Posts Tagged ‘education’

Follow the Foolish into Foolishness

Monday, December 19th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, to bow to the most foolish, is a guarantee of foolishness. College kids, the most dangerous people on Earth, are so dangerous because they are the most foolish people on the planet. Today the media points at college kids as the wisest among us inferring the rest of us should follow their lead. Of course college kids “lead” where they are told to lead and think what they are told to think, not by their parents, who’s authority is undermined in the government monopoly school system, but by their teachers and professors. So what we are really told, is to follow the intellectuals blindly, as our children are trained to do. Both professors and upper middle class kids are utterly foolish in their thinking, acting and maturity. As I said before, to allow the most foolish to lead, is to guarantee foolishness in our lives.

There are uncountable videos of college students asked to sign this or that absurd petitions. All that is required is for the presenter to tell the student, one of the progressive idols wants it, and they sign with abandon of a drunken opium user. They happily sign petitions to attack North Korea with nuclear weapons, imprison all gun owners, to support ISIS, repeal the First Amendment, etc… all of which are so absurd it is laughable, until you realize they are really that mindless. Once a person reaches the age of reason, they are expected to think their way through an argument, but schools and colleges discourage independent thinking, instead teaching them to obey what they are told. Such videos as these are sufficient to show the pathetic level of reason these children display, that inability to think their way through an argument shows a profound foolishness, by those who have reached the age of reason.

You cannot really blame the kids… they are merely vomiting what they have been force fed. Children have no life experience upon which to draw for context. Everything they have been taught supports the progressive mindset. Their teachers, who have been brainwashed in the same manner by their college professors and the culture, are simply spewing what they are told to. Those teachers who are able to reason are attacked and forced to follow the absurd progressive common core curriculum. Common core, which insures children will not be able to do simple math, understand what they read, or reason, also teaches Marxism as the highest form of government and a perverted version of history. Further guaranteeing generations of foolish people tied to foolish ideas.

Progressivism is not an ideology that lends itself to critical thinking. The progressive has to be able to deny history, because history is so damning of progressivism. When talking to a progressive their ignorance is amazing. When you bring up the eugenics programs by progressives they will first deny it ever happened, and once presented with incontrovertible evidence, either continue denying or claim the progressive movement has changed. The good progressive has to have the ability to deny what they see with their own eyes. They instead refer to their used car salesmen professors, who tell them not to believe their lying eyes, and believe honest John the professor instead. The progressive has to have the ability to make out of context ad homonym attacks to make their point rather than use logic and reason, since most people are revolted at personal attacks, and will give the progressive the filed once attacked. All of which are as childish as they are foolish.

The answer is to wrest our schools, colleges and universities from progressives. Unlike those that allowed progressives into our education system, progressives are not willing to allow other philosophies in. Now that progressives have complete control of all education they will not willingly give up that monopoly. Think of it this way, someone who worships Lucifer, is willing to give mass murder a pass, believes murdering an unborn child is a sacrament, has no compunction about lying, believes stealing is a good thing if government does it, and seeks to destroy the greatest wealth generating machine humanity has ever known, is not someone who is subject to reason nor will give up a monopoly. Our children are subjected to such crazy people and told to listen to what they say, and it is no wonder our children believe such nonsense.

Follow the foolish and you will walk into foolishness. The new class media, culture, law, government and business becomes ever more absurd as each day passes, and they inculcate that absurdity into our children. They tell our children we adults are out of touch, and that children know far more than their parents about global warming, Marxism, abortion etc… then report how smart children are… since they fell for the lies. There is a reason kids are sent to war, the young mind is easy to sway, the older mind is hardened, and much more difficult to change. You can convince a kid to gleefully kill someone they otherwise would be good friends with, while and adult is far more likely to question the reason, Che Guevara championed this quality of youth. Life experience, regarded with reason and logic, allows us to understand the difference between the absurd and the possible. Zero life experience coupled with progressive indoctrination closes the mind shutting out logic and reason. Without reason and logic the foolish becomes ever more loved… and foolishness becomes ever more entrenched.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Progressive New Class Itself Gives Us Reason To Hope…

Monday, November 21st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, what the media intends by the term that has been bandied about so much lately, “college educated whites,” aside from the obvious racism, is code for the new class. That is to say, it is a measure of how the new class is sticking to the progressive ideology they have been inculcated with. Of course, if the percentage of college educated whites were to get below fifty percent, the progressive new class wold become panicked as it would herald the end of the progressive hegemony of the new class. This brings us to the main point, the new class need not be progressive in it’s ideology, they have been programmed to be that way by university professors who have been programmed that way themselves. That is why the media was so concerned about the percentage of “college educated whites” who voted for Clinton… it is a measure of the reach into the new class of progressivism.

