America’s Single Party System

April 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, elections only mean anything if there is a real choice. Not a beauty contest between two people who have the exact same views, platforms and plans, but a choice between two or more ideologies of government, economics and governance. Today, the progressives have managed to ensure that we never get a real choice about the future of our nations, our economic system or whether or not our leaders will follow our Constitution. Every election since Reagan has been between a progressive republican and a progressive democrat. No matter who wins, progressivism, and thereby Marxism, has won. Today is no different. With the near coronation of Donald Trump the republicans have picked their progressive and no matter who wins the democrat nomination they will have theirs very soon. So yet again we will have a choice, between a progressive and a progressive. Just like the old Soviet Union, Iran and many other autocracies. The people are given a false choice.

The United States was founded on libertarian principles. The founders, especially the anti constitutionalists, sought a government system that limited the people the least while limiting government the most. They set up a government that would allow the people to do pretty much as we see fit, limiting government in it’s ability to control us. The constitutional debate was about how to limit government’s power, how to control the tendencies of the elite to abuse power, how to ensure the people have the upper hand and how to limit the power of faction. The founders believed in liberty, a word that has been vanquished from our lexicon today. When was the last time you heard a politician say the word, “liberty?” Most of what we accept as lawful in our government would send the founders of our nation into conniption fits of rage and disappointment.

Libertarians are barred from the table of power. The new class uses a plethora of means to keep anyone who believes in liberty from the reigns of power. Libertarians are labeled with every derogatory meme that can be brought to bear. Since the new class controls the narrative there is never any effective push back even from the most absurd and spurious claims. Any politician who come anywhere near believing in the constitutional limits of government is seen as a threat to the established order. An order of autocracy veiled in peace, control hidden in protection and Marxism obscured by compassion. Reagan was the closest politician to our founding principles elected since Calvin Coolidge and he was hated to the extreme by the elite even today.

Romney typified the progressive republican. During the debates with Obama Romney couldn’t agree enough with Obama’s usurpations. Romney was full of compassion for the poor, he sought peace through strength and protection by control. In every election we are told this or that politician is “unelectable” because they believe in America and our founding principles. Of course the new class elite don’t use those words but that is exactly what they mean. Any politician who believes in limited government is destroyed by the new class controlled media, defamed by the political establishment as fringe, cursed on social media for not dropping out of the race, made a laughing stock by the culture and charged with whatever spurious claim that can be made up. The entirety of our society, government and culture attack any libertarian who seeks office.

This next election will be the same. The libertarian Cruz has finally been vanquished and Trump has all but won. Trump is a progressive zealot and has been his entire life. He supports every progressive policy, usurpation and regulation. He has helped fund the cultural Marxism that is polluting our culture and society like so much raw sewage. Trump has not only supported every progressive cause and politician but has given freely of his own money to promote them. Moreover, Trump has slopped at the trough of government cronyism. Since it is all but confirmed, the republicans will put up the uber progressive Trump, calling him a “conservative.” Hillary Clinton has admitted she is a progressive and Bernie Sanders is a Soviet style Marxist. The monikers the media place on them have as much to do with reality as Star Wars does space travel. Both are fiction designed to entertain and enrich the elite. So I wonder, which progressive are you going to vote for… The crony capitalist, the utterly corrupt woman or the outright Marxist?


John Pepin

Violence as a Means to Control Followers

April 24th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if your ideas mush be enforced with violence, those who leave your sect must be killed and you spread your ideology through conquest, you must have self esteem issues. Confident people, institutions and groups know in their hearts that their ideas are true and virtuous, therefore they allow people to come and go, spread their ideas through discussion and hold onto followers by the power of love and logic, not violence and threats. Groups, institutions and people who have self esteem issues however, are very different. Factions with self esteem issues know in their hearts their ideology is wrong and understand in their heads that no rational person would follow them without being coerced. Moreover, those factions, institutions, groups and sects that have self esteem issues can be reliably singled out by their treatment of dissidents, unbelievers and those who wish to leave the fold. The reason this simple concept is so important for humanity to learn, and never forget, is that violence is the means in which an evil, backwards, pernicious and stunting ideas pervade mankind.

This concept need not be manifested in outright violence, other forms of coercion work as well. Political correctness is another form of violence that demands unanimity of thought, knuckling under of unbelievers and advances the ideology of progressivism through fear and intimidation. Progressives know, because history is unambiguous about this, that their ideology is wrong. They know if their ideas were fully implemented, world wide government, world communism and world tyranny, the lot of mankind would suffer greatly. The results of their ideas is irrelevant to them, the goal is all that is important, and so the means can be anything that works.

