Archive for the ‘philosophy’ Category

The Arab Israeli Conflict

Sunday, July 13th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, no matter where you stand on the Arab Israeli conflict you have to agree on one thing, If the Arabs put down their weapons, there would be peace, and if the Israelis put down their weapons… there would be genocide. That one fact is plain as day but is never spoken aloud, except in Arabic, it is only given a nudge nudge wink wink by the UN. That most of the world’s governments are on the Arab’s side, shows that most of the people in governments around the world, support and foster genocide. There can be no other conclusion. This is the unspoken truth behind the Arab Israeli conflict.

 

The argument that Israel was the land of the Palestinians and the Israelis pushed them out is begging the question. How were the Jews expelled from Israel in the first place? How did the Middle East go from an entirely Christian region to an entirely Muslim region? How did the world’s borders get drawn and how is it that America is no longer American Indian lands? The evil history of the human race is one of conquest and usurpation. The argument that the Israelis are occupiers is every bit as relevant as to argue Europe should give back all it’s lands to the original hunter gatherers who the farmers pushed out.

 

Even the Koran acknowledges that Israel is the historic homeland of the Jews. The Christian Bible, the Jewish Torah and Talmud, as well as the Koran all agree, God gave Israel to the Jewish people.

There are Egyptian steels that record Israel was the land of the Jews. Roman historical documents from the era tell of the Jews being dispersed from Israel by Roman legions. Archeological evidence is piling up proving that the Jewish people did indeed live and rule the land of Israel, and so, as a matter of primary ownership, the postage stamp of land we are talking about, and make no mistake, it is nothing more than a tiny dot of formerly arid land, is the historic home of the Jewish people.

 

Imagine a small Jewish city on the outskirts of Yemen randomly firing rockets at the Yemenite population while chanting “Death to Yemen!”. How do you suppose the government of Yemen would respond? How would any Islamic state respond to a Jewish, Hindi, Buddhist or Christian enclave, shooting rockets at them while calling for their extermination? How would the UN respond? Would the UN criticize the Islamic state for defending it’s citizens? No, of course not. What if the Palestinians win and wipe the Jews from the face of the Earth? How would the world respond? When Hitler was asked, what will history record about us if we exterminate the Jews? Hitler responded, “Who remembers the Armenians?!” Well, I ask you, does anyone remember the Armenians? Do you?

 

Moreover, does anyone in their right mind believe for a moment that if Israel were wiped from the map, and every Jew on the planet murdered, there would be peace? Only a fool of the highest order would fall for that scam. No, the fact is, if Israel were wiped away, those that did it would be emboldened to continue their crusade across the world. World war would inevitably result with all the horror, violence and terror that would entail, but every single one of us would experience it. To hate someone who is different, is an unfortunate part of the human condition, but to hate so much that one would commit genocide, must be inculcated from an early age.

 

Since everyone knows, but dare not speak the truth, that the goal of Hamas, Hezbollah and every other terrorist organization, and sadly, many governments Islamic and secular, is to kill every Jew on the planet, it is clear that anyone who supports that genocidal movement, must also support the genocide it calls for. But unlike a tree that falls in the forest when no one is around, there will be millions of voices proclaiming the crime, millions of villains who’s souls will be blackened by their villainy and millions of bystanders who will have abetted the slaughter. Imagine having your soul tainted by genocide when you stand before God almighty? How would you answer that damning charge? Pascal’s wager would be a truly stupid bet at that point… wouldn’t it?

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Spurious Logic and Confusing a State of Mind with a State of Being

Thursday, July 10th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the progressive elite often use spurious logic, to fool the people into confusing a state of mind with a state of being. To use spurious logic is to make an argument that appears on the surface to be logical, but is in fact fallacious, and is meant to deceive. By this means we can be fooled into acting against our own self interests and benefiting the arguer who uses spurious logic. If we seek to be rational maximizers, then it is important for us to know the difference, and be able to see a deception for what it is. In the realm of spurious logic, arguing a thing is other than it actually is, can be quite easy and very effective.

 

People argue in spurious logic to trick others into acting against their own self interest. This is an old con man’s trick. Claiming to be a bank auditor, and getting an old person to “loan” them money to help catch a crooked bank teller, who the con man says is ripping off the bank, is one example. The logic appears impeccable to the victim but is in fact fallacious. Many people have lost their life savings by this scam. The con man gets the victim to act against his or her own self interest, by convincing the victim something is true when it is not, using spurious logic. Twisting a state of mind into a state of being is no different.

 

A state of mind is essentially how we perceive the world. Our perception is to us, reality, it is our opinion and guides action. Examples of a state of mind are, prejudice, justice, friendship, humility, love and fear. These are not every example, nor are they an exhaustive list, but they are illustrative for the purposes of our discussion. A person can act in a bigoted way, we can act justly and we can be friendly, but that doesn’t make these things a state of being, because the root of the actions are the opinions and feelings of the actor. Our actions follow our mindset, not the other way around. A state of mind is an internal feeling, belief or thought, that effects the external world through our actions.

