Archive for April, 2013

Basic Human Worth

Monday, April 29th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, every human being has intrinsic worth, no matter his or her mental status, race, age, religion or any other arbitrary definition. We are more than a sophisticated explosive delivery device, more than a machine that deludes itself with a notion of self awareness, and we are far more than animals to be herded by someone who thinks he is farmer to the rest. To attribute to others, less than person hood, is to deny one’s own person hood. Therefore, anyone who considers other human beings to be less than spiritual beings with intrinsic worth, is subhuman. Unless we learn this and hold it tight we risk becoming cows for someone to milk and slaughter.

Justice is a concept that can be hard to define. As a result most people have a distorted idea of what justice is. Many people’s concept of justice is subjective not objective. A subjective notion of justice is dependent on the perspective of the observer, objective justice is unchanging, no matter the observer’s perspective. Those who espouse different levels of justice, dependent on the person, are using subjective justice and thereby are being unjust themselves. Those that apply the same attributes, worth and rights to all, are just. It follows then, that to be unjust is to forfeit justice, while to be just is to deserve justice, this is the basis of criminal law. Those that forfeit justice deserve none while those that espouse and attribute justice to all deserve justice themselves. Any other consideration is sophistry.

Many times in the past have human beings been designated as less than human. Everyone knows of the Nazi atrocities. These crimes against humanity were only made possible by the philosophy that human beings are no more than animals. That it is in our best interest to cull the herd occasionally and the enlightened must be hard hearted enough to do it. Every crime against humanity has it’s roots in this twisted philosophy. The mass starvation of millions of people by Mao’s Red Guard, were justified in this way, the Nazi slaughter of Gypsies, Jews and Slavs were justified by this philosophy, China’s one child policy is contingent on this spurious notion, and the eugenics movement is based in this perverted misunderstanding of the nature of humanity.

Eugenics has as storied history in the United States as it does England and Germany. Many people in these countries were sterilized against their will by the edict of bureaucrats and judges. Human beings were denied their basic humanity by government officials, who believed that they have the God like ability, to decide who should breed and who should not. The evil of the eugenics movement led directly to the evil of abortion and population control. The same people who funded and shilled for the eugenics movement, Rockefeller, Margret Sanger, HG Wells, Dr. Mengele, President Wilson, Charles Darwin, President Hoover, and other well known notables, would breed us into Eloi and Morlocks.

A person who denies humanity to another for whatever reason also denies his or her own humanity. If the congenital nature of man is evil then all man are evil, if human beings are nothing more than machines that evolved to have the delusion of self awareness, then everyone, even those that propose this perverted philosophy, are as well. I cannot claim everyone else is less than human and claim I am human. That is an impossibility. So, we can safely say that those who deny humanity to others are in their own way subhuman, even if the philosophy they promote is incorrect, they are subject to it. They have self identified as subhuman by their own philosophy.

Slavery, abortion, population control, eugenics, and even redistribution are all forms of injustice called justice, and require as a prerequisite, the denial of someone else’s basic human worth. Denial of the value of every human being is the slippery slope that leads to these evils and more. We are human beings and all of us have individual worth outside our value to any collective or group. To maintain that personal humanity, we must accept the individual value of every other human being, rejecting the spurious notion of collective this or that, for the evil it is and the injustice it creates. If we are rational maximisers we will accept the basic worth of humanity in general and the individual in particular. To do otherwise, is to deny our very own humanity, subjecting us to our own injustice. In other words… We have accepted that we are merely cows, and the implications.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Fight the power… by being the power that will be!

Thursday, April 25th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if we truly want to change the World for the better, we must exhibit the change we want to see. Most of us would like the World to be a better place, but we are stymied at the magnitude of the task, so we placidly go along. We long for a planet where courtesy is common, where the elite follow their own rules, where children are safe and where people are free. We seek these things for us and our children but the World keeps going further and further off the rails. The answer is not violence or to coerce virtue in others but to act as we would have others act and be the change we want to see in others. If we continue down the road we are on, it will be sooner rather than later, when the government will be all powerful. The Elite will rule without oversight and corruption will flow from government like water over Niagara falls.

In the society we live in, the Elite pass more and more laws, but follow the Constitution less and less. The examples they set for us are uniformly bad. They call us greedy, for wanting to hold on to money we have earned by the sweat of our brow, even as they seize more and more of our wealth through taxation and money printing, throwing it away on pork that carry their names. We are told we have to sacrifice, while the president lavishes himself and his family with multimillion dollar vacations, at taxpayer expense. The Elite demand we give up guns even as they buy billions of rounds of ammo and thousands of armored cars to patrol our streets. We are told that we must be watched by a camera on every street corner and submit to our homes being searched without warrant, for our own good, while they cover their actions in a veil of secrecy. The cultural, societal and political elite attack morality as old fashioned while they promote immorality as enlightened, and the unbiased media see no irony in this at all. The instances of bad examples from the elite would fill volumes. Clearly, the examples we have from our elite, are uniformly negative and counter productive to a well ordered society, and we are reaping the reward.

Confucius said, “The sage kings ruled by force of personality.” He went on to say that if the sage kings wanted the people to be more pious, they were more pious themselves, if they wanted the people to be less greedy, they dampened their own rapine, and when the sage kings wanted the people to work harder, they worked harder themselves. This was a central tenet in Confucius’ philosophy. That good leaders lead by example. Since our leaders are bad examples we must be the good examples in society and thereby be the leaders our society needs. Corruption doesn’t stop at national boarders… bad examples are a problem in every nation of men on Earth.

The problem with hypocrisy, isn’t that it doesn’t garner a reaction, it is that the reaction is disgust. The beauty of good examples is that they are magnetic. We are repelled by the hypocrisy of the elite but as we follow their example we engage in hypocrisy ourselves. When we tell our children to be virtuous, but they see us following our leaders and behaving badly, they see our hypocrisy and ignore our entreaties to goodness. Our children are far removed from the elite however, and the media is full of stories of the “good life” for our children to follow, and they do. We prove the truth of this by our very own actions, teaching our children that morals and virtue are for suckers, and repel them by being corrupt, when we should be drawing them in with good examples. Our society suffers, our civilization suffers, our government grows despotic and, worst of all, our children suffer.

Since we cannot expect our political elite to set good examples, and indeed they must want corruption in our society, as shown by their actions, we must set the example. If we follow the Sage kings of ancient China we will show those around us that virtue can be lived. Our good example will draw people to follow us, while the corrupt elite repel them. The hypocrisy of the elite will repulse our children and our good examples will make them far more inclined to be civil, courteous, hard working and honest… if they see it modeled in us. So, smile at strangers, stop and let the car waiting in, tip the waitstaff well, be honest in business, and most of all, follow the golden rule… Do unto others as you would have them do unto you! The change will not be fast, it took generations to get to where we are, and many will struggle against us. But if we want change in the World, we must be the change we seek. Unless we do, no one else will, and if we do, positive change will eventually come.

Remember, Fight the power… by being the power that will be!

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Exploiting Tragedy

Monday, April 22nd, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if exploiting a tragedy for crass political gain is acceptable, it is acceptable for all political factions, if it is not, it is unacceptable for any political faction to do it. Tragic events such as the Boston marathon bombing or the Sandy Hook shooting stun the public’s psyche and cause people to reassess the meaning of evil and good. We struggle for answers, why would a person do such horrific things to innocents. We examine our own security situation, and in our heightened emotional state, we are more susceptible to making snap decisions. This is why tragedy is so often exploited by political operatives to pass legislation that otherwise couldn’t be passed. Tragedy, is a means to move society from a place of liberty to a place of security. But, that security comes at the price of liberty, and as anyone with a real education, (admittedly uncommon today due to the State monopoly school system), knows Ben Franklin’s old adage, “Those who would trade liberty for security will get neither.”

