Eight reasons our government is not legitimate.

(This of course does not apply only to the South African government, but applies to virtually all governments acting on our Earth today.)

I also want to mention that I wrote this article for my Swedish blog first. Sweden and South Africa are very different in many ways, both when it comes to how they are governed and the attitude of their people. The Swedes have gone from the proud and fierce Vikings to a bunch of spineless cowards who allowed the politicians, the bankers and big business to dictate almost everything in their lives. But they are unable to see this, and think they are well informed and a good example to the world as to how a society should be run and how people should think.

South Africans are far more independent, self reliant and self governing. They are also blessed with a fairly incompetent government, that does not pose any huge threat to the individual.
Maybe this comparison is unfair, and maybe I do not know SA well enough as I have only been here for over a year, plus six years in the nineties. But this article should be relevant anyway.

Before we can continue, we should first define the concept of government.

Government: A group of people (like you and me) who have either been appointed by the people to represent them and their will, or who through cunning, violence and betrayal ensured that they came into a position where they could claim to speak for the people (whether the people agree or not).

All ceremonies, protocols, procedures, etc. that led to a government coming into being, is rather irrelevant. The fact remains that they are people like you and me. They eat, sleep, piss, fart, burp, brush their teeth, cut their toenails, love, hate, dream, have fears, faults, weaknesses and aspirations, just like you and me. They no more deserve to rule their fellow man, than you and I. In fact, by thinking they do, they probably are less suited to do so, since they then lack humility.

All power stems from the people. The Preamble of the Constitution states: "We, the people of South Africa, ..." which shows that the PEOPLE of South Africa is the highest authority – since it's constitution is written in the voice of the people and is the highest law of this land.
This is true even in a dictatorship. If all the people in a nation with a dictator as head of state, suddenly turned their backs to the dictator, and ignored him, he would just be a pathetic individual with a superiority complex, who stood and screamed and stomped somewhere. The police, military, security services and the entire public sector is run by individuals who are all part of “the people”.

So, how is it that the current government is not legitimate?

If we agree that the only laws that apply are the laws of nature, then it may be true that someone who is strong or cunning can acquire a position of power over his fellow men, by any means. And those who are too weak or stupid to assert their right to be free, deserve the fate they receive.

But in our human tradition - across different cultures, races and geographical locations, there seems to be some kind of agreement in terms of our relationship to each other. This could be called "natural law", “universal law" or "moral law". It is a subject in itself, but includes things like "Treat others as you want them to treat you", "When you step on other people's right to life, limb, property, peace, freedom, etc., you give up your own rights these things", "All human beings are born with equal rights and freedoms ", "All are equal before the law", "Each one is his own master", "Everyone has the right to a free, fair and impartial justice procedure", "Everyone has the right to defend themselves and others who need help, against an aggressor", "Everyone has the right to the fruits of their labour", "Everyone has the right to choose to join a society or a group, or not" etc. etc.

With this viewpoint in mind, lets continue.

Eight points showing why the government is not legitimate:

1) The government is doing things that individuals according to moral law does not have the right to do. You can not transfer a right to another that you do not possess yourself.

Theft and extortion is still theft and extortion, even if they are carried out in the government's name. To confiscate money (tax), property (confiscation) and even children (kidnapping) under threat of further fines, confiscation or imprisonment, is not something a person has the right to do with another. Thus, no abstraction like "The State" (which is nothing more than a bunch of people like you and I) have the right to do these things.

Murder is murder, whether it be planned and executed by a private person or a soldier in the service. The only circumstance in which it can be considered acceptable to kill another is if in the current moment s/he is about to kill or seriously injure you or someone else who can not defend himself or herself.

2) You can not be forced to commit acts contrary to your faith and morals. In Humankind, some things are seen as bad or or wrong - regardless of the circumstances under which they were committed. In the Nurnberg trials, it was no excuse to say "I was only following orders."

An assassin can not say, as a mitigating circumstance "I was just doing what I got paid to do."

Similarly, a business owner with employees has no right to take a share of the compensation he / she gives an employee and give it to a third party (SARS – the Taxman) if the employee does not agree. If your morals say that it is wrong to steal, then it is wrong to contribute to theft in this way. If you think it's better for your children to develop a natural immunity to childhood diseases, rather than to vaccinate them and possibly thus expose them to substances that in the long run are more harmful to them, you can not be forced to vaccinate your children.

3) You can not be expected to follow laws or rules that you can not understand. If someone gives you a thick wad of paper with only Chinese writing on them, and says that you must do what it says there, everyone would agree that it would be impossible to do so (unless you are fluent in Chinese). But if you are given a tax return form, most people think that you can and should complete it and attest under oath, that all information given is correct. How can you do this if you do not have a law degree, knows for sure what definition of each word in the Income Tax Act was intended by its creators, or even studied the Income Tax Act?

Furthermore, if you are not a lawyer, are you qualified to interpret a legal text? If you are not qualified to interpret a legal document, how can you understand what it says? If you can not understand what it says, how can you comply with it? How can you be punished for not following directives you can not understand, or even do not have the right to try to understand? And, which you may not have agreed to follow in the first place?

4) If we all, according to natural or moral law, are free men and women who are born with equal rights and freedoms, are we not then our own masters? If you then consider that the CREATOR is the senior to the CREATION, and that we humans created our laws, governments, money, contracts, statutes, rules, etc. then, logically speaking, these could only apply to us, with our consent. Consent can only be given when you understand what you agree to.

How many people can honestly say that they fully understand how this society is composed and how some people acting on behalf;f of such abstractions as The State, Municipalities, The Police or "The Justice System" has the right to order a free man, who did not cause others any harm whatsoever? Is not that like Donald Duck telling Walt Disney what to draw and write ???

We can, as free men and women, enter into contracts or agreements where we make ourselves subservient to others - such as an employer and employee scenario, but this is then, based on an informed and conscious decision where all terms are on the table and the terms for how this relationship can be terminated, as well as established and agreed upon.

In addition, it is customary that the person who agrees to subjugate him or herself to another person, does so for an agreed compensation (salary or payment) during certain scheduled hours or for a given time or task. When did you last get paid for entering into a role, subordinate to these clowns who now rule the roost? What!!! Never???

What is your schedule for when you agreed to subjugate yourself to them? What! Do you don't have one ??? Why???

5) Those who pay for something are the ones who decide over the thing in question. We - the people are the ones paying for everything. This is true even if you take money out of the equation. We tar the roads, build the cars, build the houses, sweep the streets, grow the food, transport everything, maintain equipment, tend gardens and parks, purifies water, remove the rubbish, educate the children, keep the books, bake the bread and anything else that needs to be done our country.

We do this both for ourselves and for those who can not contribute because of illness or age.

We even do it (and even more so) for those traitors who were meant to act as a good leader and trustees of the land and it's people, but now acts as traitors by letting large corporations and foreign interests rule the roost and rob us of our resources, as well as taking a lot for themselves and their personal comfort. They also allow our skies to be sprayed with toxic aerosols in global geoengineering programs – totally without asking the people or even informing the people.

6) South Africa as an institution (not the land mass), is what it seems, a corporation in a giant global commercial system. The crafty Men (and maybe Women) who designed this system, have done so more or less in secret.

Not only that - they also have for each one of us created a commercial unit; Our legal/juristic Person. This is in my case MR KENT ERIK BENGTSSON with ID Number. This is probably a trust or a corporation. Most likely it is a trust, as there is no obligation to inform the beneficiaries of a trust, that a trust even exists. See "The difference between You and Yourself" if you are not familiar with this.

The good news here is that we as a people can not be forced to do business with a company or obey its decrees without a voluntary agreement to that effect. The bad news is that it seems as if everyone in the public sector refuses to see us as people with natural rights and only recognizes us in the capacity of our legal person, which can be seen as a subordinate commercial entity. This in turn makes them Masters and us Subjects.

What leads me to conclude that South Africa (and other nations) is a corporations?

"THE REPUBLIC OF SOUTH AFRICA" is registered in the US Securities & Exchange Commission, and tax revenues listed as income. See this link and the article in this blog called “What is South Africa” for more on that:
https://www.sec.gov/cgi-bin/browse-edgar?action=getcompany&CIK=0000932419&owner=include&count=40

Also, all countries seem to have a certain credit rating. If they were sovereign nations, how can anyone say what their credit rating was?

A legal person is, in other words, a fiction, an abstraction, a paper construct, a figment of our imagination - that only exists on paper and in our minds. A legal person has different rights and obligations. But only within a larger fiction, such as a political or commercial system - not in the tangible physical reality, where a legal person can not exist any more than a fictitious person in a novel or movie.

7) “The State” is not a part of the tangible reality, and exists only as a legal abstraction. The basic idea is that the "state" providing certain services and protection for its members (citizens) in exchange for members give their support to the state (in the form of taxes, obedience and recognition). A bit like a Golf Club – you pay the membership fee and abide by the rules, and you can play on the golf course. Mutual benefit. But whoever heard of a club you cannot leave?

We hear about the "social contract" as an unwritten contract in which the members of a society have an implied contract with those who act as leaders for a society, where the leadership is providing protection and assistance to those in need in exchange for financial support, obedience and recognition of the State as a legitimate institution.

From this "social contract" can be concluded that the State can only be legitimate if it acts for the good of the members of the society and in accordance with the wishes and needs of the people.

Does the South African State do this today ???

From where I stand, it looks more as if they are working for interests other than the South African people. One of the first things the new Government did after apartheid fell, was to borrow from the IMF which made out nation a “debtor” and subject to a whole array of negative conditions. Then the politicians gave themselves huge salaries “so they would not be tempted to be corrupt”. Yet as we have seen over the years the corruption is rife and there are claims of 700 billion rand wasted in the last 20 years.

Also, in many parts of this country the skies are being sprayed with nano-
particles of aluminium, barium and other agents. This must be done with the blessings of the Government. Search “Chemtrails” and “geoengineering”.
In and around the larger cities black South Africans are today enjoying an improved education, opportunities and income. But go to rural areas and nothing looks different than it did 30 years ago, except the prices in the shops.
Large corporations are given free reign to enrich themselves – like SANRAL and it's e-tolls, or the banks who create credit, at no real cost to themselves, and then confiscate tangible assets if people cannot pay the “loans”, or gets paid in money that represents our labour, while the credit they issued were not backed by anything tangible or of any substantial value.

8) It appears that most countries are bankrupt (They have debts they can not pay right off), and are operating in bankruptcy under administration of people appointed by the bankruptcy court or Trustee. (ever wondered why politicians and officials change, but not much changes in the real world?)

I guess this is also true in the case of South Africa. In the UK, it has been admitted by public officials that the country has been in bankruptcy since the end of the eighteenth century.

If a country (corporation) is operating under a bankruptcy, it is not sovereign and its government (leadership) must do what is dictated by the Trustee or whoever administers and controls the bankruptcy.

Many a wise man has said, "If you have debts, you are not free." I am convinced that this is a key strategy in keeping both nations and individuals enslaved in this world.

Tempt politicians and public officials with personal wealth and benefits if they put their countries in debt. Tempt individuals with new cars, mobile phones, luxury homes and nice holidays, which they can get right now - if they just take out a loan.

In both cases, you now have much more control over the country or individual in question, and you can set conditions on how they run their business.

Perhaps I am wrong in some of the assumption above. I do not write thinking I have all the answers or that I am always right. I write to get people to think and question. I want us all to lift the veil of indoctrination that we had covering our own eyes, since we stopped asking "Why" as three or four year olds.

I do not want to overthrow the government or the current system. If the house of cards, built on lies, which today constitutes our modern society, suddenly fell, a lot of suffering would result. BUT, I want the people we entrusted to take care of public functions, to do what they get paid to do, and that they do it for their people and in accordance with the will, the culture, the values ​and the traditions of the people.

I also want them to do all they can to make the people wise, strong, responsible, community minded, etc. so they can start govern themselves and run their own lives, rather than having it done for them.

I want those who are now in positions of power to recognize us as living, breathing sovereign people, and treat us as their employers, not their slaves. If they want us to cooperate with them, they will have to do what others have to do – to come to us with a proposal for cooperation and draw up an individual voluntary arrangement concerning each individual's relationship to the State and public bodies.

I want them to stop seeing themselves as a monopoly on how things should be, and stop fighting individuals or groups who want to go their own way and test new ideas or models for communities, money system and laws. If we look around we certainly can find lots of flaws with the current system. So why not encourage alternatives and those who are willing to go out on a limb to try new systems.

I realize of course that no one cares what little me wants. But if we all started to wake up and removes the blinkers, and can get enough people to do the same, then we will become a group so powerful that we can change things or a group large enough to turn our back on the existing system and create our own.

So if you're reading this, and more or less agree with it, share it - and talk to people. Talk only about things they can agree with and introduce a little bit at a time of new ideas and evidence. Try not to lump the whole "truth" of someone living in "The Matrix" (the current system), as this can be overwhelming and too unreal. We do not want to seem like unreal weirdos, which can easily happen if you try to present a whole new and strange reality.

Ask questions that encourages people to think. Ask them to compare the past with the way things are now. Ask how they think it should, be rather than how things are, etc. etc.

It seems that we, as humanity are moving towards a crossroads, in the not too distant future. Beyond it (which could be a new world war, or a technological coup, in which we are facing weapons that we find it very hard to defend ourselves against) might wait a world that is totally centrally controlled by a small elite that has us in a stranglehold and dictates everything of importance, with few personal choices and freedoms. But it may also happen that humanity will wake up in time, realize their faults and weaknesses and decide to change their ways and become more responsible and live in harmony with nature.

What you and I, do now and in the near future, may well be decisive in what kind of future we will have.

Kent