Which is More Just, a Free Market or Socialism?

July 25th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we can argue all day long whether a zebra’s stripes are black, or white, but at the end of the day we still haven’t answered whether a zebra is an equine or not. In the same way, progressives and free market proponents argue about whether profit is good or bad, but that misses the point, in reality everyone seeks profit, both the capitalist and the socialist, the real question is, whether profit should come from providing value to your fellow man or at his cost? Those who contend that profit is good, know their’s is a weak argument weighed on it’s inherent merit, so to change the subject is a way to seize a moral high ground they have no right to, and keep their real position from being known, let alone discussed on it’s merits. So we fight and wrestle, vilifying each other over such weighty questions as, “are a zebra’s stripes white or black?”

Progressives claim the market system is based on profit, and profit is greed, and greed is bad. Therefore, they further contest, the market system is bad. Both Marxists and capitalists seek profits however. Socialists seek profits as much as capitalists. The socialist however, as opposed to a capitalist, seeks profits for nothing. What do you think the public dole is? The dole is nothing more than a profit to the recipient. The dole however, is not based on providing for your fellow man or woman, it is based on one’s existence. If the dole is a form of profit, and we see that it so obviously is, they are condemned by their own argument, progressivism, socialism and communism are based on greed… and are therefore bad. But that is arguing on progressive’s terms.

The real question is, is it more just to get a profit for providing value or not? The socialist side stands that it is unjust to “force” people to provide value to another for profit. They contend it is more just if we provide profit to others free of charge. This is what we should be discussing, not whether profit itself is good or bad, that is as I have shown merely a diversion. To answer that question we must first answer what is justice. The modern interpretation, since the Enlightenment is… equal treatment. Even a child innately knows justice and demonstrate it when they say, “It’s not fair!” The justice of a child is not equal justice however, because a child lacks the ability to be objective, that is a learned trait. That is exactly the root of socialism however, the demand of a petulant dependent incompetent child, to get one’s needs met.

The free market’s means for getting profit is to meet a need of someone else. Providing value in and of itself, is a good of the first and second order. A good can be broken into two types, a good we do for it’s own sake; (the first order), and a good we do because it staves off a bad; (the second order). Brushing your teeth is a good of the second order in that we don’t do it for itself we do it to stave off tooth decay. Skiing is a good of the first order, for those who love to ski, since it is a good we do for itself. Providing value for profit is both types of good. That providing value for one’s profit is a good of the first order is embodied in the old saying… “Choose a job you love and you will never work a day.” Regardless of the value as career advice, that saying is true in that many people love their jobs and cannot see themselves doing anything else.

Providing value for profit is also a good of the second order, since the innate requirement to meet someone else needs to get one’s own bread incentivizes positive behavior as, courtesy, perspective, humility, sympathy and equal treatment. At it’s most basic level, the ancient tradition of the merchant, a merchant has to be able to see things from another’s perspective to provide what the customer wants and needs, she has to be courteous else risk the loss of sales and profit, he must be humble lest his supplier or customer go somewhere else, sympathy is a natural outcome of the ability to see from another’s perspective, and every incentive for a salesperson is to treat everyone equally, to maximize profits. As we can see, providing value is a good of both types.

Socialism on the other hand is not a good of either the first order nor the second. Human nature is not egalitarian, self sacrificing, or accepting of one’s “place.” Those attribute go against the demands of evolution. A species that self sacrifices is soon eliminated from the biosphere, eschewing saving up food is a sure path to starvation during times of want, and if not for the drive to get ahead of one’s competition one falls behind in that competition, in the case of a species, that species goes extinct. Human nature itself is damning of socialism. To be a good of the first order socialism would spontaneously happen, as did skiing, due to it’s being a good of the first order, as the free market has. That it has only happened under extreme pressure from the state, shows socialism is not a good we would do for it’s own sake.

Getting profit for nothing also falls far short of a good of the second order. Getting profit for nothing incentivizes people to be rude, uncaring, egoistic, and discriminating. The best historical reference for someone who gets profit for nothing is the aristocracy of feudal cultures. The aristocrat could be as rude to the peasants as he or she wanted, they had no comprehension of the life of the masses, aristocracy is nothing if not egoistic, their profit was inherent to their existence. Moreover, at court, those with political favor were above the law, while those without were below it’s protections, because that enhanced the aristocracy’s profit. These same attributes are created by incentive in those who receive the dole. Not to argue everyone who receives profit for nothing is bad, as it is the case that not everyone who provides value is good. The incentives however over time impel either good attributes in people or bad ones, the more the bad ones the easier it is follow the crowd and adopt bad behaviors.