Today we live insulated lives. We go about our day secure in the knowledge that it is very unlikely that we will experience violence. The news shows us that violence still exists in our society however, they expound unendingly, on every robbery and shooting, making us afraid of our fellow man, while ignoring the far worse examples of State violence, then politicians exploit that violence. All to shock us into acting against our own interests. When we see random acts of violence perpetrated on innocents, our glass world of security is shattered, and the reality that violence can be visited on anyone at any time, intrudes on our personal universe of safety. This quakes the ground of our reality under our feet, making us more open to innovations, even if they wouldn’t help, at least we are doing something. That something, always makes us more susceptible to State violence, even as it has no effect on personal safety, or maybe even makes it worse… ensuring the next tragedy to be exploited is close at hand.

Politicians know this and use this attribute of human nature to get laws and regulation passed that otherwise would be dead on arrival. When Rahm Emanuel famously said, “Never let a crisis go to waste,” he was explicitly referring to this aspect of human nature. Crisis and violence gives the political elite a means to do what they want outside the normal deliberative course of the political process. This saying shows that not only that tragedy can be exploited, but that it will be exploited, for crass political gain… at least in the circles Rahm Emanuel travels in. This is a strong incentive to politicians to exploit tragedy, and even to make sure that the next tragedy is never far away, so as to provide the means to forward the next step in their agenda.

Obama and those that seek to undermine the Bill of Rights in the US Constitution have exploited the Sandy Hook shootings to the utmost. Obama parades the victim’s parents, (those that agree with him), in front of the American public constantly. Using spurious logic, he equates being against this or that attempt to undermine the Bill of Rights, as tantamount to favoring more massacres at schools. This is nakedly exploiting that tragic event to political advantage. Obama and the unbiased media make sure the parents that disagree with them, never have their opinion told to the public however, because it undermines Obama’s argument.

Now, the very people that have so expertly exploited tragedies in the past, are telling us that the Boston Marathon Bombings have no relevance to such debates as, immigration reform, gun control or the need to profile. In this, those that exploit tragedy for crass political gain always call profiling, Islamophobia, they claim illegal immigration, and all the associated crimes that go along with it, should be forgiven, and guns must to be taken from law abiding citizens. The political and media elite, keep us ignorant of the fact that human history shows, unequivocally, a person is far more likely to be the victim of State violence, than crime. Their sophistry is as thick as it is illustrative of their intentions… to undermine Constitutional rule, replacing it with arbitrary rule by the political elite… for the political elite. This subjects us to the horrors of State violence, supposedly, to protect us from personal violence.

The incentive for the political elite, who seek Constitutional change outside the parameters the Constitution sets up, is to ensure that violence continues, to provide a source of tragedy they can exploit to their own ends. They will deplore the use of tragedy to point out the folly of their agenda while exploiting that tragedy themselves. Some would say this is simply politics… The smart politician using the tools at hand to promote their agenda, while denying those very tools to the other side. If that is so, then I have a question for you, when has good ever been promoted by evil? Moreover, don’t the means taint the ends? In the times we live in, it is up to us to decry the Machiavellian machinations of politicians that seek to fundamentally change America, from a Constitutionally limited republic to a socialist Hades… else we will get hell without limit.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Boston Marathon bombings

Thursday, April 18th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if we want to eradicate violence like the Boston Marathon bombings, we must eliminate the cause, removing the means only empowers the very factions that perpetrate these crimes. The university system in the United States has ceased being a place of higher learning and instead has become indoctrination centers for communist thought, political correctness clouds the minds of the unbiased media, and we are told our Constitution needs to be weakened to stop these evil actions… all of which rewards and encourages the criminals. We allow this to go on because we feel powerless to stop it even though many of us have known about the problem for a long time.

The human suffering from the Boston Marathon bombings is the result of people who believe that violence against innocents is an acceptable form of political discourse. This mind set is as pernicious as it is evil. Those who would do such a thing should be locked up for the rest of their lives or be the voltage drop in a high amperage circuit. The outcry from the American public will demand this for the perpetrator of this heinous evil. Our outrage is justified and righteous, but justice must be applied evenly, else it is not justice, it is injustice.

Make no mistake, the bombings were a political expression. No matter who did it, be it communists, anarchists, Islamofacsists or even radical right wingers, the bombing of an athletic event was a manifestation of someone’s politics. More and more often political expression is becoming a violent act. Sometimes, because of the shooter or bomber’s feelings of powerlessness, often due to their opinion of religious teachings and regularly as a result of the overtly violent political movement, we call socialism. Our society is plagued with political violence against bystanders.

At the time of this writing we don’t know who the bomber(s) are. The culprit or culprits could be anyone. Yet this type of bombing has happened in the past many times. We have forgotten them, sometimes not even punishing them, and as a result, we are reliving them. Our forgetfulness has allowed evil to regrow and retool to become even more dangerous. Our having allowed, through our inaction, past terrorists like Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dorn, not only to escape retribution for their actions, bombings that resulted in deaths and mutilation of innocents and children in the 1960’s and ’70’s, we have rewarded them with high paid professorships… we have, at the very least, minimized the offense, and at worst, glamorized it.

The answer to stopping political violence of any nature, is not to outlaw guns, destroy the Constitution or limit access to toilet cleaner, it is to shine the light of public opinion on the political ideologies that underlay it. The unbiased media, and our government under Obama, have colluded to protect communists and Islamofascists from the light of public scrutiny. Political correctness has blinded us to the reality of violent factions that are empowered by it, while our university system has been usurped by people who seek arbitrary power, even if it has to, “come at the end of a gun”… as one of Obama’s political appointees said, quoting Mao. Indifference and ignorance empowers the political violence we find ourselves facing today.

Unless we make a stand and demand that the unbiased media stop clouding the realities of favored political factions, with self censorship, use the power of the purse to force universities to go back to higher education, visit justice on all murderers, even if they are close friends and associates of the President, and call evil what it is, without fear, (eliminating the cause), no amount of regulating the means will stop it. Timidity in the face of evil, encourages evil, even as it discourages good. If we agree that political violence like the Boston Marathon bombings are unacceptable, we must stand together and require these things of the elite, in the media, academia and politics. Nothing less will put an end to the bombings, mass shootings and mob violence our televisions bring into our homes and we experience in our lives. Outlawing guns, (the means) only leads to disarmed victims, but has no effect whatsoever at stopping political violence. Unless we seek to become Iraq or Afghanistan we must speak loud and with conviction. Our children deserve no less from caring parents.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Social and Cultural Underpinnings of Capitalism

Sunday, April 14th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, all the positions that our political elite take, are geared to undermining the capitalist system. It is well known that the market system stands on legs not of it’s own making. Economists have opined unendingly about how the capitalist mode of production is based on societal factors that predate capitalism. They also make the point that capitalism, by it’s very existence, undermines these supports that capitalism needs to remain functional. Kicking out these legs then is the primary focus of most socialists. Because they know that if these supports are destroyed, capitalism will collapse of it’s on weight, and they can step in and visit socialism on all of mankind.

The family unit is extremely important for the market system to function. Capitalism requires as a prerequisite, capital to function, and the family unit provides an important incentive to save. If a person, say a member of the bourgeois, has no children his or her time horizon for the funds he or she saves is dramatically shortened. Instead of setting aside savings for their children and grand children the time horizon is limited to their own lifetime. This provides incentives for a rational maximizer to set aside only that money that will provide for them in their old age, and no more, because the extra savings will be unneeded, and furthermore, will only lower the standard of living of the saver, due to the opportunity cost of the extra savings. Therefore, the family unit is under attack by the policies and actions of the political elite, who seek a socialist future. Can you think of examples of where they do this?

Religion is a fundamental necessity for a market system to work. Religious people tend to be more ethical than people who have no moral foundation. If there is no afterlife to worry about, then why not steal, cheat and swindle, everyone you come across? The only rational reason for those without religion to be ethical is the threat of State punishment. Those who have the ability to elude criminal sanctions have no motivation at all to act morally. In fact, they have a very great motivation to grab what they can, because if there is no reward or punishment then they must live as good as they can, in their limited lifespan. Therefore, religion must be undermined by the socialist, that is why Marx came up with the saying, “religion is the opium of the people.” Do you know of other ways the political elite undermine religion?

The importance of the work ethic cannot be understated. People without a work ethic cannot engage in the market system. They not only lower the productivity of the firm they work for, but there is an even more pernicious action of a poor work ethic, it undermines other people’s work ethic. For a firm to compete in the marketplace it must produce a want or a need for human beings. It must produce that want or need as efficiently as possible else another firm will supplant them. In this if people cannot be found with a work ethic then businesses cannot function in the marketplace. Therefore, it is of the greatest concern to the socialist, to destroy the work ethic of the people. What policies of our political elite do you suppose undermine the work ethic?

There are other important societal and civil factors that allow the market system to work. Some of these are, independence, diverse wants, education, the drive to get ahead and many others too numerous to name. These things are required for capitalism to work, they predate capitalism and the market system itself undermines some of them, through it’s effect on the mindset of people. The socialist must seek to eliminate these attributes of people, to facilitate the collapse of the market system, ushering in socialism. The socialists know this and pass legislation to destroy these important foundational underpinnings of capitalism. If we want to protect our children from the horrors of the socialist state, we must then protect and nurture these things, so as to allow the capitalist system to continue. To do otherwise is to help the socialist enslave all of humanity.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Un-American Attacks on Our Constitution

Thursday, April 11th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems quite alarming to me, that so many who serve in the US government, have open antipathy to the US Constitution. Members of the Supreme Court have said they would not use the US Constitution as a template for a new republic, members of the Legislature calling the Constitution antiquated and out of step with the times, and even the President himself calling the Constitution a charter of negative liberties, the Constitution it would seem, is a problem for many if not most who serve in the American government. Every facet of the Constitution is under assault today from the very people who have taken a oath to uphold and protect it. The result of their attacks is to turn mindless, uninformed people and the fawning press, into useful idiots.

There is no facet of the US Constitution, especially the Bill Of Rights, that is not under direct assault today. The First amendment’s prohibition on the establishment of a State religion has been perverted into establishing the State religion of atheism, the other part of the First Amendment, freedom of speech and of the press, is being undermined by the very press it seeks to protect. The Second Amendment is daily undermined by the incessant call for more gun control, and freedom from search and seizure, has been eroded by the drug laws and fish and game laws that allow law enforcement to search your person or property without warrant or probable cause. We are under constant surveillance by the State, as we go about our daily tasks, while the workings of government are hid more and more by a veil of secrecy. The list of incursions grows longer every day. The hubris and boldness of these usurpers is ever more apparent every time they undermine another facet of Our Constitution.

It would seem that the Constitution stands in the way of these people’s desire to mold the government. The reason for the Constitution is to limit the power and scope of government to the minimum possible to function. That is an anathema to those that are in government today. Many have, as their stated goal, to evolve the United States into a socialist country. They openly avow this, until it becomes a political liability, then they change the subject and vilify the person sounding the alarm. History clearly shows the result of unconstitutional rule, oppression, famine, tyranny and war. There are no examples where this is not so.

There is nothing more un American than to be against the Constitution. Someone could take a position that is not in line with limited government and not be un American. It is evidently American to argue against the actions of any and all branches of government, that Right is enshrined in the First Amendment, but today the political elite call those who disagree with the President un American, without repercussion. Our Constitution is the foundation of our government. The function of Constitutional government is not dependent on who are citizens, or what the geographical location, it is entirely dependent on following the Constitution. This makes the very definition of what it is to be American is to agree with and follow the American Constitution. To be otherwise is the very definition of un American.

If we want to stem this dangerous trend in our elected and appointed elite, then we must start calling any attack on Our Constitution un American, do it boldly and without apology. To shrink in the face of a usurper is to accede to eventual tyranny. Acceding to tyranny is to be unworthy of being called American. Our Constitution is all that has ever stood between us and oppression. Make no mistake about it, our liberty is dependent on our Constitution, and our Constitution is dependent on our vigilance.

