The Hypocrisy of Censorship

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, to paraphrase Alexander Solzhenitsyn, no one has the right to silence another. Now, I have not read The Gulag Archipelago, I have only read excerpts and watched videos about it, so please forgive me if my arguments supporting his philosophy mirror his. It is important to understand both the negative effects of the arrogant attitude, that one has the right to silence another, as well as the logical fallacy underlying the notion. To believe that is to be a hypocrite… because no one wants to be silenced themselves. Moreover, the same attitude underlays most of the greatest sins against humanity and God. Many may ignorantly accept such pernicious and destructive notions… and doing so only creates more evil in the world. So, if we want a world with as little evil in it as possible, we must strive to expunge all hypocritical concepts.

All sins are based in hypocrisy, which is the antithesis of the Golden Rule. The very understanding of the term “hypocrisy” requires as a prerequisite… empathy. Every major religion but one, for example, has as a basic tenet that rape is evil. Yet, even those who loudly claim rape is perfectly acceptable, would never want to be raped themselves! Even as they pretend rape of another is acceptable. Slavery is another example of a mortal sin couched as good, because how many people who advocate slavery as not evil, would want to be enslaved? How many of those despicable subhumans, who own slaves or enslave others, would say that their own slavery is acceptable? Murder is another example, how many who feel justified killing someone for whatever reason, would claim that they themselves should be murdered, for the same reason? The list of examples of the hypocrisy of such acts is endless. To silence another is just such a hypocritical sin.

Obviously, or maybe not so obviously, just because someone has the power to silence another, does not make it moral or just. A man has the power to rape a woman, a woman has the power to kill a man, everyone has the ability to steal and there is not one among us who cannot lie… but does that power make it right? Of course not! That we have the ability, and do not do evil, is proof of civilization in us. True goodness is not the lack of evil in a man’s heart, true good is having that evil and also the will NOT to do evil. It is not good to be powerless to do evil, because we are all capable of bad acts, especially those who pretend to be harmless. Those who wield the power of the state, have the full force of the nation at their disposal, to silence dissenters and other political views. Those leaders, who have the power to silence others, but do not, are good, and those who use power to silence others then, are evil.

Hsun Ching said, The congenital nature of Man is evil and the goodness in us is a learned trait. Our parents provide for our needs, and one of the most important, is the need to be civilized. We are born selfish, it is only through our interaction with our family that we learn to control ourselves, our family teaches us empathy, which leads to the understanding of hypocrisy. Those who haven’t been civilized are horrible to be around. Think of a brat. No one wants a brat in their home, no one makes friends with someone who is out of control, and those poor souls who have been poorly served by their parents by not being civilized become bad people. It s not their fault, the evil in them was not overcome by their parents. Yet those uncivilized among us would have us all believe they have the right to silence others. To that end, we are deluged with logical fallacies, like the notion some should be silenced for the good of the many.

That anyone claims the right to silence another is pure hypocrisy. What rapist wants to be raped, what murderer wants to be murdered and what censor seeks her own words censored? No, those prescriptions are for others, never the hypocrite engaged in them. Having the power to do a thing does not make it right or just, in fact, having the power to do evil, and not, is the definition of good. Since the nature of mankind is evil, and the good in us a learned trait, we are all subject to believing in self serving hypocrisies, like slavery, rape, stealing, lying, murder and censorship. Solzhenitsyn lived a life of oppression and terror at the hands of self serving uncivilized people, bereft of morality and empathy, who justified their lack of human compassion by claiming the “right,” to not only silence others but execute anyone who stood in their way, for the “good” of the many. Clearly such an attitude is in and of itself, self serving, and can only lead to evil. So, if we seek a world filled with evil actors, then accepting hypocrisy is a sure path to it, but if we seek a world of peace, love, prosperity and compassion, we must reject those who play word games to justify their evil deeds. It is as simple as that. As John Bradford said, “There before the grace of God go I…”

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

How To Limit The Power Of Corporations

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, both run of the mill progressives and conservatives agree, that corporations have too much power, where we vehemently disagree however, is how to curtail that power. Sadly, the average person has been spoon fed anti libertarian, conservative, and anti Christian propaganda for so long, many of us believe human beings who are categorized as such, by the intelligentsia, are at heart bad people… when nothing is farther from the truth. This is because it behooves the globalists to keep us focused on our differences, rather than realize we have so much in common… and become cohesive. Were we to come together, we could actually move the world away from where only psychopaths want us to go, to where we all know we want to go. We all agree that the “military industrial complex,” the “deep state” and “corporate America” are all tied together and are existential threats to individual liberty, the environment and oppression, where we differ is in how to control them.