Taken on their own ground, that profit is bad, socialism condemns itself in it’s own words, moreover, when we consider the real argument between free market advocates and socialism’s adherents, which is more just… to get profit for nothing or for providing value, the answer becomes obvious. Providing value for others is a good of both the first and second order. The market forces equal treatment by the ever present threat of bankruptcy, plus, as a good of the second order it incentivizes people, over time, to treat each other equally, which both meet the fundamental definition of justice. Meanwhile, socialism is not a good of either type, creating conditions for unequal treatment of people along with a host of negative behaviors, showing socialism to be unjust. That socialist have obtained the moral high ground and advanced their position as far as they have, is because we have been accepting their premise and contending on their ground, arguing to the head of a pin, what color zebra stripes are, to answer the question of is that zebra an equine or not.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Immoral Deciding What is Moral…

July 21st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we live at a time where degenerates, liars and connivers have such undeserved moral superiority, they have the hubris and audacity to tell the rest of us what to think, how to act and who to vote for. Our society has moved so far from truth and reality it has become a house of cards in a gale. Those who dismiss all that is good have seized the education system, using it to inculcate our children into their twisted hateful destructive philosophy, teaching them theirs is true morality and God’s laws are immoral. How many children graduating from high school today dismiss out of hand traditional values and moors for progressive “values.” I bet far more than you or I would be comfortable with. The results can only be terrible for future generations.

Today common sense is considered hate by those who control what we see, hear and learn. They tell us that belief in God’s laws, like thou shall not kill, is outdated because unborn babies can be killed at any time for any reason. They protest that if we disagree with them, we hate, even as they vomit the most vitriolic rhetoric, calling Christians and Jews hate mongers for believing in our faith. The commandment thou shall honor thy father and mother is undermined every day in our media with fathers being attacked as stupid, lazy and drunk. Thou shall not steal is now old fashioned, in that the State is allowed to steal whatever and however much they want, to fund anti Christian and antisemitic policies and rhetoric, like feces covered pictures of the Virgin Mary, funding anti Semitic groups and piss Christ. We are convinced that Thou shall not covet they neighbor’s wife is crazy by every critically acclaimed television show, book and movie while television shows that honor family values have been eradicated from the air. In every way, every day true morality is destroyed by degenerates who impose their perverted values on us by law, regulation and political correctness.

Listen to the hypocrisy and rhetoric of progressives. They hardly ever complete a paragraph where they don’t say this or that is unconscionable. In fact Bernie Sanders cannot get through a sentence without saying it. Profit is unconscionable unless it is stolen from those who produce. They deplore cigarettes yet glorify drug use, they hate the police yet are up armoring the police and militarizing them as fast as they can. Guns are vilified, and the right to keep and bear weapons of self defense is under constant attack, yet powerful progressives always have personal armed guards. White people are called to admit innate racism and atone for slavery, that was banished with an ocean of American blood, yet call those who favor slavery and have sex slaves today as peaceful. Every time there is a mass shooting the first people blamed are liberty loving people until the real perpetrator, almost always a progressive is found to be the villain, yet their captured media call themselves unbiased. Morals like teaching your children to be self sufficient, work hard and be courteous, are under attack by those who think people should be dependent on government, lazy and rude, like progressives.

One has to wonder at how such a state of affairs came to be but the result is all too obvious. To be so certain in one’s morality that, the least moral feel an obligation to force everyone else to follow their perverted morality, whatever it is today, is diabolical. While progressives claim Christians impose morality on the rest of us… that is nothing but sophistry. While a christian might tell someone they are sinning, no true Christian would impose fines or jail to someone for homosexuality, producing blasphemous pictures or adultery, but Christians will help sinners when the consequences of their sins become manifest. In fact, Christianity teaches everyone is able to get to heaven, all that is required is a belief in Jesus Christ. Sins can be forgiven. Progressives believe that before they can go to heaven, they must force everyone to follow their morals, as Barack Obama said, Salvation is collective, as opposed to Christ who said salvation is personal. Anyone who teaches salvation depends on forcing another to submit, worships Lucifer rather than God. Perhaps that is why our world is going to hell…

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Human Rights and Progressivism

July 18th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… progressives have never seen a human Right they don’t despise and want to get rid of. Their rhetoric and actions prove this. From their zealous attacks on the right of self defense, to their undermining of the freedom of religion, progressives show their absolute antipathy to human rights of every stripe. In their zealous crusade to rid government of the burden of having to labor under the odium of the people’s individual rights, progressives have rolled back the advancement of philosophy, humanity and government, to a time well before the Enlightenment. Progressives are only too happy to use human rights to destroy human rights however. They pick and choose who gets rights and who doesn’t, in an effort to undermine and corrode basic natural law, which is the font of all human rights. Progressives are never happier than when they are overseeing a genocide which makes them the antithesis of human hearted, making Progressivism and all progressives, diabolical.

All human rights come from natural law. Before governments were invented all human beings were created equal, had innate rights like, the right to self defense, the right to privacy, the right to own the fruits of their labor, the right to own property both personal and real as well as, the right to think and believe as each chooses. Government and powerful men stole those human rights by the sword. People were enslaved by those powerful men, who needed an excuse for their evil, so they came up with the theory of arbitrary rule. Once that had been thoroughly debunked, the powerful changed it to the rights of kings, today that philosophy has been renamed social justice. All in an attempt to destroy human rights to justify people being exploited as slaves. Which of course is the direct opposite of natural rights, or as Socrates called it, justice.

The right of self defense is their most important bugaboo. Progressives and indeed everyone who has a penchant for tyranny loathes the right to self defense. How can you enslave a person who is capable and willing to defend themselves and their children from your evil? The basic human right to self defense is the first right from which all others flow, for if one has no right to defend him or herself from the usurpations of a monster, than all other rights become null and void. Everywhere and every time human beings have been denied their basic human right of self defense, it has resulted in slavery, suffering and death, there are no historical examples where this is not true. From ancient China to the modern Syria masters had arms and slaves were disarmed. Before a person can be enslaved they must be disarmed whether by force or trickery. Now they are using trickery but soon progressives will become anxious and will resort to violence… as they always have.