 

A state of being is something that is external that effects our internal state of mind. Examples include, the environment, the economy and illness. Again, this is not a comprehensive list but is sufficient to illustrate our point. A state of being is something objective that effects our subjective mindset. If the temperature is cold our mind registers it with a feeling of cold. Our feeling of cold doesn’t make the temperature lower. Just as an expanding economy might enrich us and make us feel more wealthy, but our feeling of wealth doesn’t make the economy grow faster, (despite the implications of the theories of John Maynard Keynes’ aggregate supply aggregate demand model of economics), and illness makes us feel sick, it is not that we decide to feel sick and as a result we become ill, (except in a diseased mind which is itself an illness external to the participant’s subjective mind). A state of being is external while a state of mind is internal.

 

Modern sophists like to claim a state of mind is in fact a state of being and have visited all kinds of mischief on mankind as a result. To claim a state of mind is a state of being, or vise versa, is how absurd premises get thought of as truth, and truth get thought of as falsehood, then are acted upon in the body politic. Well meaning projects to mitigate the plight of the poor are premised on conflating a state of being with a state of mind. Poverty is a state of being, but the assumption of welfare programs, is that poverty is intrinsic to the individual, as such the individual is unable to change his or her station, and cannot survive without a government handout. A great deal of damage is done to society, the economy and the poor themselves, by this pernicious notion. Not the least of which is to trap multiple generations of people in poverty, destroy the nuclear family and crush the work ethic of whole communities, all leading to more poverty.

 

Other examples of confusing a state of mind with a state of being are everywhere in the progressive playbook. From abortion to woman’s rights, using spurious logic like mixing of a state of being with a state of mind, is their go to position. Those who call attention to the absurdity of their stances are vilified as haters and bigots to deflect the criticism, which in itself is twisting a state of mind into a state of being. As you recall, bigotry and hate are states of mind, but arguing that a person’s stance on a state of being, (objective reality), proves a certain state of mind, (subjective reality), is like claiming a scalding burn is all in one’s mind. There will always be gullible people in the world, it is a fact of life, but most of us are capable, upon reflection, of recognizing spurious logic, especially if we are warned. Consider this warning.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Why Our jobs are dwindling, Wages are Stagnating and Wall Street is Raging.

Sunday, July 6th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

I wonder, why would a big company spend money on plant, equipment or it’s workforce, when government is all too happy to drive the competitors out of business with regulation? Government regulations protect companies with political favor from any real competition and all large corporations have it. The lack of competition to large firms allows them to concentrate on giant bonuses for top executives, instead of the tedious drudgery of vying with a competitor by improving products, lowering costs or innovating. Now that government has shown all a firm need do is give to the right political campaigns, and their markets will be protected from any real competition by government bureaucrats intent on punishing the “rich,” that is what all self interested CEOs will do. This all leads our economy to stagnation, a stagnation that we see every time a new economic number comes out and is spun by the unbiased press, to make it appear better than it actually is.

 

People are self interested, some pretend to be altruistic, usually to fool others into giving them something they otherwise wouldn’t. Those in government fall into that category. They seek to appear to be virtuous only to have their need for power and wealth met by manipulative means. That is why the elite vilify the wealthy, while protecting the wealthy’s riches and privilege with regulations that are billed as “fair, protecting the consumer, saving jobs and for the children,” when nothing could be further from the truth. The elite want to appear to be virtuous, because as Thrasymachus inferred in Plato’s Republic, It is better to appear virtuous and be a villain than to be virtuous and be perceived as a villain. Our leaders know this very well and practice it through regulations sold as virtue but in reality are villainous.

 

The market system is built on innovation. That is one reason it is so dynamic. Ideas are the oxygen to the market but like oxygen they corrode older more politically favored industries and firms. Older businesses, especially very large companies, are less nimble and have a hard time competing with smaller more innovative ones. Efficiency of scale refers to the ability of a large firm to mass produce a product, not to innovate. This is one reason mergers and acquisitions are so touted by the Wall Street press corps. When government seeks to protect their cronies with regulation, innovation is limited to places where older larger firms are not doing business, as such, most innovation is undermined. The buggy whip industry would be alive and well in today’s regulatory environment. As innovation is limited by regulation our economy must necessarily suffer.

 

Small businesses are the drivers of innovation, and regulations always effects small businesses more than large ones. Small businesses are the drivers of new employment. Every economist worth his stripes will tell you this. Old firms pay more but don’t produce jobs. Job creation comes from innovative small firms. As regulation protects large politically favored firms, at the expense of smaller ones, the engine of job creation in an economy is shut off. Without new jobs created by innovators, aggregate employment stagnates, and since wages are a function of the availability of labor versus demand for it, a stagnant job market puts an inexorable downward pressure on wages, which also benefits the top management of large firms, by driving down labor costs and freeing up money for bonuses and golden parachutes for top management of those firms.