Violence in all it’s forms… soft, personal, impersonal, vague, bloody or against one’s reputation, are ways to force someone else to do something they would otherwise not do. Since someone must be forced to do something believe something or think something, they would otherwise not do, that is further proof that the action, belief or thought is not in the self interest of the individual, but of the egoist forcing the point. We do things, believe things and think things that are in some way in our self interest. Human beings are universal about this. Even the most psychotically challenged among us act in their own perceived self interest.

Self interest however come in several flavors. Self interest can be rightly understood, it can be egoistic and it can selfless. Self interest rightly understood is to follow one’s self interest in an enlightened manner, sadly, self interest rightly understood is becoming more and more rare today. Selfless self interest is what saints practice. Jesus practiced self interest selflessly. An egoist follows his or her self interest selfishly. Egoists are the ones who will use violence against others to force those others to act, believe and think, that which is against their own self interest, regardless of it’s flavor. The egoist will demand from others that which the egoist would never subject himself to. Therefore all ideologies, movements, institutions and religions that use violence to force submission, come from egoism, are perpetuated with egoistic drives and eventually are quashed in bloody upheaval.

All ideologies that spread through fear, maintain their adherents with intimidation and subject others to threats, are wrong ideologies. What the egoists that run such ideologies fail to understand is that the tighter they hold their adherents the more the adherents seek to escape. Violence only goes so far. In the greater scheme of things, it is human heartedness, (logic and love), that always eventually wins out. Yes the egoist can lower humanity for a while, sometimes centuries and even possibly millennia, but eventually, human heartedness will win out. Because people are attracted to beauty and repulsed by evil. Violence can hold a person in evil for awhile but the evil that underlies the violence, the reason that violence must be applied, the revulsion people will eventually feel at the evil they are forced to embrace will become so strong even the threat of death itself will hold no power. That is when false, evil and pernicious ideologies that use violence to hold their adherents, pull in new followers and force unanimity of thought, collapse in bloody upheaval.


John Pepin

Choosing Slavery Over Freedom

April 21st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, it is a lot of work to forge a bunch of chains, raise a band of evil men, charge into a village, kill most of the people, enslave the rest and force march them across a continent, it is much easier to get your victims to forge their own chains, kill their own people, force themselves to march across a continent… by getting them to vote themselves into slavery. Since, as it would seem, people today seek the comfort, security and structure of slavery, they look for the politician who will offer them what they want. College kids cheer whenever their rights are taken away, free speech, freedom of conscience, freedom of religion, freedom to own property, even freedom itself is hateful to our children. They would rather a society where the most vile, perverted and selfish people rule with absolute power. Sadly, I suspect, once our children get what they so longingly desire, they might not be as happy there as they believe.

Cultural Marxism has brought us to this crossroad. Designed specifically to separate people from Christianity, the market system and the advances of the enlightenment, and return humanity to a state of slavery characterized by arbitrary rule, as during the feudal days, cultural Marxism has succeeded far better than even Marcuse, Chomsky or Trotsky could have imagined. Cultural Marxism essentially soaks the culture in raw sewage until we all reek so much we loose the ability to smell it. Because of our lack of standing up to it, cultural Marxists have taken over all forms of the media, the education system, government and law. From their positions of power the new class have poured raw sewage over the rest of us without much push back.

The education system has been changed from a system to educate children so they can live a good life, engage in the market system and be good citizens of a free nation, into a system whereby children are alienated from their parents, inculcated in absurdities, taught to value authority over discourse, unlearn what sex they are, throw off the values of Christianity in favor of Satanism and seek the comfort of slavery. Ask your own children if communism is bad, men using the lady’s room is wrong, or if our rights come from government or God… their answer will most probably startle you. The power over our education system has been moved ever higher in government, until now there is essentially no local control, but all control comes from the highest echelons of government. If you stand up in a school board meeting, voicing an opinion not accepted by the authorities, you will be forcibly removed and possibly arrested for excising your freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and parental control. Moreover, the trampling of your rights will be cheered by your own children.

Since we abdicated our responsibility to educate our children, instead giving government the power to instill whatever nonsense the elite see fit to pollute our children’s minds with, we have got what we deserve. We allowed it to happen by setting down when we were told to, allowing abortion on demand, turning a blind eye to the LGBT movement, ceding the environmental movement to Marxists, voting for the politician who claimed he or she would give us the most free stuff, halfheartedly protesting when our values were being systematically undermined, sending our children to government schools we know are designed to fail because we are too lazy to educate them ourselves and buying into the fiction that government can solve our personal problems. We built the forge that our children are now using to forge their, and our, chains.

