Archive for February, 2014

Jobs and Wages

Thursday, February 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, if the government wants more jobs in our economy, all they have to do is cut job destroying regulations and taxes. While this is not a new idea, or a particularly novel one, it is an concept that has always worked. Government, and by government I mean politicians, pass more regulations every year with no end in sight. Tens of thousands of bureaucrats working diligently regulating every aspect of human existence. While this creates some good paying jobs, in the bureaucracy, it destroys private sector jobs, you know, the ones that pay for the bureaucrats. Unless we wake up to this fact, and stop believing their lies, our economy, jobs and wages will continue to suffer.

 

All politicians know this. They know that jobs are not created by government fiat or programs. Those programs and fiats destroy jobs. They certainly know, but so want the power their regulations give them over us, they don’t care about the consequences, our ability to earn a living. The hubris and egoism of the elite that engage in the type of job killing regulation, as their own actions show, care much more for amassing power than the economic well being of the people they are supposed to serve. In this self aggrandizing egoism, a few names stand out, as do the results of their regulatory policies.

 

Woodrow Wilson is one. He inherited a good economy and destroyed that good economy with growth stifling regulation, taxes and bureaucracy. The economy he passed to Harding was far deeper in recession than the US economy in 2008. Franklin Roosevelt took a bad economy and made it into “The Great Depression.” His policies were so intrusive that economic activity almost stopped altogether, and it wasn’t until his death, before the economy rebounded. The Second World War is often cited as the reason we came out of the depression, but had Roosevelt been President after the war, the economy would have hit new lows. Barack Obama has followed the policies of both Wilson and Roosevelt and the results have been exactly the same. This same experiment has been tried the world over and has failed every time. Proving it is impossible to tax and regulate an economy into prosperity.

 

If we examine the most productive economies we find that they all have several things in common. They all have low taxes, and they all have low regulation. Singapore, Liechtenstein, and Andorra are but a few examples. Those countries with the poorest economies all have high taxes and stifling regulation in common. Venezuela, North Korea and Zimbabwe are examples of this type. History shows, laissez fair capitalism enriches people every time it is tried, while socialist regulation impoverishes those same people.

 

Whenever laissez fair is offered as an option however, the elite in academia and politics make the spurious claim, we want to take the guard rails off the economy. This is entirely sophistry, because it is not regulation that protects consumers and workers, but standards. Regulations only benefit politically favored groups at the expense of everyone else. One example of job killing regulation is raising the minimum wage. Everyone knows, (politicians, economists and bureaucrats), that doing so will eliminate jobs, the only real debate is how many. Minimum wage jobs are filled by low skilled new workers. Statistics show that in the US there is huge unemployment in those areas, raising the minimum wage will eliminate some of those jobs, exacerbating the problem, and so low skilled new workers will have less opportunity to get work and start climbing the ladder out of minimum wage. Clearly, raising the minimum wage is counter productive, but those that don’t get laid off will think they have got a boon.

 

As long as the political elite can continue to fool the majority, into believing they are doing something for the economy when they are in fact destroying job prospects, we will continue to fall down the bottomless pit of poverty. Wages are like any other commodity, the more demand for workers the higher wages will be. As government drives down the demand for workers wages must naturally follow. This is no different than the price of gold or coal, if demand is high price is high, and if demand is low the price will be low too. Since Obama has taken office launching his war on business and enacted his job killing regulations, including Obama care, we have seen real wages fall, driven down because demand for workers has fallen. There has been no other recession, (other than FDR”s and Wilson’s), where the US economy has performed so poorly in the recovery, even going back to 1800. Obama’s great recession is due to the same policies that gave us the great depression. Isn’t it time to grow up and do what must be done? Stop listening to the glittering lies crooned by self serving egoists, and start believing the ugly truth, that government cannot tax and regulate us into wealth.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Our Cultural Slide

Thursday, February 20th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the Elitist culture that runs the World is drunk on their own propaganda. The producers of culture fill the internet and airwaves with vacuous nonsense about how caring our leaders are. Those news organizations that call themselves unbiased vomit naked propaganda like a bulimic and even the Congress has eliminated a law forbidding the US government from passing propaganda. They must coordinate like this because the Elitist culture has just seized fully one third of the US economy and put it firmly under socialist control. The elite are only human, despite their propaganda, and so as they are awash their own misinformation they start to believe it’s true. This would swell a saint’s ego, and as we all know, a big ego is a sure way to a bloody nose.

 

Now I am not saying a small cabal of insiders run the world from a bohemian grove or anything like that. You have to admit that those who run the various countries around the World do have a pretty incestuous relationship. Without the good, the bad would have no one else to blame for the woes of their people. Without the bad however the “good” would have no bugbear under the bed to point at to keep their people in line. So even those who at first glance would seem to be opposites benefit each other, perhaps in a symbiotic relationship. A relationship that runs on propaganda.

 

When you consider how many people really decide what World culture will one can only conclude, a very small number of people decide, what we will wear, what our children will like, IE tattoos, what foods we will try, and the depth of important personal decisions that are made by the purveyors of culture is as amazing as is the tiny number of them. They have great power over not only our lives but our pocketbooks as well. By deciding how short dresses will be this year they are ahead of markets, which have to read the cultural elite’s signals. That gives the cultural elite the ability to time the market from what is essentially insider information. When a person has outsized power be it economic, political or cultural, and the cultural elite have all three, it blinds a person to their own faults.

 

We wear the newest fashion because everyone else does, we try the latest foods because everyone else does and we generally believe the messages in the entertainment we watch. Often to our own misfortune. Most of us just want to fit in, have a decent life and have a few happy grand kids when we die. That’s why in the melee of our own lives, we allow the cultural elite to change history, call the good bad and bad good, we laugh at those crazy Christians… as Christians are portrayed in many shows, even since the 1970s Dragnet and Adam 12. The mindset this pernicious corrosive leaves behind is one that has no foundation or right and wrong to tie to. We see this every day in the news, that young people have no moral compass, they are desensitized to violence, believe in the lowest form of hedonism, and disbelieve in God. The purveyors of culture have achieved Nietzsche dream. When a person achieves a supreme goal they naturally gain faith in their ability. This can bring on a false sense of godliness, if the goal was large enough and hard enough.

 

Here we sit, with the elite in society drunk on their own propaganda and success. Our society is crumbling because of it but they stand at the apex of their power. Now that society is almost to the point it can be reformed the elite are willing to reform it. They will use the not inconsiderable power they have connived us out of and form a society where they cast off the shackles of Constitutions and law, ascending to a higher plane of enlightenment, totalitarianism enforced equality. Yes, once the strong force holding society together is dissolved by culture’s pernicious acid, we will fly apart like atoms when the nucleus is disturbed. Perhaps the most disturbing thing is that the new society our children will live in will have been formed by drunks.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Retirement Paradigm

Monday, February 17th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the human body is not designed, nor is it suitable, for decades of physical toil, that is why people retire in their 50s and 60s. The system where we put aside some of our earnings for retirement is elegant, because it sets up a paradigm where people provide labor to the market system when we are young, and capital when we are too old to work. Those who claim, people will have to work until we are 70 or 80, have no concept of the physical toll of labor, because the have never physically toiled at a job. The system, where we provide labor when we are able and then capital once we have accumulated it, works well with the human body and it’s basic limitations as well as it’s abilities. Once we have moved from providing labor to providing capital, we can pursue new things, like starting a business, personal enrichment or helping with the grand kids. This is just another of the myriad of ways the market system benefits humanity and human beings.

 

The market system requires two basic inputs to function, labor and capital. When Marx derisively labeled the market system, capitalism, he was pointing to one of the fundamental requirements of the market. Marx considered labor to be the most important input, and that the introduction of capital into the equation rendered all human interaction, including that of the laborer and the manager, into a crass means of exploitation, the cash nexus as he called it. This is why he claimed, when we labor within the market, our work is alienating. What he failed to understand, is that the improvement in the human condition that the market system brought, and brings about, is based on capital funding the new ideas that create the improvement.

 

The market system allows the efficient transmission of ideas into production, while every other system, including and especially Marxism, discourages it. This transmission of new ideas requires capital, to purchase the means of production, and labor, to provide the production itself. As new ideas are incorporated into the existing system, old less efficient ones are rendered obsolete. This creates a basic instability to any nation that uses the market system, but that instability comes with a wage… an ever increasing standard of living for everyone.

 

When we are young we are able to labor without damage to our bodies. That is the nature of youth. But as we age, labor becomes more and more dangerous, even as our knowledge of our labor becomes greater. In the most efficient economies, as we become less able to labor and our knowledge about our labor becomes ever greater, we are promoted into management to take advantage of that practical knowledge. This has been undermined by the rise of the New Class, who go directly from school to management bypassing the labor phase. Thus crowding out those with practical knowledge. This means they enter management with very little practical knowledge but a large amount of theoretical knowledge and thus, hubris born of ignorance. Since this paradigm has become entrenched, the market system, which is ever evolving to meet the needs of humanity, has evolved to allow people to retire at earlier ages, even as our life spans get longer.

 

But our physical limitations remain. This is born out when we see ever more people getting hurt in their labor. The rise of physical therapists is the market system’s reaction to people laboring at older ages. Our bodies only have a few decades of physical labor in them, and then we must move from providing our needs from labor to either management, or by providing capital. Since the market system needs two inputs, labor and capital, both have value and either can be a means of support for people. Those who have labored for decades, and have set aside money for retirement, or where they have taken less in immediate wages in exchange for a defined pension, are able to retire from a labor based sustenance to a capital based one. Those who have been spendthrifts however undermine their own best interests.

 

Since capital is a basic input into the market it has value and in a functional market is paid commensurately with that value. This is upended when government policies lower the demand for labor, and thus wages, by importing cheap low skilled labor by immigration, making it harder to run a business through regulation, taxing labor, etc… or where national banks change the value equation of capital, through inflation or low returns on equity, caused by market warping policies, like money printing and nationalizing debt. When governments or central banks do this, they make it harder for those who have saved for retirement, to move from providing labor to providing capital. Other ways this paradigm is undermined, is when government’s seize the retirement funds of the people, (like in Argentina or Cyprus), or where the New Class manage companies so there is little return to shareholders, but huge wages paid to upper management. These economy damaging practices create the conditions, where people will have to labor far longer than is optimal for our bodies, and gives the incentive not to save but to spend.

 

Today we have people in the intelligentsia, (The New Class), who claim our children will have to work until they are ready to die. This is less of a burden for the new class, because they don’t labor, they manage. The human condition is such that, it is in everyone’s best interest to have a system where we labor when it is most efficient and least dangerous, and where we move to providing capital instead of labor, when our bodies become less efficient and more prone to damage. This has the added benefit of freeing up those who are retired to expand their minds, and perhaps provide some of the ideas, ideas that are fundamental to the market system’s growth. The practical knowledge and skills we build up throughout our working careers is excellent fodder for new ideas and new business possibilities. Rejuvenating the market with new ideas that become available, because people can switch from providing labor to providing capital, frees us up to pursue new ideas to the market, creating a rising standard of living. Unless the system is warped by our own leaders that is…

 

 

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Bestowing the Power of Life and Death to Obama

Thursday, February 13th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, in the modern discussion of whether the US President can unilaterally order an American citizen killed by drone strike, the slippery slope is intentionally forgotten. While this or that terrorist who has renounced his or her citizenship is killed, and we cheer at the removal of a supposed demon, we are also cheering the demise of our own rights. This government we have elected has shown a propensity to misuse power and spit on our Constitution. We all know it even the most ardent fans of Obama. It becomes a slippery slope, because once a power is given to government it never stops there, but more is always taken. There are ways of meeting the challenge of terrorism without burning our Constitution, the only real power we have to limit the power of the elite over us, but we are given a false narrative… That the government must act now else more Americans will die at the hands of terrorists. This is not true and is an example of spurious argumentation. Unless we wake up to this fact we will loose all of our rights, cheering as it happens, because what good are all the rights in the World, if we can be killed at will?

 

Lately there is a debate about some new American Muslim terrorist who is at large in Yemen or some other hell hole. The media are all agog at the thought of Obama ordering the execution of that man by drone strike. They claim it would put American lives needlessly at risk if we tried to capture the supposed terrorist. They argue if we allow him to escape “justice” then Americans are put at risk from further terrorist attacks. Like Anwar Al Awlaki they claim Al Qaida will be further empowered by our not acting. This is all sophistry.

 

Instead of empowering the President with the ability to simply order an American citizen killed by drone strike, why not try the purported terrorist in absentia? What would be the harm of appointing the accused terrorist an attorney and give him a fair trial? Yes, the accused terrorist will not be able to make as good an argument for himself as he otherwise could, if he were at the trial, but when he or she went to a foreign country to wage war on the United States they gave up that right, and could easily get it back by volunteering to return. If the court found the accused guilty, then he or she could be legally and Constitutionally killed by drone strike, or by whatever means is most efficient. But to give an imperial President that ability is the height of stupidity.

 

This President, along with a very few others, Franklin Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson come to mind, have shown a complete disregard for Our Constitution, the rule of law and limited government. They use(d) the power of government like a dictator. Obama has exploited the taxing authority of the IRS to target his political opponents… with total impunity, he has sent high power guns into the hands of Mexican drug cartels, to undermine our Constitutional right to keep and bear arms, again without consequence, and he announced in the last State of the Union address, he plans on usurping the power of Congress, to standing ovations! Since Obama has shown he will overstep his authority and do it with impunity, to give that man, or any human being such power, is idiotic! How long will it be after Obama is given the power of life and death, before he follows his heroes examples, Mao, Bill Ayers and Frank Marshal Davis, and orders the execution of Tea Party members?

 

Ben Franklin said, those who would trade liberty for safety will get neither. That great man was of course correct. What good is any other “right” if one is dead? Those who would give arbitrary power to any President, be that a communist like Obama or a Tea Party member, are willingly putting their own head in the noose. Only a fool does that, but even a wise man can be tricked into it, and many have. All that is needed to meet the immediate necessity is a trial in absentia… but have you noticed not one in the unbiased media has mentioned it? This is not unheard of, it is not extraordinary, certainly not as extraordinary as bestowing arbitrary power to execute Americans at will. The exigencies of the situation cannot be so great they require us to become slaves and worse. Remember this; No matter how much you agree with what they are doing today, beware what they do with that power tomorrow, because you have given them the authority to do it.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Socialism Makes Us All Enemies

Monday, February 10th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, as we progress more and more to socialism by means of the welfare state, we are sinking into a state of total war, everyman versus everyone else, where all vie against all. This is the opposite of the claimed goal of socialism but is the inevitable result of that pernicious notion. Even in a state of nature where, as Hobbs said, “life is brutish and short,” there is a strong incentive to rally together against the forces that threaten us, but in a state of total government that incentive is reversed, and is changed to a disincentive. While to the committed socialist this concept, that socialism pulls us apart, is an anathema, it is empirically provable. As we move from liberty to a total state this truism becomes more and more apparent. So, unless we want to live in a perpetual state of war, every man enemy to everyone else, we must change the direction we are traveling.

 

The welfare state is merely a means to progress us to a socialist state, where the distribution of the goods of society are made by political favor, instead of merit. As we progress to a total state and political favor becomes the primary means of deciding who gets what, the incentive ceases to be to work hard to get ahead, but to game the system. This is because the products of our labor will be taken, and redistributed to the politically favored, so a rational maximizer will logically eschew work and instead seek political favor, resulting in an ever shrinking economy. This should be obvious to anyone with their eyes open. The incentive under the total state is to gain political favor, as it is the only means to get ahead, and make no mistake, the more draconian the communist state the less equal people become, and the more we are torn apart.