 

Examples of regulation that does the exact opposite of what it is supposed to are everywhere. Dodd Frank is but one. It has put incredible pressure on banks to grow “Too Big to Fail,” and is driving out smaller banks, due to the huge costs it puts on banks. This has magnified the danger to our economy of banks that are too big to fail. Remember, small banks are the primary source of funds for small business start ups, further limiting the competitive forces of the job market and the market system as a whole.

 

Innovation is destroyed by regulations, but that effect is acceptable to those who are making a killing from the system as it is, they don’t want to have to face competition and so they give to the political party that will protect their markets, drive down their labor costs and defend their bonuses, the most. The top management of every company understands the rhetoric of class warfare is only a scam the elite use to do just that. One last point is that lawyers, economists, and the elite in politics, media and business, are all members of the New Class. As I have shown, regulation protects the new class, at the expense of every other class in society. The proof is in the fact that the more the elite regulate our economy, and vilify themselves, the richer and more powerful the new class gets, and the poorer the rest of us get, even as they wring their hands at the gap between rich and poor, only to promote more self serving regulation. So I ask you again, why would a company invest in plant, tools and it’s workforce, when all it needs to do to protect itself, is to keep the rigged system going?

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

The Logic of Liberty

Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, chaotic liberty is the single best means to societal prosperity, as controlled dependence is the best means to universal poverty. This is true not only in an economic sense but in humanistic terms as well. When people live in liberty, we must self control and by doing so we focus our minds, strengthen our spirit and become self reliant, chaotic liberty makes us more human. It is in a focused mind, spirituality and self reliance that we gain the economic advantages of liberty. Controlled dependence dulls the mind, crushes the spirit and destroys self reliance, in short controlled dependence reduces human beings to mere selfish animals. Human heartedness grows in liberty and shrinks in dependence. This is so obvious it is sad that government should seek to put people into a state of dependence while eliminating liberty. Because by doing so, it is equally as clear that diminishing humanity to a herd of egoistic animals, that see their fellows as a means instead of an end in themselves, government undermines the very argument for government.

 

That is not to say Chaos is liberty or that control is dependence, it is to say that some level of personal chaos is requisite for liberty and dependence breeds people who must be controlled. If a people who have become dependent are thrust into a state of liberty, chaos, violence and poverty will immediately result. If a different people who have become used to liberty are forced into dependence there is a faux sense of control. In a state of liberty, people self control and are do not need a heavy handed government to force them to be virtuous, but where people are dependent, people do need a tyrannical government, to enforce civil equanimity. The one is because the people self regulate and the other because people have lost the ability to self regulate.

 

When people are used to living in liberty we must control our emotions, actions and thoughts. When living in a state of liberty, everyone is at liberty, and so disturbing the civil weal is counter productive. People learn this lesson at an early age when they live in liberty. Laws need not be draconian to keep people from each others throats because people have learned to be self controlled. The society becomes more mature, civil and polite. Moreover, when people are self controlled and at liberty, it is the nature of the human being to seek to better him or herself. As each improving their situation all of society is economically improved.

 

Those poor shells of human beings that have become used to living in dependence never grow out of childhood. They become disconnected from the greater society and demand their wants and needs be met by someone else. Since the very definition of dependence is to be dependent on someone else, the fruits of another’s labor, for everything, so dependent people see others as a means to their own ends, instead of ends in themselves. To put it another way, people who have become used to being dependent see others as things and not as human beings. It is much easier to steal from a thing, the morality of killing a thing is irrelevant and you don’t open the door for a thing that is handicapped. Civility in society is destroyed and all that matters is instant gratification. This shows that controlled dependence is the path to chaos while chaotic liberty is the path to civilization.

 

How to change people who have become used to controlled dependence into self controlled, spiritual, civil and focused human beings? Obviously if liberty were thrust upon them they would devolve to a state of anarchy. We have seen this many times in history. A people get liberated, not by their own action, and the entire society falls into violence, chaos and corruption. The means to maturing a people is by the elite, the leaders of society, leading by example. The leaders must be spiritual, self controlled and honest. That would be a giant step but not all that is required. A market system must also exist. This is because the market system trains people to be human. If someone comes into your store to buy a couch, you care nothing if they are Hindi, Asian or Hutu, those groupings become subservient attributes to their being buyers. If the way to get ahead in a society is to meet the needs and wants of others, people will happily become civil, spiritual and self controlled.

