing people.

You people just use the word liberty but do not mean it, you just want to enforce your ideas on other people.

You are no different from the people who are currently in control, and if you do not agree with someone you attack them and call them a troll. Because your arguments do not hold any weight.

I prefer the current PTB

Originally posted by cavrac
reply to post by AlexIR

 

I don't recall saying anything about killing people.

You people just use the word liberty but do not mean it, you just want to enforce your ideas on other people.

You are no different from the people who are currently in control, and if you do not agree with someone you attack them and call them a troll. Because your arguments do not hold any weight.

I prefer the current PTB

You have come here to attack this movement for which those who want to form parties would be denied.

This is something I think about all day every day, For 300 years politicans have been bought, sold and traded like commodites and that has caused all the problems.

Every person would get a 4 year term and guess what, a 1 term limit would be strictly imposed. No more career politicans who pad their pockets all while sticking it time and time again to those with little or nothing.

There would be a single committee in charge of the entire deal and with term limits imposed and would be authourized to fire any member who does not back what 75% of the populous demands. That is known as "The Will Of The Majority" because if more then 75% demands something guess what? They will and shall get it.

reply to post by cavrac


No, thats trolling, when you do not want to get the idea of the topic discussed.

You just want to point out a subject that i explained in previous post.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

Would you really want a Global Tea Party trying to impose their will whenever and however they can? Would you want racist groups being able to form parties?

I don't want any groups, including yours to impose their will on me, but I support your right to gather in groups and do what ever you want to, until you try to take away my rights and freedoms.

Originally posted by cavrac

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1

Would you really want a Global Tea Party trying to impose their will whenever and however they can? Would you want racist groups being able to form parties?

I don't want any groups, including yours to impose their will on me, but I support your right to gather in groups and do what ever you want to, until you try to take away my rights and freedoms.

Political parties cost people more freedoms and rights then any entity combined.

If you are for humanity, be willing to always put humanity above party, be always willing to help out your fellow human, promote the growth and ideals of the plight of mankind then you are in, that would be the few requirements.

I wonder who paid you off to infiltrate this thread.

reply to post by AlexIR


You did not explain anyhting, your post was irrelevant.

Can you guys please explain to me what you mean by Libertas since that is in your name

reply to post by cavrac


Nobody is imposing their will on you, its just an alternative, but hell, troll some more and bring this down, go right ahead.

Originally posted by cavrac
reply to post by AlexIR

 

You did not explain anyhting, your post was irrelevant.

Can you guys please explain to me what you mean by Libertas since that is in your name

Libretas is latin for liberty.

Human liberty is dictated by the will of the majority of people and not by who is the largest campaign contributor.

This would also ban politcal campaigns, no money would be allowed to be spent on campaigns. Remember, when someone "gives" or "contributes" money to a campaign they are expecting a favour.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I wonder who paid you off to infiltrate this thread.

I am sure if you people were in control, you would send someone to silence me, because I do not agree with your almighty political Idealism.

You people do nothing for the cause of Liberty and are a bunch of hypocrites.

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Libretas is latin for liberty.

Human liberty is dictated by the will of the majority of people and not by who is the largest campaign contributor.

This would also ban politcal campaigns, no money would be allowed to be spent on campaigns. Remember, when someone "gives" or "contributes" money to a campaign they are expecting a favour.

lib·er·ty (lbr-t)
n. pl. lib·er·ties
1.
a. The condition of being free from restriction or control.
b. The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.
c. The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor. See Synonyms at freedom.
2. Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.
3. A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference: the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights.
4.
a. A breach or overstepping of propriety or social convention. Often used in the plural.
b. A statement, attitude, or action not warranted by conditions or actualities: a historical novel that takes liberties with chronology.
c. An unwarranted risk; a chance: took foolish liberties on the ski slopes.
5. A period, usually short, during which a sailor is authorized to go ashore.
Idiom:
at liberty
1. Not in confinement or under constraint; free.
2. Not employed, occupied, or in use.

Originally posted by cavrac

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
I wonder who paid you off to infiltrate this thread.

I am sure if you people were in control, you would send someone to silence me, because I do not agree with your almighty political Idealism.

You people do nothing for the cause of Liberty and are a bunch of hypocrites.

If I was in charge I would send for you and give you a platform so that you can express your grievances in an open form. I would also demand and order that you be given a voice.

Originally posted by cavrac

Originally posted by TheImmaculateD1
Libretas is latin for liberty.

Human liberty is dictated by the will of the majority of people and not by who is the largest campaign contributor.

This would also ban politcal campaigns, no money would be allowed to be spent on campaigns. Remember, when someone "gives" or "contributes" money to a campaign they are expecting a favour.

lib·er·ty (lbr-t)
n. pl. lib·er·ties
1.
a. The condition of being free from restriction or control.
b. The right and power to act, believe, or express oneself in a manner of one's own choosing.
c. The condition of being physically and legally free from confinement, servitude, or forced labor. See Synonyms at freedom.
2. Freedom from unjust or undue governmental control.
3. A right or immunity to engage in certain actions without control or interference: the liberties protected by the Bill of Rights.
4.
a. A breach or overstepping of propriety or social convention. Often used in the plural.
b. A statement, attitude, or action not warranted by conditions or actualities: a historical novel that takes liberties with chronology.
c. An unwarranted risk; a chance: took foolish liberties on the ski slopes.
5. A period, usually short, during which a sailor is authorized to go ashore.
Idiom:
at liberty
1. Not in confinement or under constraint; free.
2. Not employed, occupied, or in use.

Freedom would not be affected but enhanced. You would be free from predatory lenders, free from acts of violence the second you step out of your front door.

reply to post by TheImmaculateD1


Can you tell me where you got you definition of liberty

I got mine from

www.thefreedictionary.com...