Progressives believe that the only way to control such powerful actors is with a more powerful actor, namely, the government. They see the government’s role as in limiting the power of corporations over us. To that end they don’t have any problem granting government ever more power to control the ever growing power of corporations, a kind of race to the top. They believe government through the use of enlightened regulation, written by thousands of Philip Dru administrators, working diligently in their cubicles, can curtail the power of large corporations. Like the the Lilliputians tying up Gulliver they believe regulations can shut down the caustic power of corporations to rape the environment, stomp on worker’s rights, pay a livable wage and help mankind transition to a sustainable paradigm. All these glorious goods can be achieved, if only we cede enough power to government… according to progressives.

Conservatives believe that the power of corporations is derived from their control of government, through their access to so much money with which to lobby, buy senators and create “non profit” groups to sway government’s actions their way, and so to limit the power of corporations, conservatives believe we must first limit the power of government. Elected officials are above the law, they have little fear of reelection and they even have the taxpayer pay for their indiscretions. They only fear their donors. Corporate donors know this, and along with the occasional blackmail evidence, have our elected officials under their thumbs. With that power, our corporate masters can wield regulation like a long sword, cleaving the head from any would be competitor, enabling them to grow into fat cats. Even the most anti big corporation regulations serve to help big corporations, because they have the resources to meet burdensome regulations, where their smaller competitors don’t.

Everyone agrees corporations seldom work for the favor of their shareholders, almost never for the environment or their employees, and usually take customers for granted… but work only for the advantage of the executives. Glaring examples are like looking for rain drops in a downpour. From the fact Goldman and indeed all the “too big to fail banks,” regularly get hit with billion dollar fines for breaking the law and no one even loses their job let alone goes to jail, to sweeping regulations that are closed to the public but written by corporations, Net neutrality and The Trans Pacific Partnership come to mind. Even as a corporation hemorrhages customers and market share, the executives feed deeply at the trough, until they declare bankruptcy and wipe out the shareholders’ investment, while landing softly with their golden parachutes. In the new class lust for power, wealth and fame, everything else gets trampled underfoot.

So what then is the best answer? Give government unlimited power, in hopes it will use that power to limit the power of their corporate masters, or limit the power of government and take away the lever corporations have over the rest of us? It is clear the direction corporations want us to go, it is the direction they lobby for… give government absolute power over everything. That would benefit corporations the most. Since they pull the levers, behind the scenes, they will really be the ones we are handing the keys to the world to. On the other hand, we could try limiting the role, scope and power of government over the people, and force cumbersome top heavy corporations to face actual competition from entrepreneurs. Were that to happen, the foundation of giant corporations, their wielding of government to their own ends, would collapse, and so would their bulwark against real competition. The rise in small business would increase the demand for workers lowering base unemployment, the rise of entrepreneurs would increase worker productivity and also the standard of living, while the creation of a smaller sized business economy, would increase innovation to a much faster rate.

So… which method do you think will work better?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Family

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the singular advantage the human race has above all other species, is our capacity for love, and nowhere is that more evident than in the family. We are nurtured, protected and taught by our family. It is within the family that we learn to cooperate, share, act selflessly and indeed, love. Without the lessons we learn from our siblings, mothers, fathers, beloved aunts, and uncles, without those important lessons we would become barbarians. That is why the most touching stories are about orphans. A “brave new world” would not produce people capable of being civilized but only automatons, walking in a fog through life, wills crushed, hopeless, helpless and without mercy for one another. The family then should be protected at all costs as it is a font of humanity itself.

The world does not care about your existence let alone your feelings. Set a random man down in the wilderness, alone and without tools, and he will surely perish. Only in those places where the temperature stays moderate all the time, water is plentiful and food is easily available can a man survive naked, anyplace else, and let’s face it, every where is other than such an Eden, has as it’s singular purpose to kill you and I. If it is warm enough to survive, there are every manner of poisonous spider, snake and scorpion lurking, where they cannot live, we could freeze to death on a summer night. The world is set against our very survival and it is only through our tenacity, intelligence, skill and cunning that we have even survived, let alone thrived. Why then should a world that actively seeks our very destruction care about our feelings?

Whenever we see those poor souls in utter misfortune, you know they are separated from their family. The homeless come immediately to mind. People only become homeless because they do not have family to take them in, or if their family is too selfish to. It is within the protection of the family that we find shelter from the world’s most horrible wages. Most homeless have mild to severe emotional disorders, or are in the lower percentile of intelligence, and so have no place in a self centered society, especially in a world that seeks their death… except the family. A statistic we don’t ever see, and I wager will never see, is the number of people with mental illness and are functionally retarded, cared for by their family. The vast majority of are cared for with love and familiarity. Those who are dutiful to family then, discourage the worst outcomes for not only their own loved ones, but society as a whole and the human race by extension.

We are born not only fragile but needy as well. Babies can die if they are not held… even if all their other needs are met in spades. We, as human beings need love. It is as vital to our well being as food, water and air. Our uncles take us hunting, our aunts teach us sewing, our grandparents teach us family lore while our parents give us unconditional love, and do their best to civilize us, so people will not shun us when we get older. No other invention could teach such lessons as effectively as the family. There are some who say that those lessons could be taught by force, pain and usurped autocracy, rather than the family method of, softness, love, caring, and genuine God given authority, but I disagree. Moreover, our need for love, if not met early in life, leads to emotional disorders, which then lead to poor personal outcomes, like homelessness. Once one considers all the angles, the nuclear family must be protected and nurtured, it becomes a self interested solution.

Obviously, most of us are denied some facet of family, we may be missing our grandparents, lacking uncles, aunts, even parents and siblings. Each loss, even if we never knew them, diminishes the richness, familiarity, comfort and love we experience in our lives. As we age, we lose more and more of our family but at the same time we gain as well. Children add to our lives by giving us purpose and joy. They renew our zest for life simply by being around them. In the end we have to figure our gain is worth as much as our loss. Even if our loss is unbearable. Thankfulness for our time with our loved ones, gratitude for the ones we still have, and anticipation for those loved ones to join us in the future, is what makes healing possible. Every one of us will lose a loved one. The world cares nothing for our well being. That is up to us and our family. So, thank God for your family, no matter how messed up each of them are, they think the same of you… and all of you are right, so be generous with your love to your family, because there isn’t one of us who deserves it, nor one of us who doesn’t need it.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

That’s Racist!

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, when one lacks a logical argument… the resolute rascal can simply use the pejorative “racist,” as it is a good all around replacement for logic. Many times someone may lack a logical argument, when confronted by common sense, accosted by unassailable argument and when peddling a prevarication. Many times the sophist will have to change the subject rather than face a truth, he or she either cannot or would rather not answer, and so it is much better to go on the attack, inferring the other person is fundamentally a bad person, and since they are a bad person their arguments should be ignored by that fact alone. That attack is very effective. Our modern sophists, progressives, have elevated the slur to such heights, it can be used not only to attack a person directly, but to indirectly attack him or her, by attacking the very argument itself as racist. Anyone promoting lies has only this one tool to remember, the moment you have nothing to say that will not further your cause, call the other a “racist,” and you win by default.

When winning the argument is more important than what is right, truthful and correct, often it is necessary to use spurious logic and underhanded means to achieve that goal. Lets say, for the sake of argument, you wanted to be the supreme despotic autocrat of the world. To actually be that person, one must be by definition, cold to the suffering of others, else that position would never be attained nor held long if dropped in one’s lap. To be the despot is to be more than able to put someone to death for not doing what you ordered them to do, even if it was in direct violation of their personal self interest and human Rights… but to relish the act. Such a person would care nothing for lying or connivance. The tactic of changing the subject, sandbagging, ad homonym attacks and using the Hegelian dialectic would be well practiced.

Calling someone a racist shuts down real conversation. It changes the subject from what was being discussed, to the ad homonym attack implied, “why are you such a bad person?” One cannot argue under such circumstances. Not only does it both change the subject and make an ad homonym attack but it lowers the status of real racism. Exploiting such a tactic shows the person using it to be callous to the suffering of real racism, unwilling to argue the point on it’s merits, and by that admission alone, they concede they lost the argument. Because, if they had a real logical response, clearly that would have been the superior choice in the retort. Moreover, no real discussion, no exchange of information or meeting of the minds can be had, when one party is accusing the other of being a bad person.

Changing the subject to vilify the foe gets the winning argument off the table and replaces it with how bad your opponent is. Obviously, the conniver wants to be in the position to argue how bad his or her opponent is, rather than defend a lie they are pushing. Obviously it behooves the conniver to argue logically as long as permissible, but once a loose thread is pulled, the nuclear weapon… racist, can be pulled out, obliterating all conversation from that point on. The swindler believes he or she has won the argument but indeed they have instead admitted defeat. Diligent unbiased observers will quickly discern this, while partisans on the side of the deceiver will be blind to it, and those on the other side may not know in a fully articulated sense, how the floor was pulled from under them, but they will feel it. Because why argue a losing point when you can argue how bad a person your foe is?

What a wonderful tool that liars, connivers and reprobates have… in the word racist. To the true schemer, the question is not when to pull that tool from the tool bag but when. Should they change the subject to redirect the discussion, sandbag and claim it never happened, starting a crisis then feeding hysteria for that crisis to get people to demand what they would never have accepted before the crisis, (the Hegelian Dialectic), or change the subject to how terrible a human being the person arguing against them is. To someone willing to kill to make others do as they demand, such tactics are child’s play. Using them on the other hand, shows a callous nature to the suffering of others, no matter what propaganda they might spout. It shows to the disinterested observer that the swindler admits defeat in the arena of ideas, and so must go on the offensive in the arena of reputation, to save face. The diabolical tool or argumentation nuke, changing the subject to an ad homonym attack by claiming racism, is truly the tool of the infernal… and is used by progressives every chance they get.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Exclusion, Hate, Bigotry and Poverty.

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, there are many ways exclusiveness masquerades as inclusiveness. For a culture to be successful, economically, socially and technologically, it must integrate all people. Clearly, it is not possible to exclude some people, and have an integrated society. An integrated society is one in which, individuals are free, government serves all the people, everyone is given a stake in society early on and everyone is included. Denying one, so another feels better, is not the path to including everyone, it is the path to excluding some. I personally do not believe those who are peddling exclusion as inclusion are so stupid they believe it themselves. I think they have another agenda, but since that is pure a priori conjecture, or perhaps better put… a hypothesis. Nevertheless, if we actually do want an inclusive society, we must be on guard for logical fallacies, fallacies that lead us the exact opposite way we seek to go.

Denying Christians the town square, does not protect minorities, it excludes them. Keeping our religious practices from each other separates “us” from “them.” Including “them” in our religious services creates “us.” When a Christian says, “Merry Christmas!” To a Hindu, it is an inclusive act. That Christian is including that Hindu in the holiday season. When a Jewish person tells me “Happy Hanukkah!” I feel a kinship to him or her. That they thought enough of me to include me in their solemn worship, makes them seem less foreign to me, more like me, and that I am not alone. We all feel more kinship to people who include us and less to those who exclude us. So, including everyone in the Christmas season by placing a Koresh in the town square is an inclusive act. Embracing all non Christians by including them in our festivities, makes others no longer “them” but a part of us.

Allowing certain people extra leeway when it comes to violence and abuse, because of their culture and to better embrace diversity, is the very definition of exclusivity. Not only is special treatment exclusive but it is a horrible form of bigotry. The foundational assumption, is that the group that is given special consideration, is subhuman. What can be more bigoted than that? The group, arbitrarily defined because in the end all groups of people are separated by some arbitrary quality, is considered not to be sufficiently human to act civilized. Were I grouped and considered to be subhuman, rather than embrace the definition, I would revolt at it. Moreover, to define a group of people as subhuman, is to exclude them from humanity. Probably fed, clothed, housed and entertained, because after all, they can’t support themselves, poor things… “they” don’t have the intelligence, wisdom, work ethic, self control or strength.

Having “no whites” spaces on university campuses, to create a “safe space” for minorities, is as exclusive as it gets. I don’t find it at all ironic that the same political faction, the progressives, that stood for racial separation in their formative years with such notable Black haters, as Margaret Sanger in their ranks, would stand for racial separation today. Despite all their rhetoric claiming they stand for minority rights, there can be no minority rights if there is exclusion of any minority. When talking about minority, context is everything. In Detroit people of European descent are the minority, in the US people of European descent are the majority, but on the planet Europeans are again a minority. So when exploiting the arbitrary definition of “white,” to arbitrarily classify a group as a majority, we must accept the narrow context the progressive demands as a stipulation. Therefore the notion that there should be safe spaces for minorities that excludes “whites,” for being the majority, is based on two false presumptions. That “whites” are indeed a majority, except under some narrow defined context that in the real world is worse than useless, and that exclusion can in anyway lead to inclusion.

Successful cultures integrate the people, give everyone a stake in society and insure individual liberty, while right government’s role is to benefit all the people, not the rulers first, their bootlicks second and useful idiots third. One sure fired way to destroy a civilization is to create separated groups of people, angry at each other, considering each other “them,” narrowing the definition of “us,” and seed the whole mess with violence the police are powerless to stop, due to political correctness. Yet… such a paradigm is very effective at harvesting wealth and power from a culture. Obviously, selling exclusiveness is not a winner, so progressives dress exclusivity up as inclusiveness. It is also a reason progressives go after young people, young people have no life experience and are willing to believe in a glittering lie, and will reliably reject an ugly truth. It is up to us then, the awake and aware, to keep our culture and society on track. We can do that by pointing out when people with ill intent are using spurious logic, to move us directly away from where we want to go and where they pretend they are taking us, to a dark place of exclusion, hate, bigotry and poverty.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Tolerance, Stupidity and Weakness.

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, what you tolerate… you will get more of. If you tolerate your children lying to you, they will lie more often, if you tolerate your spouse stepping out, he or she will take on more lovers, and if you tolerate violations of our Constitution, the violations will happen ever more often and become more egregious, until the Constitution means nothing. Really it is mere common sense. Everyone from children to politicians understand that people will do more of what we get away with. It is human nature. While tolerance of other people’s foibles is a sign of maturity, tolerance of barbarism is absurdly and self destructive. A civilized person will ignore minor personal failings, but when the nature of the relationship is changed, due to intransigence, such tolerance is proof of weakness. Rest assured, our children know this innately, our politicians know this by experience, and invaders know this by edict.

People are self interested. We will do what benefits us… as long as it is tolerated. Armed robbery is quite lucrative, but is not tolerated, while rent seeking, manipulating stock and commodity prices, bribery, selling political favor and outright embezzlement, is tolerated. A multiplying factor in the negative effects of tolerance happens, when tolerance is given to select groups of people, and withheld from others. Obviously that is a form of bigotry, but a form that is not only tolerated today, but encouraged by the media, politicians and academia… politically correct tolerance you might say. If our bad actions are tolerated, since they give the person engaged in them a leg up on everyone else, it is only human nature to do more, and be more aggressive. Since certain people are allowed, by political correctness, to lie under oath, block streets protesting and praying, steal directly from their shareholders, sell political favor, etc… it is not their fault… it is ours for tolerating it.

It is ironic, we do not tolerate those things that do us no harm and have little effect on our society, but allow in the name of political correctness, those things that pose an existential threat to our culture, society and civilization. People who never bathe are not tolerated, they are ostracized, while people actively undermining our government with criminal acts are tolerated and indeed embraced. This paradigm is magnified when certain groups are tolerated while others are not. Such “tolerance” elevates arbitrary groups above the law, while others are diminished, to less than human beings in the eyes of the law. The media, most politicians, academia and the new class, for instance, was utterly intolerant of the Tea Party peacefully praying outside congress, while at the very same time, they not only tolerated but encouraged Occupy Wall Street… to smash windows, burn cars, spill human feces in bank lobbies, rape women and batter passersby. Clearly, peaceful praying is not a threat to civic order, while overt violence destroys civic order. Yet ironically, the one was tolerated… and the other not.

Tolerance is only civilized when it is enlightened tolerance. To tolerate that which is of minor inconvenience is a sign of maturity, tolerating a child laughing too loud in a store is a sign of mature tolerance, while allowing people to set up child sex trafficking rings is absurd tolerance. Clearly, it is not enlightened to tolerate heinous crimes against anyone, let alone children. Yet, many of us cannot stand a child laughing too loud as we eat in a fancy restaurant, but turn a blind eye to the crimes of Rotherham. Tolerating our leaders profiting from selling twenty percent of our uranium to an enemy, is self destructive, but intolerance of our President feeding koi in Japan, the wrong way, is childish and mealy mouthed. True tolerance is for idiotic, foolish and innocent foibles, while self destructive tolerance is for crimes against humanity, our Constitution and reason.

You get more of what you tolerate… so why are we tolerating such absurdities? Unless we as a society and people are utterly stupid and foolish, or weak, we must want our politicians to lie to us, our CEOs to steal from retirees, certain groups to create unrest, live under the threat of child abductions, oppression of Christians for their faith, move our nations from liberty to oppression and disarm law abiding citizens… so criminals will not have to worry about being shot when they rob a liquor store at gun point. Today we, encouraged and led by our government, tolerate behavior that threatens our very existence, and we are told to be utterly intolerant of that which is merely annoying. So, we as a people in the West have to ask ourselves, what do we want more of? Do we want more terrorism, political evildoing, crime, incursions on our Constitutional Rights, slavery and violence, because by our tolerance of these things… we must, because if we didn’t, we would not tolerate them.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Astounding Times We Live In…

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… we are in amazing times. Today, we have a President that faced calls for his impeachment and a special prosecutor, before he even took the oath of office! His legitimate executive orders are routinely countermanded by activist judges and he is lambasted in the media constantly. Many even claim he will be assassinated before his term is up! Yet the Secret Service does nothing to prevent it. The entire elite stand as a unit against him and his presidency. We have a President who, before he took office won medals for his anti racial stands, but now is vilified as a racist. He was known for his philanthropy before running but now is called a hater. He is so loathed by the elite that the media routinely make up stories about him to lower his standing. Yes, what astounding times we live in!

Trump is a member of the bourgeoisie. The new class intelligentsia and intellectuals despise the bourgeoisie and they have made no effort to pretend they are open minded. His election was seen as a slap in the face of the new class elite by the people. Us filthy unwashed had the audacity to stand up to their usurpations. For that they have little room in their black hearts for forgiveness. Trump must be destroyed, as do we… for our audacity, to think we could run our own lives without the constant oversight and surveillance of the elite. The elite who cannot boil water, without an illegal alien doing it for them, believe the rest of us must bow before them and accept their edicts, as to how to run our lives. You know… because they are so much smarter than you and I. Trump is a direct affront to the elite. They had planned on getting total power, and now they have to settle for almost total power… all because we elected a member of the despised bourgeoisie.

In normal times, calling for the impeachment of a President before he even takes office would be considered unhinged, today it is considered enlightened, as long as the President is not a progressive! While Obama skated on such astounding scandals, like Fast and Furious where he shipped weapons directly into the hands of violent drug cartels while vilifying honest gun dealers for it, Benghazi where the entire Obama administration lied about the cause and that they refused to help our people, or the IRS targeting groups for their political beliefs,.. Trump is attacked for made up allegations like a prostitute urinating on a bed. The double standard couldn’t be more obvious. If not for the over the top negative reporting on Trump, the people would reject the new class progressive elite, for their unhinged reaction to the election.

We, the people, are the true target of the elite’s vitriol. You and I are the ones who voted Trump in and the elite are set on making us pay for our intransigence. While the new class elite despise Trump, we are the real target of their hatred. They despise us, the elite consider us too stupid to run our own lives, we lack their education and indoctrination to think correctly, our common sense enrages the elite and our detestable love of freedom incurs their wrath as well. To the elite you and I are the real enemy. We see that in the way our government works in the dark. They claim secrets are for “national security” but in reality it is for their protection we are kept in the dark. The example of Benghazi works well to illustrate the situation. We were lied to for political expediency and the rest of the new class elite went right along with it. Other governments knew the truth but the American people were lied to. Obviously since other governments knew, but the people were lied to, the lies were not to protect us from other governments… but to protect the new class elite from our enlightenment.

Now that Trump is in office he is further infuriating the new class elite. Releasing the JFK files shows the elite to be connivers who are utterly bereft of morals. The old saw that it was a lone gunman narrative is being crushed by the reality the files are illustrating. Trump’s cutting regulations is unacceptable to the elite, who put those regulations in place, to keep us from competing with their politically favored companies. His attempt to ban immigrants who come here to do us harm drives the elite crazy. The chaos that Islamic terrorism brings is the means they plan on using to lever even more power. Everything the elite do is for their benefit and comes at cost to the rest of us. To the new class elite, our out dated Constitution is not a document to live by, but a tool to be used to destroy anyone, (like Trump) who would live by it. Yes, the times we live in are unprecedented, but rest assured, if a progressive got the treatment Trump has, the media would be calling for beheadings… which is just another sign of the times.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

To Be Angry, or Grateful… It’s Your Choice

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we all have plenty of reason to be angry, God knows not one of us has escaped misfortune, or… we could be grateful for the experiences, knowledge, wisdom and maturity the totality that our life has given us. Either stance is logically permissible. By the time we are five years old we have been dealt a bad hand. We have had to go from a comfortable crawl to learn to stand and walk, which, if you think about it, is pretty unfair. On the other hand, one could be grateful for the ability to stand and walk on one’s own. It is in humility that our gratefulness is fully matured. True gratefulness by definition, is based in the humble recognition that it, (the good we are grateful for), might not have been there. As a result of our free will, we get to choose whether to be angry or grateful, along with all that implies. What power over our own happiness and indeed contentment, along with the power over our station that free choice gives us.

The situation we find ourselves in, are only part of the equation of how an episode in our lives comes out. Our reaction to that event also has to be factored in. At no time is this more true than… months, years and even decades after the fact. Anger at being treated unfairly is one reaction that is fully justifiable, or grateful it didn’t turn out worse, is another. Multiply the effect of anger over months, years and decades, and that justifiable anger results in bitterness and resentment. How you feel about a thing does not have to be how you think about a thing. Moreover, the more you will your logic over your emotion, the stronger mentally you will become. Your will doing mental push ups. Gratefulness mitigates almost any situation. Clearly, there are some that in the immediate, no amount of will can overcome, but time allows the will to gain the advantage.

Gratefulness leads inexorably to happiness. The two go hand in hand. You could search, as one does the black swan, for a grateful person who is unhappy, but if you do find one, by definition you haven’t found someone grateful. Anger on the other hand leads to unhappiness. When have you met someone in perpetual anger who was deeply happy? You haven’t, because the angry are unhappy, just as the grateful are glad. Making it clear that our happiness is in our own hands, not anyone else’ nor the situation we find ourselves in. Without spending most of our time, and mental energy being angry, allows us more time to focus on the environment we find ourselves in. Obviously, those who focus outwardly advance in whatever endeavor they undertake, while those constantly focused inwardly, trip on every stumbling stone of life.

Happiness and contentment are tightly correlated states of being. What good is it to be the richest person on the planet if one is not content? Living with some mosquito buzzing in their inner ear, never quieting it for long by buying stuff, sex or prestige, because it exists on the blood of their anger. To be content makes the life of anyone sweet, to live malcontent renders a life ill lived. If she is content, the poorest person on the planet lives a good life. Moreover, contentment leads to a better situation. People who are happy, and therefore content, will find more and more opportunities in life. Others find people who are deeply happy to be magnetic… especially people with power. Humble gratefulness then, along with allowing us better focus outwardly, makes us more magnetic, which gives us power over our station.

It all falls back on that choice, the astonishing power of free will, to be angry, because God knows, we have plenty of reason to be, or grateful, because of the life, knowledge and wisdom our experiences gave us. The one thing we should be on guard for is, comparing ourselves to others, which leads to arrogance rather than humble thankfulness. So you could say that choosing to be humbly grateful… will lead to happiness, which will lead to contentment, which then leads to the better standard of living that a better situation gives us, which of course, leads to more things to be grateful for. But then again… there is so much to be angry about. It’s your choice.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Why Our Immigration Policy Is What It Is…

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, immigration policy for any nation should seek immigrants who will benefit the host nation, and reject those who would lower it. Law abiding people should be preferred over law breakers, hard workers over the lazy, the agreeable over the disagreeable, the honest over the dishonest, good over evil and those who seek to integrate over revolutionaries, no matter their stripe. It would seem to me that this is common sense but apparently the leaders of the world have the exact opposite view. One must wonder as to the logic behind seeking immigrants that will go directly on welfare, break our laws, be dishonest, foment revolution and those who are patently evil? Why would our leaders seek such people to be new members of our societies, while rejecting those who seek to integrate, are good, hard working, agreeable law abiders? Clearly the elite are not stupid, they must know what they are doing, so why?

The elite claim to be our betters. They tell us constantly how stupid we are, and that we need to be told what to think, how to act, what should make us happy, how many children to have, how many windows to put in our homes, how hot or cold we should keep those homes, how many hours to work, who should be able to do what, what kind of car we should drive, the gas mileage of that car, what to eat, etc… all the while doing the exact opposite themselves of what they force us to do. Anyone who has such over the top arrogance, clearly, is someone who considers themselves superior to the common run of man. Since they consider themselves to be so much better than us, they must have a reason for importing so many people who will not fit in, will break our laws, will never be employed, come from a rape culture, who believe lying is a sacrament, many of which are provably evil?

The elite have always wanted permanent power, not just for them but for their half witted offspring as well. The elite are human beings, self interested, selfish, egotistical and bereft of morals. Not like the common run of man, but to a far greater extent since their avarice, abuse and actions go unpunished and most of the time… are rewarded. As egoists the elite seek their own benefit regardless of the negative consequences to the rest of humanity. The egoist connivers we have today as our leaders then seek power, sex, money and fame above all else, the lot of Mankind is of little importance to them, so they grab with gusto everything they can, and use whatever means is at their disposal to meet their selfish wants and desires. So it cannot be argued that the elite do not have a plan why they are importing chaos.

Marx said, when the people reject the revolution, change the people. The people of the West have repeatedly rejected socialism. WWII was a rejection of national socialism and the Cold War was a slap in the face to international socialism. Yet socialism is perfect for the elite. Under the socialist system, the leaders get all the goods of the economy, without having to produce a single good for anyone else. In Cuba for example, everyone is a slave to Castro and he owns everything, every building, every car, even every spoon. The people of Cuba have no say in anything. They are told what to think, do and say. Any deviation from political correctness is punished severely. Having wealth is not sufficient for a hog, nor is mere limited power, the truly greedy seek everything and to make slaves of the rest of us. In that, Socialism is the perfect system, and the elite lust for it.

So it seem clear the elite want to change the west to socialism or at least some form of autocracy. To do that they must the conditions for it. The best way to achieve this is to introduce chaos. Machiavelli said that tyranny is better for the people than chaos, because in chaos people cannot do business and therefore many starve. When the leaders have created chaos in society, the people will demand order, and when a large part of the population are out of control, the only way to reign them in is by draconian surveillance, regulations and punishments. Perhaps that is why the elite are intent on swamping Christian nations with Muslims, democratic nations with revolutionaries, prosperous countries with welfare seekers, good lands with evil people and safe places with law breakers… to change the people and cause the rest of us to demand tyranny. The new imports are used to tyranny and will accept it as the norm, and the rest of us will demand to be oppressed… to stop the chaos. Of course, only a conniving turd would do such a thing, but that is exactly who we have as leaders today, scheming fiends.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Freedom of Expression is Society’s Relief Valve

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, no culture, people or nation can call itself civilized until it not only allows, but encourages freedom of expression. Human beings are social animals. We tend to congregate, most of us are drawn to live in large cities, yet even with, or perhaps because of our social nature, tensions build up in society. No matter how constituted, any group of people will build up tensions, which is only exacerbated by limiting communication. Clearly then, without freedom of expression to release some of that tension, if it build’s up too much, limiting that ability to communicate will result, indeed it can only result… in violence. Some may mistakenly believe that the people can be monitored sufficiently and regulated effectively enough to hold off violence. Despite the growing absurd violence we see in our ever more m surveilled and regulated society. When government will do nothing to stop the violence by savage factions, their aggression will eventually generate a backlash from their victims, and societal cohesion will break down. All because freedom of expression was blocked.

Take a pressure cooker, fill it with beans and water, close it and weld the release shut. No matter how strongly it is built, eventually the heat will cause the thing to explode, the weakest link will fail, leading to catastrophic containment failure. The complex system of a pressure cooker therefore can be considered to have experienced a long tailed event, ie, the container catastrophically failed due to the release being welded shut. Groups of people are also complex systems, our ability to communicate between ourselves freely and without overt threat of violence, (since all communication between humans contains some undercurrent threat of violence), allows us to drain off some tension. Block our ability to communicate however, and the tension cannot be drained away, it builds until eventually we encounter a long tailed event… catastrophic failure of societal cohesion.

Censorship by whatever means builds tension, rather than relieves it, and so is detrimental. Government censorship is the most obvious yet there are other forms of censorship that are even more pernicious and problematic. It should be obvious that any group that has, and especially one with a history of doing violence to suppress the freedom of expression of others, is engaging in censorship. That group need not be governmental, it can be an economic faction, political faction, religious faction, racial faction, gender faction, or any other arbitrary idea someone can exploit to subdivide the human race. There is also the soft governmental censorship of political correctness. Political correctness is, as it’s name states openly, is political in nature. It is the will of the political elite, effected by the cultural elite, as to how we are supposed to self censer, in order to be considered correct, or in other words, considered “cool” by the cultural elite, and thus be correct with the political elite.

The faction shutting down freedom of expression is the one that needs to be taken far less seriously. Since clearly censoring another is by its very definition, oppression, those who do it are oppressors. It then stands to reason that a faction that at their core is oppressive, then the rest of their policies, most probably are tyrannical. By their own actions, those supressing the voice of others, discredit their own arguments! Any society that takes the arguments of factions that have discredited themselves is one that will soon see difficulty. If we don’t want more difficulty in our futures, we must give the opinions of those who seek to censor us, every bit of credit they deserve… a hearty laugh.

Our society is rapidly losing freedom of speech. That statement becomes more and more unassailable every day. From out of control political correctness, thought laws in the form of hate crime legislation, violent protests on university campuses to shut down freedom of expression, to outright legal censorship in Europe and even Canada to prevent criticism of Islam, our civilization has openly given up on free speech and has replaced it with absurdities. Our elite are effectively welding the release valve shut on the pressure cooker, that is every society of human beings there ever was and ever will exist, and the end result can only be, a long tailed event… the catastrophic failure of societal cohesion.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment