Needless to say, most of the world knows the Jewish people await their "moshiach" (Messiah, Anointed King, or teacher and so on). This person
is supposed to bring Israel back to the Torah, end the current exile,
rebuild the Temple for the third and last time ever, and the Jewish
people will forever be safe & live well and happy in the holy land.
Etc.

There is a bunch of scenarios possible, personally I don't care a lot
about which one will happen, but with good planning they should all work
out smoothly. (I realize most people will find a posting, maybe all I am posting, to be insane. Duly noted, and to a degree I guess I agree with
that. However, I feel this is mostly a superficial perception, also based
on idolatry. For someone who is an idolator, if someone else told him a
truth and it does not line up with their idolatry, then this offends the idolator. With the truth, there is always this sense of power, and
someone who knows something to be the truth will bring the truth with
that sense of urgency and power. For the idolator however, who probably
is mindless and never spend much of any time thinking, they are all
about emotion and their belonging to the herd of idolators. They have
probably a subservient mindset to the idol, and are so void of any logic
or thinking that they don't really connect with "the truth" at all. What remains is the sense of urgency and power which the person who thinks
they tell the idolator the truth (or it is the truth), which they feel
radiated upon them, without understanding almost even what the word "the
truth" means. The event collapses for the idolator into a feeling of
being dominated, even of being attacked. Thus they get angry when
hearing the truth, and they blame the person telling them the truth or
what this person thinks is the truth, for themselves being guilty of the
other side of the coin of idolatry, which is to be the idol and to
dominate. It becomes an attempt at a power grab. This is how I think an idolator can react to hearing someone telling them the truth in an
effort even to help this idolator. The whole thing sort of goes wrong,
because of the mindlessness of the idolator and how they are stuck in
their emotions. Anyway ...)

Overall the way I propose this to go is, specific to the Jewish people
who have their great Torah (no other Nation seem to have it, or only
fragments of the same, even though Israel also seems to miss major parts
of what a Nation should look like in the area of democracy): the two
programs (Torah and 'Market Socialism') can merge (for simplicity I will
assume "my program" as I have proposed it, and ignore that it is part of
the program that you can alter and ratify it partially as desired) to
the degree they do not oppose each other. When the two programs either
do seem to disagree on a principle, or disagree on the implementation of
a principle, the goal I would personally worry about is: we don't want
more disunity in Israel.

How can a solution be crafted in such a way that the unity is
retained. Should the Torah be leading, or should this program be leading (assuming there are significant amounts of people who want to do this
program of 'Market Socialism'), or is there a third option which unites
both. Then there is the issue of not needing to unite with people who
simply don't want to be good, or people who are so far outside of what
is needing to be done that for the time being it is better to not try
to unite with them. Example: Bhuddists who ignore reality, or greed
obsessed Capitalists who are only looking to exploit something, etc.

Obviously from the side of the people who claim they care about the
Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu, there is no option but to repent from the
prosbul and heter iska, and start demanding the holy land is to be
distributed to all. This certainly lines up with the principles proposed
in 'Market Socialism', and from the side of the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu,
I simply don't understand why people would even want to be liars. How
can you go through life as a liar. The prosbul is a lie and you know it,
it is also morally bad or if you want highly suspect, so just stop with
it.

From the side of the people who do not care about the Torah, the
seculars or various ideologies including Social Democracy or Socialism
or Communism and the like, they need to work on their logical economic understanding, and also stop lying about land ownership. It is a lie
that land ownership works in a market in perpetuity. It is not part of
science or scholarship, an academic attitude, the Science of Economics
if you will, to think that land can and should be traded. How and why
exactly I detailed it many times (markets are about effort, and Academia
knows this !). It is kindof funny how both camps make a similar mistake,
and need to stop lying about it.

The comonality in their mistake is the servitude to the Plutocracy, to
the rich. It is also probably part of ancient stone age level thinking,
where the land was not tilled but trade could exist. Land ownership and
use did not exist in the way that it does since farming, and so the
mistake to think that land was owned when it was being farmed is a
mistake you can end up making. The land *seems* to be owned when it is
used, and the land owner seems to have the right to sell that land.
However in the end, things are not quite that simple, while in another
way, they are even simpler. Also this was already explained so many
times.

Now at least we have both camps on a path to convergence. The lies about
the Torah have stopped, and the lies about Economics have stopped, at
least to the people who support this kind of thinking. There is still
the issue of *how* to distribute the land to all. The system I propose
is different from that in the Torah.

In general I would think, diversity is wealth. You could have one region
doing the Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu method, and another region doing the
method here proposed. These regions can also be tiny, a speck here and a
speck there, as things probably begin slow (or more likely, not at all;
of course I realize this is all an incredible long shot, but at least I
don't want it to fail because of me, to fail because I failed to believe
it was possible; so I just force myself to believe it can happen even
though it seems very hard to believe lol. The reason I believe it can
happen, is a reason an idolator will not comprehend, but the reason is:
"the truth").

This is quite a good mold for proceeding: to have one version of land distribution in one area, and a different version in another, and to
play this according to the will of those people, where they are and in
what amounts. Maybe there are ways how you can have one system, and even position the other system on top of it. Since the system in 'Market
Socialism' is more open, free and direct (you have your land back
whenever you want, even though it may be somewhere else), it seems
possible to play-act the Torah system of land distribution on top of the
Market Socialism system. You could rent out your land up to the next
50th year if you so desire, within the system of Market Socialism. You
can compute the rent amount according to the expected harvests. The
other way does not seem possible, because the system of Market Socialism
has freedoms and rights which do not exist in the Torah, namely to get
your land *right* back immediately (you vacate your claim to your current
land, which you have rented out, and you grab a free lot - yes, there
are supposed to be a lot of free lots, about 10% of the total even, or
so).

Well, this is going quite well, isn't it ! The things you can imagine
when you start writing ... ;-).

*

Then the issue of Kingship and the State. Here in broad terms I propose
this: don't do anything which crosses the Torah, so that when the
moshiach shows up and is asking you about your Torah or wishing to
re-establish it, you won't have done anything wrong, you won't have
caused any delay in the Redemption, and you are used to doing the Torah.
This is for the side of course, who cares about the Torah. The others
who don't care, I guess they could simply follow the Market Socialism
program, which includes to keep Parliament going if an improved system
of democracy turns out to fail for the time being, due to the bad social behavior of people (this is part of the Market Socialism program, it
isn't a destructive program).

Should the people who want to follow the Torah, be against a State being
set up as being proposed under Market Socialism ? One way to approach
this question is to ask: are people who follow the Torah against the
idea that 10 people get together, and talk about issues relating to the
public interest in that area where they live. It may be a dangerous road crossing: should the signs be changed ? It may be a ditch which
sometimes overflows: should it be deepened or connected somewhere ? Is
this kind of activity something which the Torah opposed. I would think
not. People coming together to talk about something significant in the
public interest, seems to be something the Torah would applaud, provided
it goes in a friendly and constructive manner. The result could be as
simple as proposing something to the sitting Government. That in case
this system of Governing proposed in Market Socialism is not strong and
widely used (yet), to have a claim to the Sovereignty.

Let's say the "moshiach" comes around and establishes some sort of
Kingship (even though I think this is not the Torah, but some people
think it is, and that is the point since different opinions lead to
disunity), then would it be wrong if 10 people propose something to that Government ? Probably not.

If there is someone who wants to be King over Israel, and this is liked
by a lot of Jewish people, the system provided in Market Socialism has a
way to get that done. I won't go over it here, except by saying that it
is a form of an election. The 10 who get the most votes form a
committee, and the oldest in this committee becomes 'King Elect'. The
amount of votes the winner has over second place, he may award to
anyone, thus changing the composition of this committee. Not add to it,
but replace.

What does this King do ? Nothing is required of it, at all (!), except in
case of National chaos. The King may study the Constitution - this may
be the Torah - and upon completion (should take one year I suppose), he
gains a new right of Sovereign Inspector, with a small force to primarely investigate crime & corruption within the State, and secondarily within businesses. Investigate, but not prosecute or punish.

Let's say, hypothetically, that there is someone who is thought to be 'moshiach' by many Jewish people who support the Torah ("all the signs!",
this that and the rest of it), but many secular people are now already
used to this system in Market Socialism (yeah I know, crazy idea long
shot impossible, but IF ...lol). Then position your "moshiach" for
elections, and with some luck (Godly intervention I suppose), your
moshiach will be King. If the vote for the moshiach is large, his
kingship would be certain. So this is how these things may fold into
each other. You can of course elect someone from the House of David, and
all that (tribe of Judah). If you cannot win this vote, then sorry, I
don't know.

*

Then we have the crazy problem that undersigned would be branded
"moshiach", in which case everything becomes a bit easier in one sense,
but on the other it makes it more complicated because it will probably
be a severe bone of contention, and this is not what we want of course,
do we. At least now I can in some sense make decisions which the
believer camp should accept (per rules in the Torah), and so I will not participate into elections for King, but I want someone else to do that;
a whole group that is, elections need multiple people. So this is how
you then will elect your King. The Torah says that your God wants to
establish a King over you, even though Kingship is not exactly favored
in the Torah, but it is in some of the prophets I suppose. Fine, who are
we to argue.

One reason that I don't want any position like that, is because the idea
is to *distribute power*, not to concentrate it. If I already propose
all this and it actually gets done, naturally I will have an inmense
amount of power. If it succeed that is. If it fails, I'm probably dead
haha. The power build up is anti-thetical to the system. Therefore it is
better that I will remain "that fool on Usenet", and that's it. Also I
think it is a good example if I retain a level of average wealth and
power. I always thought when you saw archeological digs about the early settlements, that the most beautiful phase of humans starting to farm,
was this apparently short time during which *all the houses where the
same*. I don't mean that I need sameness, but rather, everyone was
equal. Later we get this sickness of greed and society falls apart into
slaves and bosses. I think a much greater level of equality, but not
over the top equality and sameness, is healthy. So you go hang your gold
and jewels on your King and that's fine with me (the system has a limit
to that by the way), but you can leave me out of that.

There is probably more to talk about, but the system on Market Socialism
is mainly about the economy, secondarily about the State. The rest is a
distant tertiary. I do support the Torah law generally, healthy family
life and so on, so there shouldn't be any problem. I so happen to
strongly dislike the Jesus idolatry system, so I would propose probably something severe against these idolators like banishment or blocked from entering at least - so that existing idolators will more be like ignored ?
You know, I just talk on the topics, but I realize that in some
scenarios this alone can have extreme influence already, also far into
the future. ("Crazy alert" noted. If you think I'm crazy, that's fine,
and where are your proposals ? Oh, you're just "the public", you have no
need to deal with these kinds of scenarios. Good on you then. Easy for
you. Try to look at it from this perspective sometime. It's quite a
daunting thing alltogether. You are too meek and humble for it, to make
any grand plans like this, to even consider it ? Aha ok then, good for
you, good luck worshipping the bosses of your society and playing your
little part as this world goes to hell. Someone else can try to figure
it out, right ? Someone else can stick their neck out, and then you'll
be there to criticize it.)

This is more or less how I see it, and perhaps the most important thing
which you should note is: all the decision making power is already
provided for within the given system. You don't have to ask me anything.
I don't make any decisions, and I may very well decide to say nothing
else because if I did, it has the potential to alter the balance of
power and take away the responsibility to make decisions by the system
as it is proposed to you. *You* make the decisions, with everyone else.
Some of those decisions might be challenging to make, and lead to disagreements. I probably cannot help you with that, because if I did it
could distort the process in some scenarios.

If you however implement these ideas, the main poverty problems in society should be much reduced, and the evil super rich will see their stream of
money cut down. This cut in their money will mean they loose much if not
all of their power, which in turn makes them vulnerable. Everyone has
economic opportunity. You are still left with general routine issues,
such as what is the budget for roads and all that kind of stuff.

The biggest challenge will probably be social, how to talk to people in meetings and make fair and good decisions. Life would probably become
more personal, smaller. There should be more stability, while at the
same time the market should be more dynamic and have many small
businesses. More creativity, inter personal relations become more
important (because of all the democratic councils and such), less wealth difference, and this whole influence of the wicked super rich on society
is probably mostly cut away, although foreign cliques of evil super rich
people will still exit and may try something. However, without large
herds of wage slaves assembled into companies to exploit, or land
ownership possible by buying it with whatever loot, I don't know how
they still want to get their foot in the door within Israel. With the
side of evil loosing their control over society and the Government, the
side of the people their needs and hopefully the side of the good people
will reign supreme and unopposed - forever.

To summarize a bit again. The idea is to have solutions and
implementations methods which create unity. Unity with seriously bad
ideologies or ideas is not going to be possible. In such cases, first it
is probably possible to do something in a sub-sovereign way, but try to
grow. The unity is aimed at combining good people, not to combine all
people. For example, good secular people or whatever ideology they have,
but if they want to support land distribution for all, should be able to
unite with people who want the Torah, in such a way that something gets
done. Debt is a similar issue. The people who do not want any sort of
land distribution to take place, are for the time being not part of such
a unity. They oppose what is good (in our opinion). In such cases that
these people have most of the power, you can try to do things like buy
land and distribute that (this is all detailed already in the free book
below). In terms of "moshiach" it will be the idea to keep doing the
Torah, and if then the "moshiach" will show up, he can slot right into
the whole thing that you are doing, because you are still doing the
Torah - perhaps if not likely even more of it than before.

While it is an attempt at creating unity, I wouldn't underestimate the potential for disunity. Also on essentials, it also creates disunity,
because it is different than what is. I suppose it is an attempt to
create as smooth as possible a unity of everything that is good, the
Torah of Moshe Rabbeinu, everything that is reasonable and good, and try
to get something done in practice, without offending people who support
what is good. Things which might still be impossible or bones of
contention, might then also be put off to be solved later, while in the
mean time the existing opinions and decisions would cut the knot, which
can and probably should include the ability to have regional
differences. Such differences also provide experiments and cultural
wealth (my opinion).

In theory all this may look ok and doable, which could mean that in
practice might be the difference between "utterly doomed" to "virtually impossible except for a miracle". As the Dutch saying goes "De
realiteitt is weerbarstig" (IIRC), reality is stubborn/difficult (heh).
I would therefore suggest not to take all this too lightly, and expect
quick solutions which work perfectly within days. It is probably doing
to be a rather long process, taking quite a bit of effort. That makes it
real I suppose. Everyone gets their challenges.

This is the best I could come up with. If you have anything better,
let's hear it.
--
Economic & political ideology, worked out into Constitutional models,
with a multi-facetted implementation plan. http://market.socialism.nl

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)