The northern part of the Netherlands broke free, Antwerp and everything south of it remained occupied by Spain.

Here is the original article by Gödel this is about.

All security experts have maximum two of the following properties:
- they are competent
- they are honest
- they believe DRM is possible

(I don't remember who I'm quoting or paraphrasing here.)

I think I just found what will be (part of) the setting of my next tabletop RP campaign.

This is what you're missing.

This is true for Marxist/Leninist/statist communism. But communism as such does not need a state, check Kropotkin and other anarchist communists.

Right, the nuances you added are valid indeed.

Indeed, I was not replying to the original post, but to the parent who wrote "Oh, treaties concerning the military powers should be secret". I can also understand the use of discretion during the negotiations.

That is correct, but Emperor Norton of the United States was already in favor of it in the 19th century.

In the present democratic systems the only choice is between several persons/parties who admit they strife for power (definition of a "candidate").

The representatives could however be appointed for a single term by a lottery in stead of an election. Everybody is a candidate, including convicted criminals (since the definition of a crime is temporal & it would be too easy to pervert the system by convicting all your political adversaries) and including those people who don't want to be a representative (they might even be the best candidates). It would guarantee an even spread over the population and they wouldn't care about being re-elected. (I didn't come up with this idea, the first time I read it was in The Songs of Distant Earth by Arthur C. Clarke)

The League of Nations (1919-1946) forbade all secret treaties, especially military ones, since they lead to the Great War (WW1) - outlawing secret treaties was pushed by Woodrow Wilson. It was broken by the Hoare-Laval Pact in 1935, which effectively killed the League of Nations.

... are a "core intellectual property team".

... are "a core intellectual property team".

I would argue the opposite: a problem is something which has a solution, something without a solution is not a problem but a circumstance.

On that scale: what is being believed changes a lot in time, what seems to be less changing are the rituals. The meaning of the rituals change, but the form/practice stays the same a lot longer - that is, if Frits Staal is right about this. He even claims that rituals are pre-human and the origin of language.