 

Unfortunately governments prefer people to be dependent. Dependents have no independent voice only as a screaming mob can they get heard. If government likes what the chanting mob says they simply give in and are seen as benefactors, if government doesn’t like the message they clamp down violently and are seen as the protectors of societal tranquility. Since the reason political parties exist is to get and hold power, nothing more nothing less, and dependents depend on their benefactors, if those benefactors are a faction of government, that faction can count on their dependents for support against other political factions. This is not only a path to getting political power but of holding it as well. This is why there have been so very few examples in human history of liberty, and so many of dependence, poverty, and despotism.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Our Catch Me if You Can Form of Governance

Monday, June 30th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, no law that is enforced on the people, when broken, has the negative effect on our society, culture, economy and good government, than when our lawmakers violate Our Constitution and their own laws. To argue that robbing a liqueur store has anywhere near the profoundly destructive effect on our society, as an elected leader breaking his own law, is absurd. I challenge anyone to argue differently. To claim that a person speeding along in a car on the highway is a greater threat to public safety than a lawmaker who undermines our Constitution for political expediency, is to assert that up is down and down is up. We all know this instinctively, but we happily go along when the liqueur store bandit is punished with years behind bars, while the lawmaker sees no negative consequences for his much more destructive actions. We shake our heads as we pass the guy or gal pulled over for speeding, and ignore the direct assaults on our Constitution, by those very people who have sworn an oath to protect it. Then we wonder why our prisons are full, our economy is shrinking and we are not even safe in our own homes.

 

We all have a sense of justice. As I wrote in a previous article, justice is a state of mind not a state of being. Justice is treating everyone the same. The speeder faces negative consequences for speeding, in the form of fines, points on their licenses and increased insurance costs. A lawmaker who undermines the protections guaranteed to us by our Constitution faces no negative consequences at all. The worst that can happen to him or her, is to have their usurpation of our collective Rights overturned by a court, and that is only temporary until the court can be stacked with people who also want to undermine that facet of our rights. Clearly, of the two, the speeder faces far more punishment for his minor infraction than the politician who damages our very Constitution and way of life. This is the definition of injustice.

 

The damage to our society, economy, culture and good governance is far worse when a lawmaker violates his own laws. This is because people are far less likely to mimic a masked bandit holding up a liqueur store than we are to follow the example of a leader violating his own laws. The bandit is a person who is outside society, but the political leader is at the top of society. Moreover, no matter how draconian the punishment for holding up a liqueur store is, if people watch their political leaders violating their own laws with no punishment at all, there will be more crime. As Confucius said, “we follow our leaders.” If they are corrupt, especially if they face no real consequences for it, we will follow them and be corrupt ourselves. We don’t follow the lone gunman into criminality we follow our leaders into crime. That is why our jails are so full and we are not safe in our own homes.

 

As lawmakers use their positions of authority to enrich themselves and their patrons our economy is damaged exponentially more than a liqueur store robbery. The thief damages a small segment of our economy, but the lawmaker who passes laws and regulations, to protect some politically favored industry or patron, damages the entire economy, not only now but forever. The market system depends on equal treatment of people, (justice), but when the politically favored get special treatment, nations become polarized into the haves and the have nots. It is not a government bureaucrat that ensures economic fairness, they destroy economic justice, because they treat people differently. Eventually, government does so much damage to the economy, people become stuck in the station they are born into, the poor have no way out because the rich are the only ones who can get through the regulations. The gap grows ever larger and the poor are tricked into supporting a system, socialism, where they are forever poor and the powerful are forever wealthy.

 

You and I are forced to follow every law to the letter, even if we are ignorant of it, but the lawmaker, those who actually write laws, can simply claim ignorance… this is a clear injustice. We have a gut understanding of that injustice, but instead of holding our political leaders to their own laws, we hold them in awe. As our Constitutional Rights are crushed under the jack boot of ever more tyrannical authority, with no negative consequences, the usurpation of them will grow ever more bold and ever more destructive. We are held to the law so our society can function, but when our leaders are not, the functioning of society and the economy, are damaged far worse than any liqueur store robbery. As we look around ourselves, at our crumbling standard of living, the high crime rate, the scourge of drugs, school shootings, the rise of existential threats and general malaise, we must remember, it is not the speeder, the thief or the madman who is responsible, it is the corrupt lawmakers and those who allow and embrace their corruption, who are the real villains. Until we as a society and people learn this, and demand consequences for the political elite who violate their own laws and our Constitutions, the slide to despotism, poverty and chaos will accelerate.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Anthropogenic Climate Change Hoax

Thursday, June 26th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the man made part of global warming is a hoax, a fallacy perpetrated on us by the New Class in a bid for power, the type of power Nietzsche said the uberman should strive for. They know it is impossible to prove a negative, and so they have convinced many that we are in dire straights if we do not follow their dictates and commit economic suicide, else we might face economic Armageddon. For the same reason I am skeptical when a cigarette company claims cigarettes are good for you, we should look at the arguments of those who stand to gain essentially arbitrary rule if we believe them… with a skeptical eye too. Climate change alarmists stand to gain tremendous power, wealth and prestige, by having the hoi polloi fall for the scam, and power is a compelling incentive to lie. It is in our self interests to be rational maximizers and look at the facts not the rhetoric.

 

I used to believe in anthropogenic climate change. It made me hopeful we can terraform Mars into a world we can live on. I looked at all the facts with a hopeful eye. As time went on, and the “facts” became ever murkier and confounding facts came up, my enthusiasm waned. As I began looking into the political reasons someone would perpetrate such a hoax on the world, the reality of human nature opened up to me, and I became a man made climate change denier.

