Posts Tagged ‘elite’

Our Cultural Slide

Thursday, February 20th, 2014

Dear Friends,


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


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


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


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


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





John Pepin

The Gap Between the Rich and the Poor

Thursday, February 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,


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


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


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


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


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


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


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


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





John Pepin

Constitutional Usurpation

Monday, February 3rd, 2014

Dear Friends,


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


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


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


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


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


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


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





John Pepin

The Ukrainian Riots

Monday, January 27th, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, the people of the Ukraine are ripping mad, and they have every right to be. They have been deceived and stabbed in the back over and over. The riots that have been going on now for weeks in Kiev are the manifestation of that anger. Now cities around Ukraine are joining the protests. Like in the United States and the World over, politicians in the Ukraine believe they can run on a platform, then rule in direct opposition to that platform without consequence. In the US politicians get away with it, with the help of the unbiased media, but in Ukraine their feet are being held to the fire. A real fire as it turns out. The Ukrainian government has offered several concessions to the protesters but they are too little too late. Perhaps the riots won’t end, until either the government stomps them down like the Chinese communists did in Tienanmen Square, or the government falls, but there is a way to solve the problem in both the Ukraine and the World over.


People have a great ability to forgive. We understand that others are flawed human beings as are we. Upon a continued assault however, no person no matter their demeanor, will remain calm forever. Politicians in both the Ukraine and the US run as conservatives and libertarians but rule as tyrants and socialists. This enrages the people who voted for those corrupt politicians based, as it always turns out, on lies. No one can stand ceaseless irritations without eventually becoming irritated and that is where the Ukrainian people are. How long will it take for the American people to wake from our slumber?


One of the concessions offered by the Ukrainian president is the amending of their Constitution. What the unbiased media fail to report, or even understand, is that if a President can unilaterally amend the Constitution… there is no Constitution. The Protesters understand this basic fact of Constitutional rule, but the elite in the media and government don’t, (or don’t want to). A Constitution is supposed to be a document that limits the power of the elite over the people. If the elite can change it willy nilly, it does not limit their power, but give their reign a faux legitimacy. If the protesters allow the Constitution to be changed by the political elite, it will be changed back again the moment the exigency of the riots are over, giving the government unlimited power again.


History has not been kind the the people of the Ukraine. They have suffered under the Mongol hordes, they have faced wave after wave of Muslim invasions, they have suffered under the Tzar’s tyranny and oppression and have endured under Stalin and his artificial famine. The unfortunate people of the Ukraine have no history of freedom and liberty to fall back on. They have only famine, oppression, war and slaughter to remember. Now they have an opportunity to forge a different path, one free from oppression, and they are seizing it. I pray to God they can pull it off, their lot has been so bad for so long, if anyone deserves peace and prosperity, it is the people of the Ukraine.


Clearly what is needed in the Ukraine is laissez faire capitalism, a strongly limiting Constitution and a NUMA to enforce it. Otherwise the government will continue to run amok, progressing to socialism and tyranny, as they are in the US. Barring that, as soon as a new government comes into power, it will act the same as the old one. A NUMA would change the paradigm in Ukraine for the better by holding the political elite to the Constitution’s limits. This is something very few political leaders have been held to, since the dawn of time, anywhere. Power must be limited else it limits the people. We have seen this played out throughout time and the World over.


Only time will tell how the protests in Ukraine will turn out. The strong likely hood is that some new dictator will emerge, charismatic and ruthless. History is not on the side of the people. The normal state of humanity is under the thumb of a tyrant, it is the exception where and when a people escape from it and forge a new way. The US did for a while, but the current of politics always wears away the people’s resolve, eventually eroding the limits put on government by Constitutions. Only a Constitutionally empowered branch of government could ever hope to have the authority to contain the avarice of the political elite. Without a NUMA, Ukraine will fall back into oppression, as the US is progressing to.


Perhaps it is a pie in the sky dream that Ukrainians could have liberty but every man woman and child yearns to be free in his or her heart. Freedom has lifted millions of people from poverty while arbitrary rule has lowered billions to slavery. I am on the side of the protesters, I believe liberty is the only way to lift all boats, and liberty is the protester’s goal, but the protesters need to have a plan. To that end, a NUMA along with a strictly limiting Constitution, would do just that. Let’s pray it happens and that the political current doesn’t wash away the hopes and dreams of the Ukrainian people. God speed and God bless the Ukrainian people… and may God help us here in the US.





John Pepin

Morality Depends on Scale

Monday, January 20th, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, understanding human morality is similar to comprehending Grand Unified Theory, they both are enigmas that defy explanation and the difference is based on scale. It is interesting how so many phenomenon appear across scientific disciplines. While it makes the universe and God’s laws easier to understand this phenomenon also shows us the interconnectedness of the universe. We have only a limited ability to understand the World around us despite our hubris. When two dissimilar systems so closely mirror one another, it is clear indication we should examine them, with an eye to comparing them, perhaps gleaning some insight into the workings of either or both. Not one among us isn’t aware that our well beings depend on the state of society, a few less understand that the state of our morality is a crucial factor in the state of our society.


Grand Unified Theory is a goal to combine macro physics with micro physics, or in other words, Newtonian physics with Quantum physics. The difference is scale. Things behave impossibly differently depending on the scale. In Quantum physics for example, particles can be entangled such that no matter how far they are separated if one is disturbed the other shows the disturbance, if a particle is measured that particle is fundamentally changed, and in the Quantum universe particles pop into existence and back out constantly. These are things and properties you would never see in the macro world, the world we live in. In our world, things don’t just pop into existence and back out, we can weigh anything we want without materially effecting it and just because two things bump doesn’t entangle them no matter how far apart they move. If any of those things happened in our world people would call it magic. But Grand Unified Theory is ambitious enough to try to fuse these two disparate realities into one theory.


Human morality is similar to micro and macro physics in that our morality largely depends on scale. Mo Ti said he couldn’t understand why a person shown a black dot could identify it as a black dot, but when shown a page filled with black dots, that same person would call them white. One would have to question the viewer’s eyesight… Mo Ti was of course referring to War. The one dot meaning the killing of a person but the page of dots representing the killing of many. The difference is scale. If I shoved a gun in your face and demanded money, that would be a bad thing, and everyone understands that, but if a government does the very same thing, people say it is good. You don’t think government demands are backed up by deadly force? Try not paying your taxes and hold up in your home, threatening no one, there will be armed police surrounding your house before you can blink. How many other examples can you think of, where if you or I did an action it would be wrong and punishable, but when government does that same action, it is called social justice.


To conceptualize a Grand Unified Theory of Human Morality would be every bit as difficult as Grand Unified Theory of Physics. To observe such fundamental change depending on scale boggles the mind. How can physics be so utterly different, at microscopic scales from how things behave at macro scales, the scale we live in? Human morality is no different on this matter, how is it possible that an action that is wrong for the individual, right for a group? Because if you think of it, a group with political power is all that government is. How many times in human history have people done evil things to one another, simply because they were “ordered” to? In their minds and in truth the minds of most people, they lost culpability in their actions when they received orders to… gas the Roma and Jews, take food from the people’s own larders to create a forced famine starving millions to death, drive the Roma to another country, or keep quiet when we see people being abused, along with any of the other atrocities you can think of. Physics is so fundamentally different from human morality that is is startling when we find such a close analogy between them. It would serve the physics community well if they could come up with Grand Unified Theory but it would equally serve the human race if we could come up with a Grand Unified Theory of Human Morality. Perhaps the researchers in physics and moral philosophers should examine each other’s fields to get a deeper understanding of their own.





John Pepin

Hubris or Humility, Which is Best in Our Leaders?

Monday, January 13th, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, tyranny seeks to change the people to suit the State, free States seek to change the State to suit the people. Tyrants presume wisdom to know what is best for humanity, and with that hubris that necessarily comes with such presumption, they dread what would happen to them if someone else took over their power. In free states however, the state simply forms a framework for the markets, society and culture to work. It doesn’t take charge of any facet of society that it doesn’t belong in. The free state does not presume to know what’s best, it simply provides standards as a structure for human society to grow on, while the oppressive state, wants to not only provide the structure, but everything else as well, to protect their power. To that end the dictatorship must change the very essence of humanity, evolve us to something different, to become socially aware, ubermensch or whatever the mastermind connives the name to be. This is the fundimental difference between liberty and tyranny, the one respects who and what we are as human beings while the other must change who and what we are to something else.


Karl Marx argued in many of his writings that people will evolve out of our individual selves into species self. Once the revolution happens and the people live communally we will forget the individual self that so alienates us from others, and embrace our species self, that will end our alienation from each other and our work. Never mind, almost everything Marx said is provably wrong, the immense human suffering that has been committed in the name of communism, or that every “revolution” has been led by the intelligentsia and soldiered by the peasants, never the workers, think of the presumption of this as a philosophy. That fellow human beings be forced by violence, (what else is a revolution but violence), and then given such little respect, we are to be the lab rats in an experiment in human evolution? Can presumption possibly be raised to a higher level than that?


The example of the United States serves to show the other side of the coin. For most of it’s existance the US has been a place where the individual has been allowed to do his or her thing. The nation was founded on the concept of maximum liberty. The founders tried mightily to put in place a system of government that would protect the rights, priviliges and property of it’s citizens. This system has yeilded some pretty startling results. There has never been a place in the annuls of human history or lore, including the tales of Atlantis, where a country brought about such seismic change to the standard of living of people the World over, led science to such heights, achieved such measures of efficiency in the production of the goods of humanity, restored a people to liberty then left, nor reached the Moon. That the US is turning away from it’s heritage of liberty and freedom for the individual, and to the oppression of a state that seeks to become everything, will be the verfying counter experiment. Where we change the fundamentals to the opposite so the outcome reverses fundamentally as well.


If those who have such egos and presumption actually had faith in their ideas they wouldn’t have to change the essence of who and what we are. It is the nagging uncertainty, that produces a disquiet in their hearts, that forces the would be oppressor to seek to change the very nature of what it is to be human. They know in their hearts that they are not God but have the hubris to presume to supersede him. The leader, senator or government that has humility will not try to force change through oppressive control. The state that is free will have a great diversity of people, busy working away at whatever each finds the most rewarding, or whatever he or she falls into. Humility gives a leader the self assured tranquility to trust that liberty is truly the best policy, while presumptuous power corrodes the oppressors’ self assuredness and sense of safety, until they go insane and hang their uncle.





John Pepin

We Have Become Inured to Hypocrisy

Thursday, January 9th, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, folks who advocate the State has the power to dictate how others live, should be forced themselves, first, to live that way. Were this the case I think we might see a bit more leniency in the thinking of many presumptuous people. Imagine for a moment, a World without hypocrisy in it’s leaders. It is of course not ours, but an imaginary one, where the elite are held to their own laws, regulations and orders. Do you suppose the laws, regulations and orders would be, let’s say, better thought out? If the people making the rules were held to them, doesn’t it seem reasonable, those people would make as few as possible? Wouldn’t everything, society, the culture, and the economy, be better if the laws were minimized, better thought out and applied equally?


But we all know that land is fictional, the land we live in is the land of hypocrisy. The First Lady advocates the rest of us living as aesthetic a life as possible, walking to work, easing the thermostat, eating nothing but kale and green beans… while she lives and eats like a queen. Now, I couldn’t care less how she lives nor should I. How she lives is her business, not mine. She, however, has a totally different way of thinking. She would like nothing better than to order me how to live. If I do something she finds objectionable she would love to regulate it, but if she does something I am offended by, her attitude is that I should be forced to pay for it, to open my mind.


People who seek political power almost always seek control over others. Why else seek political power? The only other reason is to lessen the power of government over the people. Those that seek power over others cannot run on that. It would be absurd. Vote for me, try a session with my oppression… Those who seek power over others have to couch their rhetoric with platitudes and handouts. The whip doesn’t come out until they have total power, but how offended the tyrant would be, if he felt a lash!


One thing about people who seek power over others, their egos are so fragile, they demand others applaud everything they do. You see this in how politically correct our speech has become. How many words can you think of that you would never say in public in the next ten seconds? A dozen, or more, is my average. Those that seek power over others have changed our language, and since we think in that language, they have also changed our thinking. They have become the thought police, but is their thought policed, for the betterment of mankind too?


Some people do seek political power to lessen the reach of government however. They are the ones who the elite call heartless, bigots who hate the poor, minorities, the environment ETC… When a politician is called heartless, that is a sure sign he or she seeks to limit the scope, role and reach of government. Those that seek power over others, must delegitimize those that seek to lower the power of government, because if those that seek to lower the power of government are successful, the potential power over the lives of others, of those that seek power over the lives of others, will be reduced.


The blatant hypocrisy of those that seek power over others using ad homonym attacks against those that seek to lower the power of government, is lost on most people because we have become so used to it. Live in a sewer and the smell will be invisible to you after awhile. We have steeped in the hypocrisy of the elite for so long we have become immune to it. Yes occasionally someone will point it out but we are quickly told, there is nothing we can do about it, so we go back to ignoring the stench.


So when you hear someone claiming to want political office to help people you know they seek power over others. When you hear a politician called heartless you know that politician seeks to lower the power of government over others. Many other things can be seen, and smelled, once you open your eyes and nostrils. The way to do that is to clear your eyes and nose, by imagining a land where politicians are held to their own laws, regulations and orders…





John Pepin

Should We Civilize Our Children or Make Them Into Barbarians?

Monday, January 6th, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, to have a civilized society we must civilize our children. Those who raise barbarians have barbarism as the wage. This should be pretty obvious, but most of philosophy, if you think about it, is merely pointing out the obvious. To that end, raising civilized children and not barbarians, we as a society, culture and religions, must strive for. Those that seek to undermine the education and civilization of the youth act to bring about the end of our civilization. How can they be thought of any other way? Those that would prefer children be raised as barbarians must seek a barbarous society, if they seek a barbarous society then they seek, by definition, the downfall of ours. Those of us that seek a civilized society where difference is tolerated, and not only by one side, where people are polite, in as close to universal prosperity there can be, and where our churches, Temples, Synagogues, Mosques, and cemeteries are safe from fire and vandalism, not because of laws that force, but because we are civilized. We must point out the truth, call a barbarian what he or she is.


By civilized, I don’t mean bricks turned out from government monopoly schools, I mean stones as turned out by rivers and streams. There is an old saying, proverb or whatever, it goes; A teacher stands at the foot of a large tree, at the base are, a parrot, ape, elephant, porpoise, snake and fish. The teacher says, “The first to the top will get the best grade, then next will get the next lower grade. You will all be graded by this scale.” Clearly this scale is insufficient to capture the diversity of abilities in that group, nor scale them as individuals either within their own area of talent, but even as their talent compares to the others. This is the fundamental failure of nationalized systems of education. They make the teacher stand at the base of a large tree…


Think of what a barbarian is, a loutish person who has little self control, seeks primarily hedonistic pleasures, and is prone to violence. Isn’t that pretty much what you picture in your mind’s eye when you imagine a barbarian? Now look at what our schools teach our children, that God is fiction, the strong should take from the weak, it is better to appear good while being bad than to just be good, that honest gain is bad while dishonest gain is good… the list goes on and on. Not one of these lessons lead to civilized people, they must lead to hedonistic people, immoral, lacking utterly in self control, with a total ignorance of the social graces, such as courtesy, in short, people who are egoistic and therefore prone to violence…


To civilize a child is to teach them not only how to read, do math, understand science, know history, and write, but why they need to know these things. Grammar should be called philosophy and the reason for this explained to children. There is a whole arm of philosophy that deals in the failure of language to be a perfect deliverer of philosophical ideas. Kung Sung Lung for example. Once early philosophy (grammar) is done, then philosophy should talk about the ideas of the moral philosophers like, Plato, Socrates, Confucius, Buddha, Hsun Ching, Jesus, Abraham and Moses. The stories children should read need to have the theme of overcoming diversity, while striving to be good, like the ones written by Horatio Alger. Much can be taught by games, war games like, Russian Campaign, Panzergruppe Guderian, France 1940, Desert Fox, Saipan, ETC… teach basic math, geography, and history long with strategic thinking and an appreciation for the reality of war, where the numbers of men each unit represents is stressed. This is how I would set up an education system.


These innovations can only be done in small experimental schools, the good ones will be rewarded by the market and the bad ones will be punished by the same market. A market set up by the voucher system. Making the voucher system the means to civilizing children, since it is the only way educationally diverse opportunities would be available to children, who would potentially shine in them. To educate a child is to knock off the rough edges, but keep the eccentricities, to teach a child is to cut everything that doesn’t benefit the State off a child, fabricating them into equal rectangles, eliminating all political eccentricities. The first is strong inside but oddly shaped, the second weak inside but regular outside.


Our government is making more and more of our children into little barbarians, and when they act as government taught them, barbarous, government points to them as reason to limit all of our Rights. It is almost like those in our government want crime, poverty and strife, to justify the enhancement of their power over us, as shown by their actions IE, turning out barbarians from the government factory schools, instead of allowing us to civilize them. Be it for the sake of the Teacher’s union, political expediency or simply egoistic self interest, these are the actions of people who seek the downfall of civilization, with all that implies. We are the ones who must take action, demanding the voucher system be fully implemented everywhere in the US, with no religious exclusions. Pry our children from the trap of government factory schools, where they are being turned into mindless barbarians, and get them into schools where they can be civilized. The elite in government, media and culture are against us, but God is with us. With the scale tipped so far in our favor how can we but win?





John Pepin

Immigration Reform

Sunday, December 22nd, 2013

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, the immigration bill that is winding it’s way through the legislature, should be called “The wage suppression act of 2013.” Let’s face it, the United States does not have a shortage of workers, we have a shortage of jobs. The labor participation rate in the US is falling at an epic rate. The US is in fact the only industrialized country that has a falling labor participation rate. Couple that tidbit with the fact that unemployment is still high by historic standards, and one can only conclude, that for some reason jobs are not being created in America today. Now, to a person with normal thinking, when a country is hemorrhaging jobs, that would be a bad time to introduce millions of new workers… wouldn’t it? Unless the elite think that the reason jobs are becoming more and more scarce is because wages are too high. If that is the case then those in power would do what they can to lower the wages of workers, for example, bring in millions of new workers to compete for fewer and fewer jobs, IE the wage suppression act.


Are wages too high in the US today? If we look at wages for skilled and unskilled work in the US, adjusted for inflation, we find that wages are at a historic low. All wage categories, except upper management, bureaucrats, and politicians, have been on a slide down. Wages in the low skilled sector have taken the biggest hit but the high skilled sector has been stagnant for years as well. Engineers in the US, back in the nineteen eighties were at about one hundred thousand a year, and are still at that rate today. Many argue this is because companies like Microsoft, Google, Hewlett Packard, IBM, etc… have been hiring immigrants instead of American engineers. These firms claim there are no Americans capable of doing these high skilled jobs, and that is why these high tech companies are pushing so hard for immigration reform, but facts fly in their faces.


Today colleges and universities in the US are turning out record numbers of high skilled people. These new college grads are entering the workforce at a time when there are few jobs and less opportunities. As a case in point, ask the waiter next time you go out to eat, if he or she has a college degree. More likely than not they do. When a college graduate must wait tables, he or she dislocates lower skilled workers, and so lacking a job they fall out of the workforce. So, we must ask ourselves, why are so many skilled people working so far below their potential? Moreover, with wages so low and opportunities so rare, no wonder recent college graduates are depressed and angry, therefore they have the time and are willing to participate in the Wall Street protests.


This would seem to indicate that it is not wages that is negatively effecting job creation but some other factor. When Ronald Reagan was elected there was a similar dearth of jobs. Unemployment was high and wages had stagnated. The course Reagan put the US on was not one of raising taxes, regulation, government stimulus and creating new entitlements, what Reagan did was lower taxes, deregulate and ratchet down the entitlement mindset. Calvin Coolidge did the same thing. What was the results of these policies? High GDP growth, rising wages, lower crime, low unemployment and the creation of the term “yuppies.” If you don’t remember what a Yuppy was, it meant a young upwardly mobile person… an all but extinct species today.


Since Obama has taken office he has raised a whole slew of taxes, from income to fees and introducing a whole new tax regime, Obama care. His party has regulated everything they can find. Our banking system reels under the weight of Dodd Frank, and the trillion dollar stimulus went entirely to rich political hacks, who went bankrupt as soon as the government check cleared, with not a job to show for it. The Federal Reserve has printed trillions of dollars, to counter the negative effects of Obama’s policies, to no avail. The only people making out well are the uber rich, (you know, the people Obama claims to hate, but spends all his time on Martha’s Vineyard with), government workers and politicians. Washington DC is a boom town awash in money and power while Main Street USA crumbles.