Today progressive make a compelling case to get rid of basic human rights. They seek to control thought, whether by hate crimes or political correctness, progressives seek to control not only what we do, but what we think as well. The right to freedom of religion has been perverted to separation of church and state, which actually means the elevation of atheism, as the state religion. The right to privacy doesn’t exist in a surveillance state, where your every move is recorded and stored in a government data bank, for use against you when the elite see fit. Moreover, how can anyone argue, with a straight face, that we are protected in our personal papers and effects when government can hack into our phones, computers and phone conversations without warrant? Instead of “interpreting” our Constitution, as it was written and intended, progressives claim it is a “living breathing document,” which means they get to change it’s meaning arbitrarily, eviscerating the protections our Constitution is supposed to provide. What is most distressing is that a huge number of people fall for such chicanery.

Justice is not arbitrary rule no matter what they call it, freedom is never submission and humanity cannot be imposed by the state’s monopoly on violence. Our basic human rights come from God or nature but not and never government. Government is the opposite of freedom. While in a state of nature you can go out and kill a deer to feed your family, grow whatever crop you want to fill your children’s bellies, worship whatever deity you please, protect your family and self from thieves and murderers with violence if necessary, build a home, and think whatever you want, progressives always seeks to take these rights away. If you need permission from government… they have taken away your right to do it.

That progressives loathe and despise human rights is an open secret. Their every action serves to undermine human rights and humanity itself in the process… all in the name of “equality.” Progressive’s, socialist’s and Marxist’s version of equality, however, is where some people are more equal than others, to borrow a phrase. While they zealously defend their own “right” to control our thoughts, actions and religious beliefs, arbitrarily as in the rights of kings, they actively destroy those of everyone else. The quiet of Woodrow Wilson when the Armenians were being exterminated, FDR’s silence as Jews were being slaughtered on an industrial scale, and now Obama’s defense of those massacring Christians in their original lands, shows progressives, socialists and Marxists passion for genocide. The master has every right while the slave has not even the right to life. They hold us to every word of their law, constitutional or not, while openly arguing law doesn’t apply to them. Listen to what they say, consider what the outcome of their argument will be… exercise your basic human right to think, before it is taken away.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

CEO Pay

July 14th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, a painter who charged for paint but used white wash, a drywaller who put up cardboard instead of sheetrock and a paver who used clay slurry instead of asphalt, would not deserve a huge bonus, but that is exactly what our CEOs do… and get. The difference in treatment for the new class and the rest of us is as stark as it is baffling. You would think people would start a rumpus over it. Instead, we take it, doing our best at our job and settle for shoddy workmanship from the new class. Meanwhile they demand us to deliver excellent quality at high rates of productivity for ever lower wages. Our economy, wages and standard of living corrodes every day for it. Today the new class is fighting an undeclared war against the hoi polloi. So much so that now we live in the age of the principle agent dilemma.

Our businesses have become so politicized they no longer function as profit making enterprises but lackeys of the progressives. Examples like Target are glaring. Target has decided to poke it’s customers in the eye with such absurdities as allowing men into the woman’s bathroom. On the face of it that decision alienates customers, corrodes the value of the shareholders and puts employees jobs at risk. The decision to follow a political regime changes Target from a retailer that provides value to customers, jobs for employees and returns on investment for shareholders, is a form of corporate suicide. The CEO however will not suffer for his decision, there will be no negative consequences for him, but the fallout for everyone else will be disastrous. From children being abused in the bathroom to shareholders loosing their hard earned money, the rest of us will be on the loosing side of that gambit. If Target goes belly up from that policy, the CEO will still get his bonus, and another cushy job, where he can impose his absurd political beliefs on the rest of us, even as he has used cardboard in place of drywall.

Stock buybacks is another example of how the new class embezzles money from shareholders. Stock buybacks, the main reason the stock market has risen to record highs, provide no real return to shareholders but instead corrodes the actual value of their stock. The new class borrow money against the real value of the company, diminishing that value, then buy it’s own stock artificially increasing the stock price while eroding it’s actual value, because that money is not used to buy the means of production so the company can be more profitable in the future, nor is it used to expand territory, or integrate with it’s suppliers or retailers to provide a basis for future profit growth. All a stock buyback does is make a short term stock price rise, in the absence of future profit potential, so the upper management, the new class, can get huge bonuses for that price increase. In other words, they use clay slurry instead of asphalt, the moment it rains the reality of what they have done will become apparent.

The new class is in favor of any and every regulation that comes down the pike. Regulations make the job of a CEO much easier. While that statement may seem counter intuitive it is truth incarnate. Regulations are easy for a large firm to follow, with their armies of new class lawyers and deep pockets to meet them, regulations are death for small businesses that compete with large corporations. To paraphrase Milton Friedman… If a CEO faces competition from a small business that makes a better product at a lower price point, that CEO can lower prices and increase quality, which both lowers his bonuses and makes her work harder, or they can go to their trapped regulators and get the small business shut down. Obviously, as history shows, they will go to government to stifle competition. In doing so they crush innovation, the lifeblood of a market economy and drive down wages by lowering demand for labor. It is almost like they are using white wash instead of paint.

We pay top dollar to our principles for inferior work. Every day the new class is living the principle agent dilemma everywhere we look. They politicize their firms, they destroy value and stifle innovation, all to the very real detriment of everyone else. The new class is the agent and the rest of us are the principles. We own companies when we have IRAs and we are the citizens of government, we are the principles, the new class, CEOs, lawyers, journalists, bureaucrats, teachers, politicians, professors, etc… are our agents. They are supposed to work for us. The trouble is, the agent will abuse his position for personal gain all day long, if they can get away with it. Many people do raise a commotion, but in the end only empower the new class to further abuse their positions, because the new class channels that anger to increasing their power as our agents. Regulation is increased, journalism veers decidedly leftist, political correctness becomes ever more ingrained and our liberty is washed away by it. The problem starts and ends in our colleges and universities where our children are indoctrinated into the new class mindset. It is past time to wrest our education system from Marxists and progressives and instead teach common sense, work ethic and basic logic.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Obama Presidency

July 11th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the United States and indeed the entire world, is far worse off eight years after the election of Barak Obama, making his Presidency one of the worst, if not the worst President in US history. By every measure the US has slid backwards, race relations, disease, economically, socially, militarily and culturally. Obama’s outstandingly poor record of performance while in office is also marred by the most damaging scandals in US history, fast and furious, Benghazi, IRS as a political weapon, wiretapping reporters, the VA scandal, etc… all these scandals without a single special prosecutor. From the destruction of the US Constitution to the rise of radical Islam Obama has created one mess after another at home and abroad. When he was elected he ran on hope and change, today hope for the future is at an all time low, and our nation has been fundamentally changed for the worse.

When Obama was elected race relations were at an all time high. Obama had huge support of every race especially white voters. Since he was elected he has sown the seeds of division, hate and anger. Today there is violence in our streets, police are being murdered across our nation and our large cities are no longer safe places to raise children or even go to the store. Rather then unifying us Obama has made it his priority to divide us along racial lines. From jumping in to attack the Cambridge police before he had any information, then having to have a “beer summit” to save face, to his absurd stance that easy access to guns is causing the riots and police murders, Obama ‘ record on race relations is as bad if not worse than Woodrow Wilson’s.

Economically, Obama has been the only President in history to enjoy zero interest rate for the entirety of his term, yet economically the US has been in depression since the great recession. The staggering number of people not it the workforce shows an underlying weakness in the economy that is as pervasive as it is destructive of our standard of living. Meanwhile, that record low worker participation rate feeds the need for record welfare rolls, record food stamp participants and declining real wages. Despite the run up in stocks, largely fueled by the unheard of low interest rate allowing corporations to buy back their own stock thus keeping the market artificially high, enriching the corporate CEOs at cost to shareholders, customers and employees, the actual value of our investments has declined with a record high price to earnings ratio (P/E). Because of Obama care the incentives to hire full time employees is negative. That is why low paying temp jobs are rapidly becoming the norm and poverty is rising.

There has never been a President who had so many terrorist attacks on US soil during his Presidency. Once 911 happened, Bush took steps, and we didn’t see another successful attack on American soil under his Presidency, in stark contrast to Obama. Under Obama there has been an Islamic terror attack resulting in American deaths every year of his Presidency. Obama has done everything in his power to hinder law enforcement from addressing the root causes of Islamic terror even refusing to acknowledge Islamic terror! His willful blindness to Islamic theology, inciting it’s followers to attack infidels and instill terror in their hearts, as Islamic scripture induces it’s followers to do, has encouraged more attacks, not placated them as Obama said it would. Today the average American is more likely to die from an Islamic terrorist attack than at any other time in US history.

The US Constitution is under attack from every angle today. Every amendment has been eroded under Obama. From his perpetual hatred of the Second Amendment, to outright attacks on free speech and freedom of religion, Obama has shown himself to be an enemy of our basic fundamental rights as enumerated in our founding documents. Our society has moved so far away from limited government and liberty, that a politician who openly avows fealty to our Constitution and it’s principles, is called an extremist! The rule of law has become arbitrary rule under Obama with some above the law and others below it’s protections.

In Iraq, Obama snatched loss from the jaws of victory. Regardless whether we should have got in that war to begin with, Bush had essentially won the war, when Obama came into office he unilaterally withdrew US forces and ceded Iraq to radical Islamic fundamentalists, who have since wiped Christianity from that place where it has been for two thousand years, enslaved young women for sex, and is a safe haven for exporting Jihad to the rest of the world. When the people of Iran rose up to quit themselves of the chains of the Ayatollah, Obama sided with the Ayatollah, and against the freedom movement! Last year Obama gave Iran the green light to build a nuclear arsenal it can use against the US and Israel, with a memo recently intercepted from Iran, showing they plan to use an EMP weapon against the US power grid!

By every measure the Obama Presidency has been a disaster. Our economy is teetering on the edge of catastrophe, our streets run red with blood, our Constitutional Rights are under assault like never before, the world has devolved into turmoil and war, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction goes on unimpeded and hope for the future is at another all time low. The hacking of the Black Lives Matter movement, a home grown terrorist organization, leaked to the public shows they plan on a “Summer of Chaos,” that they hope will allow Obama to usher in marshal law. Now, that would be his crowning achievement, calling for marshal law in the US for the first time in our history. One has to wonder how anyone so inept could become a janitor, let alone President, unless he is not incompetent, but a villain. History will have to answer that question, what is unquestionable however, is that Obama has been one of if not the worst President in US history if not the worst… as measured by results.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Justice, Honor and Arbitrary Rule.