Khrushchev said our children will happily vote for Marxism, and as it turns out… he was right. They have been swimming in the sewage of cultural Marxism for their entire lives. So much so they can see something white, know it is white, yet call it black with the absolute certainty of a zealot. Not just our children but many older people too seek the comfort of slavery. As you read this, your chains are being forged, your rights are being crushed, you may be killed if you push back, the forced march is being lined up and our own children will be the ones holding the guns to our heads. Democracy, according to Aristotle, is one of the wrong forms of government, because it is the tyranny of the majority over the minority. When the majority vote to make us all slaves, the elite will be too happy to go along, and than tyranny will be worldwide and complete… enjoy.


John Pepin

The Crony Capitalist Turned Politician

April 18th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, government corruption has two facets, one is the corrupt politician who benefits from the corruption and the second is the corrupt businessman who funds the corruption. Both parties get benefits while the nation as a whole pays a heavy price in reduced wages, lower economic output, crushing of innovation, high unemployment, less small businesses and a government that sinks into despotism. Since both the corrupt politician and the corrupt businessman are willing for the nation and all the other people in it to pay such a heavy price, for their narrow self interest, it stands to reason neither of them care much for the well being of the nation. To expect someone who has participated in the system as a corrupt businessman to stop the system which he has made so much money in, is like expecting a fish to stop breathing water and start breathing air, in short, it is absurd.

The price society pays for corruption is very high indeed. Loss of economic flexibility leads to many other economic woes. As the power of government is used to protect the businesses of corrupt businessmen, it must necessarily stifle small businesses and therefore, innovation. Innovation being the wellspring of the boom phase of the economic cycle. Since halting the catalyst of the boom phase of the economic cycle puts an economy into semi permanent recession, depression as it is called, is dangerous to the political elite, so they have come up with a way to have it both ways. They destroy the economic cycle then boost it with economic crack by printing money and giving it to their patrons. This rewards the corruption of the businessmen and the political criminals while creating a false sense of economic expansion in the people.

The political cost is even greater than the economic cost. Corruption has a way of growing. It feeds off the egoistic self interest of those who participate by transferring wealth from the people to the elite. Government power must become ever more intrusive and pernicious to protect the ill gotten gains of the corrupt politician and the corrupt businessman. Moreover, increasing government power both in scope and force, encourages the scheme to go on. Eventually the power of government grows to the point that government becomes autocratic. Liberty is lost and tyranny is born. The people become slaves to arbitrary laws, crony capitalists and government intrusion.

Those who participate in the system of corruption have vested interests in keeping the gravy train running. A great evil is seldom done immediately, a great evil is always preceded by small evils piled upon one another, until a great evil is a small step. Once a person is consistently doing great evils, like abusing the law and regulation for personal gain, it becomes very difficult to stop and go back to virtue. It has happened and those examples are renowned due to their rarity. Saint Augustine was just such a case. The fact Augustine is a saint is testament to how rare an event turning from corruption to virtue is. Those who have made great wealth by visiting great evils on mankind, are not likely to change without divine intervention, as in the case of Saint Augustine.

So, when someone stands before me claiming they were engaged in crony capitalism, but now are looking to put an end to it, I know I am being lied to. To do that, the corrupt businessman turned politician, would have to do violence against his own self interest. It is not normal for anyone to violence against their self interest, and that holds true especially for egoists, who have done great evils for great wealth. To claim that they are not “in the pocket” of whatever faction you care to name, is absurd, they are the one who owns the pocket! Of course, it is a simple thing to steam roll over the laws, our Constitution and mores, but it is much easier if the people can be tricked into voting for the corruption. There is a saying, “You can fool all the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you can’t fool all the people all the time…” Sadly, a crony capitalist or socialist can fool enough people, for enough of the time, to get elected to office… and the game goes on.


John Pepin

Political Labels

April 14th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, a label only has utility when everyone knows what it means, as the meaning becomes ever more arcane, that label becomes more of a means to bring a scheme to fruition than to explain. Political labels have become nothing more than a means to obscure the workings, motives and means of politicians, which shows political labels have become obscured. When people are unable to discern the means, motivations and plans of politicians it is impossible to rationally choose who will be best in any given political office. As the ability of the electorate to make rational choices about who our leaders will be the ability of leaders to trick us is ever more easy. This circle will continue until no political label has any utility at all and the people are utterly befuddled about politicians, parties, platforms and even economics… as it has today.