 

Their arguments are based on spurious logic and have no real bearing on what is really happening. Many of the temperature data is knowingly fallacious. As land is industrialized, the same location that once was forest and fields, has become asphalt and buildings. The localized warming of a city is a well documented theory, and as civilization has encroached on locations that are cited by the climate change alarmist, the temperature will certainly go up. This is called the Urban Heat Island effect. That is not to say however, the temperature of the planet in it’s entirety has gone up, only those locations where temperature has been traditionally taken has. This makes the temperature data decidedly biased and thus dubious at best.

 

The nail in the coffin for me however, was finding out by reading Science News, (a strong voice for anthropogenic climate change), that planets around our solar system are in fact warming at a similar rate to Earth. I admit I was a bit depressed, because if planets around the solar system are warming, that pesky fact makes the likelihood of “man made,” evaporate like so much dry ice. Mars is the example most cited but there are other examples too. The planetoid, or asteroid, Ceres has been shown to be warming, Pluto seems to be warming even though it is traveling away from the sun, along with other planets and moons. The measurements of these planets and moons is not based on local temperature fluctuations, they are based in infrared measurements of the entire planet or moon, and so are more telling of the actual planet wide temperature than localized data. In other words, we have better perspective on them, then we do our own planet.

 

 

The alarmists argue that this is irrelevant because at any given time a planet or moon could be warming or cooling. It is mere coincidence that they are warming. Many pages of sophist arguments have been written with this perspective. They also claim the Sun has cooled so it is impossible for these places to be warming, and some simply deny the facts. These arguments are of course the pleas of a huckster who has been exposed trying to justify the utility of his snake oil. If their argument, that any one could be warming or cooling, then why are they all warming, and none are cooling? Logic would at least incline one to believe that if they could be warming or cooling, the ratio of planets and moons warming versus cooling, should be about fifty percent. The data flies in their face. Since there is not a single example of a planet cooling in our solar system, but many examples of planets and moons warming, this is at least strong evidence the warming trend is a solar system wide phenomenon. Since there are no carbon spewing cars on Mars, (as far as we know), Jupiter, Triton, Ceres or Pluto, the solar system wide warming cannot be human generated.

 

 

The scientific method is not a popularity contest. If it was, then the world would be flat, since most scientists believed at one time it was. There was a philosopher, Karl Popper, who posited a theory of science. In it he said that scientists are exceedingly bigoted people. They work diligently in their labs testing and proving ever smaller bits of fact about a theory, until it is proven false, then there is a paradigm shift culminating in a new theory. Since scientists have worked so long and so hard on their piece of a theorem, they have cognitive dissonance, in other words they are very resistant to change. In the case of anthropogenic climate change anyone who offers a different view is attacked as a heretic. No differently than Galileo, Kepler or Newton were in their day. Their ideas led to a paradigm shift in scientific thinking however, and are worshiped today, even as the modern equivalents of these great thinkers are vilified. Couple the propensity of science, and scientists, to cling to an idea, with the potential power such an idea as man made global warming puts in the hands of the new class, and you have the modern equivalent of the inquisition.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Justice is a State of Mind not a State of Being

Monday, June 23rd, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, justice is simply treating everyone the same, to argue otherwise is to twist wrong into right by spurious means. Justice is not to force everyone to be, act, or think the same, it is not to give everyone the same stuff… it is to treat everyone the same. It doesn’t seem like that is such a difficult concept to understand but it is not understood by most people. They have been fooled into thinking justice is a state of being and not a state of mind. We have been deceived into thinking justice is some concept of economic equality, (a state of being), when this is only a spurious way to trick people into acting and thinking, unjustly. To be a rational maximizer, or put another way, civilized, a person has to be sufficiently mature and thoughtful to grasp this basic concept of justice, rejecting those sophist ways the elite enforce injustice, by calling it justice. Our compliance with their absurdity, even if most who honestly believe justice is a state of being, creates a fundamentally unjust society, where people cannot leave the station they are born into, which is true economic, social and cultural injustice. In other words, unless we wake up and wake up our friends, our children and grandchildren will forever be trapped in the station they are born into, living in a fog of fallacy, with no ability to transcend it, regardless of their personal merit.

 

Justice is equality in treatment not equality in some physical instance. What if the elite claimed blond hair is the best and it is unjust for anyone to be burdened with brown or black hair? Would it then follow, that the government had a legitimate role to play in improving the lives of it’s citizens, by forcing everyone to dye their hair blond? What if the elite managed to convince the people that blond hair is indeed the best, would it be just then? What about if government forced blonds to shave their heads? No, of course it wouldn’t be. Justice is not a state of being but a state of mind. To conflate the two is a path to injustice. It is however, a sure way to trick people into doing unjust actions, while thinking they are actually being just.

