Jump to content

What's Rickie Lambert upto these days?..........


Wurzel

Recommended Posts

Gerrard needs him on board his new project,  ground breaking stuff. With the positive water, looking into each others eyes and communicate more bombshells of tactical forward thinking they can't fail......can they? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wurzel said:

Talking to water that's what, watch and marvel...........

 

There was another vid with fellow 'believer' Le Tissier backing him up strongly.

Edited by Tom13
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, will87 said:

Along with Le Tis he's also withdrawn his consent to be governed, whatever that means. Must be something in the water in Southampton...

 

He genuinely believes he’s a super brain who is 1 step ahead of everyone else :lol: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, will87 said:

Along with Le Tis he's also withdrawn his consent to be governed, whatever that means. Must be something in the water in Southampton...

 

Theres a lot in the water in Southampton...

I wouldnt swim in the Solent, thats for sure...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

3 hours ago, will87 said:

Along with Le Tis he's also withdrawn his consent to be governed, whatever that means. Must be something in the water in Southampton...

 

I would guess it means that he is declaring himself sovereign, and or the highest authority (maybe excepting the possibility of a creator) over his own life. In essence to become a Dictator of himself. It means he is withdrawing himself from the concept of having a government, at least in the words he is saying, if not his actions? I presume based upon the principle that to be governed requires the consent of the individual.

Edited by Seal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Seal said:

 

I would guess it means that he is declaring himself sovereign, and or the highest authority (maybe excepting the possibility of a creator) over his own life. In essence to become a Dictator of himself. It means he is withdrawing himself from the concept of having a government, at least in the words he is saying, if not his actions? I presume based upon the principle that to be governed requires the consent of the individual.

Yes, basically this, though I think it's more that they think there was a moment in history when government became somehow 'illegitimate' and that they can somehow withdraw from it (they often claim support for this idea from  the Magna Carta). Often they believe that everyone has two 'personas', one their flesh-and-blood form and the other a legal persona or 'strawman' who is the one that gets taxed etc, and that it is possible to separate the flesh-and-blood person from the strawman through saying precisely the right combination of words to police officers, tax collectors, judges and so forth. It's that separation that is the idea of 'becoming sovereign'. 

If this all sounds mad it absolutely is, but there is a very vibrant industry of people on the internet who will happily sell you courses in becoming sovereign in exchange for a large sum of money. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Wurzel said:

Talking to water that's what, watch and marvel...........

 

 

The theory/story he's talking about is from a 2004 documentary/film called "What the Bleep do we know"

It discusses various quantum theories. Looks pretty dated now but that's where this idea gained traction in the zeitgeist.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, HanoiVillan said:

Yes, basically this, though I think it's more that they think there was a moment in history when government became somehow 'illegitimate' and that they can somehow withdraw from it (they often claim support for this idea from  the Magna Carta). Often they believe that everyone has two 'personas', one their flesh-and-blood form and the other a legal persona or 'strawman' who is the one that gets taxed etc, and that it is possible to separate the flesh-and-blood person from the strawman through saying precisely the right combination of words to police officers, tax collectors, judges and so forth. It's that separation that is the idea of 'becoming sovereign'. 

If this all sounds mad it absolutely is, but there is a very vibrant industry of people on the internet who will happily sell you courses in becoming sovereign in exchange for a large sum of money. 

Being honest, I myself don't consider myself to have a government nor do I recognise the nation state or the nation state system. I personally think it is quite important that a government runs by consent, which means that if someone does not consent, then that is their choice. If not you have a dictatorship. Personally I do not think consent of the majority quite cuts it. 

Where I think this is stupid, is that you don't need to say some words to get out of it, you just need to change your perceptions of what reality is.

Surely it may well be that there is a moment in history where government became illegitimate (perhaps the enclosure act)?

I think that people who do this, don't always do it to look edgy, albeit that is certainly how it comes off in Rickys video. I think they often do it to change themselves inside because after all you cannot change the world yourself but you can change yourself. Doing stuff like this can be quite effective at changing your own internal world. Albeit it at a cost of looking stupid to others. But ultimately it is often a symptom of someone who has got to a point they think that being true to their own sum of thoughts and experiences is preferable to paying lip service to the collective consciousness. Lets face it no-one can say anything with objective certainty, because unless you know everything you cannot presume that the stuff you don't know invalidates the stuff you think you know. So I think trying on different reality hats, exploring them, discarding them if they don't fit, is a pretty valid way to explore whatever this reality is. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Seal said:

Being honest, I myself don't consider myself to have a government nor do I recognise the nation state or the nation state system. I personally think it is quite important that a government runs by consent, which means that if someone does not consent, then that is their choice. If not you have a dictatorship. Personally I do not think consent of the majority quite cuts it. 

Where I think this is stupid, is that you don't need to say some words to get out of it, you just need to change your perceptions of what reality is.

Surely it may well be that there is a moment in history where government became illegitimate (perhaps the enclosure act)?

I think that people who do this, don't always do it to look edgy, albeit that is certainly how it comes off in Rickys video. I think they often do it to change themselves inside because after all you cannot change the world yourself but you can change yourself. Doing stuff like this can be quite effective at changing your own internal world. Albeit it at a cost of looking stupid to others. But ultimately it is often a symptom of someone who has got to a point they think that being true to their own sum of thoughts and experiences is preferable to paying lip service to the collective consciousness. Lets face it no-one can say anything with objective certainty, because unless you know everything you cannot presume that the stuff you don't know invalidates the stuff you think you know. So I think trying on different reality hats, exploring them, discarding them if they don't fit, is a pretty valid way to explore whatever this reality is. 

i'll be honest, this is the first time i've heard of such a concept, so fogive my ignorance. but how can you not consider yourself to have a government? surely the moment you pay a penny of tax (be it car, council, or buying a product/service) or the moment you use a service provided by the government (i.e. NHS) then that is you giving your consent?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Seal said:

Being honest, I myself don't consider myself to have a government nor do I recognise the nation state or the nation state system. I personally think it is quite important that a government runs by consent, which means that if someone does not consent, then that is their choice. If not you have a dictatorship. Personally I do not think consent of the majority quite cuts it. 

[...]

I think that people who do this, don't always do it to look edgy, albeit that is certainly how it comes off in Rickys video. I think they often do it to change themselves inside because after all you cannot change the world yourself but you can change yourself. Doing stuff like this can be quite effective at changing your own internal world. Albeit it at a cost of looking stupid to others. But ultimately it is often a symptom of someone who has got to a point they think that being true to their own sum of thoughts and experiences is preferable to paying lip service to the collective consciousness. Lets face it no-one can say anything with objective certainty, because unless you know everything you cannot presume that the stuff you don't know invalidates the stuff you think you know. So I think trying on different reality hats, exploring them, discarding them if they don't fit, is a pretty valid way to explore whatever this reality is. 

The problem with this is it IMO confuses the personal (my beliefs and values, my 'consent', 'being true to their own sum of thoughts and experiences' and 'trying on different reality hats') with the political (the system of government we have in the country I live in). On the left, there are anarchists, but I think there's a clear distinction between the type of perspective shown in the paragraph above and anarchism. I'm not an anarchist and have many disagreements with their worldview but they do (at least the serious ones anyway) have a theory of the state and its powers, which is essential if you want to propose or create any form of alternative. By contrast, this personal rejection of 'the nation state or the nation state system' I associate more with right-wing politics but it's not a politics that can go anywhere because it doesn't involve coordination or a consistent theory of the state, and because it is less coherent it always ends up in grifters selling courses to suckers over the Internet. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â