Imagine how hard it would be to communicate… if red meant blue in Europe, red in South America, green in the US and brown in Asia. There would be no common reference. I could be talking about how good a red apple was, understanding the traditional definition of red, and people in Asia would be revolted at the thought of me eating brown and therefore rotten apple, people in the US would believe I liked unripe apples and people in Europe wouldn’t understand at all what I meant. Our frame of reference would be worthless. Communication would be impossible. Such a situation would lend itself to all sorts of misunderstandings and fraudulence.

Light is a powerful antiseptic that is why darkness is so favored by politicians. In the bright of day everyone can see everything, but in the dark of night, much is hidden. Those who seek to defraud others need some darkness else their machinations would be seen. Light and dark are not the only ways to hide things, language, slight of hand, mirrors, etc… are all ways tricksters have beguiled the masses. Scammers know this tactic well and use it every time they ply their trade. Most politicians are at heart scammers and so utilize misdirection, obscurity and outright lies all the time.

Terms like left and right no longer have any meaning other than as a dog whistle to alarm people. Calling someone a leftist in the US means something directly opposite in Europe, neither of which may have any bearing on the actual position of the person so labeled. A liberal in Europe is a free market advocate but a Marxist in the US. Progressive has had so many iterations since the first progressives polluted the American political system, the only actual definition one can derive from it, is a slow path Marxist, even that doesn’t describe them effectively. Political labels and terms have been so muddied up, intentionally so, that without an actual list of the positions of any candidate, along with their actual votes on various issues, their intentions, plans and positions cannot be know to any degree whatsoever.

Since we cannot, or at least are hindered, in our understanding of where our politicians stand on the various issues facing the world today, the democratic process is severely undermined. It becomes much easier to pick a team and vote for that team rather than make informed rational decisions based on past stances and present platforms. Today, a Soviet style Marxist can be called a socialist, progressive, left, right, conservative or liberal. A laissez faire free market advocate can be called right, left, neocon, libertarian, conservative, liberal, etc… It has become impossible to decide what a politician stands for anymore, from the labels given to our politicians, and so the democratic process has become a beauty contest on the radio.

How could it be easier to trick people into voting against their best interests than a beauty contest on the radio? We cannot fairly or accurately judge the merits of any politician without knowing what they stand for or have voted for in the past. If all we have to go on is propaganda, that the media that calls itself unbiased vomit in our ears, we are easily manipulated. Informed is the opposite of ignorant, without information that has a consistent frame of reference, ignorance is the only option, lacking hours of research into each candidate. How many of us have the time, inclination or energy for that? Clearly the perversion of our language has allowed connivers to obscure the realities of our politicians and therefore governments. So when you hear this politician is far right, left, conservative or liberal, you have heard… nothing.


John Pepin

Government has Rights… We have Priviledges

April 11th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if you have to ask permission to do something, it is not a right. That should be pretty obvious. Unfortunately, it would appear that such a statement flies in the face of modern governments. They demand the people ask permission to do everything, while they do whatever they want, without question. The concept of liberty has changed, from the freedom to do as the individual wants, to the ability to do whatever the government wants us to do. What it really means is that we no longer live in liberty but a form of soft tyranny. Soft tyranny where in theory we are free but in fact we are limited by government in every way. Since we live in soft tyranny, what will the government or more precisely, those who run government, allow us to do. Obviously they will not allow us to act against the interests of government or the elite that run it. Moreover, it is in the best interests of the rulers to keep us from getting too rich, too much power or too much independence, that would threaten the elite and their monopoly on power, as well as their total freedom to exercise that power. What we are allowed to do then, under the regime of soft tyranny that we live under now, are things that don’t threaten the elite, go against their interests or get us too much power.

By dribs and drabs we have allowed our rulers, those who were once our servants, to usurp our power, political, economic and cultural. We have allowed our government to do for us. Government is only too willing to do for the people, in fact, government would prefer to do everything for us. The more dependent we become on government the less able we are to do for ourselves. The less we can do for ourselves the more power we cede to government. Eventually government becomes omnipotent and we are impotent. We have allowed, no encouraged, government to usurp our sovereignty. Once government is all powerful only violent bloody revolution can return the people back to liberty.