 

Like the terrorist who believes he is blowing himself up and killing innocents to advance the interests of God. He doesn’t examine the absurdity of the notion, he simply follows the orders of the guy who would never blow himself up, and in the end advances the goals of Satan. The ostensibly pious person damages God’s ends and advances the ends of Lucifer while all the time thinking he serves God. Ironic as it can be, people can be easily tricked into doing the opposite of what they seek, by the diabolical means of fooling someone with sophistry. When we don’t think an argument all the way to the end, we can be tricked into the opposite of what we want, and end up doing injustice when we intend justice.

 

To be civilized, is to think things through and take concepts to their logical conclusion, to do otherwise is to be a member of a mob. Unthinking brutes who act on orders instead of logic and a sense of right. Do you suppose the Nazis thought they were evil? No, they thought what they were doing was good. People cannot be convinced to do evil, for evil’s sake, the packaging of evil must appear to be good. Yes, there are a few psychopaths out there who would happily serve Beelzebub, but the throngs of humanity seek goodness, and eschew evil. To get them to serve evil requires spurious logic and sophist arguments. Twisting justice into injustice by claiming justice is a state of being and not a state of mind, is just as absurd as tricking a child into thinking that committing several mortal sins at the same time, will get him or her to heaven and serve the goals of God, when it is the exact opposite of the truth.

 

Justice is clearly a state of mind and not a state of being. To force people to be the same, economically, socially, culturally or in any other way, is effecting their state of being. Moreover, to effect one’s state of being, forcing equality in some state of being, requires as a prerequisite that an injustice be done, in other words, some must be treated differently than others, which as we have already shown, is the definition of injustice. If you treat everyone you meet the same, with gratitude for their help, courteously recognizing their humanity, and avoiding hurting those who society tell us are “the other,” you are acting justly. If you visit evil on someone because their state of being is other than what the elite have defined as “fair,” then you are acting unjustly, and no amount of twisted logic can make that wrong a right.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Today’s Federal Reserve Meeting

Thursday, June 19th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, economists have been predicting three plus percent GDP growth since Obama came into office, and all their predictions have been wrong. The US GDP has stagnated for over five years despite the huge recession we were in when Obama came into office. Today, the Federal Reserve danced around the obvious, and all the economists Bloomberg radio interviewed, provided the dance partners. Yellen claimed the economy will achieve liftoff once we get by this latest slow patch and will exceed long term economic output… next year. This, despite all the previous predictions that have said the same thing, and have been wrong. I guess if they predict it enough, eventually it will come true, like if I predict a solid gold meteor will land on my property making me rich… long enough, it will happen. At some point however, this ceases to be a prediction, and becomes instead wishful thinking.

 

Typically, immediately after a recession economic activity rebounds strongly for a year or two, but the recovery from the 2008 recession didn’t. The reason economies typically rebound strongly after a recession is due to the fact that the units of production become cheap. Labor rates go down, interests rates plummet along with the cost of plant and equipment. The destruction of outmoded firms drives down the costs. Lower costs of the means of production give those with new ideas, the ability to implement those ideas, resulting in the virtuous cycle of economic growth. This is the creation part of creative destruction.

 

This last recession had it’s share of what, at he time, were called “Vee shapers.” They were largely those economists in Obama’s political camp, who eschew the Schumpeter model of the economic cycle, creative destruction, and instead favor the Keynesian, aggregate supply aggregate demand model. They thought that since interest rates had been so suppressed by the Federal reserve, government was spending such tremendous amounts of money, in the form of stimulus, and their man was in, demand would go up and the economy would rebound very strongly, resulting in a V shaped recovery. We found that they were wrong… it was more of an L shaped recovery.

 

The economy dropped like a cow chip. Instead of rebounding it stagnated despite the record amount of stimulus. Trillions of dollars were spent by the government, what is called fiscal tailwinds, spending that drove up aggregate demand, but did nothing for the average man and woman. Interest rates have been extraordinary low for half a decade now with essentially no real GDP growth to show for it. Inflation has been alarmingly low as well despite the record monetizing of government debt that the Federal Reserve has done. Pimco has named the recovery, or lack of one, the “New Normal,” now the term has become the “New Neutral,” but by any name a skunk is a skunk. The labor participation rate has fallen off the table, GDP growth hasn’t even reached normal levels, let alone takeoff velocity, and the Federal Reserve along with most of the central banks of the developed countries have followed along and monetized their debt… to no avail.

 

The one exception is Britain who instead embarked on a policy of fiscal austerity. Economists the world over warned that Britain would suffer economic Armageddon as a result. They were wrong. Today Britain and Germany are the only developed countries that are experiencing real economic growth at all. Since their economies are too small to be the engine of the world’s economy, the world is left with America as the little engine, that couldn’t. The developing countries have stalled as well due to the lack of an engine pulling the train.