July 7th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the mask has come off, we in the US now officially live under arbitrary rule and our leaders have no honor whatsoever. The fact Hillary Clinton has not, and will not be indicted for destroying evidence, keeping top secret information on an unsecured server, using a personal email for government business and/or lying under oath to congress, is proof positive we live under arbitrary rule. If anyone with less political power did one of those things they would be in jail and everyone knows it. That is an undeniable fact. The US has become, no longer a constitutional republic, but a banana republic. That a member of the elite can get away with multiple infringements of federal laws, without consequences, consequences that you or I would face, shows there is a double standard at work that is as pernicious as it is destructive. Moreover, recent news articles have shown that the rest of us no longer have the protections of law, or our Constitutional rights. Just as Rome was no longer a republic after Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the US is no longer a republic since the elite have the audacity to rub our noses in the fact they are above the law, and we are below it’s protections.

There is no true rule of law whatsoever the world over. This is not just happening in the US but is a world wide phenomenon. Human history is nothing but a story of the elite holding the people to laws they will not hold themselves to. The US was different, for a speck of time, because the US had the rule of law. True, the elite held themselves to it by their honor… but at least they did. Since FDR broke the unwritten rule that a President only run for two terms, our elite have increasingly lost all honor, and have disgraced themselves in every way possible. It is a quality of a civilized person to hold others to a lower standard then one does him or herself. To hold others to a higher standard then oneself, shows a lack of character, moral indifference and conniving which is on full display in the Hillary Clinton case.

Throughout history the wise have opined about the need for honor among the rulers of a society. When the rulers have no honor they will resort to every evil known to Man. History shows this to be true but goes further. In a society where the elite have no honor the people quickly loose their honor. Confucius said it first, (at least as far as I know), the people follow their leaders into corruption or virtue. In a nation where the leaders have no honor, the people will have no honor, where the people have no honor crime, chaos and beggary are rife. Economies grow in serenity and collapse in chaos, wealth flourishes in the absence of crime but erodes like sand when crime is rampant and where the economy is collapsing and wealth is being destroyed, poverty becomes the norm. All because the leaders have no honor.

The question of whether justice or arbitrary rule is best was considered in Plato’s book, The Republic. In it, Socrates argued for justice, while Thrasymachus the sophist argued for arbitrary rule. Thrasymachus claimed the great men, (those with political power, intelligence, wealth and ambition), should not follow the law, only appear to do so… law is only to make the hoi polloi believe there is justice to facilitate the control of the people and trick them into being obedient. Socrates made the argument justice in and of itself is a good. Justice is both a good that we do because it is good and a useful good as well. By allowing arbitrary rule to come back into fashion we become the dupes of the “great men.” Do you want the elite to exploit law to enrich themselves, amass political power over us and eventually tyrannize us? Or do you agree with Socrates that justice is a good in and of itself, one that is useful in creating a peaceful, wealthy and safe society?

Why would the people follow laws even those who write them don’t? Every one of us is a hypocrisy detector and hypocrisy is the surest way to make people despise the law. As a lack of honor flows from the top down a society will increasingly only follow laws by force and threat. Whenever they believe they can get away with breaking a law they will. Once dishonor reaches the lowest rung of a society no amount of punishment will suffice. People will not be not safe in their own homes, business cannot be conducted, children are at risk, people’s oaths are meaningless and every chance meeting becomes a danger. Clearly, to allow the leaders of a country to become utterly corrupt, dishonorable, conniving and lustful for power, can only lead to human suffering on a national scale.

One way to tell how dishonorable your leaders are is to look around with open eyes. Do people need bars on their windows, are all children safe on the streets, can you look at a passerby in the eye, is poverty rampant? Corrupt leaders will claim all this is due to worthless, lazy and ignorant people, but will never look in a mirror. The Duke of Lu asked Confucius one day, how he could get the people to stop lusting after other men’s wives, stealing and murder. Confucius said, the duke could lead by example and stop doing those things himself. Shortly after that Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state in fear of their lives. Let the scales drop from your eyes and really see.

So you see, this is not a matter of hate of an individual or gotcha politics, it is a matter of justice and human suffering. If we allow our noses to be rubbed in the elite’s corruption, we have given our consent to the elite to be even less honorable, in doing so we sentence our children and grand children to a life of poverty, fear and tyranny. Just because you like a politician, is no reason to allow them to get away with blatantly breaking laws, laws you or I would be severely punished for. Such actions are those of children, sycophants and imbeciles. Say nothing, do nothing, and the US will join the ranks of other failed experiments in human governance like Rome, Athens, Sparta, etc… with the same catastrophic results, human suffering on a grand scale. To do nothing is to abet a crime against humanity, to do something, even if it is small and of little consequence, is to make a stand against corruption. The choice is yours, lay down and let the elite walk over you… or stand and push back. It may be too late to have an effect, since we have allowed our leaders to be villains for so long, but maybe not. Regardless, do you want to be hated by your own grandchildren for your lack of back bone, or be a champion for liberty, prosperity and equality?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Ideal Government