If we hear an elected or appointed representative attack our Constitution, it is our duty to pillory that politician, justice or bureaucrat. To grumble in silence is to accept, we must openly state we are in absolute support of our Constitution, and that we will broach no disrespect of it… especially from people who have taken an oath to follow and protect it! To attack and undermine our Constitution, after having taken an oath to protect it, is high treason and it must be called so! In the end, it is our silence or our vociferous defense, that will win the day. It is up to everyone who reads this to make up his or her mind, are you for the Constitution or against it? Ask yourself this… am I a useful idiot? If you are not, then take a stand, and remember… the pen is mightier than the sword, and your voice is louder than you think!

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Moral Relativism

Monday, April 8th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, moral relativism is an open door to the worst evil imaginable, and closing that door should be the first goal of every human being who seeks justice in our World. The theory of moral relativism is as pernicious as it is seductive however. This idea allows anything, no matter how heinous, to be called good, and it makes it possible to call the most human hearted things, evil. Actions, under this concept, should be judged in the social atmosphere of when and where they are done. This theory explicitly states, there is no objective good and no objective bad, only the context in which a thing happens is pertinent. This corrupting influence on mankind has led to untold human suffering and is leading us down the primrose path to far worse. Unless we unanimously call moral relativism what it is, evil, it will continue to lower the moral standard of humanity, reducing us to mere animals with no moral foundation for our thoughts and actions, opening the floodgates of every evil imaginable on mankind, propelled by our quickly advancing technology.

No one wants to be judged and moral relativism is seen as a means to keep others from judging us. This is one of the more attractive, and pernicious, aspects of moral relativism. Those that are enamored by this argument, usually claim that those who say there is an objective morality to human behavior, are judging them, and who are they to judge? This simplistic and sophist claim ignores the call by Jesus Christ, “Judge lest ye shall be judged.” The moral relativist thinks, or maybe just crassly claims, they are taking the moral high road, in not judging the actions of others. But then again, for there to be a moral high road, there must be objective morality. More and more we hear the moral relativist say, this or that economic, social or cultural ill, is unconscionable. Which is in fact making a moral judgment, showing them to be, at the very least, hypocrites and more likely, sophists. We see by their actions, if not their rhetoric, they seek to judge others without being judged.

The sophist claim that there is no overarching morality completely neglects human history in it’s entirety. In order to hold fast to moral relativism, one must forget all the lessons taught by human history, dooming us to relearn them. Never mind most were learned the hard way, and will be again, if we take up the mantle of moral relativism. Do we really want to relive the atrocities of human sacrifice? Is it in our children’s interests to go back to slavery? Do we want to live in a world that allows binding feet, eunuchs, feudal serfs, molesting children or forced prostitution? All these things, under moral relativism, are not immoral, because they must be considered in the context of the social and cultural situation in which they were, and are, done.

Objective morality must consider the wants, needs and feelings of all involved, to do otherwise is the very definition of evil. Objective morality takes all these things into account where moral relativism does not. If human sacrifice is a moral act, would you be happy to be the victim, if binding a person’s feet is good, would you want your feet bound, if slavery is a righteous act, depending on the cultural and social moors, would you want to be enslaved? Of course not! To argue so is piling absurdity on insanity and adding a cherry on top. No sane person would want these things done to themselves or a loved one. This fact alone, empirically proves that there is an overarching morality to human actions, disproving the theory of moral relativism completely.

Our technology is growing at an ever increasing pace. News accounts of the ability of science to do amazing things appear more and more often. Some of these things have the potential for great good, and some, horrific evil. Science fiction is filled with examples of the dark side of science. Even in the Victorian era there were warnings of the evil that could come from science, the Island of Dr. Moreau is but one example. Perhaps the most scary to me is the dark future that The Brave New World presents. Under the aegis of moral relativism the atrocities of Nazi doctors can be justified, and are… the darkest evil that can be imagined will be visited on mankind under conditions of moral relativism.

We human beings are a moral species all of us having that spark of good and evil in us. We nurse the good to our benefit and all mankind is blessed by that floodlight of goodness produced, but we feed the spark of evil to our peril, lest we are consumed by the ensuing inferno. Being flawed, we all do good and evil in our lives, and we all seek to escape being judged. Jesus commanded us to be moral, refraining from judging others, but the moral relativist calls us to be immoral while we are judging others. The ability of science to do good or evil, is based on the morality of the scientist, moral relativism removes the limit that morality places, unleashing the mad scientist to visit the greatest evils on humanity that can be envisioned by the most psychopathic minds. Moreover, if we remove the inhibitions that objective morality put on us, we are dooming our children to relearn the lessons of the past… So you see, it is not only our duty to dismiss moral relativism, but an imperative, lest we find ourselves trapped in a Brave New World of our own making… with no way to escape. God help us of we do.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Anti Capitalist’s Irrational Hatred

Thursday, April 4th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that irrational hatred is not susceptible to rational argument. No matter the elegance of the argument, the eloquence of the hyperbole nor the heights of logic, irrational hatred will never be dissuaded by it. This holds true no matter what is the source of the hatred. Hatred is an emotional feeling, irrational hatred even more so, and so we see why the anti capitalist is so difficult to appeal to. They hold the market system in absolute disdain. This is reason enough, for us to take a long hard look at irrational hatred of the market system, but when we couple the intractability of the anti capitalist’s irrational hatred with the ultimate consequences of it, we see that this emotional madness will inevitably lower the lot of Mankind, perhaps for a thousand years.

That irrational hatred is not susceptible to rational argument is not such a leap to make. Emotions are never susceptible to rational examination. They are, however, usually rationalized by the hater. He or she hates the capitalists system for a myriad of imagined failures, all of them when examined in the light of logic… are irrational. Furthermore, to use logical arguments to pick apart the rationalizations the anti capitalist uses will only further infuriate them, by removing the taffeta limitations on their hatred, allowing their full emotional loathing to be expressed maybe violently, as we saw in the Wall Street protest movement.

The very fact that anti capitalists have a hatred for the market system is irrational. Without a thought to the irony, they will set in a fast food restaurant, tapping away at a free smart phone, eating food that was prepared for them at a moment’s notice, for a historically low price, using the free Wi-Fi that is provided for their convenience, and rail about the unfairness of it all. They might not even have ever worked a day in their lives, but they are incensed at the unfairness of even the potential of having to work, to provide for themselves let alone others! They are immune to historical arguments about the wealth that the poor have, they cannot fathom how the socialist system has starved to death millions of people in the twentieth century, and they are blind to the vast economic gulf between the elite and the masses in a socialist system. Their only consideration is their undying hatred of the capitalist system.

Since this is unquestionably the case, the only way to argue effectively, showing them that capitalism is in their own best interest, is by emotional arguments. If we want to reach the very few anti capitalists who can be swayed, the only means at our disposal must be emotional. The gap between the rich and the poor in a capitalists nation must be met with outrage at the gap between the elite and the masses in a socialist country. Their railing at the unfairness of having to work must be met with sympathy that the people in socialist countries have to work longer harder and for less pay. Even their lamentations that capitalism is the source of all that is wrong with the World can be extinguished with the horror of Stalin’s purges, Mao’s famines, Hitler’s genocides and Pol Pot’s mass murders. As it turns out, the fall of the Soviet Union as an example of socialism at work, was a great tragedy. The only argument that holds water to the anti capitalist is an emotional one.

The market system has lifted more people from poverty than any other that has ever existed in human history. That is simply the truth. But the victories of capitalism are it’s greatest enemies. The market rationalizes men’s minds with questions about the cost benefit of everything. This mindset, that is the bread and butter of capitalism, bleeds over into all walks of life. The same reason capitalism won out against the feudal system undermines the market as well. People ask themselves, “If capitalism has raised so many so high, there must be another system that will do it universally with less effort.” They delude themselves with imaginings of universal prosperity and brotherly love, but to reach for such things with irrational hatred in one’s heart, is like expecting to breathe underwater. The result always falls short of the expectation.

