Is Italy ever going to have a proper government?
 

On my side, no, since I'm Italian and I see no hope for my country :k_confused:

What do you think?

Condivido, Purtroppo

Could prove difficult :)

politici tutti maiale

Belgium, Greece, Spain, France...
The list of countries going sideways because of bad politicians who make bad politics seems a never ending one

Salva il popolo

Bello vedere un compatriota ogni tanto!

Krieg, I'm not up to date on Italian politics, can you provide a summary, from your point of view? You don't have a used car salesman as President too, do you?

https://freeprivatecities.com/


The system is corrupt by design, all in the West and all beyond that , and so it is no surprise that it produces corruption, and corrupted staff that is bred by this system that is - well, corrupt.


I am in the middle of reading that book in that link, I know the author from earlier readings on the web. Very solid arguments he has. And healthy plain reason as well.



I have quite a small library now with books arguing against this Western pathology named "democracy". Its a joke that starts already with laughing about that what we call democracy today has nothing, absolutely nothing in common with those we refer to as being the cradle of decomarcy: ancient Greece.

...OR ANCIENT REPUBLICAN ROME! THE FIRST RULE OF POLITICS IS : 'BEWARE THE IDES OF MARCH' :D....A VERY ITALIAN CONCEPT! https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikiped..._di_Cesare.jpg
THE DAGGER HAS SIMPLY BEEN REPLACED BY A TWITTER ACOUNT BUT THE BACKSTABBING GOES ON!
:haha:

An old friend whose grandfather came to America from Sicily once told me they had a saying: "Any time two Italians get together you immediately have three new political parties."

Show me a honest government first.

HuffPost Italy dropped the bomb when publishing a draft of the coalition agreement between the two parties negotiating for government currently. They want to leave the Euro, and demand a debt cut of 250 billion.



As long as Kunos Simulazioni nevertheless pushes out Assetto Corsa Competizione, I'm fine with that. :D



Meanwhile the EU plans for new members on the Balkan. Somebody has to save this ruinous club, right, so why not the economical powerplayers on the Balkan?

I've always liked the "mixed constitution" system they had, the checks and balances worked quite nicely. Far from perfect of course, but for its time it worked rather well. :yep:

Well yes, exactly!
There is in France a guy named Etienne Chouard that got my attention since 2012 or so, as he explained during the countless conferences he has given that our system is corrupt by principle because we (the people) have given up on politics to leave an elite group take care of it.
To resume quite simply, those of the elite group making the law have the keys to change at will what rules or laws they need to render us even more powerless.
Since this Etienne Chouard insists on us the people to get more active in politics by grouping up to write our own constitution and let not professional politicians do it for us.
Re-public (the people is king) or demo-cracy (the people have the power) mean more or less the same thing, which is quite far from what happens in our society, I'm asking you guys, what power do we have?
To insert a piece of paper, every once in while with someone's name on to do the job we actually don't want to do
The thing is democracy takes some doings, we have dismissed in our role of law makers, and therefore we comply with wathever those we placed in charge have decided for us, cause if you don't, well you become an outlaw.
We should reconsider, and maybe give up on some distractions to work a bit on that power we suppose to have, else others we'll do it for us

Already Rousseau and Mills had understood in their time that every social contract needs the voluntary agreement of every member, of 100% of the population, else you have the many that claim the right of the stronger to enforce their will and interests against and at the cost of the few: the law of the jungle, that is, and that is what our "demicracy" today is: a jungle in whichh the bigger mob rules and enslaves the minority. You end up with that some people have interests, impose force on others who do not have anything in common with the first's interests, nevertheless get forced to pay for them. That is slavery, plain and simple. A majority vote is not the characteristic of "democracy", it only is a decision forming mechanism, not more - and it can be binding only for those who before have voluntarily agreed to accept the outcome of this process in which they themselves also participate. If you refuse to participate in it, and if you deny to give your compliance, then the demand of the majority that you should follow their wishes, cannot be considered to be ethically, morally binding for you, for you cannot be owned by other humans and thus they cannot have the right to subjugate you against your will to their command.

