NTOABOMA—All systems run inexorably to decline: even modern democracy; it runs inescapably to corruption. Thus says the second law of thermodynamics, which is a natural law that has been known to ancient philosophers since Punt, some 12,000 years ago.
More succinctly put: the level of corruption of a system—physical, social or political—only increases and never decreases.
A simple way to think of the second law of thermodynamics as a political system is through the example of a living room. If the room is not tidied, it will unavoidably become increasingly messy and disorderly with time. That is, the level of corruption of the living room will increase.
When the room is cleaned its level of corruption will decrease, but the effort to clean it results in an increase in the level of corruption outside the room—for instance, gathering the garbage in the room and dumping it outside. When the increase in the level of corruption outside the living room is compared to that lost by cleaning, it exceeds the drop in corruption within.
All together an effort to clean up an already corrupt system is futile since it increasingly destabilizes the world outside.
To this point, and to undergird this model with evidence, I look no place else but to the world’s policemen on democratic reform. The United States of America has branded itself as the beacon of modern democracy and has indeed espoused and paraded—even with the tip of the gun—its core beliefs about democracy to the rest of the world.
But this year’s unending batches of Wikileaked DNC and Hillary Clinton emails and Project Veritas’ undercover campaign videos confirm that the entire U.S. political and economic systems are morally and financially bankrupt, irreparably broken and in need of complete overhaul.
The system has presented two astonishing candidates—one astonishingly corrupt and evil candidate. The other, well: he’s just not worth bringing home to mommy.
Add to this, voter fraud and election fraud are rampant in the United States. Corroborated by various media organizations, there are reports that George Soros, a convicted criminal, funds electronic voting machines that are preprogrammed to vote for one candidate and not the other, and which are operating in sixteen key battleground states in the upcoming US elections on November 8.
America’s internal house and its democratic institutions are now in total disarray, badly in need of a deep cleaning purge like never before. With its rhetorical poses and elaborate decoration, it is no mystery that few understand why it is bad, but also morally corrupt.
American mass media is strongly biased against one candidate in its blind support for the other candidate. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (the FBI) has refused to indict one candidate who has clearly broken the laws of the land several times over.
One candidate has sold out the nation, placing Americans on high security risk and under foreign interest control at the hands of high rolling bidders so this candidate and the fat cats can get richer as fellow partners-in-crime from places like Saudi Arabia and Israel destroy American sovereignty while aiding, abetting, financing and supporting the global terrorists—like ISIS and Boko Haram—around the world.
The entire sordid affair of this year’s totally rigged political elections—pre-fixed in one candidate’s favor—blatantly reveals to the rest of the world the gross misnomer of the US “justice” system being two-tiered: one tier for elitist cabal bosses and the other for the rest of the ninety-nine percent of Americans, who under a totalitarian police state are no longer protected by the US Constitution.
A recent study by Princeton University Prof Martin Gilens and Northwestern University Prof Benjamin I Page reveals that the US is dominated by a rich and powerful elite. The two professors conducted exhaustive research to present data-driven support for this conclusion. Here’s how they explain it:
“Multivariate analysis indicates that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on US government policy, while average citizens and mass-based interest groups have little or no independent influence.”
Put rather simply: the wealthy few move policy, while the vast majority of Americans have little power.
Perhaps this is why the oligarchs hate one candidate in America and will do everything to make sure he doesn’t win on November 8. For the rest of us in Ntoaboma, Ghana, regardless of what happens in the future concerning the world’s “beacon of democracy,” the truth genie has been let out of the bag, and for eyes open enough to see, it’s floating in the Washington cesspool of filth, debauchery and deception.
Like all systems, according to the second natural law of thermodynamics, democracy, too, runs inevitably to decline–no matter its high falutin support among the commoners and the monied interests to steer its illusory promise afloat. There is no bigger example than the United States of America itself, the so-called experiment in democratic ideals.
If US democracy continues to remain the standard—and its leaders insist by the force of the nuclear bomb that it should be the benchmark across the globe—then the system is a corrupt institution run by a criminal bureaucracy. The level of corruption makes voting for the next administrator an exercise in futility.
The system needs not only to be cleaned. Because it has led us to ruin, it is morally corrupt and its credibility is shot to pieces. It needs to be purged. Otherwise voting is in vain.
Democracy is definately on shaky grounds. But a question: A bold accusation is made against the FBI without substantiation. On what Credible basis should candidate Clinton be indicted?
This is a good question Kwesi Richie. Perjury. She lied. She destroyed evidence. She shared sensitive classified information and many more. The FBI found her guilty of these charges calling her “extremely careless” or, to me, grossly negligent. But the FBI advised that no “reasonable” prosecutor would drag Hillary to court although the FBI never announced advice in public. But Comey did. The DOJ didn’t press any charges. Obviously, the head of the DOJ, met with Hillary’s husband on the tarmac. The appearance of impropriety is immense.
All this point to the charge then of a preferential treatment of Hillary Clinton, not by the law, but by the FBI and the DOJ. But we say “preferential treatment” here because we see a double standard. One set of laws for the commoners and another set for Hillary. Any man or woman will be in jail by now. That much, there are several examples to the effect.