July 4th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the entirety of my articles taken in the aggregate, are a road map of a nearly ideal government, pragmatically accepting human nature as it is, without the presumption of trying to change it. People are people, we want to collaborate, but we take advantage of the weak, we want to trade but we will take if there is no chance of getting caught, and we want equanimity but when our own interests are at stake, we balk at it. We are our own worst enemy, each and every one of us, any governmental structure must speak to our dualistic natures. Whenever possible, passive incentives rather than active measures should be put in place, to give everyone a stake in society. Since history is unambiguous about the outcomes of a free market versus a rationally controlled market, the free market must be as free as possible, to reap the greatest gain from it’s inherent abundance. Those who run government, always have been and always will be the greatest source of tyranny, their ability to usurp power to themselves must be sufficiently strong and have real teeth else no form of government, no matter how well constituted, can survive long. To that end I offer the Fourth Branch.

Our natures get the better of us all the time. Selling a house we might “forget” to mention there is a septic problem and when directly asked, simply lie. Then lament the huge extra costs of paying for a lawyer to do anything. If those around us are so corrupt, imagine how much more corrupt, those who pay no price for their actions and take no blame for any decision, are. Leaders have almost no incentives to remain virtuous and every reason not to be. Name them, power, sex, money, these are the worldly things that draw us into corruption. How much more magnified must the corruption be in our leaders than us, when they are caught doing things that put you and I in jail, but they skate with a standing ovation, a raise and another intern to abuse. Meanwhile churches, synagogues, fraternal organizations and others, give away food for the needy, provide for orphans, nurse the sick and help rebuild after catastrophe, all at their own costs. Human nature must be taken into account in any attempt to form an ideal government.

Since human nature is so mercurial, tending to corruption in a vacuum, oversight should be greatest for those at the top and least for those at the bottom. This is exactly opposite of what society does now. Today, our leaders have no oversight whatsoever, except themselves, while the rest of us are monitored incessantly. An ideal government would subject leaders to every law they pass on anyone, even, and especially if those laws don’t fit to lawmakers. Safety regulations for example, when a lawmaker crosses the parking lot to his waiting air conditioned limousine, he or she should, as a McDonald employee must, wear day glow green vest and a hard hat. Every regulation passed, must be applied to those who passed them, else there is no incentive to keep laws sane, and to pass the responsibility to a bureaucrat. Rather, if every law was forced on the lawmakers, including the President as he gets off Air Force One, wearing a safety helmet and day glow green vest flapping in the down draft, rest assured, laws would be very well thought out.

Active measures like law enforcement should be the last resort never the first in community problems. Most crime comes from a lack of a stake in society. Take away a child’s stake in society, or just blind them to their stake, and you have created a criminal. Suddenly everything that was off the table when that child had a stake in society is now on it. Drugs, stealing, prostitution, robbery, murder and every crime you can think of. Fraternal organizations, Scouts, churches, Synagogues, etc… all have a function, or at least they did, now the government has muscled them aside and taken over that role with the government monopoly school system, with the result that no one believes they have a real stake in society. Passive measures like, a school voucher system and limiting government’s ability to interfere with cultural and social institutions, would go much farther than an unlimited number of police in limiting crime and societal upheaval.

Even in a very limited constitutional government we see that the elite in government must be actively policed. How absurd is it that in the US today, a politician who wants to balance the budget and return to Constitutional government, is called radical!?!?! Only in revolutionary times would such a thing go past our noses without at least a sniff. The offices of every congressperson, senator, judge, bureaucrat, appointee, diplomat, etc… should be equipped with full video and sound, recorded and available to the public both on demand and live streaming on the internet. Any infraction of any law would bring instant enforcement action through a Fourth Branch. The Fourth Branch would be given power sufficient to try even the Alger Hiss’ of the world, without reprisals, teeth to punish them and eyes and nose to detect any hint of corruption.

Limited government, laissez faire free markets, returning to a society that embraces morality, individualism, innovation and risk taking are the hallmarks of my vision for a better government, economy, culture and society. One that is limited and so doesn’t limit anyone’s potential, is based on free market principles so the people can be affluent, is moral so the laws need be few and enforcement rare, individualistic people to beware of those peddling tyranny in a bunny mask and finally, innovative to advance our technology, understanding of God’s universe and ourselves. In short government should not be in the way. Anyone who reads the entirety of my work will quickly grasp the subtleties of such a government, why I have concluded it is nearly ideal and how to implement it. Any country that adopted these ideas would very quickly become a power house, economically, militarily and have a wealthy happy people.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

To A Progressive; Progress is Toward Administrative Government

June 30th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, before any real understanding or agreement can be made, before the discussion can really start in earnest, the topic of discussion must be stipulated. In the discussion of progressivism, that key understanding is absent. Even progressives themselves have a lack of understanding exactly what it is they stand for, they might have some absurd notion they want to feed the poor, while others want the poor to starve, or they might accept the progressive party seeks communism, which is partly right, or any of a number of things, but they all miss the mark, because the progressive party seeks administrative government, as far from the ignorant masses as possible… pure and simple.