Either the power of government grows, while the power of the people shrinks, else the power of the people grows as the power of government shrinks. It is impossible for both to grow at the same time nor is it possible for both to shrink at the same time, one grows as the other shrinks. Every law, regulation, ordinance and edict, diminishes our power and grows the power of government. The more efficient government becomes at passing new rules for us to follow the faster we devolve to autocracy. Now with the advent of bureaucracy, government has tens of thousands of bureaucrats working diligently in the dark, passing regulations controlling every aspect of our lives. The power of government has never expanded so fast or so efficiently.

Government on the other hand sees less and less oversight. The media that is supposed to keep us informed, is on the payroll of the democrat party in the US, and is beholden to other partisan political ideologues in other nations. The media is the most biased it has ever been. Government itself today routinely breaks it’s own laws, violates our Constitution and the elite get away with the most clear transgressions of law, without any negative consequences. The government itself allows us less and less information into it’s workings, using excuses like national security, executive privilege and an arcane maze of rules to hide the workings of government.

We are barred from even the most mundane knowledge of what our governments are doing, how they are doing it and even why. The why is assumed to be in our best interests but does that really make any sense at all? Does government work in our best interests or the best interests of the elite? Look at every government program ostensibly designed to “help” some politically favored group. Farmers have been coddled since the FDR administration and the family farm has for all intents ceased to exist, the steel industry has been given a great deal of attention from government and now steel is mostly produced overseas, education has long been a leading project of government and now our children graduate school unable to read, write, do basic math or pick the US off a globe. Everything government touches, in the name of helping us, is destroyed.

Government and the elite on the other hand are empowered. Government hatches whole new departments to destroy that which they have pledged to help. The department of energy is the poster child for government failure but has a budget that exceeds 9 billion dollars annually! NASA, which was initially designed to allow the US to put human beings into orbit and beyond, has failed so bad that only now since the 1950’s, the US cannot put a man into space but needs to rely on Russia. There is not one single department, program or initiative that has not failed. Failed in their stated objectives, but succeeded wildly in growing the power of government. That is because, if they were to succeed, the need for them would go away… and that would be unthinkable!

The government need not ask permission of the people to do anything anymore. A handful of elite change the Constitution, as they see fit, altering the very nature of the relationship between the governed and the governors. Naked violations of law like Fast and Furious go unpunished therefore encouraging more law breaking. Even the elite themselves get caught red handed violating their own laws without consequence. Remember Al Gore saying there is no overriding legal authority? There wasn’t for him, but when Dinesh Dsouza was caught breaking the same law to a much lesser extent, there was. We on the other hand, need to ask permission to do anything. Buy a gun, get government permission, start a business, get a license and permits, engage in religious acts, get government’s approval else pay stifling taxes, even driving a car is a privilege for citizens but a Right to illegal aliens. There is not one aspect of human endeavor that does not require first, the government’s permission, as the limits of government evaporate away like so much dew. The only question left is, how long before soft tyranny becomes hard tyranny?


John Pepin

On Judging the Humanity of a Human Being

April 6th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the the reason an unborn child must be taken as having full human rights is because, an existence cannot be judged until lived in it’s entirety, the whole cannot be judged by the part. Therefore, future life must be taken into consideration, whenever the humanity of any one of us is taken into account. The question whether or not a person has access to the rights enumerated in the various constitution is of the greatest importance. The fundamental rights of the individual are at stake, life and liberty. Questions of such weight must be answered carefully. To make a distinction between humanity or not, flippantly, is not simply immature but outright evil. All considerations must be taken into account and the future life of the individual must be taken into consideration.

There is a story of Solon and Croesus. Solon the lawgiver of ancient Athens was widely renown as the wisest man in the world at the time. Solon had just saved Athens from violent revolution, and had called upon the people of Athens to ostracize him in the name of liberty, as Solon considered his popularity to be a threat to liberty. During his ostracism Solon was traveling the world when he landed upon the shores of Lydia. Lydia was one of the richest countries on the planet at the time. Upon hearing that the renowned Solon was traveling his country, Croesus, the king of Lydia sent for Solon to meet him.

Solon met Croesus in Croesus’ magnificent throne room. After talking for a bit, Croesus became impressed with Solon’s acuity and intellect, so he asked Solon, “Am I not truly the happiest man on Earth?” To which Solon responded, “I have no idea only having just met you.” So Croesus told his people to give Solon a tour of Lydia’s farms, Croesus’ treasury and harem. After Solon had been shown all the riches, people and agricultural wealth of Lydia Solon returned to Croesus’ throne room. After being asked again if Croesus was not indeed the happiest man Solon said… no.