The new class is the group of people college educated. It is as simple as that and as profound as life and death, the new class is a complex system with independent, interdependent actors, expressing emergent actions and generating long tailed events. The new class runs our society, government, decide what the culture will be, report the news to us, teach our children and run our corporations. They are ubiquitous. Since the new class is universally trained in college and universities, doctrine that is taught there, that doctrine has the ability to effect people trained there their whole lives. That doctrine then is carried into the real world where it is put into practice. That is why our lawyers, doctors, journalists, bureaucrats, executives and artists are called the intelligentsia, while the professors, deans and trustees are the intellectuals. In the complex system that is the new class the intellectuals set doctrine and the intelligentsia put them into practice.

The new class then need not be progressive. The progressive faction seized autocratic control of the intellectuals over the course of the twentieth century. That so many college educated whites voted for Trump shows the progressive grip on the new class is slipping. Progressives may still have a monopoly on our colleges and universities, but that control could be made tenuous, if a sufficient and devoted part of the new class set themselves to changing the doctrine taught at colleges and universities. Institutions of higher learning are supposed to be places where free thought is encouraged, lively discourse is heralded and diversity of thought is cherished, that today’s colleges and universities discourage free thought, discourse is lowered to personal attacks and diversity of opinion is loathed shows how off track progressive have taken our institutions of higher learning.

By progressivism I mean, the philosophy of the Frankfurt school, advanced by Gramsci’s cultural hegemony, Marcuse’s repressive tolerance and Saul Alinsky’s Rule For Radicals. The ends of which are global socialist world government, if you are to believe their own literature and philosophy. World government is always sold as the end to war, suffering, poverty, hunger, need, broken toenails, etc… when it is the exact opposite. Socialism has only delivered famine, suffering and war, world socialism would deliver these things on a global scale rather than a national one. Global would be and end to experiments in governance, the nature of distant government would crush innovation, wherever it is found and create a people ripe for extinction.

All night on election night, November eight, two thousand and sixteen, the media that calls itself unbiased touted the “college educated white” number as a propaganda weapon. The connotation being that college educated means smarter than you, whites means thoughtless majority, the reality being the new class. Journalists who are charter members of the new class have a dog in that race, to be validated they need to know the majority of the new class, their equals, believe as they do. Moreover, journalists and the rest of the new class, have a nagging suspicion they have been given the wrong dogma to implement. Blind devotion being only as good as long as reality doesn’t present results in a way undeniable.

Since the faith in progressivism is built upon clay, when it faces reality, which it inevitably must any defection from the ranks of progressive ideology… could trigger a stampede, and is a threat to progressivism. Soon those who defect will come under withering personal attacks in the media that calls itself unbiased. The attacks wont be addressed as much to the defectors, as those behind the defectors, people in the new class who know the doctrine they have been implementing all these years has been discredited, and so are waiting for the right time to jump ship. If a sufficient number of the new class abandons progressivism, progressivism will languish another century before it rears it’s ugly head again.

The new class is a complex system. It need not have progressivism as it’s primary philosophy, being a complex system it can change that philosophy, sometimes very fast. Today that complex system is introspective, it seeks to decide if it should throw off it’s programming and pragmatically rewrite that programming in a way that makes more sense in the real world, or hold onto its doctrine in the face of obvious absurdity. We saw this in the election night reporting where the term college educated white voter was the buzz word. The new class reporters wanted to know if the majority of the new class still clutched the dogma, along with them, even in the face of the obvious absurdities they were expected to believe and advance. Which gives us hope, hope that the advance of globalism might be destroyed by the very forces that have been marshaled to drive it down our throats, hope that the cause of liberty might gain traction in the new class, hope for a future where our children are not just little slaves of the state… but free human beings with natural rights and everything that entails.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Humanity’s Tendency to Hate the Truth

Monday, October 10th, 2016

 

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, people love the man who tells them two plus two equals three, women will throw themselves at him, and men will die for him, but the man who tells people two plus two equals four… that man will be criticized and hated, spat upon and vilified, especially after he is proven correct. History is full of examples of both. This quality of human nature is as pervasive as it is destructive, since every aspect of the human condition depends on correct information, incorrect information leading to mistakes, mistakes that cost pain, economic loss, loss of freedom and lost standing, this penchant to prefer lies should have been weeded out of our psyche millennia ago, yet it persists… to our great detriment. If we really want to advance it is incumbent on us to actively counter this tendency in ourselves.

In The Republic, Glaucon asked Socrates, is it better to be so just, one is perceived unjust, or perceived just when one is unjust? Glaucon went on, the man who is perceived as unjust, even if just, will be hated, while the man who is perceived as just, even if he is unjust, will be lauded. What Glaucon meant was that the perception of the masses is more important to the individual than reality. In this example, the just man, the truth teller, is hated, scorned and put upon, while the unjust man, the liar, is glorified, raised up and helped in all his unjust endeavors. This historical anecdote shows the tendency of people to love a liar and hate a truth teller is at least as old as Socrates.

After a long diet of such cultural, social and economic poison, you would think people would long for someone, anyone, who will tell them even a hint of the truth. Sadly that isn’t the case. Edmund Burke correctly predicted the outcome of the French revolution. He also provided the reasons why it would end in bloodshed. He was vilified, hated and condemned for telling the truth, and when he was proven right, he was hated even more for being right. Glenn Beck is another example of someone who told the truth and is hated for it. Now that Beck’s predictions have come true, proving his hypothesis, Beck is loathed almost universally. The more one tells an ugly truth the more that person is hated.

This is because people want a glittering lie to be true. In this we will ignore facts and instead turn to emotion. People so wanted the Arab spring to usher in a new era of peace, prosperity and freedom to the Middle East, when Beck told the truth, those people who had invested so much emotional capital, turned on him with vitriol not even given a monster. When Beck turned out to be right, the Arab Spring so loved by people the world over turned out to usher in a new era of bloodshed, genocide and tyranny, all that emotional capital was destroyed. Instead of blaming themselves for believing the lie, people turned their hatred to Beck, for being right.

This is because of cognitive dissonance. That is the psychological theory that we think and feel in ways consistent with our past thoughts and actions. If I ridicule someone who has a different belief than I, then that person is proven to be right, my past actions will force me, subconsciously, to dislike that person. My past belief forces me to feel this way, because otherwise I would have been wrong in my ridicule, and to ridicule someone undeservedly would make me a bad person, since in my mind I can never be a bad person, therefore that other person had to have deserved it… so I hate him. Our cognition of ourselves cannot be dissonant from our self perception.

Since we so want to believe in pixy dust, when someone tells us pixy dust is nothing but dust, we become angry. When they are proven right, we become enraged, because we have been proven to be stupid or bad. Since in my own mind I cannot be stupid or bad, that other person must be stupid or bad, justifying my original belief. Sadly, this tendency has not served us well in the past and certainly will not in the future. Since it is impossible to force change on others, we can only change ourselves, we must self examine, look at how we tend to believe glittering lies while condemning ugly truths, so that we and our children, will not have to suffer so that we can feel better about ourselves. If enough of us do, liars will be vilified and truth tellers will be glorified, reversing a negative trend that has visited so much evil on the human race.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Evil is Evil, No Matter Who or How Many Do It…

Thursday, September 22nd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if an action is wrong for an individual, it is wrong for a group. Blame cannot be diluted, as salt is diluted in water, blame fits all equally. Evil is evil no matter who does it or how many are involved. A robbery is made no less of a sin, if ten people are involved than if a lone gunman in an alley robs you, it is still a sin and the blame is not diluted by there being ten involved, each is as to blame as a single thug. This is an important concept for people to understand since the dilution of blame is a paramount theory of government. Often this dilution of blame is such that it allows ever greater evils to be done in the name of goodness, which is of course absurdity.

If a person wants his neighbor’s land, so he storms that neighbors house killing the father and enslaving his family, obviously an evil has been done. What of a whole neighborhood lusts after the land of someone and they storm her house taking her land and killing her? Is it any less evil? What if a million people desire someone’s property, kill them and take it, is it any less evil, are the individuals any less culpable? No, they are all equally culpable and don’t share the blame, diluting it, they are all as culpable as if one person does it. No matter if the thing stolen is real property or chattel, an evil has been committed, and everyone involved shares in the blame equally, in the same measure as a lone wolf.

What if a person is detestable in his philosophy, espousing a point of view another cannot stand, so that other cuts out the first person’s tongue, has an evil been done? What if a hundred people don’t like what the first person says, would it be okay then to stop his speaking by force? What if a billion people call for it… is it any less evil? No matter the number of people involved the crime is the same, the blame is the same, and everyone involved has committed an evil. What about if someone is doing something detestable but is harming no one else? Can a lone woman take offense and lock that man in her basement for a few years? Would that be okay? What if a dozen people get together and in their indignation capture him and lock him in a dungeon for a decade, for his own good, would it be a good thing then? What if a million are offended?

A crime is a crime no matter who does it. What if a king decides he only likes women with blue eyes, would it be acceptable for him to order all women with brown or green eyes executed? Does the king’s pleasure overwhelm the right to life of those women? What about if he preferred brown eyes… would it be okay then? Would it be a good thing if a king ordered a squad of armed men to go door to door taking every carrot the people had grown? Perhaps our theoretical king could violate his own edicts, would it be acceptable for him, but not anyone else? What if that king were loved by the people, would that make it okay? No it wouldn’t. A person’s title, occupation or status does not give her the right to visit evil on another, no matter the difference in the adoration of the masses.

In the example of the king ordering a squad to visit evil on someone else, is the king less culpable because he didn’t actually commit the crime himself, what about the squad of men, are they less to blame for their actions because they were simply following orders? Do you think God will hold a death camp guard blameless because he was following orders? Will God hold the person ordering the sin blameless because she didn’t actually commit the sin herself? Maybe a king could change what is good and what is evil by edict? Could a king, beloved by the people, change morality, let’s say changing murder from a sin to a virtue? Is that in the power of any man, king or not?