 

What everyone in the economic community are dancing around, and trying their best to ignore, is the tsunami of regulation that washed over the US economy in 2008-2009. That tidal wave of regulation continues flowing in to this day. Obama care was a thousand page law, one that has fluffed up to tens of thousands of pages of arcane regulation, hindering economic growth in a myriad of ways. It has driven up the cost of labor dramatically, without a penny of it going to workers. That increase in the cost of labor is still rising even today from Obama care! The incentives of that single piece of legislation has directly resulted in lower wages, terrific job losses and a cost of labor that is unpredictable. Dodd Frank was meant to eliminate the problem of too big to fail but has made that problem even more intractable than ever. It is driving small banks out of business, and pushing large banks to get larger, exacerbating too big to fail. In short Dodd Frank has failed. Environmental regulation has skyrocketed under this administration. But these are only the top waves of the tsunami.

 

These problems that regulation has created cannot be worked through with low interest rates, we have had a low interest rate policy for 5 years, and it has failed. No amount of new regulation can solve the problem of too much regulation, it’s like trying to heal a burn, by burning yourself more. The long term unemployed will not be solved by importing millions of low skilled labor, sopping up the few jobs that are still available, and raising the minimum wage will only drive down the demand for those low skilled jobs in the first place. Dancing is all well and good, but when the elite dance around the problems they created, simply to protect a President and theory they are in love with, all of us suffer. Any alcoholic can tell you, the only way to solve a problem is to recognize it, then roll up your sleeves and actually fix it. Unfortunately, that is not on the Federal Reserve’s dance card.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Bureaucracy, Law and Separation of Powers.

Monday, June 16th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, nothing can prove the out of control growth of the bureaucratic regulatory apparatus of the Executive branch, than the fact that now the Legislative branch needs to pass legislation to stop regulation they find appalling. Congressman Peter Welch of Vermont is sponsoring a bill that would stop some new regulations, prohibiting cheese from being aged on wooden boards, or in wooden containers. As with most regulations this one is absurd, makes no sense from a scientific perspective, legal or even a sociological perspective, but it is an example of bureaucrats working diligently in the dark, regulating how we do everything and in every way. Their regulations are not subject to the will of the people, and are not Constitutional, but they have transferred tremendous power from the legislative branch to the Executive, undermining the intent of our Constitution’s foundational thesis, that of the separation of power, all for the dubious goal of efficiency in government. As we move further and further away from Constitutional rule, and into the chimeric bastardization of our government, we can expect our leaders, especially the Executive, to act more and more arbitrarily, until we have arbitrary government in all but name.

 

Constitutions are a concept that was invented as a way to limit the propensity of governments to become tyrannical. History shows that there has never been a government, no matter how well devised, that didn’t eventually become despotic. Rome was a republic for century upon century but eventually became a tyranny. That great republic began it’s death spiral the moment the people accepted arbitrary power in the hands of the Caesar, whether wielded by Marcus Aurelius or Nero, that power corrupted not only the man, and the Praetorian guard who protected him, but the society that became dependent on it as well. This is what Constitutions are supposed to prevent. If they are not followed however they loose the ability to limit and instead provide cover for a would be dictator.

 

Separation of power is the primary means the US Constitution, our Constitution, is supposed to prevent arbitrary rule. History shows that most of the time despotism comes from the Executive. Separation of powers is meant to prevent this propensity of rulers by limiting their absolute power and divesting that power in other segments of government, then pitting those segments, (and political factions), against each other, like using a fire line to stop a fire. Federalist Paper number ten explains this far better than I can. The power of a Constitution to reign in the avarice of a leader depends on it’s being adhered to.

 

The power to pass laws was given solely to the Legislative branch in the US Constitution. Our leaders have evolved the definition of the words in the Constitution to allow for a bureaucracy to take over most of the legislative functions of the Legislature. This has ostensibly been done to improve the efficiency of government to regulate the actions of it’s citizens. While it has allowed government to regulate far more efficiently… that regulation is anything but efficient. It drastically diminishes economic growth, personal freedom and US competitiveness, all for some pie in the sky notion of government efficiency. The truth is, the most efficient government is a tyranny, but is that where we want our government to go?

 

Keeping the thousands upon thousands of bureaucrats busy, as well as the hundreds government adds every year, presupposes that reams and reams of regulations must be written, else the need for the leviathan of the bureaucratic government goes away and the bureaucracy becomes redundant. Making those tens of thousands of high paying government jobs all go away. Bureaucrats, who are the modern equivalent of buggy whip weavers, cannot stand for their cushy, pensioned, well paid careers with government go away, and so they have a self interested need to keep the regulatory bandwagon rolling. The deleterious effect on society, our economy and even the destruction of Constitutional rule is irrelevant, and so our Legislature is taking up the all important question, whether cheese should be aged on wood as it has been for thousands of years.

