Posts Tagged ‘International Capitalist Party’

Censorship by Another Name…

Wednesday, November 16th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the election of Donald Trump has triggered a backlash by the new class, further limiting free speech for political ends. In a move that has no hint of coordination, Google, Twitter and Facebook, on the same day, announced they are going to cut off ad feeds to fake news sites and make it easier to report “hate” speech. While these sound good on the surface they have the potential to be abused. Especially since the definition of satire and fake news is subject to interpretation as is hate speech. The new York Times has been caught many times fabricating stories from whole cloth, since it has reported fake news, does that make the NYT a fake news site? Progressives have a long and colored history of calling any speech they disagree with, hate speech, so does that mean all content now has to go through a progressive filter, else the person posting it will be banned from expressing his or her views? The policy is a slippery slope who’s bottom is total censorship of individual speech by a cabal of political zealots. Is that really a place where we want to go?

I have written about the rise of fake and satire “news” sites on the Internet. They have the pernicious effect of both discrediting those who fall victim and of muddying the waters of political debate with falsehoods. They are usually created by progressives, intended to fool conservatives into posting true sounding but fake news articles, with the intent to discredit conservatism as hysterical. While that was the intention the election of Trump has rattled the progressive new class into thinking these fake news sites might have backfired on them. One thing progressives loathe is their dirty tricks biting them in the derriere. While I would love to drive fake news sites from the Internet, a better way would be through disseminating information of who are fake news sites, so the people themselves can avoid them. That would accomplish the stated goal without encroaching on free speech.

The term hate speech is as liquid as water. The problem of online harassment is real and pernicious. It diminishes people’s willingness to share their political views for fear of harassment and attacks. Sadly, what the new class calls hate speech however, is any speech that disagrees with their world view. I have been banned from Facebook on several occasions because a progressive disliked my opinion. Although I never personally attacked anyone nor engaged in harassment, I was subjected to constant harassment, not knowing what I would say that would get me banned fro several days from Facebook. Once I was even banned three days for saying, “God bless you,” to a progressive! Until I figured out who was using Facebook to alienate me from my freedom of speech the harassment was unending. Once I discovered where the attacks were coming from, I unfriended everyone who was a friend to him, and the harassment immediately stopped.

My experience is not unique. Progressives have since Teddy Roosevelt engaged in censorship. Gramski, Marcuse, Alinsky and the lot of progressive philosophers argued that the only thing put before the people must be progressive propaganda. All other information has to be hidden from the people, and those with a different opinion destroyed personally, lest we discover the truth. That is one of the tenets of cultural Marxism. These new rules will make it far easier for them to shut up conservatives and libertarians under the flag of stopping hate speech. How many conservative news outlets will be considered by the new class to be fake news sites and what will be the criteria? Certainly publishing fake news stories cannot be the sole criteria, else the NYT will come under that moniker, and that cannot be allowed by the new class, so will sites be banned from receiving ad revenue because they are alternative media, like The Blaze, Drudge Report, Breitbart, etc… even though they don’t post fake news? I bet they will and the censorship will only grow over time, sliding down that slippery slope further, and the further we slide down that slope the faster the slide will become.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions and the car that travels that road is fueled by good sounding rhetoric. While I agree that fake news sites should be eliminated the means must not grind away our freedoms. No one should have the power to stop another from expressing their opinion, especially using such terms as hate speech, vilification of the speaker or personal destruction for their opinion. I disagree with everything progressives stand for, but I would fight to the death to defend their right to say it, sadly progressive’s first goal is to separate me from my freedom of speech. These new rules will be used to quiet conservatives and libertarians, they will not, nor are they intended to stop personal harassment but to give progressives another tool to harass anyone they want to shut up. Stepping on that slippery slope can only lead to a loss of more freedom.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Post Election Riots

Monday, November 14th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the violence we are seeing by progressives in our major cities is a result of fear, fear that Trump will abuse his political power as their man Obama did. Obama used every aspect of government to promote his ideology and destroy anyone who disagreed with him. Even Obama’s rhetoric foretold who he is, instead of calling conservatives the opposition, Obama called people enemies, rather than dialogue Obama vilified the loyal opposition, when Tea Party groups sought tax free status the Obama IRS denied them, Obama used taxpayer money to campaign for Clinton and himself in 2012, conservatives regularly get audited and some vocal conservatives get audited every year, Obama went around congress over and over, even signing a treaty with Iran, giving them a path to nuclear weapons without going to the Senate as the Constitution requires, in short Obama used every dirty trick in Alinsky’s book to grab and hold political power, and the progressives are worried Trump will do the same to them.

Fear is a powerful motivator. A person who is afraid will walk through fire and to a progressive loss of political power is terrifying. To a progressive, government is everything, mother, father, sister and brother, government is the means to all ends and is the best bludgeon there is. Progressives see government as the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, and those who wield that political power as having the ability to decide, what is right and what is wrong. Since progressives are atheists at heart they have no concept of a greater moral code, the code the US was founded on, instead they see only a political code. Rights are, to a progressive, only those things the government allows the people to do, and if government changes it’s mind, the rights change as well. As a result, progressives feel real terror when they are not in charge, the terror that someone will use their own tactics against them.

I predicted progressives would become violent if Trump won and my prediction has been validated by progressives themselves. Daily riots are the norm in almost every major city in the US today because of progressive fear. To predict a cat will chase a mouse is no great feat and to predict progressives will become violent isn’t either. Since progressive ideology is based on hate, anger, and envy, and is implemented by government violence, it only follows progressives will become violent anytime they believe they can get away with it. Hate is their core emotion, envy is their primary motivator and anger is the horse they ride in on, making Violence the essence of progressivism.

Funded by billionaires like George Soros, these progressive organizations have the deep pockets to hire rioters, bus drivers and lawyers to foment violence and frustrate the legal establishment’s attempts to quell it. Instead of winding down, as anger usually does in time, these mobs are getting more violent and destructive. Until the racketeers have been arrested shutting off the flow of funds to the rioters, plan on seeing them get further out of hand until marshal law is imposed. Which is of course the plan, impose martial law and negate the election results. I guess if someone has enough money they are above the law, as Soros has proven over and over again, like when he beat his 19 year old girlfriend up badly, and she went to the NYC police, who turned her away! Progressives don’t believe in the rule of law because to them, it is merely the will of those in charge, and never part of a greater moral code.

The fear that progressive feel is in some ways justified. Trump has shown himself to be a man who holds grudges. Look how Trump went continued to go after Cruz after Cruz ceded victory to Trump in the primaries. This should be a warning to all progressives that Trump is a man who will exact revenge. Since Obama has created so many precedents to abuse Presidential power, for a political end, to harm enemies and help friends, all Trump need do is follow in Obama’s footsteps. There were no consequences for Obama and there probably will not be for Trump who is only doing what his predecessor did. Progressive organizations may have a much harder time getting tax free status, progressive news outlets may find themselves being audited, they might find their FBI files have been used to get a lever on them, they might find a government purge sweeps them from their beloved bureaucracy and they might discover their reliable allies in the media turning on them in fear of Trump. Indeed progressives have no one to blame but themselves.

Progressives created the environment where political power is the ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, they have devolved our system of government so that rights come from government, they used mean spirited rhetoric to slander their opponents and rather then debate a point resorted to personal attacks. They used the tactics of Saul Alinsky, who dedicated his book ‘Rules for Radicals’ to Satan. Progressives gleefully tried to destroy anyone who disagreed with their plans, personally and vindictively, in fact progressives created the very system and atmosphere they now fear, which explains the old saying, be careful what you wish for, you might just get it.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Struggle Between Liberty and Tyranny…

Thursday, November 3rd, 2016

Dear Friends,

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

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Secrets

Thursday, October 27th, 2016

Dear Friends,

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

John Pepin

When Life is Fantasy, Comeuppance is a Reality.

Monday, October 24th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we have, and are, building a world where no one need come in contact with reality at all. Fantasy is an imagined idea. Virtually all of the highest paid professions today are based on fantasy. Lawyers, bureaucrats, university professors, even accountants and business are based on fantasy. The reason I say they are based in fantasy is because they are all founded by ideas, and, (although I detest the term), in A Priori fashion. Therefore, those professions are fantasy, the imagined ideas of those who invented them. Moreover, we are ever further removed from that which keeps us alive. By removed from reality I mean, slaughtering an animal if you want mutton, digging in the ground if you want peas, weaving cloth for your clothes from the thread you wove from flax, starting a fire to stay warm, building a shelter and all the other things that must happen for a human being to live… the reality of life. The farther away from reality one lives the more one lives and works in a fantasy. So, we work in fantasy, live in fantasy, and those who most live in fantasy, are the ones who rule the world.

The law could be anything and it would be called just, indeed it has been radically different in other places and times, and is always called the height of justice by those who practice it, there and then. Meaning, law is only based on ideas, those ideas could be anything, they are therefore fantasies of what the founders believed justice. As in law the ways of structuring a government are as numerous as stars in the sky, all of them ideas of what right government were by their founders, but very few have ever produced the good fruit… of liberty, prosperity and equanimity. Since every form of government is merely an idea, or was one at sometime, they are all fantasies, the imagined ideas of the founders. While they are all fantasies… only a select few are good. The same argument goes for journalism, academics, culture, etc… All these professionals work in a fantasy.

Living in a fantasy is as easy as going to the supermarket to shop, riding down to the Cape on a day trip, turning on a light, reading a book, sleeping in a bed, flying to Paris in spring, turning on the heat on a cold winter night, flushing the toilet, turning on the bathroom fan, watching television, playing golf, riding around the course in a cart, whiling away time on a computer, etc… All of which remove us from the reality of what it takes to physically meet those needs ourselves. The less we understand about what it takes to keep us alive, reality, and the more we mindlessly rely on modernity to meet them, the more we live in fantasy. At the supermarket you can get fruit from across the planet, out of season or grown organically so as to be more in touch with the food. Flushing a toilet is far preferable to the alternative, as is the use of toilet paper, a bidet removes the user even further from the reality of what he or she is doing, enhancing the fantasy.

Living in a fantasy, distant from reality, allows foolish ideas to get merit where, when looked at in the cold light of reality are absurd, a reality most of our leaders are as far from reality as the stars are from us. It isn’t their fault, if everything you live in, work at and spend free time in becomes who you are. Ignorance of reality allows someone to believe things possible that are not, it fosters a holier than thou attitude and living in a fantasy allows one to live in a way impossible, if not for the fantasy world they live in. Sadly, those who are the least in touch with reality are the ones who rule. Bureaucrats, who’s only touch with reality, is when their daughter scrapes her knee and the nanny cleans it up, and reading about it in her report, they are the ones who decide exactly how you and I should do… everything. Lawyers, judges, professors, teachers, journalists, they all work and live in total fantasy. Their lives have no more relation to reality than pulp fiction. Add to that, every day, fewer and fewer people are in touch with reality, or grounded if you will.

Before mathematicians had quantified the physical world people believed in magic. Since they had no idea of what makes a thing fall, that electricity exists, etc… they believed in mystical forces that could be exploited to make the world as they wished it to be. They mixed potions, chanted to various deities and carried all manner of talismans upon them, but to no avail, why, because they were living in a fantasy. Their disconnection from reality created for them, a fantasy, it allowed them to believe the absurd, belief in magic. Their fantasy was based on their ignorance leading to superstition, magic, today the fantasy we live in is based on our ignorance, leading to superstition, progressivism. Only farmers, hunters, people who build things and engineer things, people who have more than a passing knowledge of what it takes to keep a human being alive, are actually grounded in reality. Like a physicist understands why a talisman will not work, a grounded person knows why a policy will not as well. The more our world moves away from reality, I fear the ever greater outcome, because we have become so mesmerized by the fantasy world we live in… is that we as a people will step off a cliff into cultural, societal and economic oblivion.

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

Our Sick Economy

Thursday, September 15th, 2016

 

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, when someone is coming down with an illness, initially the signs are slight and not too bad, later when the symptoms become worse they can be alleviated by aspirin and other medications, the worse the symptoms the stronger the medications needed to mitigate them, but when the illness hits with full force it can no longer be mitigated by medication and the body dies. Today the world economy is sick, the initial signs were ignored, so it has got to the point the strongest medication available is being used. Up to now, the symptoms have been mitigated by Keynesian principles, stupendous amounts of money printing, government debt spending, monetizing government debt, negative interest rates and central banks are even buying corporate bonds and stocks! From our own experience we can tell how bad a disease is, by the drugs used to treat it and when the morphine drip of monetizing the debt is used, pretty much all hope is lost. The chemotherapy of QE, Twist, negative interest rates etc… have lost their effectiveness and the illness has spread.

Using the right drugs to treat any disease is critical. Penicillin is wholly ineffective against malaria and quinine has no effect on strep throat. The Keynesian prescription is always spending, add to that the monetarist prescription of money printing, and you have the “universal” cure for every economic ailment. Of course not all ailments are the same. Just as strep throat is different than malaria the reasons economies falter are different. Moreover, if a single drug is used too much it looses it’s effectiveness and becomes inert, like the Keynesian prescription. Keynesian economics is the fall back position of every government since John Maynard Keynes described it. Like penicillin however, it has been used too much and for illnesses that it is unfit to cure, and so the overuse of Keynesian economics deficit spending has made our economies immune to the effects.

Some drugs only mask the symptoms of disease. Pain killers are an example of this type of drug. They mask the pain but have no effect on what is causing it. In fact, new studies have come out that show opiates actually enhance a person’s feeling of pain, if they are used too much. Monetary stimulus is this type of medication for an economy. It masks the underlying problems. Money printing makes the stock market and bond market appear to sail. That rise in stock valuation however only hides the problems. People understand the disconnect, like when an injured person looks down at his broken arm, but feels no pain because he has been given morphine. He sees the arm is broken, he knows it should hurt but the lack of pain confuses him. If another person isn’t there to render first aid, the victim will likely damage himself far more, from using it due to his lack of pain. Masking a problem only makes it worse especially if what caused the problem in the first place is not addressed.

To argue someone is doing well, even as they are on Keynesian life support and the morphine drip of money printing is being used, is to argue up is down. The media that calls itself unbiased knows if the true state of our economy were widely known, the faction they prefer would loose in a landslide, since they cannot allow that, they are pulling out all the stops to argue up is down. The media cherry pick data, and polish it before they deliver it to us, protecting their favored faction. The more they get caught manipulating data the more they do it. Like a witch doctor, his dancing and waiving a chicken leg over someone with cancer might be entertaining and have a placebo effect, in the end it will have no effect on the outcome, only possibly the duration.

Regulation is like poison, in small enough amounts it has no great harm and can even be beneficial in some cases, too much and it becomes toxic and perhaps even deadly. Our governments have been introducing regulatory poison into our economy since time immemorial. Since the effect of poison is to create illness where there otherwise would be none, the elite need to mask the symptoms of the illness they have created by regulation, crony capitalism, and corruption, even as they inject ever larger doses and more deadly poisons into our economy. The way to save a person who has been poisoned is first to stop poisoning her and then get the poison out her system, by chelation or by introducing an antivenin.

What we have is a sick economy… it has been sick for many decades and the illness has been metastasized by Obama’s policies. We have witch doctors, the media that calls itself unbiased dancing and waiving a dismembered chicken leg giving false hope, there are “doctors” who have only read one book and their only tool is a butter knife, performing open heart surgery, as we are being plied with heroine to mitigate the pain, and the patient dies a slow and lingering death. Our economy has been poisoned by government actions and so cannot recover until the right medications are used in the right amounts. Just as heroine will not heal a broken leg and can lead to the worsening of it by continuing to use it, masking our economic problems with money printing only makes them worse, because there is no incentive to stop poisoning our economy. We have progressed beyond the initial stages where lethargy, slight pain and muscle aches… through the open sores, crushing pain and high fever to being hospitalized in intensive care. Isn’t it time to stop poisoning our economy and use different medications?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Political Evolution

Monday, September 12th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we are experiencing the evolution of our republics, in their democratic elements as well as the aristocratic and monarchic. No evolution comes without demand, as movement requires as a precedent, force. This evolution is driven by the elite who have for a very long time now, only served their own narrow self interests rather than the interests of society, civilization and humanity. Good government serves the interests of all equally; bad government serves those who govern. Bad government generates the demand for change required for a government to evolve or collapse. When those who serve government serve themselves first and best they create incentive for change. In the complex systems, that exists in every manifestation of humanity, what change could emerge is unknowable. One thing that is certain, that change will be painful, especially for those unprepared.

In the US the two party system has become two teams in the same league. They both stand for exactly the same thing, totalitarian government, for the benefit of the people to be sure, the only contention is who can run that totalitarian government best? Now with the presidential race between a self serving, sociopathic, incorrigible liar, who is unable to follow any rules, law or regulations whatsoever and a self serving, egoistic, self described crony, who has only become religious last week, is learning about our Constitution as we speak and knows only one thing… his presidency will be huge. Obama has implemented the Cloward and Pivon plan to collapse the US and, it would appear, his Presidency has been to that end all along.

Europe with their parliamentary system has dozens of political parties but has effectively outlawed any party that stands for liberty. Both on the right and left they both agree, government should be tyrannical and law arbitrarily applied, they disagree if society should be destroyed immediately, so the world government can be ushered in or if European socialism should be confined to Europeans. Read the platforms of any party and they read like a socialist list of votes to buy. Pandering to this or that faction, unless they seek liberty, then they are a pariah.

We have woken up to the game even as the last quarter is upon us. Perhaps not too late, the democratization of information made possible by the internet, has reduced the gate keepers to babbling fools, still mesmerized by their past success. We now see them for who they are, and every day as more people wake up to it, the demand for actual representation rather than misrepresentation grows across Europe and the US. The demand for change is forcing evolution on all of us, even the elite. They may believe themselves in the catbird’s seat, European civilization is facing existential threat from unlimited Muslim immigration, which would collapse the system allowing the Fabians to rebuild it in the image they see as better. The US two party system is showing is slip for the people to see and the Cloward and Pivon strategy is in full execution. Change is coming, whether that change is good or bad remains to be seen, but change becomes inevitable once the people believe their own eyes, that the emperor is naked. Better prepare for rough times…

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Input Plus Reaction Equal Outcome

Thursday, September 8th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… outcome is always the result of an input plus a reaction. This can be applied to many situations, violence for example, more particularly, when violence is warned of by the elite. The elite, by definition, are those willing to visit violence on another, to force their will on that other. Today the elite couch their threats by the sophist claim the people will become violent. Notice that lately, and in increasing amounts, the elite are warning of violence coming from the people, citizens, when the policies of the elite have become so onerous, they can no longer be stood by just right minded human hearted beings. It is the will of the people, to stop the globalization of government, that is diametrically opposed to the will of the elite, and that insult must be met with violence. As is always the case, violence is perpetrated by those who seek more government power and avoided by those who seek less. That is the rub, the elite input absurdity upon absurdity on the people, then waiting for the backlash so they can slam down and impose their will… to insure “security.”

The elite today have realized the people are catching on. The internet has democratized the flow of information, so that everyone has at their fingers information about everything that is going on, both filtered and unfiltered. Added to that the ability to disseminate that information via social media has castrated the gate keepers. The actions of the elite are available for everyone to see, and knowledge is power in that it tempers the indignation, leading to better judgment. The media that calls itself unbiased used to have as it’s chief worry that people would see them as biased, today that fear has been realized and only those willingly deluded believe a word of them. So the elite have lost their ability to control public opinion by the control of the media

Have you ever noticed, virtually all the political violence perpetrated on humanity since Adam ate the apple, has been by those seeking more government power? No time in history has this been more true than today. Islamists use violence to impose Sharia on non Muslims, Marxists use violence to impose socialism on those who don’t want it and governments use violence to impose laws that benefit a politically favored faction, at the cost to the rest of society. The first people charged by the progressive controlled media, is a right winger, like the Boston Marathon Bombing. That was initially blamed on an anti tax movement because it fell on tax day, but in fact it was an Islamist who sought to impose Sharia on non Muslims.

Now that the elite have created a mess in the Middle East and North Africa with their Arab Spring, the flood of immigrants who loathe Christians and Christianity are inundating Europe. The natural uptick in crime and rape is as predictable as it was planned. The reaction of people who have been forced to tolerate such violence, abuse and outright loathing in their own homes, is just as predictable. Even when the media that calls itself unbiased sell a narrative counter to reality, reality gets out, via the internet. The radical influx of people antithetical to the culture of Europe is abetted by their prodigious birth rates. Even the slowest European must be able to see the future for their children, and so they either react or go quietly into the night.

The idiotic unheard of money printing, and monetizing anything they can see central banks, have created a situation that can only end in an epic economic bubble burst during a recession. Adding trillions to their balance sheets for what has amounted to zero actual economic growth, punishing savers with zero percent interest on their savings thus disincentivizing saving, has put central banks the world over in a dilemma. When the bubble they knowingly inflated, to protect their progressive president from the results of his flagship policy, the affordable care act, pops, they will not be able to lower interest rate much below zero without causing a run on banks so they will be stuck, their own policies feeding back into a recessionary cycle, driving it ever lower. There is not a person among us who doesn’t feel this, even if they are not able to put it into words.

We have an input, the social and economic upheaval we are at the cusp of experiencing due to the corruption of the elite, and we have our reaction… that will decide the outcome. Should we react, as the elite want, with violence? No, that would be playing into the hands of the elite. They desire a violent reaction from us more than a husband his new wife. We know we are being pushed and many feel it is near time to push back, but I tell you, push with letters to your “representatives” and newspapers, stop voting for the establishment candidate, look at the truth rather than the propaganda, even create a political party that stands for less government. Our reaction to the provocations of the elite have to be counter to what they seek else we are pawns in the game of our own demise.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Jobs, Wages and Government Intervention

Thursday, August 25th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, take the most horrible, filthiest and degrading job that must be done, pay enough and people will climb over each other to do it for you. On the other hand, one could use the power of government to coerce someone to do it, for nothing. Clearly, the one is human hearted the other hard hearted, the first generous the second greedy, and to pay a wage befitting the job shows respect while using violence to coerce shows disrespect. I am amazed then, that those who follow the second philosophy are seen as more compassionate and humane, and those who follow the first are viewed as selfish and oppressive? Perhaps that warping of logic is a means to an end?

Since the first cave man hired another to help clean hides there has been a give and take relationship between employees and employers. Both seeking to get the most for the least. The employee wants the highest wages for the least work she can get and the employer wants the most work for the least pay. At various times both have exploited government power to force the other into a less desirable position. That strategy however depends on the political faction in power. Without government intercession the wage to labor rate would always eventually be fair. Not fair only to workers, or fair only to the bourgeois, but fair to everyone. Government cannot keep out of the relationship between labor and employer however.

Politician’s interests are harmed when there is a level playing field. The people, either as employer or employee, will not have need for the services of government when there is equilibrium, and as everyone who has grown up in a market system knows, where there are no customers there is no business. Fortunately for politicians, their predecessors have put in place a myriad of rules and regulations altering the balance of power. Those past intercessions have so warped the relationship for so long everyone has got used to it. All a politician need do is pander to one of the two factions and a steady flow of campaign revenue and political backing come with that choice. That is why illegal immigration is encouraged, it drives down wages for Americans, while at the same time labor unions get special laws passed to help their cause, to drive up wages. Both policies backed by both factions.

Marx wrote passionately about the alienation of work. That some jobs are terrible and so people shouldn’t be forced to do them by their ever gnawing stomachs. He called it unfair that people had to do work that alienated themselves from themselves or their higher selves. All sounding, of course, humane and compassionate. What Marx didn’t address however was the fact someone has to do those jobs that are alienating. Septic systems have to be maintained, barns need to be cleaned and dishes need to be done, there are far worse jobs that need doing as well, if no one does them they will not get done. The answer from communists is to force those who have no political favor to do those alienating jobs by use of violence. Which makes perfect sense to a sociopath or psychopath who seeks to appear to have empathy.

Were government to stay out of the relationship between labor and employer, the wage rate would settle to a fair rate, and working conditions would steadily improve. Dirty jobs would be paid at a rate sufficient to get people to do them, there would be more jobs due to lessening of the drag effect regulation has on job creation, which would drive up the cost of labor due to the removal of slack from the labor force, the cost of labor would be more in line with the strata of… difficulty, education required and supply/demand for each job. Why should a lawyer make one hundred times more than a sewer repairman? Especially when there is a glut of people wanting, able and educated sufficiently to be a lawyer, and there is a dearth of people sufficiently able, knowledgeable and willing to repair sewers? Government intervention in the employee employer relationship warps the wage rate, otherwise both political faction’s would suffer a loss in power, that’s what drives it. The same faction in control of the media sets the societal norm. They decide what is called tolerance, kind and compassionate and what is called intolerance, hate, bigotry and fascist, regardless of reality. That is why the tolerant are called intolerant, the intolerant called misunderstood, the fair called unfair, the violent called peaceful, victims called occupiers and the kind called haters, it serves the faction in control’s… interests.

Sincerely,

John Pepin