That which is evil, is evil, no matter who does it, why it is done or how many people do it. Sadly this concept is lost on the lion’s share of humanity. People see a single evil and call it evil, but when they see a million evils, they call it a good. This doesn’t follow. The ancient Chinese utilitarian philosopher, Mo Ti said, “Take the case of a man who when shown a few black dots calls them black, but when shown a large number of black objects calls them white. He would have to admit his eyesight was in disorder and that he did not know the difference between black and white.” This sums up what I am saying, everyone knows a single evil like theft, is evil, but many see theft by the multitude as a good, especially if it benefit them. They would have to admit their moral compass is off by many degrees… Just because an evil is done by someone who claims to represent the many, doesn’t make it a good, it simply involves the many in the sin.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The War of Ideas

Monday, September 19th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we live in a world of competing ideas, America is an idea, justice is an idea, socialism is an idea, Islamism is an idea, gender fluidity is an idea, limited government is an idea, etc… these ideas compete for the minds of people. As in any competition it is not the best who wins but the most zealous. If the adherents of an idea are willing to do whatever it takes to forward their idea, then that idea will become widespread, if the adherents of an idea are wishy washy, that idea will loose ground. The battleground for these competing ideas is the media, schools, universities, cafes, bars and any other forum in which people communicate. The goal line is the zeitgeist. The ideas that permeate the zeitgeist best become widespread and either visit evil or good on humanity. It is important to note, the goodness or badness of an idea has little or no merit in the strength or weakness of that idea, the strength of an idea comes from the intensity of belief of that idea, in the minds of those who take it to be truth. If we seek goodness, then we must grab those ideas that are good and let go of those that are bad, in this we have history and common sense as guides, yet the power of many bad ideas is such that they cannot be easily let go of. As self interested rational maximizers however, it is our ability to reason that has allowed any good ideas at all to survive, against the magnetic pull of evil.

Bad ideas, or ideas that result in human suffering, have an innate pull. They always promise power wealth and prestige for those who hold fast to them. Think about the pull of socialism for a moment. It promises wealth to everyone, it claims to be a form of fairness and it pretends to be about love, (applying to emotion) but most of all, socialism gives unlimited power to those who will run the socialist state, (applying to self interest). To anyone who favors socialism, it is that unlimited power that is the magnet that provides the attraction. Every socialist wants to be the one who runs the socialist state. That is why whenever the dismal history of socialism and Marxism is brought up, the socialist will claim true socialism has never been tried, else that the “wrong” people were in charge then, the obvious connotation is that if they were in charge things would have gone much differently. Bad ideas have an innate pull to people who lust after power.

When someone is so certain of the idea they espouse they are willing to do violence to force others to believe and to stop others from abandoning that idea. The NAZI party was all too willing to visit evil on anyone who didn’t hold their ideas. They waged war against every other political faction in Germany at the time until all the rest were subjugated. Then the NAZIS went on to wage a bloody war of conquest across Europe and north Africa to further their idea of national socialism. The NAZIS are not alone in their willingness to do violence to forward their idea. The willingness to do violence in the name of an idea is a strong indication that idea is bad. If an idea requires the evil of violence to spread, that idea is evil. Evil ideas must be withstood at all costs else evil will become widespread.

Good ideas however don’t promise power, wealth or prestige for a faction, person or group, they offers good to everyone, and in that way good ideas have less power over the minds of those who take them to be truth. Limited government offers no incentive to someone who seek power over others, and so those who believe in limited government don’t have personal gain in believing in limited government, so limited government is an idea that while good, has little pull on the minds of people. The idea of America, the land of opportunity and of the free, has a strong pull to those who live in poverty or oppression, but once a person gets to America, other ideas become more attractive. Preferential treatment by political force is much easier than hard work, and so it often replaces the idea of “America,” once an immigrant comes here. The result is that people move to a place for freedom and opportunity then try mightily to turn it into a place of no opportunity and oppression.

It is in talking that we promote or denigrate ideas. Any form of communication is how ideas are spread and how they are destroyed. Hitler wrote Mien Kampf, Marx wrote the Communist Manifesto, the Founding Fathers wrote the Federalist papers and the anti Federalist papers, nightly news programs promote progressivism, and it is in our cafes, bars, and internet forums, that ideas are passed from person to person. The battleground for the spread of ideas is anyplace people congregate and talk.

When we watch people debating an idea we usually gravitate to the idea whose adherents are the most zealous. Often a zealous arguer is more convincing than one who uses logic and reason, because she uses emotion, and emotion is a stronger motivator of men than reason, especially those who claim to be “reasonable.” Logic, reason, emotion and self interest, are some of the weapons people use to promote their ideas. Emotion is like a nuclear weapon since it has such power, self interest is like strategic bombing and logic is like a sword, cutting absurdity from truth. Only where the battleground is intolerant of emotion can the nuclear weapon be banned. This is why bad ideas that are based on self interest and emotion are so powerful and have such sway over the minds of people.

We live in a world of ideas, whether evil or good, those ideas determine the quality of life of all humanity. It has been said, the human mind is like a rider on an elephant, the rider is reason and it is the elephant that does the work. Clearly, the rider has only limited control of the elephant, and must ride where the elephant goes, that is why emotion is such a good motivator. We are all self interested, seeking our own good over the good of others, applying to our immediate self interest then is another powerful way to promote an idea, bad ideas are good at this tactic while good ideas are bad at it. It is this siren call of evil ideas, that is why human history has so few examples of good ideas becoming widespread, and why evil ideas have been the norm. Good ideas apply to logic and reason while bad ideas apply to emotion and self interest. Good ideas recoil from violence while evil ideas embrace it. In the end however, the good ideas… limited government, America, and justice for all, actually are in our long term self interest, if not in our immediate self interest. Let us pray then, that humanity will use logic and reason to decide what ideas we will follow, abandoning emotion and lust, thus improving the lot of mankind.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Debating a Crypto Marxist

Thursday, September 1st, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the way you can reliably tell when a progressive knows he or she has lost a debate, is when they call you a hater. Since progressives know debate is not to change the mind of the opposition, but the spectators, they cannot allow a libertarian to win any debate, so once their empty rhetoric has failed they go nuclear and slander the opponent, to delegitimize the libertarian’s argument. By libertarian, I mean anyone who believes in limited government, like a conservative, and so I use the inclusive term libertarian. Of course slander is an underhanded way to win an argument and is a transparent ploy to anyone who knows the rules of debate, but since most spectators know nothing of logical fallacies, that tactic has worked wonders for Marxists, socialists and progressives for over a century. So, when a progressive calls you a hater, racist, bigot, etc… you can rest assured you have won the debate, by facts and argument, but are still at risk of loosing it by a logical fallacy. That is why it is important to point out the logical fallacy instead of getting mad.

Politics is based on debate. People discussing the merits of this or that policy, position of program is the best way for a group to decide what is the right course of action. Without debate the democratic element of any government becomes impossible. An ignorant people cannot make reasoned decisions. The ancient Greeks had open and lively debates in the Pnyx. Smart as well as foolish decisions were decided there. The disaster of the attack on Sicily was decided there, as well as the fortunate history changing judgment, to support the Spartans at Thermopylae. Both were debated by the Athenians and voted on by them, based on the result of the debate, but in one debate we see calamity and the other a blessing on humanity. The difference was the debate.

The rules of debate as well as logical fallacies should be taught in every school on Earth. Sadly, that is in direct opposition to the power of the political elite, and so those important lessons are eschewed for politically correct knowledge, like how to put a condom on a cucumber. Teaching debate and logic would undermine the ability of those who favor arbitrary rule in any of it’s manifestations and names. The power of slander would be severely curtailed by such teaching and so only in private schools is debate and logic really taught. Even colleges and universities pervert the teaching of logic and debate, since they have long abandoned their fundamental purpose, to be open minded and forward the goal of reason. Debate a recent graduate of a university, and you will quickly realize the little person is an automaton, spewing rhetoric she has been programmed with. Once you win the debate you will be painted as a hater.

Of course slander is a logical fallacy… but why? If someone is really evil how can you agree with anything they say? Well, if Adolph Hitler came in soaking wet and tells you it is raining outside, does that mean it cannot be raining, since Hitler is evil? What if Stalin says the sky is blue, does that mean the sky is actually green? Of course it’s not. Bias on the other hand can undermine a debaters position. When Phillip Morris cited paid for “scientific research” proving smoking is good for you, that turned out to be patently untrue, it was an example of bias undermining a position. In a similar vein, when someone who stands to gain if people opt for their position, their argument should be given extra scrutiny. Like for example, a scientist who has millions of dollars of government money at risk, claims man made climate change is happening, especially when they try to shut down debate. It is only logical to view their argument with a bit more care. This is especially true when one side has made predictions based on their theories that have not proven accurate. The more inaccurate predictions the less credence we can give them.

If we want our children to live in a world that is prosperous, healthy, harmonious and safe, it is up to us to understand the rules of debate and the logical fallacies that make people reach a faulty conclusion. Steel yourself to the fat that whenever you debate a progressive they will not debate fairly or logically. All Marxists, even crypto Marxists like progressives, are ideologues, they care nothing for reality, only their political ideals. To them, and sadly, to most audiences as well, facts, historical examples and a finely crafted argument means nothing, emotion is paramount. So, to win a debate with any crypto Marxist you must point out, once they slander you, that their slander is proof they have lost the argument… and they know it. Then laugh heartily at them rather then get defensive. Make the progressive a laughing stock and you have won the debate. Use their logical fallacy against them and sooner or later they will drop that tactic. When you are called a hater, simply say, “How do you know a progressive has lost an argument? They call you a hater…”

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Evil Bourgeoisie

Thursday, August 11th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, there is some misconception of what the term “owners of the means of production,” actually means. This is important because more often now than in the past, we find ourselves debating a Marxist, Keynesian or half wit, and we hear the term bourgeoisie and think Marxism, but don’t realize that the owners of the means of production is the definition of bourgeoisie, nor the true depth of the meaning of the means of production. If we don’t have Marxist terms, their definition and the magnitude of the ideas fixed fast in our heads, we are at disadvantage in debate, even though we have the empirical truth on our side. Remember, words have emotional undertones, they make you feel things, and Marxist words are often both a description and an insult, so knowing the insult and the emotion it is supposed to raise in the onlookers is power, because you never debate someone to change his or her views, you debate someone to change the views of the audience.

Bourgeoisie is an emotional term it packs a punch and it hits you in the gut. We are programmed to think, evil guys, whenever we hear that term. Those of us who are more indoctrinated have an even more visceral loathing for the bourgeoisie. “They are those evil people who run everything and have all the money and all the power,” might be what goes through your mind when you hear that term. Notice how it is so often used as a pejorative? “Filthy bourgeoisie…” Everything we are taught by the media, the government monopoly schools, our culture and society programs us to feel that way. After all, the bourgeoisie are the enemy, they stand in the way of perfection, harmony and changing human nature for the better.

The bourgeoisie or, the owners of the means of production, is an economic term created by Marx to describe all the people who own any tool whatsoever. If you have a table saw in your shed, you own the means of production, if you own stocks through your IRA or 401K, you are the owner of the means of production, if you own a machine shop, guess what, you are the owner of the means of production, but you know what, if you are the CEO of a publicly traded company, you are NOT the owner of the means of production, if you work in government in any of it’s manifestations, you are not an owner of the means of production, and if you are a lobbyist, lawyer, banker, doctor or journalist, you are not the owner of the means of production, (unless you have set of side tools in your basement or a well financed 401k). If you own a store or are a middleman, you are the petite bourgeoisie, the enablers.

Think of the implications. If jack has a wood shop that he sometimes uses, he is the owner of the means of production, in that he can produce a thing by way of the tools he owns. Even a hand chisel counts because it can produce goods. The means of production are not limited to auto factories and computer chip campuses, anything that can produce a thing is the means of production. The CEO of Ford Motor company, in the scope of his job is not the owner of the company, he is the caretaker of the company for the shareholders. The shareholders are the owners of the means of production in this case. Usually the CEO will be given stock in the form of an option to buy at below market price, as a way of creating emotional bond and give him a financial stake in the outcome of the company, but he is not the owner of Ford. The CEO is an agent of the owners who are the principles.

Have you ever wondered why those taxes that were supposed to hurt the rich bourgeoisie only seemed to hurt you? That is because the people you have thought of as bourgeoisie, are not the bourgeoisie but the new class, you are the bourgeoisie. Wealth today is far less dependent on producing things people need and want and more about manipulating… sifting money, slip and fall, managing someone else property, regulating everything and who your friends are, are far more important today. Ever thought it strange the richest of the rich favor the most socialist policies, policies that make it ever harder for the evil rich bourgeoisie and ever easier for the virtuous new class, that is because you are the evil bourgeoisie. When a billionaire tells you he is for damaging the rich… he is lying to you, to really do that he would have to damage his own self interest, and it is not in human nature, now or ever, to do that. Shortly after Obama was elected, the billionaire Warren Buffett complained it unfair that he paid a lower tax rate than his secretary, so Obama fixed it, Obama raised the secretary’s taxes and gave Buffett a monopoly on oil traffic from Alberta to Texas. Now that’s redistribution! Remember, Warren Buffett runs Berkshire Hathaway, the shareholders own it…

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Education as an Investment

Thursday, July 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, as education goes in a nation, so does that nation. If children are given an excellent education in a wealthy country, the likelihood of economic advancement becomes far more likely, while at the same time a poor education in a wealthy country, will grind that nation into poverty. The same holds true in a poor country, good education leads to better outcomes and poor education leads to poor outcomes. Taken in the aggregate, the more good outcomes for the individual, the better the national outcome. Children need to be able to read, write, do math, know history as well as understand economics. In most nations today, if not all, economic education is absent, and history is a means to vilify people rather than enlighten. Education is an investment in the future wealth of a nation.

Like any investment there are good investments and bad. One can invest in fake oil futures and loose her shirt, or invest in heavy manufacturing, and make money. Education is like that. Invest in bad education and the future wealth of that nation is destroyed, invest in good education and the future is so bright kids have to wear shades. We as a society have embraced the idea that education is an important investment, we spend huge amounts of money on it, yet we see the abilities of our kids diminish. To sharpen the point a bit more, if someone invests a thousand dollars in a scam, they will loose all the money, if they invest a billion dollars in that same scam, they will still loose the money. The amount of money invested does not effect the quality of the investment.

The quality of an investment is only dependent on the quality of the investment itself. There have been times in the US where education was not expensive at all yet the quality of education was excellent. Today we spend exponentially more and have outcomes that wouldn’t have been tolerated even a few generations ago. The quality of education has gone down while the cost has risen. Clearly we are investing in an education system that is under performing. Those who make money from the present system, shockingly, claim the answer is to spend more money on it, (them), citing the fallacy that more money improves the quality of an investment, which is patently untrue. The reality is we need to improve the quality of the investment, education, rather than spend more money.

Education over the last century has gone from the purview of local government, to national government, taking the decisions farther and farther from the people, putting them in the hands of unaccountable administrators, who make gobs of money regardless of the outcome of students. Obviously that is a recipe for disaster. Whenever people are unaccountable for the outcome of their actions, it is in human nature to become arrogant and have poor performance. Today we have education standard that are set by bureaucrats at the highest reaches of government, local schools must follow else loose access to the heaps of money the government takes from us to enforce their objectives. Good education is not one of them, political education apparently is.

Students should be taught economics and everyone graduation high school should have a basic understanding of a market system, money theory, the interaction of interest rates and inflation, and have a grasp on the various competing theories of economics, Keynesian, Marxist, Austrian school and Schumpeter’s boom bust theory as well. Such education would allow kids to understand the macro economic theme of various elections and the underlying economic theories of the various actors. Sadly, that is not the case today, in fact economics is not taught in high school at all, even home economics has been abandoned for political indoctrination. Children are being taught what to think rather than how to reason.

History should be taught in an over arching theme of humanity advancing in science, philosophy and culture, never in a political context. Industrial arts must be returned to our schools, for those children who have a talent for working with their hands, especially since it gives kids the ability to create what they dream. Basic philosophy, logic, epistemology, ethics and semantics should be covered in a good education system. These are some of the important courses that have been ignored so that other less important course can be taught, like how to put a condom on a cucumber, how to use Google, why homosexuality is good, atheism, etc… Our children are nothing more than lab rats to the hubris and egos of the education dictators. The results are children graduating school, unable to engage in the market system, angry at the history of their nations, incapable of controlling themselves, needing safe spaces so they don’t have to hear unpleasant truths, and cannot make change without a cash register doing it for them.

The government monopoly school system has shown itself to be an abject failure, in every way by every measure, more spending will not change that. That failure portends our children’s economic standard of living to be a failure as well. We need to get away from traditional school funding and bring in a voucher system, where parents can choose the education they want for their children, and allows use of the money government takes from them to do it. Let the free market improve the quality of education, rather than throw more money at a failed system, to maintain it’s failure, and our children’s mediocrity. Those education tzars who run the show today scream like scalded cats at the thought, adding their voices to the political elite, who benefit from a poorly educated people, to insure a voucher system never be tried. They argue… “a voucher system would destroy the public school system,” which if one thinks about it, is grounds enough to do it, if only people had sufficient education to reason it through.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

CEO Pay

Thursday, July 14th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, a painter who charged for paint but used white wash, a drywaller who put up cardboard instead of sheetrock and a paver who used clay slurry instead of asphalt, would not deserve a huge bonus, but that is exactly what our CEOs do… and get. The difference in treatment for the new class and the rest of us is as stark as it is baffling. You would think people would start a rumpus over it. Instead, we take it, doing our best at our job and settle for shoddy workmanship from the new class. Meanwhile they demand us to deliver excellent quality at high rates of productivity for ever lower wages. Our economy, wages and standard of living corrodes every day for it. Today the new class is fighting an undeclared war against the hoi polloi. So much so that now we live in the age of the principle agent dilemma.

Our businesses have become so politicized they no longer function as profit making enterprises but lackeys of the progressives. Examples like Target are glaring. Target has decided to poke it’s customers in the eye with such absurdities as allowing men into the woman’s bathroom. On the face of it that decision alienates customers, corrodes the value of the shareholders and puts employees jobs at risk. The decision to follow a political regime changes Target from a retailer that provides value to customers, jobs for employees and returns on investment for shareholders, is a form of corporate suicide. The CEO however will not suffer for his decision, there will be no negative consequences for him, but the fallout for everyone else will be disastrous. From children being abused in the bathroom to shareholders loosing their hard earned money, the rest of us will be on the loosing side of that gambit. If Target goes belly up from that policy, the CEO will still get his bonus, and another cushy job, where he can impose his absurd political beliefs on the rest of us, even as he has used cardboard in place of drywall.

Stock buybacks is another example of how the new class embezzles money from shareholders. Stock buybacks, the main reason the stock market has risen to record highs, provide no real return to shareholders but instead corrodes the actual value of their stock. The new class borrow money against the real value of the company, diminishing that value, then buy it’s own stock artificially increasing the stock price while eroding it’s actual value, because that money is not used to buy the means of production so the company can be more profitable in the future, nor is it used to expand territory, or integrate with it’s suppliers or retailers to provide a basis for future profit growth. All a stock buyback does is make a short term stock price rise, in the absence of future profit potential, so the upper management, the new class, can get huge bonuses for that price increase. In other words, they use clay slurry instead of asphalt, the moment it rains the reality of what they have done will become apparent.

The new class is in favor of any and every regulation that comes down the pike. Regulations make the job of a CEO much easier. While that statement may seem counter intuitive it is truth incarnate. Regulations are easy for a large firm to follow, with their armies of new class lawyers and deep pockets to meet them, regulations are death for small businesses that compete with large corporations. To paraphrase Milton Friedman… If a CEO faces competition from a small business that makes a better product at a lower price point, that CEO can lower prices and increase quality, which both lowers his bonuses and makes her work harder, or they can go to their trapped regulators and get the small business shut down. Obviously, as history shows, they will go to government to stifle competition. In doing so they crush innovation, the lifeblood of a market economy and drive down wages by lowering demand for labor. It is almost like they are using white wash instead of paint.

We pay top dollar to our principles for inferior work. Every day the new class is living the principle agent dilemma everywhere we look. They politicize their firms, they destroy value and stifle innovation, all to the very real detriment of everyone else. The new class is the agent and the rest of us are the principles. We own companies when we have IRAs and we are the citizens of government, we are the principles, the new class, CEOs, lawyers, journalists, bureaucrats, teachers, politicians, professors, etc… are our agents. They are supposed to work for us. The trouble is, the agent will abuse his position for personal gain all day long, if they can get away with it. Many people do raise a commotion, but in the end only empower the new class to further abuse their positions, because the new class channels that anger to increasing their power as our agents. Regulation is increased, journalism veers decidedly leftist, political correctness becomes ever more ingrained and our liberty is washed away by it. The problem starts and ends in our colleges and universities where our children are indoctrinated into the new class mindset. It is past time to wrest our education system from Marxists and progressives and instead teach common sense, work ethic and basic logic.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Path to Enlightenment, Step One…

Monday, May 16th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, in the material realm… it is foolish to dwell on that which we don’t have, and wise to dwell on that which we do have, while in the realm of knowledge… it is wise to dwell on that which we don’t have, and foolish to dwell on what we have gained. The thirst for knowledge is one of the definitions of a sage that Confucius used. Jesus taught us not to overly value material things. It is only when we keep these truths at the front of our minds do we have any chance, if we are already a sage, to become more enlightened, and if a fool then, less of one. We all do it, value our material things more than they deserve and at the same time, scorn that which is most valuable to us. If however, we try to keep the true value, to us, our growth, our mental as well as spiritual well being at the forefront, instead of vanity and disinterest. Even if we only do it for a short time, the growth in that short time, may carry to the end of our days improving, ever so subtly… our lives.

The sage always seeks knowledge while the dull are happy in the knowledge they have gained. In a conversation, when confronted with knowledge a person doesn’t know, the disinterested will change the subject to something they know, to display their intellect, while the wise will instead focus on learning that new knowledge. The best way to gain utile knowledge is always from other people. Have a pain in your abdomen, chances are you know someone who had the same problem a few years ago and solved it, their knowledge would be useful to you now. If you ignored new knowledge, that information would be forever withheld from you, while at your very fingertips. Even knowledge that doesn’t immediately benefit us has value. History widens our understanding of human nature, math provides structure as does language, art allows the mind to exceed the limits of the material plane and trivia allows us a glimpse into our own societal structure, indeed ourselves. Knowledge is always a thing to be valued.

The wise are always happy with what they have, while the foolish care nothing for what they have, because what they don’t have is all that is important to them, and so the foolish cannot, by that circular logic, ever be satisfied. Since there is an infinite number of things in the universe, and we are finite beings, it is impossible to own everything, even everything we might desire, moreover, to focus on that which we cannot by definition have is futile, shows the foolishness of focusing on that which we don’t have, while ignoring that which we do. We see it every day. Someone gets a brand new car, and is happy for a day, maybe, sometimes two, then they are looking for the next car. No sooner does someone move into a new home and they start planning the next one. Some desire is helpful and is a motivating force to drive our economic station better, but when the total focus is on those material things we don’t have, then it stunts our mental and spiritual growth.

Both ideas, focus on those things we have, and focus on that knowledge we don’t have, can be kept at the front of our minds for a bit. While you are mindful, try to use them as templates to judge those things you focus on. Do you focus on the next door neighbor’s new grill or your own trusty old one. If you think of it, turn the conversation today to something you don’t know. Ask questions to learn not to appear intelligent or trip someone up. Instead of dwelling on the stuff you want, inventory all the stuff you have. Go fishing at a river instead of saying to yourself, “if only I had a boat…,” Walk around the neighborhood, instead of pining for a new aerobike indoor full fitness machine with heated seats and accurate to the centi calorie, caloric calculator. For as long as you can, focus on what you have and be thankful while seeking knowledge from any source available.

Only the most ardent will remember this article much after a month at most, but mindfullness for even a day or two can result in a step closer to enlightenment. It might even lead to a sea change. Pragmatic philosophy are those ideas, that when sown reap sweet fruit, to get a bit better at focusing on what we have and on gaining knowledge, can only lead to a more healthy, happy and enlightened state. Catch yourself once… focusing on what you don’t have or diverting a conversation back to familiar ground, and you have made great progress.

Sincerely,

John Pepin