|Interest of||George Contogeorgis|
|In 1919 sociologist Max Weber defined the state as any "human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory". There are about 200 such groups in the world, which form an exclusive club that has portioned up (almost) the whole world up into particular jurisdictions.|
The official narrative of nation states is that they represent independent political entities. Most of these claim to be "democratic" and that they seek to influence world events so as to promote the welfare of the citizens of that country. These 'democracies' represent the will of their electorates.
Most "democratic" states use a hierarchical system of representative democracy in which the involvement of citizens is limited to a vote every few years. In many, the party political structure has been infiltrated (or even set up) by the deep state, and so is in no way responsive to the desire of the electorate.
Although some nation states are independent actors, the importance of national governments is systematically overstated by the commercially-controlled media, which is keen to obscure the role played by deep state groups. John Perkins, for example, has written about the systematic policy of removing national leaders who refused to submit to foreign control. The result is that many nominally "independent" nations are in reality controlled by small groups whose loyalties lie elsewhere.
Rogue State USA
The government of the United States is openly contradicting the official narrative of how nation states operate. After generations of covert interference in the affairs of other nation states (bombings, assassinations and other interventions), the US has increasingly been claiming the legal right to outside its borders. It does not yet explicitly state that "might makes right", but prefers nebulous justifications such as "humanitarian intervention" or the "war on terror".
|Government||“No matter its guiding “ism,” every government has granted itself the power to initiate violence against its citizens. Just because the ruling agglomerate asserts this privilege doesn’t render it philosophically valid. What it does is legitimate the initiation of violence for any and all causes — domestic and foreign — the government deems proper. Having violated the first principle of nonaggression, nothing can stop that philosophical default from trickling down to the subject population.”||Robert Gore||11 February 2017|
|This is a page stub. Please add to it.|