Solon had met a woman who’s sons died pulling her wagon full of goods to the Olympic games, She, Solon said, was happier then Croesus. Croesus fumed, surely and old woman who’s sons had died could not be as happy as the richest man on the planet. Croesus pushed further. “Than I am the second happiest man ever…” No, Solon replied again and related another sad story. Croesus became infuriated. “Begone from my presence!” Croesus demanded. Solon left but turned as he left and said, “The happiness of a life cannot be determined until that person has breathed his last.”

Years later Cyrus the great invaded Lydia. Cyrus’ camels terrified Croesus’ horse infantry routing Lydia’s cavalry. After Cyrus had captured Croesus he ordered Croesus burned at the stake. A huge pile of dry wood was stacked and Croesus was dragged to it. As Croesus was tied to a stake at the top of the pile Cyrus asked Croesus if he had any last words before being burned to death. Croesus shouted to the ghost of Solon, “You were so right Solon, it was I who was the fool!” Cyrus was curious. He asked Croesus who this Solon was, a God perhaps? Croesus related the whole story of Solon’s visit to Lydia, Croesus’ question and Solon’s answer. Cyrus was so impressed that he ordered Croesus untied and made Croesus his chief advisory.

The moral of the story is… the life of a man cannot be judged until he has breathed his last. Croesus thought that because his circumstances were great that they would always be great. He made the mistake of judging a whole based on a part. The whole can only be judged in the whole, no part is ever sufficient to judge the whole. If you were judged by your eyes only the observer might think a human is wet, fragile and spherical. The same applies to age. If another observer saw only an old man that observer might think the entirety of mankind is to be shriveled, wrinkled and bent over. Clearly, that is not the true quality of man. To judge a human in the same way as having no worth because they are merely a fetus in the womb, is judging a person by a part, while ignoring the whole.

Future life cannot be predicted with any accuracy but it need not to give a human being value. A human life cannot be judged worthless or worthy by her hair, his stamina, her wit, his intellect, her wisdom or his age. Such are parts and do not make up the whole. Only the whole can be judged accurately. Therefore to judge a person not a person based on a part is to commit a logical fallacy. A fallacy that can end the life of a human being in the name of political correctness, expediency and selfishness. To deny a human being is a human being based on a part and not the whole, is a form of malevolent ignorance forwarded by egoists to lower humanity, since the loss of any human being diminishes us all, especially one with such promise as a baby, unborn or not.


John Pepin

The Double Standard is Slavery

April 4th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, today while the lowest of us are held to the highest standard, the highest of us are held to the lowest standard. The mechanism of it is appeal to authority. Of course that was what the Enlightenment was all about, rejecting appeals to authority and settling arguments by logically reasoned, rational discourse. Rational discourse however, is and has been, a means for the people to wrest power form the elite and so is discouraged. In doing so, those who run our governments, banks, corporations, journals, and adjudicate law, are devolving us back to a time and philosophy that predate the Enlightenment, to a form of slavery. Think about it, is a slave allowed to do that which a master can, of course not. The master has free reign to do whatever he or she wants and the slave must toe the line. What if a slave acts up and does something the master disapproves of? The slave is punished. The more obvious the double standard becomes, the more secure the elite feel in their dominance over us, now that the double standard cannot be denied our slavery is all but complete.

The Enlightenment was a watershed event in human understanding. It rejected appeals to authority, which prior to the Enlightenment, was the basis for all discussions. If the authority said something, it became the truth regardless of the absurdity. The Enlightenment made the case that disagreements in the sciences, politics and economics should be decided by rational discourse. The person with the most logical best reasoned argument would win. This doctrine gave rise to the market system, the industrial revolution, constitutionalism, science and a constantly rising standard of living. Such an important advance in human understanding should be protected, nurtured, enshrined and taught so it can keep benefiting the whole of humanity. Sadly, it gets in the way of the elite’s interests and so has been hidden, perverted and mischaracterized.

Constitutionalism was probably the most important advance that came directly from the Enlightenment. Science, it can be argued, was more important, but science in and of itself cannot raise the standard of living, or the humanity of a people, limited government does and limited government gives rise to the conditions that allow science to flourish. Constitutionalism, and along with it, limited government, was a rational reaction to the history of human governments. Many had been birthed in liberty but had always aged into tyranny. A constitution is a contract between the governed and the governors describing what powers the government has and what powers are reserved for the people. Since mankind’s first attempts at writing constitutions the idea of a constitution limiting government has been perverted by the elite to empowering government. Like Obama said, the US Constitution is a charter of negative liberties, in that it limits what government can do to you but in Obama’s view, a constitution should limit the people rather than the government, empowering government to do for us. That is the modern philosophy that returns us to a doctrine of appeal to authority and thereby… slavery.

