Iceland To Hold New Election Due to Prime Minister's Family Support For A Long Term, Convicted, Child Rapist.
The people of Iceland have demonstrated several times in recent years that they have the guts and integrity that is mostly missing in much of the rest of the world. Not only did they arrest their criminal bank bosses, kick out corrupt American FBI agents who lied to attempt to investigate Wikileaks and voted in an anarchist pro-freedom party into their parliament - but now they are moving to hold another election due to their prime minister being involved in a case which suggests some possible involvement with support for a child rapist!
In the world of national politics, there is almost no end to the list of cover-ups, denials and twists of truth that take place on a daily basis. Those who appear to be 'upstanding members of the community' may in fact be some of the more evil members of the society and it can even be the case that those who appear to be evil are, in fact, being smeared with false information by opponents and may actually be genuinely decent people. It could, then, be said to be admirable that the Icelandic government has moved to hold a new election after a recent scandal whereby the current Prime Minister's Father, Benedikt Sveinsson, wrote a letter of recommendation to the government for his friend 'Hjalti Sigurjón Hauksson' to 'have his honor restored' after serving five and a half years for raping his stepdaughter 'almost every day for 12 years from an age of 5'.
Obviously, support for such a spiritually dysfunctional being is going to be very low and it demonstrates either a fundamental corruption of the PM's Father for him to agree to support such an action - despite his claims of ignorance that he simply signed the letter drafter by his 'friend' without reading it properly! There have also been fingers pointed at the government after they refused initially to make public who had written the letter of recommendation.
source: bbc
Child abuse and heartlessness are all around us
I have lost count now of the number of cases of child rape, torture and murder that have been identified as being perpetrated by members of national governments and their cronies - a brief recap includes the following:
- Jimmy Saville - British TV/Radio Presenter, close friend of the Royal family.. A Serial child rapist and even necrophile (having sex with dead bodies).
- Numerous members of the Dutch Government and Royal Family - implicated in a largescale child rape/torture/abduction/sacrifice ring.
- A long list of British MPs alleged to be involved in child abuse and a considerable list of witnesses and police investigators threatened to make them silent.
- America's long list of cases spanning decades, including the so called 'Boys Town' events where children were taken from care homes and pimped out for sex at political parties, by and to prominent 'well known' people.
- Jeffrey Epstein's Pedophile island, whereby the world's richest and sickest child abusers would pay vast sums to visit and apparently have sex with children. Repeat visitors include Bill Clinton and 'Prince' Andrew.
So it should be no surprise that this sprang up in Iceland too. The difference, though, is that it appears that Iceland has 'seen the light' sufficiently not to let this kind of criminality go unchecked.
Direct Democracy in action?
I remain certain that 'democracy' as we have seen it so far has always been a facade that is intended to give the impression of 'people power' while actually always following the directions of a small, covert group behind the scenes. However, it is none the less the case that many people intend and desire to operate democracy in a more balanced way and it is 'representative democracy' whereby only a small number of people 'speak for' everyone else that is a big part of the problem. The alternative, favoured by the 'Pirate Party' in Iceland is 'Direct Democracy', whereby every member of the nation can vote on policies instead of being forced to have to live according to the choices of their allegedly 'elected officials'.
While it is true that no form of democracy can ever result in true balance, since the outcome of any form of democracy is that the will of some is forced onto others who disagree - it is at least mildly refreshing to see a 'democracy' operate with some degree of respect for the will of the people, instead of ignoring them entirely and carrying on with tyrannical criminality with no concern of being stopped!
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Buy your "Steemit, Dreamit, Memeit, Teamit" T-Shirts, Gifts & Other Clothing Here.
Thanks for the article, next chance I get I am going to cover this on my channel. Great info as always!
You are welcome!
I just wanted to point out that this is only true of extant democratic systems. I have previously attempted to craft a system whereby democratic means of growing voluntarist governance were employed, here on Steemit.
There was little response, but that doesn't mean such a system isn't possible. I am not a populist leader, and neither the most lauded author, so my own failure to create such a system in no way implies a completely voluntarist means of democratic governance isn't possible.
Democracy, also, isn't the only means whereby tyranny can be accomplished, and isn't even the most common. Simple force suffices, and long has.
Thanks!
Thanks for your comment. I'm not sure I understand how voluntarist governance is not an oxymoron. I understand that voluntarism is simply an agreement among the community to participate in activity in a strictly voluntary way and so if agendas are set which are not agreed upon, then no particular individual is required to participate. Governance implies government and thus hierarchy and thus also an element of coercion for it to exist, since it is unlikely that everyone in society is going to agree to hierarchy.
Having looked up the definition of tyranny I realise now that there are other definitions beyond the common use for the word to mean government abusing it's power. So to be clear, I was referring to the kind of 'authorised' tyranny that governments often 'legalise' and attempt to justify through indoctrination and 'normalisation' of their preferred form of imbalance.
You govern your actions. If we agree to, you and I can govern our actions according to rules that we both find amenable. We would then be in a voluntary government. No one who hasn't agreed would be included in that government, if we didn't force them to be. Any hierarchy we agree on would neither affect anyone we didn't force it on.
Others could agree to govern themselves by quite different rules, and yet our government and theirs could still conduct affairs, unless their rules were such that such intercourse wasn't possible, just as extant governments do. Even if two governments were so incompatible they couldn't conduct business with one another, they wouldn't necessarily be enemies, as long as neither was intent on aggression.
There is no limit to the number of governments that can be established, including governments of single individuals that established no rules at all, that were autarchies that would have to conduct business with other governments on a case by case basis, per such agreements with those other governments as those others found necessary.
This mutual agreement system was what I essayed to establish, but it is a daunting task to determine what rules you will live by, and to write them out, and I wasn't able to get much traction here.
Regarding tyranny, if a guy has an army at his back, and decides that I am gonna follow his rules or die, and I am unable to resist his force or flee, he is a tyrant, and I am fucked. No democracy required.
OK, fair enough - I'm still not really clear how that could work any better than simple anarchy. The Ubuntu movement has set up voluntarist towns in South America and Africa - yet as I understand their model, they function using a traditional 'tribal' idea of having 'elders' who make key decisions. To me that is not necessarily any better than any other form of hierarchic system.
The problem is always 'power over' - so what is the outcome if I am part of a group of people who form a collective and have governance through voluntary agreement and someone who has 'sway' for one reason or another decides something that I don't like and cannot live with? My only option is to leave... So, then I have to leave my friends and family to avoid having to conform to what I don't like. When examined in thought this might sound fine, but in practical terms that is not a simple situation at all.
Essentially, the core issue here is personal empowerment and the presence of balance or imbalance. If there is any barrier that stops me from being free and doing what I need/want to do - such as, for example, the barrier of land 'ownership' that has evolved to be imbalanced - then no amount of removal of hierarchy will solve the problem and we are back to feudalism.
I agree about your definition of tyranny and again it all comes back to personal empowerment, part of which is being empowered enough to not go along with the commands of a tyrannical 'leader' who forces you into his/her army.
Well, with such a basis for further agreement to 'ride' on, business would be easier to conduct. Maybe not, but it seems that having known points of agreement already established through prior examples would make drafting other ancillary agreements easier, and avoid much revision.
And as to the example you provided of a commune, that is a part of the problem with communes. It is a good example of real world issues communes actually face, and people have to decide how to handle. Being authorized to make a decision doesn't make that decision necessarily easy, however.
Regarding extant property, I haven't had my morning coffee yet, so am gonna have to defer that issue.
That is a thorny problem, and I'm pretty sure I alone will not come up with the solution.
Edit: I failed to address the Ubuntu movement you mentioned. This would be another example where knowing what their governance model is would make it easier for me, or you, to decide whether we wanted to participate.
I, like you, am not enamored of a council of elders making decisions for me. Such a hierarchy is less than ideal, and I'm agin' it.
Agreed. Representative Democracy is just a private club that represents noone apart from powerful interests. These Direct Democracy movements like the Pirate Party are indeed a step forward in my opinion.
Direct democracy, as in Participatory Democracy as it was in Ancient Greece, is a fairer and less corruptible form of governance. Everyone has a voice, and the most popular opinions voted on Direct Democracy Online Platforms find their way to the top. It's important though to always have good Constitutions which guarantee basic human rights and freedoms or it could risk becoming a Dictatorship of the Majority. Currently we are in the Dictatorship of the 0.1% and Constitutions are being trampled on and modified as it suits.
In Italy there's the 5 Star Movement which has an online Direct Democracy platform but also 5 inviolable principles (civil liberties, protection of the environment etc) and if they win in Italy I think it will inspire many other countries to follow suit.
In essence, it is anarchy which is the only viable model for group interaction, but since the dominators have sought for so long to warp the meaning of words (even paying violent trouble makers to identify as 'anarchists') - we have a problem whereby the majority will run from the solution due to ignorance.
I don't have experience of direct democracy, so I can't say much about it beyond that it would be an improvement over the current corporate enslavement system!
Rapist are everywhere.What is happening with the people ?
The epidemic is heartlessness. It is the same heartlessness that causes almost all other problems on Earth, from wars to the mental errors that cause illness, suffering and destruction of all kinds. Healing starts in the heart.
I am always surprised at the shocked reaction to these kinds of stories about politicians; they are sociopaths and psychopaths to begin with, otherwise they would not gravitate to the political world. Why wouldn't they trend towards destroying the innocent?
If the majority of people understood that then they wouldn't vote or support politics.. (I would like to think anyway)... So, therefore, there is 'shock' when they learn they have been supporting someone who is apparently in total opposition to their preference. Essentially, denial is the epidemic at the root of our problems.
How in the name of the world can someone think like that?, raping a 5 year old child once (for me) is enough to a lifetime in prison, there is no honor when you think of raping a child. This is horrible, worst than a horror movie.
According to the bbc piece, his father claimed that he just blindly signed the letter and attempted to sneak out of the responsibility.. so he is either extremely foolish, a twisted mind or both.
Any grown person knows that have to read first before sign, no matter what he/she has in front. We are not talking about a legal contract, but a letter anyone can clearly understand.
Yes, I agree - at the very least he signed a letter from a serious criminal without reading it closely!
I was thinking since my last reply, something was missing and figured it out : what detonated this crisis was the intention to hide the identity of his father, because whatever the reason of his signature in the letter the impact could be mitigated by an early public clarification, announce it in their terms and not reacting when the new went out.
By hiding it made him look like corrupt, but if he decides the opposite i's sure we would be seen as an honest public server and the repercussions to his father wouldn't be so hard.
Yes, denial is always the problem and more of us know that now..
Well said @ura-soul ) Democracy is a big word, one that millions in our past have fought and died for ! Its a word that protects us from another word known as tyranny ! We who believe in this word must defend it with other words, both written and verbally to make sure that this second word, tyranny never becomes the politcal destiny of us all !
ironically, it is democracy that makes tyranny possible - since it is democracy that 'authorises' the ability of one sub-section of people to control another in an 'official' way. without such an idea, tyranny is impossible.
that is a disgusting new......i believe bad people should be literally killed...no forgiveness for paedophiles and for some kind of criminals...we should care about good people's right....not shit people's rights...all the best
This post has received a 37.38 % upvote from @upgoater thanks to: @ura-soul. Please vote @swelker101 for witness
This post has received a 6.58 % upvote from @booster thanks to: @ura-soul.