There is only one, only one argument in defence of a suprastructure equalling what today is called a state: defence of a group of voluntary "members" against enemies from the outside of their community. Lets be realistic, without that, every individual or every group that shows a communal, social alternative that works and aquires material wealath by that, will fall victim to a foreign plunderer who notices that and tries to steal the fruits of their labour and effort, and make them work for him. Thats how history works. Thats why humans form communities: to be stronger and defend in company, or to become stronger than a defending community so that one can overwhelm them.

Everything else, EVERYTHING, must be object to voluntary contracts between members of said community, else you again get a tryranny of the likes we have in the world everywhere now. And you only pay for what yiou have ordered and agreed a contract over, you must not pay for what others want to impose in obligations on you against your will. A small elitist group of leaders today claims the right to tell everybody what he must do, and what he must pay. But there is nothing that a state can provide better and more competitvely, than the competition of the market could bring. Worse, the state, as a monopolist of power, education and violence, can abuse his position at will to secure the interests of the parasites who made their nest within its supply structure. And it does, excessively. This is not democracy - not in the distorted modern understanding of the term, and not in the meaning of the term in ancient Greece. It simply is tyranny, and it never can be anything else than tyranny. A mixture of oligarchy and ochlocracy.

When the only justification for state's existence is that he shall serve as a defender of the community to the outside, and people pay for it, for maintaining a military, that is, then this state has a contract with the population. So, when the state refuses to fulfill his legal obligations, if he refuses to secure the borders, if he fails to confront aggressors from the outside, then he is 1.) violating his obligations by the contract he has with the population, and he is 2.) failing the only reason for which an existence of a state-like super-structure can be considered as necessary and reasonable, and thus 3.) beign a violator to the contract, this state cannot expect or demand that the other side in this contract - the people - nevertheless pay for it and stay loyally committed to the contract's purpose and regulations, or the state itself. What wonder then if people turn their backs on the state and refuse to care for it any longer. Only a fool stays committed to a treaty with a partner who betrays him and unilaterally rewrites the treaty at any opportunity he sees fit to do so.

I mentioned the book by Titus Gebel, and his website, somewhere above. He argues from the perspective of a lawyer (that he is, also a businessman). And his writings show that, they are not just theoretical fantasizing, but sink real nails in real wood and adress the real nitty-gritty of the practical world we live in. So far the best book I have had on the issue of private cities replacing national states and their inherent corruption and inherent tyranny and abuse. His books makes me even angrier than I already am, which means he got it right.

Over the years I have sometimes been accused to be a nationalist, or a sympathiser of classical statehood, because I call Islam he enemy of all free mankind, and oppose almost all of this contempory leftist Zeitgeist that is en vogue again currently. But nothing could be more distant from the truth. I do not oppose the EU because I want back a classical national state, but because the EU is the exponentiation of all the principles for which i already dislike and oppose the idea and conception of "state". If I oppose a state already, how could I not contradict myself if then sympathising with a mega-state and even less freedom? That makes no sense.

I am for freedom, and self-responsible decisions - full stop. Every step any politician or party makes beyond this, debunks this poltician and party as somebody who wants to command me, wants to control what is mine, wants to steal from me, and wants to live his worthless existence and function at expense of my ressources. Thats why I call this scum parasites, and anti-social, and gangsters, criminals. If you want to do work "in the world" and "for the better of man", this does not already give you claim over me, for me needing to obey your orders, even if you have many behind you (that is just the stronger ones threatening to overwhelm the weaker ones), for me needing to hand over to you my ressources so that you can use them as if they were not mine, but yours. They are not yours. You can walk around with an open hat and ask people to support your idea with a donation, or you run a donation gala. You ask. But having taxes enforced to pay your ambitions, is blackmailing protection money, and enforcing payments for special interest groups' oh so very special interests, is robbery and plundering. The whole redistribution schemes beign run by the state today, are just this: interest groups versus interest groups, everybody trying to get a better overall net outcome in his favour.

What an idiotic show. What a contempt shown for freedom and self-responsibility. What stellar amount of cynism in calling this "liberty".

Freedom. One golden rule. Beyond that, shoot "states" when you see them - and every parasite making his livng by robbing from you in the state's name. Be patriotic if oyu think you want to be that, for that means to love the people you stem from - but never accept to pledge your allegiance to a state. Never. In the end, that simply is as fascist as it can get. Patriotism, okay, I can live with that. Nationalism- confront it.

If they want to put all the world onto your shoulders - shrug it off.



Just shrug.