Why wouldn’t everyone want to be a slave? You get three hots and a cot, your day is planned for you, your freedom to act is strictly enumerated, you have free healthcare and you are protected. Liberty is why people hate being slaves. We all crave liberty. Liberty comes from equality. When some people are allowed more liberty than others, the argument cannot be made there is equality, and if there is not equality, there is no real liberty. Those who are limited in their actions are the slaves and those who have freedom are the masters. If a slave speaks back to his master he is punished and made an example of. A slave’s actions require permission from her master while a master’s actions require no permission from their slave.

Today we are awash in double standards. Al Gore was caught red handed violating campaign finance laws, and had the audacity to stand before the nation declaring there is no overriding legal authority to hold him to the law, and that was accepted by the slaves. Hillary Clinton was caught red handed using an unsecured server to store top secret information putting the entire nation at risk and to date there is no negative consequences for it. If you or I, on the other hand, were to violate campaign finance laws as Dinesh D’souza did, we would go to jail, as he did. If we were to endanger national security, even accidentally, we would be imprisoned. The elite, like Tim Geithner and Charlie Rangel, regularly get caught lying on their taxes with no punishment, if you are caught doing it to a much lesser extent, there are life altering consequences. As Obama was threatening gun owners and sellers along the Mexico boarder with sanctions, for supplying Mexican drug cartels with weapons, Obama himself, as it turned out, was the one supplying the weapons! He faced no such sanctions however. The list of examples where the elite, our masters, have liberty where we don’t could fill a tome the size of the national register.

Global Climate change is the best example of how the elite are moving us away from the advances of the Enlightenment back to appeal to authority. You are not allowed to question the voracity of man made climate change because the authorities have made their determination. Arguments are even met with threats of imprisonment. The concept of limited government has been so veiled in propaganda, misdirection and taught ignorance, most people believe the liberty of others is a bad thing, and so destroy their own liberty by their lack of understanding. We have become so ignorant, needy and selfish we allow our noses to be rubbed in a double standard. That double standard is proof positive there is no true equality, and therefore, no true liberty. When some people are above the rules, they are the masters, and when others are below it’s protections, they are slaves. You are a slave, even if not in name, but in fact.


John Pepin

Limited Government or Usurpation

March 30th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, what limit to the law if the lawmakers are not held to it, furthermore, if the lawmakers do not follow whatever constitution they are supposed to, then what limit on government? Law then must become mere usurpation and government must serve the elite not the people. It is a self evident fact that when a class serves only it’s own narrow interests, economic destruction ensues, social upheaval follows and violent revolution comes shortly after. History is unambiguous about this. In fact, there are names for the various wrong forms of government enumerated by Aristotle, Tyranny when a monarch serves only his own interests, oligarchy when the aristocracy (elite) serve themselves and democracy when the polis is tyrannical. Everyone is served best when everyone serves everyone.

The class warfare theory of human history is undeniably false, at least as it pertains to economic classes since most of human history has seen tension between factions of the elite, and only rarely between the elite and the people, but when class is defined as faction then it holds some truth. Faction is like fire, it consumes a nation, leaving it in ashes. Every great nation, city state and empire has seen this happen to it. At the outset all the people work together to build a great society. Once the society has been built, the people split into factions, each vying for themselves. The more prosperous the nation becomes the more factious the people become. Naturally, the faction that has the most power is the one to come out on top, these are almost always the lawmakers.

Those who write the laws may be the people as in ancient Athens, the aristocracy as in Venice or a monarch as in feudal Europe, but in all cases there is a defined group that writes the law. When a monarch writes law that benefits all of society, that society flourishes, and when he or she writes laws to serve him or herself, then the country crumbles. The same holds true if the lawmakers are a class, faction, heirs, elected or appointed. The type of government is also irrelevant. Monarchy can have liberty, private property and prosperity while democracy can be illiberal, usurp private property and be filled with poverty. What generates wealth, liberty and prosperity is that the factions, classes and groups work for the benefit of the whole.

Lawmakers usually are not constrained in their actions. There is no overriding legal authority to hold them to their laws or constitutional limits, except the police and military, which they have total control of. If the lawmakers choose not to hold themselves to their own laws then why would they limit the law? They could freely use law to advance their personal self interests with impunity. Passing laws that move ever more of the national wealth into their own hands would be a snap. Money isn’t the only thing that can be usurped. If they sought sexual gratification rather than wealth then they could molest interns as they wanted, if they wanted to never be criticized they could pass laws to jail anyone who criticized them and if they desired godhood they could merely have statues made at the public’s expense and placed in city centers. If those who make the law are not held to those laws there is no limit to the usurpations they can engage in.