The obvious meeting you allude to may not be too obvious. no? You must have some powerful source unknown to most of us. One would wonder the purpose of Mr. Comey’s revelation last week that came to nothing, if indeed she is being protected. Some argue that The FBI’s retreat this week proves true the accusation against Hillary. But if last week’s annoucement could sway any voter at all, don’t you think minds are already made up against Hillary? My critique was based on the article proper though.
Sure, that meeting may not be too obvious although for those of us who are aware, the fact that it looks suspicious is the reason why we rail against it. This too is for good reason. The appearance, as I said, of impropriety is immense.
That said this article claimed: “The Federal Bureau of Investigation (the FBI) has refused to indict one candidate who has clearly broken the laws of the land several times over.”
According to Comey, “We don’t want to put anyone in jail unless we know the person has committed a crime he knew he was committing.” That is odd!
Add this to all the statements by the FBI about the Hillary email saga and what you have, and what we see, is gross preferential treatment. Of course, since the FBI came out last week again to announce no recommendation of charges for the DOJ to follow, one can argue against this observation.
But, I agree, it remains an observation alone until Hillary can be dragged to court over it. My view is surely just one public opinion and I have no inside source. But then again if we must judge all appearance of malfeasance only by having an inside source we would have to shut up and allow the government and its agents to do all the work for us.
Which is why participatory democracy is long dead. This Hillary case is the sublime example.
I have no issues with opinions expressed but when it’s expressed as if it is fact when there’s no evidence to back it is my small challenge. And about Comey’s comment being odd. The DOJ will dare not initiate criminal proceedings against anyone unless they can prove that the crime ( in this types of crimes) while being committed, the alleged knew he was commiting a crime. Intention is important in criminal cases. By the way i dont believe Hillary is an angel.
Kwesi Richie, since you repeat U.S. Clinton Corporate Media memes like “as if it is fact,” I shall address your most unnerving point. You have commented on my essay. This is fact. If I say, “”You have commented on my essay” negatively because you are a Hillary supporter masking as an objective observer,” that will be opinion based upon fact. Perhaps let us start by learning how to separate opinion from fact. Now, this is what I wrote:
“The Federal Bureau of Investigation (the FBI) has refused to indict one candidate who has clearly broken the laws of the land several times over.”
The fact is, the FBI did not indict Hillary, although I think she broke the law several times over. No one is trying to mislead anyone as you have charged. So, I implore you to reread the essay.
Now about why I think that Hillary has broken the law several times over. Here are the six criminal laws of that type, which, I here allege, she clearly broke:
(1) 18 U.S. Code § 2232 — Destruction or removal of property to prevent seizure.
(2) 18 U.S. Code § 1512 — Tampering with a witness, victim, or an informant.
(3) 18 U.S. Code § 1519 — Destruction, alteration, or falsification of records in Federal investigations and bankruptcy.
(4) 18 U.S. Code § 2071 — Concealment, removal, or mutilation generally.
(5) 18 U.S. Code § 641 — Public money, property or records.
(6) 18 U.S. Code § 793 — Gathering, transmitting or losing defense information …
This is not an exclusive list, nor does it relate to charges that should be made against Ms. Clinton on grounds other than the unquestionable and basic ground that she moved all of her State Department email operation to a private and non-secured computer outside the State Department, and then attempted to destroy the record of those emails.
Now we can discuss these criminal laws and advance our dialogue or we can descend into a cesspool of name calling.
Just edited my commet before this to correct some typos. Narmer Amenuti i have not called anyone names and i have no intention to. My interest is in having an intellectual debate, nothing else. And if i were an American, i would vote Hillary. My first question was: on what basis should Hillary be indicted? my friend Solomon cited some alleged offences and added that DOJ did not press charges becauase of a certain meeting on the tarmac. I expressed my doubts about that and then a lot followed…All i am saying is that Hillary may have broken the law, but where is the evidence to back it?
Ok. Fair enough. Instead of rewrite many of the arguments and show the evidence, I shall share with you from the horses own mouth what evidence Comey himself found. If it’s not enough let me know I will gather for you more information about why I think Hillary broke the law.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_MOAZRM0Zo
“If US democracy continues to remain the standard—and its leaders insist by the force of the nuclear bomb that it should be the benchmark across the globe—then the system is a corrupt institution run by a criminal bureaucracy. The level of corruption makes voting for the next administrator an exercise in futility.” – Narmer Amenuti. Simply the Truth! As to what can be done about it, Frantz Fanon wrote to advise those of us from Afrika and other parts of the colonised World precisely what those not overcome with slavishness, greed or cowardice ought to do in the soulstirring conclusion to his 1961 published classic “The Wretched of the Earth”! Dare to read, better still diligently study, and then join us in Positive Action Changemaking!
So Narmer Amenuti… if all systems run to decline, including democracy, which should we use to choose our leaders and structure our communities? Using your analogy, what ideally should we do with an untidy living room?