All -isms originated from the one offering it. So who has the power to mass suggest -isms to the many? The few.
When YOU Are in Charge, When YOU Make up the Rules
ONEs free will of choice represents ONEs sole authority over self; the rules are defined by the motion that establishes the balance within, for the ONEs to have a choice of action. So ALL (motion) imposes (charge) the rule over self (free will) upon the ONEs within.
mob behaviors
Use the terminology "cult of personality" and ask yourself what the idol is they all follow? It's their consent to believe what others are offering them through words such as democracy; religion; politics, entertainment; education; science; economics etc. These are the idols the many worship; which puts them into a false unity under these idols; controlled by the few who act in the name of those idols.
Now what does ONE do when believing the offer of another ONE? He consents by free will to believe an offer made by free will of another...one consents by the sole authority over self to ignore it for the sole authority of another one. This is why the majority are followers of orders by those who act in the name of the idols they believe in.
They want us to believe that...
No; they don't care WHAT one believes; only THAT one believes, which represents consent to ignore authority over self.
Plebescite
Does that sound like a "historical" relevant" term or a recent rhetorical corruption added to their repertoire?
Direct (from beginning towards end) represents an allegory for motion, while DEMOCRACY, noun [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] ignores that ALL motion established sole authority over self for the ONE within. ONE cannot govern others without claiming ownership (possessing) over them, which ignores coexistence within ALL.
Each ONE has the sole responsibility to govern ONEself; in adherence to the rules as defined by ALL. Who are the two types that will speak against this? Those who want to claim ownership over others and those who want to shirk responsibility over self onto others. Both act in ignorance to natural law as defined by ALL motion.
All -isms originated from the one offering it. So who has the power to mass suggest -isms to the many? The few.
ONEs free will of choice represents ONEs sole authority over self; the rules are defined by the motion that establishes the balance within, for the ONEs to have a choice of action. So ALL (motion) imposes (charge) the rule over self (free will) upon the ONEs within.
Use the terminology "cult of personality" and ask yourself what the idol is they all follow? It's their consent to believe what others are offering them through words such as democracy; religion; politics, entertainment; education; science; economics etc. These are the idols the many worship; which puts them into a false unity under these idols; controlled by the few who act in the name of those idols.
Now what does ONE do when believing the offer of another ONE? He consents by free will to believe an offer made by free will of another...one consents by the sole authority over self to ignore it for the sole authority of another one. This is why the majority are followers of orders by those who act in the name of the idols they believe in.
No; they don't care WHAT one believes; only THAT one believes, which represents consent to ignore authority over self.
Does that sound like a "historical" relevant" term or a recent rhetorical corruption added to their repertoire?
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Plebescite&year_start=1500&year_end=2019&corpus=26&smoothing=3#
Direct (from beginning towards end) represents an allegory for motion, while DEMOCRACY, noun [Gr. People, and to possess, to govern.] ignores that ALL motion established sole authority over self for the ONE within. ONE cannot govern others without claiming ownership (possessing) over them, which ignores coexistence within ALL.
Each ONE has the sole responsibility to govern ONEself; in adherence to the rules as defined by ALL. Who are the two types that will speak against this? Those who want to claim ownership over others and those who want to shirk responsibility over self onto others. Both act in ignorance to natural law as defined by ALL motion.