Constitutions were an invention to constrain those who write the law, but even under a constitution, if the lawmakers don’t hold themselves to it, no matter how well written, how insightful or how intelligent the framers were, it is moot. Since people are usually unwilling to hold themselves to a rule that limits their self interest, especially egoists, then constitutions cannot function alone. To argue those who make law are somehow not human but angelic is to argue up is down. Especially in the light of past human governments, where the lawmakers were not held to their own laws, or indeed the constitutions that were designed to constrain them. Until the lawmakers are forced to follow every law and letter of the constitution, there can never be real liberty, true prosperity, no one’s private property or person is safe from usurpation. Until there is a NUMA or Fourth Branch, creeping tyranny will ever hold mankind in it’s cold selfish clasp.


John Pepin

Individualism and Egoism

March 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the egoist demands liberty for himself but slavery for everyone else, while the individualist seeks liberty for everyone else and self control for herself. There is a tension that is inherent in egoism that results from this underlying conflict. The egoist demands from others that which he is unwilling to give. Individualism however lacks the conflict since the individualist demands of himself more than he demands from others. This vein in human relations passes through many other qualities of personality. Moreover, it has profound implications in the wealth of a society, it’s civility and social cohesion. Sadly, egoists seek political power to assuage their egos, while individualists humbly seek to live their lives in peace. This is why government is such a destructive force, those who should be in power are not and those who should not be, are.

Egoism is an immature human trait that has held humanity back since the dawn of time. Sociopathy and psychopathy are extreme forms of egoism but not the only ones. Egoism takes many forms. The egoist need not be unbalanced only selfish. The “great men” of the ancients had egoism in common. An emperor will invade a peaceful neighbor killing thousands, a king will execute a subject for something he does all the time, an aristocrat will order someone flogged for an inadvertent insult, and a bureaucrat will charge and fine or imprison someone for violating an arcane impossible to know regulation that the bureaucrat made up that afternoon, all without a spec of sympathy, remorse or humanity.

We are born egoists and slowly grow out of that immature state to the wisdom of adulthood by the efforts of our parents and society. Of the two however, parents and family life are the biggest positive factor in our maturing. Philosophers have described the maturing effect of family life since the time of Socrates and Confucius. The destruction of the family has shown some of it’s pernicious effects in the rise in the percentage of the population that are egoists. With the rise in the population that are egoists, social cohesion must fail, our economy can only be depressed and our governments naturally become tyrannical.

Individualism on the other hand is a mature state of being. The individualist is tolerant because she seeks tolerance of herself, he is forgiving since he wishes to be forgiven, she is compassionate because she understands people are flawed including herself and he is honest since he wants others to be honest with him. The individualist seeks to be left alone and doesn’t seek power over others. It is learned in the family environment. We each learn to get along with our siblings by the give and take that family life demands. The actions that betray egoism are discouraged by our parents. Lying, stealing, fighting, etc… are all things immature children do. Those actions are punished by good parents teaching children not to be selfish but tolerant.

The vein of holding others to a higher standard than oneself, exposes itself when those with no tolerance demand their evil actions not only be tolerated, but appeased. An egoist will demand their antisocial, selfish and even violent actions be tolerated by others, while at the same time being intolerant of anything she doesn’t like, even the most virtuous actions. Simply demanding tolerance for the intolerable actions of an egoist is not enough but the rest of us must participate. Like the Mapplethorpe exhibits that were intended to offend Christians. Christian individualists tolerated that the exhibit existed but were upset that they were made to pay for it. Meanwhile those who forced Christians to pay to be offended, demand they not be offended by Christianity, let alone pay to promote it.

Political power is to the egoist as heroin is to a heroin addict. The egoist is an immature small person, who holds himself to a very low standard, if indeed he holds himself to any standard at all. Yet the egoist demands everyone else toe the line and will use violence to force tolerance and even participation in their childish antisocial actions. Government is the perfect place where the egoist can get her wants met. The coercive power of government allows the egoist to enforce her own twisted desires on the rest of society. The government’s monopoly on violence gives the egoist the security to apply violence to anyone who seeks independence from the egoist’s will. That is why government is such a powerful force for destruction, economic, social and civil, governments are populated by egoists and shunned by individualists. The exact opposite of what would form good government.


John Pepin