Writing about political "Illuminati" and the power across the party limits

https://metsantarinoita.blogspot.com/

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The term political "Illuminati" is normally meaning the political power across the party borders. Behind that group of politicians is claimed to be some economic groups, what supports politicians across the political field, for creating comfortable laws. Those politicians normally ride with some international conflicts, but those conflicts cover the tax-laws and customs, and who wants to talk about taxes and money when our boy is dying. But those laws are in the political control of senates and parliaments. And those laws are more important for economic life than some war.


The internet is full of stories about political corruption and "Illuminati", what means high-class politicians, whose families have been members of the parliaments and senates in generations. Those families have "brandy" how to get votes, and they would get very much political power inside the governments. There are reasons, why people believe that. Sometimes the thoughts about political conspiracy are caused because of mistakes. One of those mistakes has been McCarthy's case. Joseph McCarthy (1908-1957) was the senator of Wisconsin, and well known about the persecutions against communists.


Eugene McCarthy (1916-2005) who had the similar family name with Joseph McCarthy was against Vietnam War, and I don't see anything special about the people believe that those men were members of the same family. In real life, those persons probably were not known together, and the namesake is the total coincidence. The same family name makes people believe all kind of stuff, and sometimes some persons claim, that the Eugene McCarthy's policy against Vietnam war was only acting or playing some kind of role. In this theory member of the same family would want to keep political control by playing different roles in different areas.


Those politicians would ask the people, what they think about some actions, and after that politician would fix the speeches for supporting the majority of the people. That guarantees very much votes.  Maybe they would represent different political parties, but if they are popular enough, would that guarantee that the votes come to the same family, and if another would be dropped from the political elite, would another person allowed to continue. That model would use some kind of economical groups, what want to guarantee, that their men are in the parliament.

How is the growth of cities visible in the street views?

https://kirjabloggaus.blogspot.com/

Kimmo Huosionmaa

Almost every person in the world wants the own house and lot, but in city areas they are expensive. The taxes of lot are high, and the persons who rule the city wants that there would be live as many people as possible in some area.  Growing and improve the cities happens the way, that if the most people like it, would that thing put in the action. Sometimes there have been claiming, that cars dominate the plans, how the living would be developed.


City areas are growing all the time, and that causes very interesting thing in the ordinary street view. The picture above shows, that there was been cheap land somewhere in the past. And in that time the green painted house has been built. The work was cheap and the even ordinary worker could buy that kind of house in the past. But then there was the phenomenon when the price of the land was rising, and that was the reason, why the new buildings were different.


This green painted house has been somehow the attractive point of the city image, but this kind of unique buildings must step away from new architecture. And this is quite a sad thing because we all want to live in the unique house. But of course, the identical shape of the buildings increase safety and it's more practical to build than a unique building. Making groups is cheaper and more effective as financial and productive than making unique buildings.


The reason, why those old houses have been left in that area could be that they were not owned by private persons. The rising taxes and other payment guaranteed, that the normal worker would sell that property, and there would move directors of the firms. But if some company would own that house and the lot, would that guaranteed, that there was money to pay those payments. And if there were some big organization behind those payments, that would be the reason, why this green painted house has been left in this quite expensive area.

Individual's Behavior and “social guillotine"

Kimmo Huosionmaa

The method “social guillotine" was created on 1920’s to demonstrate the bad and unhealthy lifestyle of the  British high-society people. The non-stop parties, where wine was flowing and cigarettes were burned caused many times more deaths in the British community than the World War 1. Of course, those parties were sometimes boosted with opiates like morphine, heroin, and opium, what are very dangerous things, because the person will take an overdose of those things. The problem with opiates is also aways that they will benumb the stomach, and the user will eat too much simultaneously, and then the too fatness cause the death. Also, those narcotics caused the situation, that those people forgot to take care of their children, and this caused more problems because those children were living at the streets. Also, tumors in stomach, liver, and lungs caused the death. The “social guillotine” is same way lethal as some weapons.


And when we are talking about the bad and unhealthy lifestyle of the wealthy persons, we must notice the same thing, what many sociologists have been noticed many times before I have written this text. If the person has been made the property self, there is no problem with those people. They realize normally, that they are not alone in the world. But sometimes their children are acting like, they would be owners of the whole country. We all have met the persons who begin to all speeches by telling the people, who are son or daughter this person is, and this is sometimes very tiresome. If the person adjusted for service, this might be seen in the behavior. When Karl Marx created his model of societies, he noticed that the right wing industrial leaders were supporters of the violent model of controlling the society. Those persons, who were standing at the top of society ever want to change things in the country and the social situation in society.


They refused to talk with the people, and the arguments what aristocrats gave for using the violence against the commune of Paris and executions, what happened after it, was that the law was their side. Why they should ever listen, anybody because the law allowed the executions if some persons rebel against the state of France. Because military followed the law, there was no crime in those actions, what were the result of bad conditions of the working class people. The law is the strange thing because, until Nürnberg trials, there were no convictions about murders, what was made by the government. If the pressmen were not been followed the liberation of the concentration camps, the crimes of Nazis maybe not ever set in the trial. The crimes that were made under the communist flag, were ever prosecuted and after the Stalin’s death, his head of security service got the death penalty.


We always see that Stalin was a genocide, and in some situations, some genocides, who made crimes before his “cleanings” were able to return their honor, even if they were executed people by themselves. The thing that made the judgment wrong, was because the punishment was given by Stalin. So what we have learned about this? Hitler and his Nazis had just bad luck because they lost the war. The allied air forces were, of course, trampled German cities as the dust, but making this way, the genocide would seem more acceptable than neck-shots and gas chambers. The cement dust and high-temperature air would cause the same effect than poison gas, but they are legal methods because all Germany were mobilized, and the allies were went to total war against this state, what produced military equipment in all buildings.


The total war is one version of absolute war, what was the great idea of general major  Carl Von Clausewitz. In absolute war, there would be no room for a moral or ethical aspect of actions, what will help the army for winning the war. And in some sarcastic comments, the difference between total war and absolute war is just the number of ruins. The army is a key element in this action, and when we are looking at the military service in that time, we must notice that there were three layers in the military forces. The normal workers served as the normal soldiers, who made all work in that system, and the high-society people served in the headquarters as an officer. They just gave the orders to the people, who just followed the orders. This gave a very good reason for hate against high-class people. When we are thinking about the time, when Marx lived, the censorship was very hard. Punishment for actions against those orders was very tough, and in many countries was political prisoners.


So the way as Marx saw the society is the little bit different than modern people. He saw the high-society people only the ruling class of society, who was hiding behind the guns, what was kept in hands the mercenary soldiers. And because the high-class persons were often served as an officer, they were good targets for political propaganda. And in early 20th. century the army was a machine, what was used for denunciations. The idea was that the military men were used as the reporters for political police like Surète or Stalin’s GPU. As mentioned this, because the Eastern blocks governments used the same methodology than some government of Napoleon III. If they would make reports to secret police, they would get sergeant ranks in that organization. The reason why those aristocrats went to the army, was that gave them tough reputation.


 But when we are looking the world, the controlling class is many times against the new things, because they will need no reforms. Why the people, who use their own car wants new public transportation for some area? Here we will see. If the person doesn’t use the public services,  this person will be always against investments for those things. The same thing would happen with every service, what we will not use yourself. If the person uses private medical services, why this individual would want to make the payment also for public services? The problem is that those persons won’t hear anything, what they want. They want to be separated from other people and the real world.