 

Since the Legislative branch has given up so much of it’s power to the bureaucracy, it finds itself in the uncomfortable position where it has to pass legislation, to protect certain politically favored industries from the negative effects of regulation, in this case the cheese industry. When the legislative branch must pass a law to stop a regulation, it is proof positive that the kudzu of bureaucracy, has outgrown the garden. There was a Supreme Court ruling a few years ago that in effect said, since the Legislative branch had willingly ceded their power to the Executive’s bureaucracy, that bureaucracy has now the same power to pass regulations as if they were law, Constitutionally passed by the Legislature and signed by the Executive. That ruling, along with a host of other absurd rulings by the Supreme Court, has evolved our government away from Constitutional limits on the power of government as intended by the founders, to this bastardized inbred monstrosity we now live under. The real problem here, is the disdain and loathing our leaders hold for our Constitution, from the Executive through the Legislative and the Judiciary branches, all the way down to the lowly bureaucrat toiling away in his or her cubicle, for eight hours a day, making rules for the rest of us to live under, without scrutiny, or oversight… and without Constitutional authority.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

 

 

Impeach this Lawless President.

Wednesday, June 11th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, there is no reason Obama cannot run for a third term, or even simply dictate he is now President for life. I am not saying he will, but there has never been such a lawless President in United States history. The scandals of the Obama administration have been so profoundly destructive of our Constitution and the rule of law, without any real outrage by the elite in the media, politics or culture, that our very Constitution has become mere window dressing. There is historical precedent for this, but not in American history, in the history of Rome there is a close example. One that led directly to Rome becoming a tyranny while calling itself a republic. We are on the same road as ancient Rome, with the difference that we have history to teach us where that road leads, and the Romans didn’t. Our republic will certainly end, in all but name, if this level of lawlessness continues. Our elected leaders are too afraid of Obama and his machine to even vociferously call attention to it. Tyranny is in our future unless we stand up and demand his impeachment.

 

The examples of lawlessness by Obama are legendary. Fast and Furious was a blatant attempt to undermine the Second Amendment to our Constitution and should have been a fast track to impeachment. Using the IRS against political enemies was so naked an assault on individual liberty, and good government, that everyone involved should go to jail for a very long time, you or I would, for far far less. Benghazi might have been overlooked as incompetence of the highest order, if not for the coverup, a coverup that was broader in scope and exponentially more pernicious than Watergate. Muzzling the media through intimidation is a direct attack on the First Amendment. Giving heavy weapons including surface to air missiles to Al Queda allied terrorist groups is a clear example of “Giving aid and comfort to the enemy.” Which, as defined by our Constitution, is the meaning of a traitor, which is one of the reasons Benghazi was covered up. Releasing enemy combatants to reenter the war against us, in exchange for a deserter, is another example of traitorous actions. Selective enforcement of law is the very definition of lawlessness and is itself impeachable. Now with Obama’s Dream Act he has opened the floodgates to tens of thousands of children crossing the southern boarder, to date over 60,000 children are in custody, with another 120,000 expected in the next year, giving some insight into what our government calls a “secure” boarder… one that is so open even a child can cross it. How many children who were not picked up by the Boarder Patrol, have been raped, murdered or enslaved? I could go on and on but space limits me. Suffice it to say, Obama is not held to any law our Constitution, or even common decency.

 

Rome faced the same problem. There had been intercine fighting for a few generations between the advocates for patricians and plebeians. The advocates for both sides were all members of the patrician class however. When Julius Caesar came into the picture, he handed out money to the plebeians to buy their support, and it worked perfectly. He had the plebeian’s unwavering backing when he declared himself dictator for life. Some of the patricians understood the danger to the republic from Caesar’s lawlessness and assassinated him to protect the republic. That is where the famous saying, “Et Tu Brute,” came from. As we all know from our history books Rome never recovered and it became a tyranny of the worst kind… arbitrary rule. The ascension of Octavius and his institution of the praetorian guard was the death knell of any hope for freedom in Rome. After that, Rome simply declined year after year, until the hordes from the north and the Islamic invasion from the south, destroyed both Western and Eastern Roman empires, the Holy Roman Empire and the Byzantine Empire.

 

History is a great teacher. It can warn those who have learned it’s lessons where a given policy will lead. We have such a wonderful chronicle to understand the nature of human government that it is absurd not to glance at it now and then. That we don’t, is why we repeat the worst parts over and over, and almost never relive the good parts. Those who have political power know and understand the lessons, and clearly by their actions, they don’t want liberty, they want to be dictators for life. To ascribe any human being with altruistic attitudes is foolish, but once a person has shown his complete disregard for our Constitution and laws, it is suicidal to allow his incursions to go on. Our political elite are too terrified of him, the cultural elite are in love with him, and the media elite are effectively cowed by him, as our republic relives the history of Rome. Caesar was only the first, he opened the door to Mark Antony then Octavius… Obama is only the first American President to openly flaunt the law, our Constitution and common decency, he will not be the last, since he opened the door, more will enter through it. God help us if we don’t stand, because even if he doesn’t declare himself President for life, the door is now open, when the next usurper walks through it, we will be forced to sit… for the the next few centuries.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin