Archive for the ‘philosophy’ Category

Choosing Slavery Over Freedom

Thursday, 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

Monday, 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

Thursday, 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

Monday, 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

Wednesday, 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

Monday, 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

Wednesday, 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

Monday, 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

European Villains

Thursday, March 24th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, in Europe the Islamists have succeeded magnificently, abetted by the traitorous European leaders. Not simply because of the Brussels attacks but because of the perpetual state of marshal law that is oozing over Europe. The blood of the innocents killed, maimed and wounded in those attacks, isn’t on the hands of the Islamists, that blood stains the hands and faces of the European leaders. Partly because the traitors allowed unlimited numbers of Muslims, some of whom are perfectly decent people, but the wheat cannot be separated from the chaff, those with malevolent intent cannot be separated from the people seeking a better life. The leaders of Europe know this as does anyone with an operational cerebrum. Moreover those traitors are using the terrorist attack, attacks they helped happen, to turn Europe into an autocracy. Never ending marshal law, chaos in the streets, daily terrorist attacks and a collapsing economy all combine to make the natives of Europe into panicked sheep, ripe for tyranny

These attacks are the responsibility of the leaders of Europe. They destabilized the Middle East, seeking regime change there. Even after the catastrophic invasion and ouster of Saddam Hussein, or maybe because of it, European leaders insisted on overthrowing Libya’s leader Muammar Qaddafi and Syria’s Bashar Al Assad. They knew that such actions would lead to a humanitarian crisis. If they didn’t they are too stupid to operate a mop. In full knowledge of what they were doing they created chaos, bloodshed and pernicious incentives for despots the world over, creating waves of refugees. Moreover, instead of sending those refugees directly back to their native countries, or countries that have Sharia law, European leaders gave them free food, spending money, housing, healthcare, smokes and women to rape. Thereby creating an impossibly strong incentive to flood into Europe.

The terrorist attacks were as obvious as wet ground during a rain storm. Hundreds of thousands of Islamic people, people who have no concept of liberty, tolerance, freedom of religion, democracy, equal treatment under the law or the market system can only lead to civil unrest. The leaders of Europe have embarked on a scheme to replace the Christian Europeans with Muslims. With clear malice in thought the leaders of Europe are committing genocide on their own people. Encouraging so many people to flood into Europe, who have some percentage of Islamofascists in their ranks is madness of the highest order… unless there is a plan for the violence they will foment.

Not so much the attacks themselves but the government’s reaction to them is what is truly telling here. France is under a perpetual state of marshal law. Belgium is soon to follow, Sweden is looking into radical measures, Germany is nearing chaos and Britain faces more beheadings on their streets. All it will take is a few more major attacks to take place and most of Europe will be under unending marshal law. Islamic State claim they have over four hundred terror cells waiting to be activated all around Europe, if that is the case, many more attacks will come. The native European people are facing terrorism in their neighborhoods, no go zones where Christians simply cannot enter, their government arrests them if they speak out about the invasion and now they have to endure under marshal law.

Every drop of blood shed by the Islamofascists is on the hands of Europe’s leaders. They created the situation and now have exploited it in their play for total authority. Europe is most certainly lost. Soon, all the beautiful places people loved to see will be no go zones, the magnificent cathedrals will be torn down so as not to offend the Muslims, the native European people will be slaves and the seat of the Enlightenment will become a throwback to feudalism and arbitrary rule. History will not be kind to the leaders of Europe, they will be held in the same, or even greater contempt than Adolph Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini or the Marquis De Sade. Clearly, the bloodshed, rapes, chaos, collapsing economies and being judged villains by history is a price the elite in Europe are willing to pay… to become tyrants.


John Pepin

Political Correctness, the Tyranny of Imagination

Monday, March 21st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, many of us would rather imagine what a thing is, than examine it’s reality. There are all sorts of things that captivate our imaginations, movies, books and music, but when we use our imaginations to “believe” some aspect of a thing, be it religion, philosophy, a politician or a political system, we are doing ourselves and the world a great disservice. That is because our imaginations never actually capture the reality, the essence of a thing, our imaginations project an idea that may be in direct contravention of that thing, imbuing it with virtue or villainy that is simply not there. Not only do people do this about a myriad of things but once we have done it, many will fight to the mat that their imagined qualities are true, further harming our societies, economies and cultures. Political correctness is the legitimization of this very tendency.

To argue about the qualities of a thing is human nature. Three blind men approach an elephant, one grasps it’s trunk, another the tusk and the third the tail. Afterwards, they argue over what an elephant is… but at least they had some first hand knowledge about an elephant, each had only a portion of the truth but each had a portion. How much worse when one or more of the participants in a discussion have no real knowledge but only their imaginations to go on? How do you argue logic and truth with someone who holds his or her imagination above empirical reality? You cannot. Those who have imagined the qualities of a thing are the hardest to persuade, they refuse to look at evidence, they obstinately talk over you and hold you and your empirical evidence in contempt.

When Obama ran for office he ran on Hope and Change. He didn’t outline a plan for that hope and change, he didn’t qualify what it was nor did he allow any personal information, about him and his past to leak out. When some did the media that calls itself unbiased went to great lengths to obfuscate it. As a result people projected whatever they wanted on him. To a capitalist he would restore laissez faire, to a communist he would be the second coming of Mao, to the poor he would make them rich and to the rich he would protect them from the huddled masses. He was everything to everyone. People imagined what and who Obama was and voted based on their imaginations.

Many people imagine socialism as being more fair, more just and more humane than capitalism. They dream about how everyone will get along and work hard for the collective. To those who imagine a better world through despotism, any argument about history, reality or economics falls on deaf ears, they have made up their minds based on their imaginations. The further people get from real Marxism and , the easier it is to imagine what it is, rather than look at the reality of what it is. Reagan’s policies dealt a blow to communism, but without that example of a very real and undeniable socialist nation, where people fled at the risk to their very lives and their children to escape, has allowed people to imagine what socialism is.

Many who have never studied Islam claim to understand what it is far far better than Islamic scholars. In the face of the reality of Islam, after a mass beheading for example, they rush to the news programs and claim such acts are a violation of Islam, even as Islamic scholars claim otherwise. We are to believe the atheist, who imagines Islam as a light in a dark world, over those who have spent their entire lives studying the words of Mohamed. To do so is absurd. Do you believe that a witch doctor or faith healer can set a broken bone better than someone who has spent their entire life learning and working in medicine? To believe he who imagines what a thing is in that case would lead to a badly set leg, a limp for life and perhaps even death, how much worse to believe a politician is everything to everyone, socialism isn’t despotism or the realities of Sharia and Jihad?

Political correctness is the imagining what a thing is and forcing others to follow what is imagined not what is real. The market system teaches those raised in it to be pragmatic, look at the reality of a thing and measure profit against loss, not just in business but in our daily lives. Political correctness seeks to change that paradigm of the lesson of the market system. Political correctness will not broach the reality of a thing to enter the conversation, it demands blind faith in the imaginations of another. Arguments about reality can be derailed by mere ad homonym attacks to protect the imagined reality of the politically correct person. The market system , is a force for pragmatism, examining reality and weighing the profit versus the loss of an action or philosophy. Political correctness is the polar opposite of the lessons of the market system and as such will always be in contention with it. So what do you believe? Your imagination, or reality, you cannot believe both.


John Pepin