Administrative government is bureaucratic government or government by bureaucracy. That is where bureaucrats write the laws, enforce them and have administrative proceedings to adjudicate them as well. All of what we in the US call the Three Branches are combined into one. Instead of an executive and legislature agreeing on a law then passing it after public debate, as in our old form of government… under an administrative government, law would be passed by the stroke of a pen, by an anonymous person at a desk, in some cavernous office building. Knowing the People would have a problem if the new laws passed by bureaucrats, were called laws, they instead called them… regulations. In the US, the regulation has more power to coerce action, than the law.

Imagine, a government where thousands perhaps millions of office workers go to work every day, writing laws that effect every aspect of our lives, behind the heavy curtain, that is bureaucracy. Every day they write more regulations because that is what they do. The amount of our lives becomes ever more tightly regulated, every day, many regulations most people are ignorant of, until they run afoul of them. Eventually, under any and all administrative governments, the burden of regulations becomes so onerous the whole thing collapses, the economy, social cohesion, and even the government itself.

Administrative government is at the core of the European Union and has metastasized in the body of the US, Canada and every other even remotely Western government. We call it bureaucracy. As the number of things legislators in their hubris and presumption thought they should control grew, so did their need to delegate some authority to the executive branch. After all, tea parties and mixers take up so much time, and oh so much gets done there… The Legislature’s eyes for legislating became bigger than their ability to legislate, so they delegated some authority to the executive, who relished getting more power. In that way the Bureaucracy was illegitimately born of the legislature’s presumption and the executives lust.

Those who seek administrative government must, as a matter of precedence, believe in the honesty, integrity and fairness of a bureaucrat over that of their fellow man. Of course such a notion is absurd but that doesn’t stop progressives from basing much of their world view. Obviously, a bureaucrat is one of our fellow man, or woman, and so, is just as fallible as your most hated enemy. Absolute trust in government is a foundational idea in progressivism. They will deny it, as they always do the facts, but their every action proves the thesis more eloquently than I could ever pontificate.

The progressive’s blind faith in administrative government makes sense in a distorted way. Most progressives have a college education. As such they identify with others who have a college education, they were similarly schooled, were taught the same curricula with the same progressive tilt. Progressives form the core of the new class. They consider themselves smarter and better educated, and so why shouldn’t they regulate what us ignorant, racist, lazy, red necked, clinging to their guns and religion, climate change denier, hoi polloi do?

“Isn’t it better someone with the best education, who is probably brighter than us, evidenced by their being better education than us, decide what side of our bread the butter should go on? Or would it be best to have limited government?” That is the discussion we should be having… because that is the real discussion, everything else is mud tossed into the water to obscure the real argument.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

In Government, Size Does Matter…

June 26th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, as a matter of fact, that the farther government is removed from the people, the less it cares about the people and instead, it’s own power. At the city level you have some power, if you can muster several people to show up at a town council, but at national level you have to muster millions of people willing to act to effect your senators, how much more if government is taken to a supranational level? At a supranational level could government be coaxed to reflect the needs of all the people instead of the faction that keeps them in power, moreover, independence would be an impossible dream. Today everyone is talking about the possible dissolution of the European Union. In as far as, that supranational government and it’s pernicious bureaucracy is undermined, the better for humanity. As a free trade area it is a great idea… and that was where it should have ended.

A government that is so far from the people, those in it need bodyguards, is too far from the people. Think about it, does your state representative need a daily body guard? In most cases no. In those cases where they do, they are far removed from the people they “represent,” that only a select few get to meet and talk to him or her. Moreover, if they need a body guard, they probably done something to warrant a body guard. Those who have no or very little power over others never need a bodyguard. If government didn’t have such an outsized power to make, destroy or crush someone, or some business, government wouldn’t warrant the time to threaten… they wouldn’t need bodyguards. It can be reasoned then that the more a government official needs a bodyguard, the farther they are removed from those they represent along with they have too much power to effect the lives of others, negatively or positively.

Distance itself give a person a feeling of superiority, a feeling of superiority gives a human being a god complex. This is especially true, when the levers of power are shared, but by few. The responsibility for wrong decisions is shared, while the credit for right decisions or any decision that can be spun as right, can be taken direct credit for, even as all the cronies do too. How liberating, to be able to use humanity as a lab rat in which to try, this economic regulation or that experiment in immigration, without responsibility. No way that could go wrong, eh? Meanwhile, even as responsibility is shirked, negative consequences are averted. So, even if a government far removed from the people, constantly poked the people in the eye and called it ice cream… the people would have no way to do anything about it.

This is not because this party is good and that party is evil, nor that all representatives are bad people, there certainly are a high percentage that are bad people, but… they are all human beings. People are self interested. You are, I am, she is, and he is too, we are all self interested, that is a fact of human nature. Economists call us rational maximizers. We rationally maximize our outcomes in any given situation. So if a situation has very very strong incentives to act a certain way, even if that way is immoral, add to the incentives a strong disincentive to act in other ways… and a rational maximizer can be induced to sell their very soul. A government distant from the people will always have those pernicious incentives and disincentives.

The supranational governmental structure of the European Union itself not only creates distance from those it is supposed to represent, but in and of itself, creates a regulatory structure that hinders small businesses in a host of ways. This is a natural outcome of the pernicious incentives that our leaders are awash in. Those who can effect the outcome of an election can then effect the outcome of legislation to be on the winning side of that legislation. It follows that only those with money today can do that while those who have potential money, from an innovation they have have had tomorrow, cannot. As Milton Friedman said in Free To Choose… why improve your own quality and lower your price when you can go to government and get your competition shut down?

If the European Union is struck a mortal blow then so be it. Of course the elite who have suckled at the teat of the state for so long will not let it go without a fight. They have become so used to having no responsibility and acting without consequences, they will shriek and wail, at the very though of having to sidle up to the unwashed peasants, they represent. The fact they appear to be in such a panic shows either they are so gullible they believed their own hype, else a conniving that would make a conspiracy lover wince, because this referendum was known about for years… so why didn’t the elite prepare plans for this contingency? Adding weight to my assertion, Government close to the people is best, the farther government is from the people, necessarily, the less power it must have, in relation to the distance of the governors.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

On the Brexit Vote…

June 23rd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, tomorrows “brexit” vote will tell us if the people in Britain favor liberty… or tyranny. It is as simple as that. On the one hand leaving the European Union would create chaos and uncertainty but allow the British people to have a say in their futures. On the other hand a stay vote would keep the apple cart from upsetting and the British people will be governed by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who care nothing for the welfare of Britain or it’s people… the technocracy of Europe will be saved. Nevertheless tomorrows vote should be interesting, if for no other reason then, to see the machinations our “leaders” are willing to go to keep their power, privilege and prerogative. So far it appears the elite have manipulated the odds on leaving, used naked fear mongering, lied, open threats and even possibly a false flag attack. To the elite the ends justify the means, especially when the ends are their goal of total control of the hoi polloi.

Liberty is always chaotic, that is the nature of freedom, while slavery is always stable, that is the nature of slavery. A slave knows what he or she will be doing every day, sun up to sunset, no matter if that is tending to plants on a farm, toiling away in a sweatshop or servicing filthy men’s desires, there is the probability of a severe beating now and then… but a slave knows their place, their life, and future, while the life of their master is stable as well. Free men however cannot possibly know their future. A freeman might wake up in the morning after a strange dream and come up with an idea to get rich, a rich man who is free might make a bad decision and loose everything, someone might get fed up with their job and quit, all of which leads to chaos and disruption that a slave society doesn’t have. To argue that slavery is better because it is stable is like arguing death is better because it is changeless.

Simply looking at who favors staying within the European Union tells us a great deal about what such a vote would mean. Those who openly avow a one world government uniformly want the British to vote for their servitude. People like George Soros are threatening Britain with economic Armageddon if they vote to leave. Soros connived to destroy the pound sterling and admitted he made a billion dollars on that “deal.” Such a person, it must be acknowledged, doesn’t care for the British people having visited on them the suffering a destroyed currency brings. A list of those supporting staying is like a who’s who list of globalists and favorers of arbitrary rule.

David Cameron has been caught lying about future Turkish inclusion in the European Union. He said that question was decades away but it just came out that Turkey’s admission will be debated immediately after Thursdays vote. This is perhaps the single biggest reason the Brits are seeking exit. If Turkey is included in the EU, Muslim immigration, immigration that now threatens the very nature of Britain and indeed Europe itself, will go from a flood to a tsunami, washing away all vestiges of European culture, like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the permissive sex characterized by Amsterdam, British pubs, and everything that makes Europe, well, Europe. Yet this most important issue was lied about to the British people to calm fears that, as it turns out, are very real.

A British Parliamentarian was murdered the other day by someone who supposedly is in favor of a leave vote. That hideous crime was welcomed by the stay supporters and triggered a world wide stock market rally. The globalists have tried to use that killing as a means to put off the vote indefinitely. Such actions are tantamount to dancing on the grave of Jo Cox. Now some conspiracy theorists believe her killing was a false flag attack to undermine the referendum, I have my doubts, crazy people are everywhere and by definition, do crazy things. If the killer actually wants Britain to leave, as he is said to want by the media that calls itself unbiased, he wouldn’t have created sympathy for the stay crowd… unless he was a nut job.

Of course there is always the possibility that the European Union bureaucracy will not let Britain leave anyway. Look what they did to Greece. The European Union’s Bureaucrats ordered, by fiat, the rightfully elected leaders of Greece to vacate their offices, who were replaced by apparatchiks from the EU. Greece is now a technocracy. Such actions are not the works of accountable leaders but of autocrats who rule arbitrarily. That such firebrands obeyed the orders of unelected unaccountable despots can only lead us to believe there were threats behind the scenes. Greece is now basically a protectorate of the EU. Philip Dru would be pleased.

Such obvious conniving should be a clarion call to all the British people and indeed all the people of Europe. Germany, France, Sweden and Belgium are rapidly loosing their identities as well. Protests fill the streets regularly in those rapidly disintegrating former nations. Europe is promptly loosing it’s unique culture and societies. Of course that is the plan for the globalists who seek one world government. They call it “multiculturalism,” when it is in fact the destruction of all cultures, to be replaced with a culture of slavery and subservience. In this one instance I agree with Nietzsche, and it makes my skin crawl to do so, Europeans have as a matter of history had the mindset of slaves, now that mindset is showing itself to be a suicide pact as well. May the vote be free of tampering, honestly reflect the will of the British people… and be the spark that sets the fire of freedom blazing in Europe again.

Sincerely,

John Pepin