So we see that it is impossible to convince an anti capitalist that the market system, with all it’s flaws, is still the best system to raise the lot of Man. The very act of hating the market system is irrational, and irrational hatred is emotionally based. It is usually rationalized, like a murderer rationalizes his actions, but if that thin veneer is removed, the hatred becomes unhitched from all reality and is expressed without limit. Therefore, the only means at our disposal to help the anti capitalist to see the rightness of the market, is with emotional arguments, not logical ones. To save our children and grand children from tyranny, slavery and poverty, we must fight against the very mindset that capitalism brings to the table. If we fail, then we have let slip through our fingers the manna of prosperity, and exchanged it for the poison of irrational hatred.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Charity, the State and Individual Growth

Monday, April 1st, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that charity is a form of love. When we are charitable to our fellow man, we are expressing not only love for him or her, but to humanity itself. To be charitable is to be loving, but love is a human feeling, and can only be felt by a human being, (and a dog). The State is not a human being, therefore it cannot feel human emotions, like love and charity. The State is an expression of the power of the collective over the individual. Power is not love nor can a mob practice charity. Those who seek to be charitable then, must be charitable, but cannot pass to the State their human requirement for charity, doing so causes injury, not benevolence.

When confronted by the Pharisees, whether or not to pay taxes, Jesus asked for a coin. He looked the coin over and asked who’s face was on it. “Caesar” was the answer. Jesus said, “Render onto Caesar that which is Caesar’s and unto God that which is God’s.” The State coined the money, which is a thing, God coined mankind’s soul, which is divine. The State is of the Earth, charity and love is of God. The State cannot do that which is divine, it is not in it’s nature, but human beings can… it is in ours.

To expect anything to do that which is not in it’s nature is foolishness. Just as a crow eats carrion, and a clam strains algae from the water, the State survives on the power to coerce. If we understand this, then we can clearly see, charity is not a thing the State can do. If it tries then it must be uncharitable to be charitable. Since the end does not justify the means, the means taint the ends, to have charity handled by the State, renders the entire operation uncharitable and unloving.

Giving is said to be it’s own reward. When we try to pass our very human feelings of charity to the State we don’t get the personal reward from being charitable. Those that are forced to pay for the State’s giving, (which is, after all, injury to them), are disconnected from charity, they begin to resent the recipient of the State’s largess, and become indifferent to the plight of the poor. The person being helped gets a fish for a day. That fish for a day comes at great cost to the recipient of the State’s giving however. More often than not, welfare leads people to dependence on the State, undermining their personal drive to get ahead. This again, is not loving charity that uplifts the recipient, it is crushing dependence that stagnates the individual and undermines their ability to grow as a human being. The benefit of charity is totally lost, to society, the giver and the receiver.

There are three parts to the human being, physical, mental and spiritual. As we exercise those parts they become stronger, as we allow them to atrophy, they become weak. True charity and love are uplifting for both the giver and the receiver. Our divine nature is fed by voluntary giving, not only of money, but our time and attention too. As we nourish our divinity we grow stronger in spirituality. The recipient of our love and charity grows as well. They see the example we set and are inclined to follow it. Goodness begets goodness and injury begets injury. This is a simple concept to understand. Individual charity grows the souls of those involved, but fake charity withers the soul.

It is up to each one of us to be loving to our fellow men and women. Charity is an act of love, and the State is incapable of love, and so cannot be truly charitable. Jesus himself tells us that the property of the State, power, money and pomp, should be practiced by the State, and that which is the property of God, love charity and kindness, should be practiced by human beings. The only ones to benefit from the State’s faux charity, are the political elite, who amass greater and greater power to run the lives of individuals… for their own good, since the State’s charity does injury to the receiver. We ignore this lesson to the detriment of our children, who we fail to set a good example for, by passing our very human need to be charitable to the State, and we all slide further down the slippery slope to oppression. The answer is to take back that power from the State, and be personally charitable, love your neighbors, act as you would have others act, leading by example and let show the divine nature God gave each and every one of us. To do otherwise is to deny that Godly spark within us, and even to let it die, a leper in the cold dark prison of indifference.

Sincerely,

John Pepin