So why import millions of new workers who will work for far less than Americans can? The only logical answer to that question is to lower the wages of Americans. Why would the government do that? To diminish the political power of the people and create disquiet in society. Remember, the worse conditions are for the people, the more power politicians get. Since power is their goal, not creating the conditions for a stable wealthy society, the unrest that… diminishing wages, resentment of immigrants, and the crime these beget, drives demand for more regulation, more government oversight, more police, more surveillance, in short, more power to government and the elite. Our compassion for the children of illegal immigrants, is being exploited to lower our standard of living, therefore enhancing the political power of the elite. This should come as no surprise, the new class’ goal has always been to reestablish the power they lost to the bourgeoisie a few centuries ago. Back to the good old days, when there were only two classes, the aristocracy and peasants.





John Pepin

Principles Versus Party

Monday, December 16th, 2013

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, most folks will give up their beliefs for their team, but very few will give up their team for their principles. We all want our team to win. It is merely human nature. When we allow that want for connection to supersede our self interests then we become our own enemy. This happens in many places in life but no place more so than in the arena of politics. Too often we will subvert our principles for our party. If our party is caught lying, we forgive them, but if another party lies, we hold a grudge forever. While it is natural it is counterproductive. We follow out of a sense of connexion but as we do we do great damage to our self interests. It is through following principles that we protect our self interests, and the interests of society as a whole, party is only a means to that end.


Human beings need to be connected with others. Team sports is an example of this paradigm at work. We root for our team against all others. Like people in ancient times, and in less advanced societies allegiance to their clan. To a person raised in a capitalist society, where allegiance to clan is out moded we don’t understand their thinking on an intellectual level, but as human beings we are subject to it nonetheless. Those of us that live in a market system weigh the good against the bad and keep a mental tally sheet that guides us as to the right course of action. When we root for our party over our principles we fall back to a less evolved way of thinking.


We all would rather believe a glittering lie than an ugly truth but it is in facing ugly truths that we grow and mature. It is in indulging in glittering lies that we devolve as human beings, becoming a force for evil, regardless of the loftiness of the principles we have abandoned. Those that shriek about freedom to do this or that need to do the math. Weigh what we are all loosing for their team to win. Because what is a principle, if we don’t hold ourselves and our team, to them? They become nothing, but an egoistic means of controlling others, that we eschew ourselves. When we abandon our principles for political expediency, for the team, we participate in the destruction of those very principles. It is a hypocrite that expects others to follow his principles when he won’t follow them himself.


Without values society crumbles. A society that is devoid of any real principles is a society cast adrift. Great nations, societies and civilizations rise in virtue and fall in vice. This is the sole lesson of history. A great people rise to power, wealth and prominence by following their principles and fall into weakness, poverty and ignominy when they abandon those principles. It follows like water flows down a hill. There is not one example where a people rose to greatness without principles, in other words a societal myth, or where a society thrived by ignoring those principles.


Apparently this is a lesson of history that needs to be taught over and over. The results are always the same, the factors that lead up to the fall are always the same, but humanity refuses to learn the lesson. The vast majority of human suffering that has been experienced has been due to this. Today we are no better than the Athenian who abandoned Solon’s laws, the Spartan who turned his back on the laws of Lycurgus, or Rome when it embraced an emperor instead of the consular system. We are no different when we abandon our founding principles, the market system, limited government and individual liberty.


Our society is no stronger than the Athenian, Spartan or Roman, because our system is made up of flawed human beings, who are more than happy to give up our principles, for political expediency. The new class seek to regain the power they lost to the bourgeoisie, when the new class was called the aristocracy, and so they need to destroy the principles that gave rise to the bourgeoisie, the market system, limited government and freedom. They seek to restore the old system of political favor, total government and oppression.


When we the people participate in abandoning the principles that brought us to such a height of technology, wealth, and freedom, we are as villainous as the politician who lies, connives and usurps. If our team is part of the problem, it is our duty to sand up and demand our leaders return to our foundational principles, else those principles will wither away leaving a destitute society that is controlled by the few using violent oppression, which is the normal case in human affairs. We will have delivered our children into slavery, by abandoning our principles for the team. So I ask you… is the victory of your team worth the enslavement of your children?





John Pepin