 

Even a cursory look at historic examples of socialism show that equality is nonexistent under a socialist government. Those who don’t have political favor are lucky if they even get subsistence while those with political favor live like kings. Every example of a communist/socialist state show this to be true. Those in the party are not held to any standard at all. Socialism always results in a cleptocracy where those in the party steal from everyone else. Communist China is a perfect example. They have forsworn the communist means of production for the capitalist, which has resulted in huge wealth for party members by outright stealing, taking bribes, and other corrupt practices. They are almost never held to the law or morality, because the nature of socialism and socialist policies make those with political favor above the law. This shows the societal divisions that socialism begets.

 

It is clear that as we progress through the welfare state to socialism, our leaders are held to the Constitution and law, less and less. Their political favor gets them a get out of jail free card as well as riches far in access of what they have earned. That is why politicians become so wealthy while in office. They don’t produce, they steal the production of their constituents and give a pittance back, claiming they are liberal and charitable, when the exact opposite is true. If a thief stuck a gun in your face and took all your money, then gave you back a twenty and said, “get yourself a nice meal.” Would you call that crook liberal or charitable? If the thief was above the law, which would you rather be.. the crook or the victim?

 

Harry Truman said, “Anyone who gets rich in politics is a God damned crook.” Take the example of Senator Bernie Sanders. The man has never worked a day in his life. He was on welfare until he became the mayor of Burlington. Since then his brand of socialism has made him a millionaire many times over. Everything he has got was by political favor. When he was elected to the House, the Banking scandal broke. Sanders claimed the corrupt names should be withheld from the people, but as it turned out… Bernie had bounced checks the moment he got into office! You or I would be prosecuted for check fraud. Meanwhile he has made it harder and harder to make a living by honesty and hard work. This example shows, political favor allows those who have it to skirt the law, and is at least as good a means to wealth as being an entrepreneur, especially for the lazy.

 

The example of North Korea shows us how far we will be torn apart by socialism. In that hell hole parents are at war even with their own children. There are reports of parents eating their own children because hunger is so rampant. The gulags in North Korea are known as the most terrible places on the planet, where children will turn in their parents, for a slice of stale bread. During Stalin’s famine in the Ukraine, the teachers told the students to report their parents if they were hording food. An innocent little boy raised his hand and said his parents had a few potatoes in the floor boards. The police went to the home and indeed found several potatoes in the floor. The parents were arrested and executed as examples. The boy was called a hero and a statue was erected in his honor in Kiev. The boy starved to death the following year.

 

As I have said many times in these articles, when observation comes into conflict with theory, theory must give weigh. History in unambiguous about the fact that socialism creates a state of total war between people. We are pitted against each other in a race for political favor, else we run the risk of starving to death, or worse. The brutish and short life in a state of nature makes us band together, to get our needs met, while capitalism rewards collaboration, hard work and equality, creating conditions conducive to brotherly love, and the inhumane nature of a socialist government rends us apart in a never ending race to get our needs met in an ever shrinking economy, under a system where the party is oligarchy, and everyone else is a slave. I count this as one of the most evil things about the diabolical system called socialism.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Gap Between the Rich and the Poor

Thursday, February 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the disparity between the rich and the poor is so misused and so misunderstood, it ceases to be a metric of the justness of the market system, and has become a mere tool for leftist propaganda. The term is never fully defined, is it the difference between the income of the highest earners and the lowest earners, is it the difference between the wealth of the richest and the poorest, or perhaps it is the difference between the both income and wealth of the prosperous and the pitiable? The parameters are never stated, only left to the imagination of the observer, and as such becomes a subjective measure and not an objective measure. This makes the term spurious in that it appears logical but is in fact false logic meant to deceive. Yet this sophist measure is touted as proving the unjustness of the market system, and by extension, the justness of the socialist system. If we are to improve our standard of living and not backslide, as we have done under Obama’s reign, we must throw away this specious measure for one that is objective and empirical.

 

It is all the rage today in the unbiased press to claim the disparity between the rich and the poor is at an all time high. We are scolded by the rich media elite that we must do something about this disparity else we are immoral and self indulgent people. The media elite however never actually lower their own standard of living they only demand us to lower ours. Using this false measure to goad us into accepting government actions, that we know will harm our economic interests, for the supposed interests of the “poor.” As we are shamed into lowering our standard of living the elite in the media, government and culture increase theirs. Are we to assume then that we are the culprit when it comes to the disparity?

 

President Obama is constantly using this specious claim, along with the spurious admonition that all of us must give a little so that others can get a little. All the while Obama vacations on Nantucket island, the playground of the rich and powerful. He never vacations at a bowling ally, Detroit or Seven Flags. He spends all of his time with the rich, living the life of a king, at the expense of the taxpayer… you know, us… the ones who have to give up a little so that others can have a little more. Apparently we must give so the king can have more. How does this help the poor though? His spurious rhetoric makes Obama’s admonition that we “share” the sacrifice, hypocrisy at best.

 

Socialism is always touted as the means to close the gap between the rich and the poor, but when we examine the results of socialism, honestly and fairly we find the direct opposite is true. Take the most socialistic nations, Cuba and North Korea, there are many more but these two will suffice. In Cuba the socialist haven in the Caribbean, Forbes Magazine has deemed Fidel Castro one of the richest men on the planet.. A label he vehemently denied but is empirically true. He owns not only everything on the island of Cuba but everyone as well. If he arbitrarily orders someone to do a thing, they must do it else face jail, or worse. He decides what everyone gets, he decides every aspect of the county’s economy. This all makes Fidel Castro richer than rich, it makes him the slave master of Cuba.

 

In North Korea people must do and think exactly as the tyrant says, even crying at the death of the last tyrant, if the tears are not sufficient or realistic, they get punished for three generations in forced labor camps. People who have escaped those human atrocity factories, have given some of the most horrendous stories of human suffering, starvation and deprivations imaginable, where a child will sell out their mother to the hangman for a slice of stale dry bread! Meanwhile, the tyrant lives the life of a king. He has the best of everything while his people starve. Is it possible to have a greater disparity, by every measure, than between the master and the slave?

 

A better scale would be to compare the standard of living of the poorest in a society to the richest. If the poor are well fed, have multiple flat screen televisions, at least one car and the finest sneakers… as compared to another country where starvation is common, housing is filthy, leaky and subject to collapse, where it can be obtained, which of the two is more just? The wealthy will always have a high standard of living and the poor will always have a lower standard of living, that will never change, and is only exacerbated by socialism’s benefit to the politically favored versus the politically disfavored. When the actual disparity between the standard of living between the rich and poor is low however, the rich claim the environment and thus the carrying capacity of the planet is threatened. The truth is, it is not what they have that makes them happy, it is what we don’t have that they have. To that end, they use spurious arguments like the gap between the rich, (themselves) and the poor, (us) to further their selfish ends.

 

When we use the standard of living of the wealthy versus the poor we are using a metric that can be measured empirically, is objective and not subjective and is far more indicative of the real justness of an economic system. Moreover, if we add the rate of rise of the standard of living in a given system, we have a much more accurate measure. This is not done because if it were the market system would always win out hands down. Since the New Class sets the parameters of any debate on the justness of a given economic system, and they are the ones with political favor and power, they always seek to give us false choices, hanging us on the horns of a dilemma, so we are gored no matter what we choose, resulting in a system that further empowers them.

