Posts Tagged ‘constitution’

The Chiffon Dress Covering Naked Oppression

Sunday, July 16th, 2017

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, as a law not enforced becomes meager sophistry, a Constitution unenforced becomes a chiffon dress, to cover naked oppression. One way to undermine a constitution, and therefore establish oppression, is to keep the words the same, but change their meaning. Take the US Constitution. Freedom of religion has become separation of church and state, freedom of speech is under attack in every corner of the globe and even in liberal Canada is lost, while, shall not be infringed, now has added to it “unless it is dangerous,” in the unwritten language of tyrants, and States Rights are whatever scraps fall from the Federal Government’s table. When the police do not enforce a law, over time, everyone becomes a scofflaw, how much more so then, when it is a Constitution that is not enforced, and the people effected are ambitious and unscrupulous to begin with?.

Today we live in extra constitutional times. The US is not alone in this, what nation state or super state like the EU, or empire like China, actually hold everyone to the same standard? The elite in all countries point to their respective constitutions as proof of the legitimacy of their rule, but the moment that same document gets in the way of their avarice or hubris, they ignore it like a smelly cousin at the prom. The elite love to add in more government giveaways, because that increases their power, a government that has by constitutional authority the power and duty to provide for the one, has the power and duty to take from the other, the other always at the discretion of the elite. The more things the elite can glom onto a constitution, like the right to good housing, healthcare and three meals a day, basically three hots and a cot, like a prisoner or factory town worker… the thicker the cloth covering the tyrant’s naked oppression.

Our constitutions, and especially the US Constitution, have been undermined by the post modern philosophy of likening a constitution to a living breathing document, which in practice means the Constitution says whatever the Hell the elite say it does, and if they change it tomorrow to better suit their needs, then so be it. A constitution that’s meaning changes, “with the times,” is not a constitution but a means of legitimizing oppression, just as a law that is never enforced is not a law but a way of allowing a thing, while pretending to not allow it. The changes are not done to the words but to their interpretation. As whole clauses are ignored, irrelevant words are magnified to mean what they obviously don’t, all allowing the self serving elite to change the Constitution, outside the Constitutionally prescribed method.

That is how; “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.” Has been used to… establish a state religion of Islam/atheism, license people to talk over the air, and in Sharia compliant nations, talking about Islam will get you imprisoned… like Canada and England, with many elite demanding we in the US adopt those same laws. Meanwhile the US government has established Islam as dominant over all others by their actions. When holy Bibles were found in the possession of a serviceman, the government itself burned them, as trash, but the Koran is by code of conduct supposed to be handled with gloves, with both hands at all times, etc… but NEVER BURNED! Which, judging by actions and indeed rhetoric as well, establishes Islam as a dominant religion to Christianity. Every year the Right to Life marches in DC to condemn the Roe vs Wade decision, that has led to the slaughter of over 60 million babies in the US, those old grandmothers, mothers and young women have to be licensed and by the government and intimidated by snipers and police the whole way.

As long as we allow this post modernist philosophy to reign… our Constitution will be rendered ever more impotent. Common sense will be further crushed under the jackboots of social justice and cultural Marxism. It was only recently that the democrat party denied God three times and booed him after, daily we hear about shrines to Satan going up, in places in the US, Dearborn MI, for example, a Christian no longer has Constitutional protections while certain groups are above the law, those who expose the selling of baby parts are tried as criminals, the government itself exports guns to Mexican drug cartels and then blames gun dealerships along the boarder for the ensuing violence, etc… Our common sense is assaulted daily by these absurdities, and due to the tribal nature of humanity, many of us toss common sense out, for our team, both teams.

The answer is to force our leaders to follow the Constitution as written and originally interpreted. If the elite want to change it, fine, do it by the Constitutionally prescribed means. We have to stop tolerating absurd statements like, “living breathing document,” to describe what should be cast in stone. It is our complacence that allows the elite to get away with it. Our Constitution was never meant to be a cover for oppression… it was to be a protection against oppression! That which we tolerate, like a law that is not enforced,… we will have. Yes, it is hard to stand up, especially when dancing with the stars is on, the recliner is so comfortable and you are half way into a six pack, but if we don’t, our children will have chains holding them fast, rather than bread and circuses. Lets make our Constitution a bulwark against tyranny instead of a concealment for it… be self interested rightly understood human hearted civilized human beings. The type of people that change the world for the better.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Will Barbarism Win?

Wednesday, May 17th, 2017

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if the progressives succeed in hounding Trump from office, it is the end of our Republic as we knew it. That has of course been the goal of progressives and progressivism for decades, the destruction of the US from within to make way for a new world order, a one world government. The victories of progressive violence, intimidation and slander have been extraordinary. They have hounded many of his appointees from office, and now are nearing their goal of impeaching Trump… merely for his existence. In their gleeful attacks they forget they already gave Obama a break for the very same things! But, then again, Obama and progressives are above the law. Yes, if they succeed and get Trump, there will never be a libertarian or conservative holding elected office again. Because the left will use this effective strategy, violent riots, intimidation, falsification of charges then prosecuting us for them, and the utter destruction of their opponents politically, personally and emotionally. What conservative in their right mind would step into that meat grinder?

Our republic is based on the rule of law. Progressives have effectively shorn us from the rule of law and instead moved us back to rights of kings. During the Obama Presidency, the most alarming abuses of power in the history of the US were overlooked. Using the IRS as a political weapon, sending arms to terrorists who have a stated goal of the slaughter of Americans, sending money to Iran to help them build nuclear weapons to wash the world in blood to bring back the twelfth Imam, sending weapons to Mexican drug cartels then vilifying US citizens for it, the Benghazi scandal and follow up lies about it, the Clinton foundation slush fund, Clinton exposing classified secrets to our enemies… among so many that it would be impossible to list them all. One thing the Obama Presidency has proven is that we no longer live under the rule of law.

This latest flap over Trump giving the Russians classified intelligence is proof positive of the diabolical nature of progressives and progressivism. When Obama did the same thing the media gave the story a good hard leaving alone. They bent over backwards to justify, misdirect and personally attack anyone who brought it up. Now, on mere unfounded and anonymous allegations, even conservatives are saying Trump should resign! Just the latest in a long line of fake scandals attacking Trump. Like the boy who cried wolf however, eventually the people will get weary of the lies, slander and smears, and become repulsed by them. It boils down to whether progressives succeed in hounding Trump from office before that happens.

Our Constitution is written for civilized people and is wholly unsuited for any other. If we follow our politicians into barbarism, we will be complicit in our own enslavement. Progressives have thrown off the shackles of civilization and have embraced arbitrary rule, autocracy, censorship and political violence. Progressives have become the intolerant faction. They are intolerant of any point of view that doesn’t correspond with their world view. They act the barbarian for the barbarian’s ends. A civilized person doesn’t show up at someone’s home with a crowd of unruly protesters and terrify the children of the target. Civilized people don’t riot in the streets if their candidate is not elected, civilized people follow just laws and civilized people don’t hold others to a higher standard then they hold themselves. Progressives know that if they can move us all away from civilization and toward barbarism, they will have done the hard lifting of destroying our Constitution so they can replace it with a global Marxist one.

Success would embolden progressives to destroy personally anyone who disagrees with them. If Trump is forced from office, Mike Pence will not last a year in office, then Paul Ryan may last a term because he is a progressive republican… but probably not. Progressives smell blood in the water and abetted by their lackeys in the legacy media they are in full combat mode. The will of the people is irrelevant to progressives, as they consider the rest of us untermensch, (subhuman). Victory of Trump will not placate the progressive faction but embolden it to be even more barbaric and vitriolic. Our republic faces an existential crisis at this moment. This crisis was created by progressives who have no sense of right or wrong, to them the ends justify the means, and the ends are such a glittering lie… they can’t help themselves.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Struggle Between Liberty and Tyranny…

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, all of human history can be described, not as class warfare… but between those that seek tyranny and those that prefer liberty. There have been times when the proletariat have sought liberty, and others where the masses have preferred tyranny, the same holds true of the Bourgeoisie and the elite. Both sides are self serving, those that seek liberty however, serve the needs and wants of all of society, while those who favor tyranny only serve their own narrow self interests. Once we understand that history is actually a struggle between the forces of autocracy and freedom much of human history comes into focus. Allegiances, wars, economic policies, socialism, free enterprise, and every other policy governments have come up with, are merely battles in the greater war between liberty and tyranny. Each seeking to hold mankind in it’s sway forever.

Class conflict is always based on the struggle between liberty and tyranny, the factions may change seats, but the conflict is always the same. The hoi polloi have great power in their numbers but are like a herd of cats, dangerous, sweeping but uncontrolled. The elite are fewer in numbers and have political as well as economic might, but to keep those attributes, the elite must constantly be wary of the people. Most often the people seek liberty but usually live in tyranny, while the elite almost always enjoy liberty but usually seek tyranny. Occasionally, the people have sought tyranny while the elite have hoped for liberty, as in the case of the founding of the US. The people wanted a king but the elite wanted limited government.

If we examine history through the lens of a struggle between tyranny and liberty much of human history is made less opaque. The various wars are obviously a struggle between tyranny and liberty, but other historical events can be described as the struggle as well. Economic policies for example, socialism is all about promoting tyranny while free enterprise is all about forwarding liberty. The French Revolution was ostensibly about restoring liberty to France but resulted in tyranny. How did that happen? Because the people who overthrew the aristocracy and king never had liberty as their goal, the revolutionaries never sought freedom, instead they wanted to be the tyrant themselves. The struggle between liberty and tyranny can be applied to every time and place, while Marx’s dialectic only describes the European feudal state, and then not very well.

With the insight that the struggle between liberty and tyranny gives us we can examine the roles of the various players in human history. We can place them in which faction they go and in doing so we can understand the arc of human history. Like the French Revolution the players usually don’t let their actual positions known, because those positions would undermine their effort to succeed, in establishing tyranny. Robespierre wrote about liberty as a means to fool the people into following his form of tyranny. While those who sought tyranny backed the French revolution, others who understood the struggle wasn’t between classes, castes or other social station, but between those who sought tyranny and those who prefer liberty, like Burke, correctly predicted the outcome. Not based on a supernatural understanding of human nature, but of the fundamental nature of the struggle, and that most of the participants wanted to replace the tyranny of the king, with tyranny of the proletariat.

Those few occasions where and when liberty won, ushered in the heights of human philosophy, science and human heartedness, plus, they have raised the lot of mankind, socially, economically, politically and culturally. The results of the few victories liberty has tasted, show it to be exponentially better for the human race and indeed individuals themselves, than tyranny. Yet the pull of tyranny is uncontrollable for some people. Some might trick themselves into believing they will be benevolent tyrants, others know just what it is they seek, but to them tyranny is a siren call, unavoidable, inevitable and too powerful to resist. The people who prefer tyranny usually understand that liberty is better for humanity but the pull of unlimited power over others cannot be resisted.

If we as a race start to understand that we live in a constant struggle between the forces of tyranny and liberty, we can start to get more liberty, and less tyranny. To do so however requires an understanding that most who claim to stand for liberty actually seek tyranny. The way to tell the difference is to look at the policies they propose. The cause of liberty is never helped by more regulations, more laws or more control, just as tyranny is never promoted by more freedom, more autonomy from the state or limited government. Those that claim their form of “liberty” demands more control of our actions, thoughts and even how we worship, are those who seek tyranny, while people who promote less government, less control, freedom of thought, and religion, are those who fight on the side of liberty. Human history is one long fight between the forces of tyranny and those of liberty, if we want a better life for our children then it is time to take sides, side with liberty.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Secrets

Thursday, October 27th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, to argue national defense is sufficient cause for a secret, is to argue suicide is necessary for cancer prevention. After all, there is not one secret the US or any other government has, that is not known by other governments, so in reality, when government classifies something secret, they are merely keeping it from citizens, not foreign governments, so, to claim a thing needs to be secret for national security is absurd. The only people who are unable to know what our governments are doing are the people themselves. Look at the “secrets” wikileaks has released, none of them put a single American in jeopardy, the only things threatened are the elite’s machinations. Snowden’s release of information shows how our government violates our Constitution and that is why he is under indictment. In a limited republic that guarantees liberty for it’s citizens, everything government does would be available for any citizen to see. The only thing that grows in darkness is corruption and we have more than a sufficient supply of that.

If government only did what it is supposed to, protect people and property from those who would abuse or abscond, is the only legitimate role of government…. In other words, the police and army. Other things that can be argued are right roles of government are, printing money, building roads and infrastructure, settling disputes between citizens, setting standards and defining governmental boarders. These other roles however, have often been done by citizens themselves, usually better and cheaper. When government sticks to it’s legitimate role it need not maintain thousands of bureaucrats administering government. The more illegitimate roles government takes up… the more things it decides need to be secret. It is the pervasive and ever growing secret state that is a sign that government has breached it’s banks and is flooding the country with red tape and taxes.

When government takes on clearly illegitimate roles like “helping” American industry, the need for secrets grows. As our government gets in bed with tyrants the need for secrets grows, the more illegal activities our government engages in, the more they need to keep secrets, the more powerful government grows the more need for secrets, the more controlling it becomes the more it needs its secrets and the more government monitors the people the more it needs to hide what it is doing. All from the people, not other governments, who have spies to insure they know all there is to know about our government’s secrets, but the citizens whom the government is supposed to serve live in darkness. So the people government is keeping secrets from are the people themselves.

Why keep secrets from citizens? Because government knows what it is doing is wrong. Instead of protecting people’s Rights, lives and property, government has become the biggest threat to our lives, Rights and property. The modern government has as it’s core philosophy, everything within it’s boundaries are the government’s property, the land, houses, cars, factories, and even the people themselves. That which we are allowed to keep is out of government’s beneficence. This is made clear whenever taxes are brought up. The argument is based on the premise all income belongs to government. When that is your mindset, you have to keep it secret from the people you consider your slaves, else they might get uppity.

Of course there will always need to be spies. They are an arm of the army and as such help government meet it’s core role of protecting the people. The amount of secrets however exceeds mere spy craft by orders of magnitude. Plus, why keep the findings of spies on our enemies, secret? Shaming enemy nations should be a legitimate role of spies. Sadly, governments are far more concerned about spying on their own citizens than on potential invading armies. The need for secrets is a sure sign government is grown beyond it’s legitimate role. Everything government does should be freely available to any citizen that asks for it. The Freedom of Information act is a first step but falls short. Every legislators office should have a camera and microphone installed that stream to the internet, the President’s office should be monitored the same way, judges chambers should be recorded and the recording released to the public the day that judge casts his or her decision. Every trade deal should be open to anyone to see, every regulation should be read by the people, every document created by government using tax dollars should be available to the people who paid those taxes, not one aspect of government should be hidden from the people who government is supposed to serve. The more secrets a government has, the more it needs them, because that government is doing something it is not supposed to.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Voting Dead…

Thursday, September 29th, 2016

 

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the one thing that gives any governmental unit true authority… is the consent of the people, absent that consent, government has no real authority and the power it wields is mere usurpation. The way government gets the consent of the people is by the electoral process. If that electoral process is undermined, whether the people know it or not, consent is not given. Therefore, any government, or faction that seeks to undermine the democratic process, is unjustly assuming power. Moreover, anyone who seeks to govern without the consent of the governed, especially where that consent is artificially created, is engaging in the most heinous kind of crime. Crime that is far worse than stealing, abuse and even murder, because the very lives, liberty and property of everyone is at risk. In other words… The single crime from which tyranny flows in the modern world, is vote fraud.

Vote fraud usually comes from hubris and presumption. Those who engage in vote fraud have the hubris to fool themselves into believing their cause is the most just and presumption in they presume to know what is best for everyone else. They see their own arguments close at hand while they see the arguments of others at a distance, crediting themselves, as we all do, with the most enlightened wisdom, they willingly pervert the electoral process to benefit their preferred faction… themselves. Hubris and presumption are the natural result of misplaced pride.

Some people believe themselves to be smarter, wiser and more caring than everyone else, this is especially true of people with college degrees. They consider themselves smarter than everyone else because they went to college. If they find they are incapable of holding a job, it cannot be because of any deficiency in themselves, the system must be wrong, after all, they are smarter than the rest of us who do have jobs. So they gravitate to socialism, with themselves as the rightful leaders, in this violence is acceptable but if that isn’t viable, vote fraud becomes thinkable. Since they see themselves as more deserving and caring than everyone else, they appoint themselves as the master who forces all those other uncaring louts to provide for the less fortunate. If they personally benefit, what is the harm, aren’t they the most deserving anyway?

People have an amazing ability to justify their actions in their own minds. Psychologists call this cognitive dissonance. If a person treats you badly, even if by accident, their opinion of you goes down… they like you less. That is because since they treated you badly, in their mind’s eye, either they are bad for treating a good person badly, else you are bad and deserve it. Since no one believes themselves bad the fall back is always that you are bad. This concept can be applied to vote fraud, in that someone who believes their cause just and themselves wise, engages in vote fraud, they must believe others who seek free and fair elections are bad people, otherwise the fraudster is bad, plus those others don’t see what they see or care like they care. Even the voters themselves are seen as less than human to people who manipulate the vote through fraud. Otherwise, those who pervert the electoral process would be bad, and cognitive dissonance forbids that.

This is why efforts to stem vote fraud are met with such vehemence, vitriol and violence. Anything that limits their ability to pervert democracy to their own ends cannot be allowed to stand. Anyone who wants free and fair elections must be personally destroyed else society might not go the way the self appointed masters think it should. Moreover, people who seek the honest consent of the governed must be ignorant, since fraudsters are so much smarter, wiser and more caring than the hoi polloi. You can reliably tell who is in favor of vote fraud by how they react to efforts to stem it. Their silence at obvious vote fraud screams they consider the people fools to be manipulated and trod underfoot. When a district votes 100% for one candidate, and turnout is 120% of the registered voters, or dead people have come back to life simply to cast a ballot, clearly either the laws of physics has been upended, or vote fraud on a large scale has taken place. Those who find identification to vote obnoxious are those who seek to pervert democracy to their own ends. Of all the crimes, vote fraud has the potential to result in human suffering far greater than even murder, and should be treated as such.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Justice, Honor and Arbitrary Rule.

Thursday, July 7th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the mask has come off, we in the US now officially live under arbitrary rule and our leaders have no honor whatsoever. The fact Hillary Clinton has not, and will not be indicted for destroying evidence, keeping top secret information on an unsecured server, using a personal email for government business and/or lying under oath to congress, is proof positive we live under arbitrary rule. If anyone with less political power did one of those things they would be in jail and everyone knows it. That is an undeniable fact. The US has become, no longer a constitutional republic, but a banana republic. That a member of the elite can get away with multiple infringements of federal laws, without consequences, consequences that you or I would face, shows there is a double standard at work that is as pernicious as it is destructive. Moreover, recent news articles have shown that the rest of us no longer have the protections of law, or our Constitutional rights. Just as Rome was no longer a republic after Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the US is no longer a republic since the elite have the audacity to rub our noses in the fact they are above the law, and we are below it’s protections.

There is no true rule of law whatsoever the world over. This is not just happening in the US but is a world wide phenomenon. Human history is nothing but a story of the elite holding the people to laws they will not hold themselves to. The US was different, for a speck of time, because the US had the rule of law. True, the elite held themselves to it by their honor… but at least they did. Since FDR broke the unwritten rule that a President only run for two terms, our elite have increasingly lost all honor, and have disgraced themselves in every way possible. It is a quality of a civilized person to hold others to a lower standard then one does him or herself. To hold others to a higher standard then oneself, shows a lack of character, moral indifference and conniving which is on full display in the Hillary Clinton case.

Throughout history the wise have opined about the need for honor among the rulers of a society. When the rulers have no honor they will resort to every evil known to Man. History shows this to be true but goes further. In a society where the elite have no honor the people quickly loose their honor. Confucius said it first, (at least as far as I know), the people follow their leaders into corruption or virtue. In a nation where the leaders have no honor, the people will have no honor, where the people have no honor crime, chaos and beggary are rife. Economies grow in serenity and collapse in chaos, wealth flourishes in the absence of crime but erodes like sand when crime is rampant and where the economy is collapsing and wealth is being destroyed, poverty becomes the norm. All because the leaders have no honor.

The question of whether justice or arbitrary rule is best was considered in Plato’s book, The Republic. In it, Socrates argued for justice, while Thrasymachus the sophist argued for arbitrary rule. Thrasymachus claimed the great men, (those with political power, intelligence, wealth and ambition), should not follow the law, only appear to do so… law is only to make the hoi polloi believe there is justice to facilitate the control of the people and trick them into being obedient. Socrates made the argument justice in and of itself is a good. Justice is both a good that we do because it is good and a useful good as well. By allowing arbitrary rule to come back into fashion we become the dupes of the “great men.” Do you want the elite to exploit law to enrich themselves, amass political power over us and eventually tyrannize us? Or do you agree with Socrates that justice is a good in and of itself, one that is useful in creating a peaceful, wealthy and safe society?

Why would the people follow laws even those who write them don’t? Every one of us is a hypocrisy detector and hypocrisy is the surest way to make people despise the law. As a lack of honor flows from the top down a society will increasingly only follow laws by force and threat. Whenever they believe they can get away with breaking a law they will. Once dishonor reaches the lowest rung of a society no amount of punishment will suffice. People will not be not safe in their own homes, business cannot be conducted, children are at risk, people’s oaths are meaningless and every chance meeting becomes a danger. Clearly, to allow the leaders of a country to become utterly corrupt, dishonorable, conniving and lustful for power, can only lead to human suffering on a national scale.

One way to tell how dishonorable your leaders are is to look around with open eyes. Do people need bars on their windows, are all children safe on the streets, can you look at a passerby in the eye, is poverty rampant? Corrupt leaders will claim all this is due to worthless, lazy and ignorant people, but will never look in a mirror. The Duke of Lu asked Confucius one day, how he could get the people to stop lusting after other men’s wives, stealing and murder. Confucius said, the duke could lead by example and stop doing those things himself. Shortly after that Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state in fear of their lives. Let the scales drop from your eyes and really see.

So you see, this is not a matter of hate of an individual or gotcha politics, it is a matter of justice and human suffering. If we allow our noses to be rubbed in the elite’s corruption, we have given our consent to the elite to be even less honorable, in doing so we sentence our children and grand children to a life of poverty, fear and tyranny. Just because you like a politician, is no reason to allow them to get away with blatantly breaking laws, laws you or I would be severely punished for. Such actions are those of children, sycophants and imbeciles. Say nothing, do nothing, and the US will join the ranks of other failed experiments in human governance like Rome, Athens, Sparta, etc… with the same catastrophic results, human suffering on a grand scale. To do nothing is to abet a crime against humanity, to do something, even if it is small and of little consequence, is to make a stand against corruption. The choice is yours, lay down and let the elite walk over you… or stand and push back. It may be too late to have an effect, since we have allowed our leaders to be villains for so long, but maybe not. Regardless, do you want to be hated by your own grandchildren for your lack of back bone, or be a champion for liberty, prosperity and equality?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

To A Progressive; Progress is Toward Administrative Government

Thursday, June 30th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, before any real understanding or agreement can be made, before the discussion can really start in earnest, the topic of discussion must be stipulated. In the discussion of progressivism, that key understanding is absent. Even progressives themselves have a lack of understanding exactly what it is they stand for, they might have some absurd notion they want to feed the poor, while others want the poor to starve, or they might accept the progressive party seeks communism, which is partly right, or any of a number of things, but they all miss the mark, because the progressive party seeks administrative government, as far from the ignorant masses as possible… pure and simple.

Administrative government is bureaucratic government or government by bureaucracy. That is where bureaucrats write the laws, enforce them and have administrative proceedings to adjudicate them as well. All of what we in the US call the Three Branches are combined into one. Instead of an executive and legislature agreeing on a law then passing it after public debate, as in our old form of government… under an administrative government, law would be passed by the stroke of a pen, by an anonymous person at a desk, in some cavernous office building. Knowing the People would have a problem if the new laws passed by bureaucrats, were called laws, they instead called them… regulations. In the US, the regulation has more power to coerce action, than the law.

Imagine, a government where thousands perhaps millions of office workers go to work every day, writing laws that effect every aspect of our lives, behind the heavy curtain, that is bureaucracy. Every day they write more regulations because that is what they do. The amount of our lives becomes ever more tightly regulated, every day, many regulations most people are ignorant of, until they run afoul of them. Eventually, under any and all administrative governments, the burden of regulations becomes so onerous the whole thing collapses, the economy, social cohesion, and even the government itself.

Administrative government is at the core of the European Union and has metastasized in the body of the US, Canada and every other even remotely Western government. We call it bureaucracy. As the number of things legislators in their hubris and presumption thought they should control grew, so did their need to delegate some authority to the executive branch. After all, tea parties and mixers take up so much time, and oh so much gets done there… The Legislature’s eyes for legislating became bigger than their ability to legislate, so they delegated some authority to the executive, who relished getting more power. In that way the Bureaucracy was illegitimately born of the legislature’s presumption and the executives lust.

Those who seek administrative government must, as a matter of precedence, believe in the honesty, integrity and fairness of a bureaucrat over that of their fellow man. Of course such a notion is absurd but that doesn’t stop progressives from basing much of their world view. Obviously, a bureaucrat is one of our fellow man, or woman, and so, is just as fallible as your most hated enemy. Absolute trust in government is a foundational idea in progressivism. They will deny it, as they always do the facts, but their every action proves the thesis more eloquently than I could ever pontificate.

The progressive’s blind faith in administrative government makes sense in a distorted way. Most progressives have a college education. As such they identify with others who have a college education, they were similarly schooled, were taught the same curricula with the same progressive tilt. Progressives form the core of the new class. They consider themselves smarter and better educated, and so why shouldn’t they regulate what us ignorant, racist, lazy, red necked, clinging to their guns and religion, climate change denier, hoi polloi do?

“Isn’t it better someone with the best education, who is probably brighter than us, evidenced by their being better education than us, decide what side of our bread the butter should go on? Or would it be best to have limited government?” That is the discussion we should be having… because that is the real discussion, everything else is mud tossed into the water to obscure the real argument.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

In Government, Size Does Matter…

Sunday, June 26th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, as a matter of fact, that the farther government is removed from the people, the less it cares about the people and instead, it’s own power. At the city level you have some power, if you can muster several people to show up at a town council, but at national level you have to muster millions of people willing to act to effect your senators, how much more if government is taken to a supranational level? At a supranational level could government be coaxed to reflect the needs of all the people instead of the faction that keeps them in power, moreover, independence would be an impossible dream. Today everyone is talking about the possible dissolution of the European Union. In as far as, that supranational government and it’s pernicious bureaucracy is undermined, the better for humanity. As a free trade area it is a great idea… and that was where it should have ended.

A government that is so far from the people, those in it need bodyguards, is too far from the people. Think about it, does your state representative need a daily body guard? In most cases no. In those cases where they do, they are far removed from the people they “represent,” that only a select few get to meet and talk to him or her. Moreover, if they need a body guard, they probably done something to warrant a body guard. Those who have no or very little power over others never need a bodyguard. If government didn’t have such an outsized power to make, destroy or crush someone, or some business, government wouldn’t warrant the time to threaten… they wouldn’t need bodyguards. It can be reasoned then that the more a government official needs a bodyguard, the farther they are removed from those they represent along with they have too much power to effect the lives of others, negatively or positively.

Distance itself give a person a feeling of superiority, a feeling of superiority gives a human being a god complex. This is especially true, when the levers of power are shared, but by few. The responsibility for wrong decisions is shared, while the credit for right decisions or any decision that can be spun as right, can be taken direct credit for, even as all the cronies do too. How liberating, to be able to use humanity as a lab rat in which to try, this economic regulation or that experiment in immigration, without responsibility. No way that could go wrong, eh? Meanwhile, even as responsibility is shirked, negative consequences are averted. So, even if a government far removed from the people, constantly poked the people in the eye and called it ice cream… the people would have no way to do anything about it.

This is not because this party is good and that party is evil, nor that all representatives are bad people, there certainly are a high percentage that are bad people, but… they are all human beings. People are self interested. You are, I am, she is, and he is too, we are all self interested, that is a fact of human nature. Economists call us rational maximizers. We rationally maximize our outcomes in any given situation. So if a situation has very very strong incentives to act a certain way, even if that way is immoral, add to the incentives a strong disincentive to act in other ways… and a rational maximizer can be induced to sell their very soul. A government distant from the people will always have those pernicious incentives and disincentives.

The supranational governmental structure of the European Union itself not only creates distance from those it is supposed to represent, but in and of itself, creates a regulatory structure that hinders small businesses in a host of ways. This is a natural outcome of the pernicious incentives that our leaders are awash in. Those who can effect the outcome of an election can then effect the outcome of legislation to be on the winning side of that legislation. It follows that only those with money today can do that while those who have potential money, from an innovation they have have had tomorrow, cannot. As Milton Friedman said in Free To Choose… why improve your own quality and lower your price when you can go to government and get your competition shut down?

If the European Union is struck a mortal blow then so be it. Of course the elite who have suckled at the teat of the state for so long will not let it go without a fight. They have become so used to having no responsibility and acting without consequences, they will shriek and wail, at the very though of having to sidle up to the unwashed peasants, they represent. The fact they appear to be in such a panic shows either they are so gullible they believed their own hype, else a conniving that would make a conspiracy lover wince, because this referendum was known about for years… so why didn’t the elite prepare plans for this contingency? Adding weight to my assertion, Government close to the people is best, the farther government is from the people, necessarily, the less power it must have, in relation to the distance of the governors.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

America’s Single Party System

Thursday, April 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, elections only mean anything if there is a real choice. Not a beauty contest between two people who have the exact same views, platforms and plans, but a choice between two or more ideologies of government, economics and governance. Today, the progressives have managed to ensure that we never get a real choice about the future of our nations, our economic system or whether or not our leaders will follow our Constitution. Every election since Reagan has been between a progressive republican and a progressive democrat. No matter who wins, progressivism, and thereby Marxism, has won. Today is no different. With the near coronation of Donald Trump the republicans have picked their progressive and no matter who wins the democrat nomination they will have theirs very soon. So yet again we will have a choice, between a progressive and a progressive. Just like the old Soviet Union, Iran and many other autocracies. The people are given a false choice.

The United States was founded on libertarian principles. The founders, especially the anti constitutionalists, sought a government system that limited the people the least while limiting government the most. They set up a government that would allow the people to do pretty much as we see fit, limiting government in it’s ability to control us. The constitutional debate was about how to limit government’s power, how to control the tendencies of the elite to abuse power, how to ensure the people have the upper hand and how to limit the power of faction. The founders believed in liberty, a word that has been vanquished from our lexicon today. When was the last time you heard a politician say the word, “liberty?” Most of what we accept as lawful in our government would send the founders of our nation into conniption fits of rage and disappointment.

Libertarians are barred from the table of power. The new class uses a plethora of means to keep anyone who believes in liberty from the reigns of power. Libertarians are labeled with every derogatory meme that can be brought to bear. Since the new class controls the narrative there is never any effective push back even from the most absurd and spurious claims. Any politician who come anywhere near believing in the constitutional limits of government is seen as a threat to the established order. An order of autocracy veiled in peace, control hidden in protection and Marxism obscured by compassion. Reagan was the closest politician to our founding principles elected since Calvin Coolidge and he was hated to the extreme by the elite even today.

Romney typified the progressive republican. During the debates with Obama Romney couldn’t agree enough with Obama’s usurpations. Romney was full of compassion for the poor, he sought peace through strength and protection by control. In every election we are told this or that politician is “unelectable” because they believe in America and our founding principles. Of course the new class elite don’t use those words but that is exactly what they mean. Any politician who believes in limited government is destroyed by the new class controlled media, defamed by the political establishment as fringe, cursed on social media for not dropping out of the race, made a laughing stock by the culture and charged with whatever spurious claim that can be made up. The entirety of our society, government and culture attack any libertarian who seeks office.

This next election will be the same. The libertarian Cruz has finally been vanquished and Trump has all but won. Trump is a progressive zealot and has been his entire life. He supports every progressive policy, usurpation and regulation. He has helped fund the cultural Marxism that is polluting our culture and society like so much raw sewage. Trump has not only supported every progressive cause and politician but has given freely of his own money to promote them. Moreover, Trump has slopped at the trough of government cronyism. Since it is all but confirmed, the republicans will put up the uber progressive Trump, calling him a “conservative.” Hillary Clinton has admitted she is a progressive and Bernie Sanders is a Soviet style Marxist. The monikers the media place on them have as much to do with reality as Star Wars does space travel. Both are fiction designed to entertain and enrich the elite. So I wonder, which progressive are you going to vote for… The crony capitalist, the utterly corrupt woman or the outright Marxist?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Government has Rights… We have Priviledges

Monday, April 11th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if you have to ask permission to do something, it is not a right. That should be pretty obvious. Unfortunately, it would appear that such a statement flies in the face of modern governments. They demand the people ask permission to do everything, while they do whatever they want, without question. The concept of liberty has changed, from the freedom to do as the individual wants, to the ability to do whatever the government wants us to do. What it really means is that we no longer live in liberty but a form of soft tyranny. Soft tyranny where in theory we are free but in fact we are limited by government in every way. Since we live in soft tyranny, what will the government or more precisely, those who run government, allow us to do. Obviously they will not allow us to act against the interests of government or the elite that run it. Moreover, it is in the best interests of the rulers to keep us from getting too rich, too much power or too much independence, that would threaten the elite and their monopoly on power, as well as their total freedom to exercise that power. What we are allowed to do then, under the regime of soft tyranny that we live under now, are things that don’t threaten the elite, go against their interests or get us too much power.

By dribs and drabs we have allowed our rulers, those who were once our servants, to usurp our power, political, economic and cultural. We have allowed our government to do for us. Government is only too willing to do for the people, in fact, government would prefer to do everything for us. The more dependent we become on government the less able we are to do for ourselves. The less we can do for ourselves the more power we cede to government. Eventually government becomes omnipotent and we are impotent. We have allowed, no encouraged, government to usurp our sovereignty. Once government is all powerful only violent bloody revolution can return the people back to liberty.

Either the power of government grows, while the power of the people shrinks, else the power of the people grows as the power of government shrinks. It is impossible for both to grow at the same time nor is it possible for both to shrink at the same time, one grows as the other shrinks. Every law, regulation, ordinance and edict, diminishes our power and grows the power of government. The more efficient government becomes at passing new rules for us to follow the faster we devolve to autocracy. Now with the advent of bureaucracy, government has tens of thousands of bureaucrats working diligently in the dark, passing regulations controlling every aspect of our lives. The power of government has never expanded so fast or so efficiently.

Government on the other hand sees less and less oversight. The media that is supposed to keep us informed, is on the payroll of the democrat party in the US, and is beholden to other partisan political ideologues in other nations. The media is the most biased it has ever been. Government itself today routinely breaks it’s own laws, violates our Constitution and the elite get away with the most clear transgressions of law, without any negative consequences. The government itself allows us less and less information into it’s workings, using excuses like national security, executive privilege and an arcane maze of rules to hide the workings of government.

We are barred from even the most mundane knowledge of what our governments are doing, how they are doing it and even why. The why is assumed to be in our best interests but does that really make any sense at all? Does government work in our best interests or the best interests of the elite? Look at every government program ostensibly designed to “help” some politically favored group. Farmers have been coddled since the FDR administration and the family farm has for all intents ceased to exist, the steel industry has been given a great deal of attention from government and now steel is mostly produced overseas, education has long been a leading project of government and now our children graduate school unable to read, write, do basic math or pick the US off a globe. Everything government touches, in the name of helping us, is destroyed.

Government and the elite on the other hand are empowered. Government hatches whole new departments to destroy that which they have pledged to help. The department of energy is the poster child for government failure but has a budget that exceeds 9 billion dollars annually! NASA, which was initially designed to allow the US to put human beings into orbit and beyond, has failed so bad that only now since the 1950’s, the US cannot put a man into space but needs to rely on Russia. There is not one single department, program or initiative that has not failed. Failed in their stated objectives, but succeeded wildly in growing the power of government. That is because, if they were to succeed, the need for them would go away… and that would be unthinkable!

The government need not ask permission of the people to do anything anymore. A handful of elite change the Constitution, as they see fit, altering the very nature of the relationship between the governed and the governors. Naked violations of law like Fast and Furious go unpunished therefore encouraging more law breaking. Even the elite themselves get caught red handed violating their own laws without consequence. Remember Al Gore saying there is no overriding legal authority? There wasn’t for him, but when Dinesh Dsouza was caught breaking the same law to a much lesser extent, there was. We on the other hand, need to ask permission to do anything. Buy a gun, get government permission, start a business, get a license and permits, engage in religious acts, get government’s approval else pay stifling taxes, even driving a car is a privilege for citizens but a Right to illegal aliens. There is not one aspect of human endeavor that does not require first, the government’s permission, as the limits of government evaporate away like so much dew. The only question left is, how long before soft tyranny becomes hard tyranny?

Sincerely,

John Pepin