 

Since socialism in all it’s pernicious incarnations is simply distributive justice by political favor, and since the New Class has both political favor and political power, they benefit most when society is socialist. Therefore they want socialism despite the very real damage to the lives and welfare of the people. To this end, it is in the egoists self interests to use spurious claims of economic justice, to goad us into allowing government actions that do real harm to our economic, cultural and social interests. Spurious claims are by their nature difficult to counter and so they become memes in our society. It is up to us then, as self interested human beings, to do everything in our power to point them out as well as the sophist nature of them, else we fall into the rabbit hole of absurdity in the name of justice.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Constitutional Usurpation

Monday, February 3rd, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, if I am not held to the Law, I will not follow the law. Moreover, if our elected leaders are not held to the Constitution, they will not follow it either. This not only applies to the US, where the Constitution has been bastardized by the New Class to their own purpose, but around the World. Human nature is unyielding. We do what we can get away with due to our egoistic self interest. No one among us is immune we are all subject to the demands of our egos. It is said that our emotions are like an elephant and our reason is merely a rider. Since politicians are human beings, they are as subject to this weakness in human nature as anyone, perhaps more, since they seek egoistic power over others. If we are to leave our children and their children, a World where people are free and prosperous, we must realize a means to counter this predilection in our leaders.

 

Think about it this way, if the laws against speeding are not enforced, people will speed more and more. As a result accidents will become more and more frequent and deadly. If the laws against drunk driving are not enforced as well the trend of more deadly accidents will accelerate. This is incontestable, we all know that we will do what we can get away with, and we all understand the repercussions. What we fail to realize however, is the same holds true for our elected leaders, but with far greater negative consequences.

 

The elite, like everyone, seek to exceed limits on their actions. In the case of the elected leaders, they want more freedom, to limit the freedom of others. Like the guy late for work, if he believes he will get away with exceeding the limit, he will do it. The repercussion to the society and culture from the elite exceeding their authority, as limited by the Constitution, are far more dangerous than merely allowing drunks to careen down the road fast as bullets. If we allow our leaders to surpass constitutional limits, the results include but are not limited to, famine, oppression, poverty, social strife, and hopelessness.

 

The predilection of the elite is only exacerbated, when those that are empowered with limiting the power and scope of government by their Constitutions, cheer and applaud when a would be usurper publicly announces he fully intends to practice arbitrary power. In this case the Constitution is nothing more than a cloak that gives the new tyrant’s usurpations a veil of legitimacy. When this happens the people have two options. Rise up and demand the Constitution be followed to the letter as intended or fall into line like lambs to the slaughter house. In such a society, where the people rise up immediately, the change back to Constitutional rule can be done with little or no blood shed, but where the people fall into line, whether it is for free stuff or fear of being called a name, eventually they will be led to slaughter and terror. Once that happens, if the people become enraged at the usurpations and rise up, we will be put down by deadly force and much blood will be shed, like in Tienanmen Square or Iran.

 

The right thing to do is never the easy thing to do. Most of the time we know the right thing to do but withhold action because it is seen as too difficult. Mo Ti wrote volumes about this facet of human nature, that we will do the hard thing to avoid the easy thing… In the case of a blatant usurper the right thing to do is to immediately write letters and articles, demonstrate, demand the Constitution be followed as written and intended, and otherwise act out. This is not easy, especially when the elite in the media, government and culture, back the usurper. But if it is not done and we fall into line like lambs the slaughter house cannot be far away.

 

In the US today we have a President who is so blatant about his usurpations he announces them to standing ovations like Adolph Hitler did. He is so confident that the American people will fall into line like lambs he openly avows he will practice arbitrary rule, like following laws as he sees fit, changing laws to suit his moods, bypasses other Constitutionally empowered branches of government and otherwise acts the dictator.

 

Using the spurious logic of “living breathing document” wasn’t undermining the Constitution fast enough, and we have become such sheep, he can do all these things without complaint from the very people he is avowing he will oppress. He knows the media will not hold him to any standard, the cultural elite back his incursions, and all other political factions behold his usurpations with admiration, drooling at the possibility they will get the same power if and when they come into office. The last hope to such a society, are the people who are awake and aware, we must demand our Constitution be followed. A NUMA is only a means to maintain Constitutional limits once they are reestablished. Like I said, if we do not hold the elite to the Constitution, they will not follow it, with all the consequences that will ensue. Lambs don’t write letters and don’t fight, they cry as their throat is slit, but to no avail… they have entered the slaughterhouse of their own free will.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin