Posts Tagged ‘Law’

Hate Filled Progressives

Thursday, September 4th, 2014

 

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, progressives are the very people they purport to hate, which points to the reason for their self loathing. Any time a conservative brings up the lack of school shootings, the lower crime rate, the better work ethic of the past, progressives claim the conservative really wants to return to slavery, Jim Crow, segregation, robber barons and rolling back woman’s suffrage. Of course that is the old tried and true method of spurious argumentation, by putting words in someone’s mouth they didn’t utter or believe, and argue against those words. It also points out that what the progressives claim to hate, bigotry, intolerance, the wealthy, the US and racism, is just part of a meme. Let’s call it the progressive hate meme. This meme plays out in the minds of progressives constantly and spreads like influenza. Hate however, is the most counter productive means to solve any problem, it is corrosive to the humanity of the hater and the person hated.

 

Bigotry is one of the things progressives rail about the most. They really hate bigots. A progressive will scream red faced all day about how bigoted everyone in the Tea Party is. Progressives love to go on and on how terrible it is that law enforcement would profile people, anyone who puts people in a box, they argue, is a bigot and therefore a bad person. Yet progressives put everyone in a box! They separate us into groups and factions then pit us against each other. Claiming everyone in an arbitrary grouping has the exact same qualities is the very definition of a bigot.

 

Progressives cannot tolerate intolerance. They are quick to point out that someone who they disagree with is an intolerant hater, and so the “hater” should have their free speech curtailed, so they don’t lead others astray. Progressives love to use epithets like intolerance to shut down debate they cannot win. They will go to the utmost extreme to get a Koresh removed from a park or a cross taken down from a hill, because it is so intolerable to them, they simply cannot tolerate Christian symbols in the open. A progressive will move heaven and Earth to get a CEO who made a donation to a charity or political campaign they disagree with fired, because any other perspective than the progressive’s, cannot be tolerated.

 

Oh boy do progressive hate the rich! Well, not the already rich, but people trying to get rich. The propaganda against the “rich” is as hostile as it is sophist. Those uber rich who support progressive causes are considered the “good” rich and those very few who support our Constitution are the “bad” rich. What is always lost on the progressive, is that they are mostly members of the New Class and as such, make up 90% the top 10% on the wealth scale. George Soros gives billions to the Tides foundation and the Center for American Progress, among many others, he has bankrupted whole nations resulting in famine, economic collapse and want, and never gets attacked for his donations in the unbiased media… but the Koch brothers are demonized, even in the halls of power, for favoring our Constitution.

 

Progressives constantly rail about inequality. They demand everyone be equal, well, not equal so much as have the same stuff, except for them. Like, Obama eats the best food but begrudges it for our children and us, they spend millions of our tax dollars on vacations but tell us to cut back, the hypocrisy they show is astounding. A progressive sees nothing wrong with going to a $10,000.00 a plate dinner, to raise funds for another progressive who will stomp down inequality with regulation, while never donating a single cent to charity.

 

Racism is one of the progressive’s biggest bug bears. They hate Tea party members, ostensibly because all Tea party members are racists, which is of course a bigoted way of thinking. Even a cursory examination of progressive rhetoric shows who the real racists are. Progressives claim all white people are racists. You know, those bitter clingers, clinging to “their” guns and religion, in other words, typical white people.

 

If we look back at history and the progressive heroes the loop closes. Margaret Sanger so hated African Americans she started Planned Parenthood to exterminate them. The first ever showing of “The Rise of a Nation” was played in Woodrow Wilson’s white house! Speaking of the progressive Wilson, he also penned many letters and articles explaining why women are inferior to men, the attributes of the “lesser races” among other topics modern progressives claim to hate. But they love him. Eugenics, as practiced by Hitler, was based on the progressive eugenics movement in the US. The progressive movement metastasizes every few decades and destroys our economy, standard of living, gins up hatred and civil unrest, the results of their policies are always so bad they destroy the progressive name, so the movement goes underground, rebranding themselves as “liberals,” until people who remember what the progressives stand for are all dead. Then they come back, hating everything they stand, (stood) for, and tricking another generation into thinking they are human hearted, when nothing could be further from the truth. Progressives truly are the very people they claim to hate and have always been. The really scary thing is… both political parties in the US are run by self loathing progressives.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

 

 

Evil Always Defeats Itself

Monday, September 1st, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the rise of ISIS will result in the deaths of perhaps millions of human beings, but in the end, it will be their own evil that defeats them. Great evil always defeats itself because it confuses human suffering with victory. The suffering of other human beings is always more important to those who serve Lucifer than anything else. Oh, they might lie to themselves and even believe their own lies, but in the end it is not power, righteousness or to serve God that evil people like ISIS do what they do, it is a love of inflicting human suffering that is their primary motivator, and that motivation has it roots in hate. Hatred is so powerful an emotion it can drive people to do the most despicable things without a hint of remorse. In the next few years when our governments do nothing of any real consequence to stop ISIS from their goal of a global Caliphate, where only Muslims are allowed to live, we must keep in mind that even without intervention of government, armies or even God, ISIS will be defeated, due entirely to their evil nature. Evil always has within it the seeds of it’s own destruction.

 

There is no better example in history than the Second World War. Hitler and the Nazis were evil. Evil fueled by hate was their primary motivator. Hate of the Jews, Gypsies and all non Aryans was the Nazis bread and butter. The Nazis reveled in slaughter. The war was ostensibly a means to power but in reality is was a way to round up more people to feed into the meat grinder. All other purposes came second to the slaughter.

 

In September 1941 the Nazi war machine was on the verge of victory. They had taken almost all of European Russia and were banging at the doors of Leningrad, Moscow and the Caucuses. When winter fell on the German troops they had plenty of winter gear but it was in Germany. OKW had thought the war would be over before winter and so the winter clothes and gear sat in Berlin. This is where priorities came to the front. The Nazis had enough trains to get the winter gear to their troops in plenty of time, but instead, those trains were used to bring Jews and Gypsies to the death camps. Meanwhile the flower of German youth froze to death in the frozen wastes of Russia.

 

Later in the war, in 1943 Germany was worried about Hungary flipping and signing a separate peace with Russia, as Romania had a month earlier, so Nazi Germany sponsored a coup. The coup brought loyal Nazis to power in Hungary. The Hungarian government had, until that point, been sheltering the Jews from deportation to the death camps, but the moment loyal Nazis took power they started rounding up Jews for extermination. Meanwhile Army Group Center was facing imminent collapse. They badly needed ammunition and supplies, but the German rail system was diverted from the war effort again to ship Jews who had escaped the campaign of extermination, to the death camps. The result was that Army Group Center collapsed creating a hole the Russian army could simply drive to Berlin through.

 

The evil empire, the Soviet Union, was also defeated by their own evil. Instead of building up their industry to improve the lot of people, the Soviet Union built a war machine, in the absence of war. Stalin the despot, would sign the execution papers for thousands of people a day, then watch his favorite swashbuckler. Millions were executed, sent to forced reeducation camps, tortured, shipped to Siberia as slave labor, whole races faced ethnic cleansing and suffering was universal among the people, while splendid luxury was the bailiwick of the Communist elite. The whole thing came crashing down because of the economic, social and cultural stresses such a system must build up.

 

ISIS is no different. The seeds of their destruction lay in their evil. How many have they murdered that otherwise would have helped them like the Nazis did in Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia? Eventually they will divert essential war supplies to some evil end or turn on their allies just as the Nazis did. Even if they win and subject the entire world to tyranny their empire will not last a decade. The stresses such a system create will put an end to that perverted structure. Sadly, not until millions or maybe even billions of our fellow human beings have died horribly, will ISIS’ own evil defeat them. That is the cost to good people who allow evil to grow, and that is exactly what we have done. By voting in governments that not only allowed it to grow, but nurtured it for their own evil ends… we have become our own executioners.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Capitalist Security System and a Zero Unit Cost of Labor

Monday, August 18th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, another thing most countries could do to improve their economy, would be to establish a Capitalist Security System (CSS). Such a system would be completely different than the typical social(ist) security system (SSS) we have now. Some of the ways they differ are, CSS would invest and add to the stock of capital available for growth; while SSS steals from the capital stock, CSS would add to generational wealth; while SSS steals from generational wealth, CSS gives every man woman and child a stake in society; while SSS gives people a stake in more powerful government, to take the taxes needed, etc… If a country redirected the funds now going into all the SSS in that country were instead turned to a CSS, that nation’s economy would reap huge rewards, incentive wise, in productivity and capital available for new companies. Everyone would benefit with each successive generation reaping ever larger rewards while contributing to the economic success of their countries.

 

We all know how SSS works but I’ll explain it for those who might not be sure.The Social(ist) Security System is a system, where the government takes money from those young enough to work and the businesses that hire them, then gives some of that money to those who have reached an age deemed too old to work. The money goes through various bureaus of government and some of the money stops there to fund those bureaus. Some of the money gets caught in the sieve of corruption and conniving that surrounds every government bureaucracy and stops there funding corruption. The rest gets to those on government pension. The system is expensive because so many hands are in it, it fuels corruption with government money, it is unsustainable, it takes capital from producers and redistributes it to non producers… among many other problems.

 

A CSS would operate very differently. A Capitalist Security System would not invest in government’s power, as does typical social security, Capitalist Social Security would instead invest in the power of the market through dividend paying stocks. Initial funding would be through legally required investment of a portion of one’s income, or perhaps a .5% tax on consumption, (Sales tax). It would be run by an algorithm that buys dividend paying stocks the world over based on several criteria, one of which would be longevity of the business model and of dividend history. The fund would grow by reinvesting the dividends and selling stocks that under perform via dividends. Once the first generation reached the requisite age, then it would pay out 50% of the dividends to the retirees and reinvest the other half. A person’s portion of the income stream from the fund would transfer to their heirs upon their death as the pensioner see fit. The heir could then start receiving payment immediately or allow their portion to grow and get larger payments later, say when they retire.

 

It would probably be administered by a bureaucracy in government, but it doesn’t need to, it could be administered by some financial firm, the operation of the CSS fund being awarded by competitive bid based on the firm’s fees. There would have to be special tax exemptions for the fund. One tax exemption would be to stop the double taxation of dividend income. Either tax the company or the investor, not both. In the case of CSS the company would pay the income tax, (if there is one) and the fund would face no tax penalty. The investor should not be taxed on the income he or she gets out of the fund, since the corporation already did, and the fund itself is just an agent of the investor. In the case of the CSS fund the investors would be everyone.

 

The economic advantages should be clear for anyone to see. One would be the strong incentive for companies to reinvest in plant equipment and training. Else they run the risk of being sold by the CSS fund which would be the kiss of death to a company’s stock price. The huge fluctuations in the stock market would be diminished due to the fact the CSS fund wouldn’t sell it’s stocks in a panic, the incentive for companies under such a system would be to pay dividends as well as grow the company. Another advantage would be that pay for corporation bigwigs would face downward pressure, because if too much is sucked off today the power of shareholders to demand more of the company’s profits given to them as dividends is far too diluted by various factors, but if a giant fund such as the CSS showed displeasure at the high pay of a CEO the firm would toe the line. Perhaps most importantly, in the real world, SSS must eventually fail, because government will eventually run out of other people’s money to take, but a CSS would be self sustaining and grow organically. The list of economic advantages is endless for a Capitalist Social Security System.

 

With human like robots coming on the scene sooner than people realize, (20-40 years) this will be a phenomenon that will eventually drive the unit cost of labor to zero. A zero cost of labor will usher in a completely new paradigm for humanity. Maybe for the better and maybe for the worse but it will be different than anything that has come before. For a leader in government to see this and envision a means to stave off the possible starving masses, that such a situation could give rise to, shows vision. A Capitalist Social Security System could be just such a means to keep future generations, who will have lost the ability to sell their labor in the open market for wages, a means of sustenance. A means of sustenance that will grow with each generation. Like I said, “ another thing most countries could do to improve their economy, would be to establish a Capitalist Security System.”

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

One Step To Improve the Economy

Monday, August 11th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, one simple thing all governments could do to improve their economies, would be to create a panel, that would go over the regulations and laws then make an annual list of regulations and or laws that are outdated, redundant, harmful, pernicious etc… The legislative branch would then see to it that these regulations and or laws would be removed from the books. In this way any country could at least grab the low hanging fruit of economic improvement. There is not a country on Earth that would not benefit economically from this approach.

 

Regulations are the nemesis of economic expansion. While a standard facilitates market transactions, regulations are designed to give an economically favored group a leg up, in an other wise free market transaction. Since they give an economically favored group special treatment, they both skew the market, warping it and creating bubbles, and they create pernicious incentives. Pernicious incentives like, it being more economically beneficial to seek political favor than, to provide a good product at a low cost. Regulations undermine economic expansion in other ways as well.

 

Typically the favored economic group are older more established firms. Regulations raise the cost of entrance and extend the time line where a business operates in the red before it starts making money. This allows older more established firms to make higher profits and pay for political favor. Even a seemingly innocuous regulation like requiring a furniture store to have a changing table in their bathrooms, benefits older firms, they have the monetary cushion to absorb the cost, but new firms might be running in the red to hopefully get to profitability, so the extra cost might be the tipping point.

 

Now… many will say, oh well, so sad… but may I put this to you? As I have explained before in prior articles, small entrepreneurial businesses are the engines of growth in a market based economy, so when government regulations hinder the formation and operation of entrepreneurial companies, that regulation or law directly lowers the standard of living for that generation… and that lowering is magnified over later generations due to the effect of compounded growth!

 

Take the negative effects I have outlined and multiply them by the thousands of regulations on the books of every country on Earth, if they were combed of nits, a huge source of friction to the economic machine that is the market system would be removed. Such a panel, given sufficient funds and prestige, who’s ideas were followed through on… actually erasing the regulations and laws the panel suggested, would reward such wise governance with economic success. There would be push back, from those elite who’s sacred cows go on the chopping block, but I’ve heard somewhere, sacred cows make the best hamburger.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

The New Class and Our Civilization’s Suicide

Wednesday, August 6th, 2014

 

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the West is committing civilization suicide. Not any different than a man who throws himself off the top of a high building, shoots himself or immolate herself. Not everyone agrees we should do this, but those in the new class, the political elite, believe we will be able to fly once we are airborne, so are determined to jump… while the rest of us are doing our best to hold them back. The same debate goes through the mind of someone who is on the ledge. The signs of our impending suicide are all around us. Pick up and read any newspaper and the intention of the ruling class becomes obvious. From the US’ open borders to our lawless government, the writing is there for us all to see, if we would only look. Some, mostly members of the new class and the peasantry, (traditional allies in any communist take over), are fully on board with our destruction, while others, the middle class, working class and some in the new class, are trying as hard as we can to save us all. The trouble is, those who seek the destruction of our culture, society and economic system, are the ones who wield political power, run the media and direct our culture, while those of us who want to preserve those things may be the majority, but our political power is so diffuse it is rendered irrelevant.

 

Why would the new class and modern peasantry want to destroy the greatest wealth creation machine the world has ever known? To answer that we need to plumb the subconscious of the new class. The new class is trained and indoctrinated in our universities and colleges. The higher a professor gets in academia the more they are full blown Marxists and anarchists. That is not my contention, it is the premise of Alvin Gouldner’s book, The Future of Intellectuals and the Rise of the New Class. As a result of their political bent, they detest the west and everything the west stands for, the market system, limited government, wealth, Christianity and people of European descent, (even though most of them are wealthy, claim to be liberal and are of European descent). In short… hate and jealousy are their primary motivating emotions. So when students show up to get an education, they are instead indoctrinated by a curriculum of anti American propaganda, Marxist indoctrination and a ludicrous world view, where everything white people have done is evil and everything anyone else has done is good. If there is any one characteristic of the progressive new class’ mindset, it is their blind hatred of the west.

 

Since the new class primary motivation is righteous hatred of the west and therefore themselves, they feel justified in their intentions to rid the world of such bad things as limited government, the free market and the wealth capitalism bestows on humanity. They justify their actions like any other criminal would, by holding that other people are less than human, while they themselves stand above the hoi polloi and are “enlightened.” They reason that if only they could get rid of the evils in the world, as they see them, there would be universal peace, prosperity would sweep the world, the lion would lay with the lamb and justice would finally be born. Of course, to usher in this new era of utopia requires as a prerequisite, the total destruction of the west and all it stands for.

 

The only way to stop this madness is to take back our schools, colleges and universities, from Marxists, anarchists and all those who detest the west. Begin teaching our children and young adults the truth, that yes, the west has done bad things but there is not a people, civilization or society that has not. That what makes western culture, society and economy so noteworthy, is the good it has bestowed on the human race… prosperity to anyone willing to work and take chances, class mobility, liberty of the individual brought about by limited government, an increase in the standard of living of the average person the world has never seen before, the near eradication of ancient plagues like small pox, polio and measles, and that the United States is the only nation in the history of humanity, that has been attacked by another country, successfully defended itself conquering the attacker, and instead of annexing it, gave the people of the attacking country their liberty.

 

Like a person who so detests themselves they seek to take their own life, the new class clearly seeks civilization suicide. To that end they pervert our culture, ignore the rule of law (unless it furthers their agenda), undermine the US Constitution in every way, destroy the market system with crony capitalism, taxes and regulation, punish work and reward indigence, use the power of the government purse to break up the traditional family unit (rendering fathers irrelevant), promote anything that lowers human beings to mere beasts, wage a global war on Christianity, side with those who openly call for the genocide of the Jews, thin out the populations of whole European countries with people who also loathe the west… and change our history and traditions to suit their wants. The Georgia Guide stones show their plan more clearly than I ever could in such a short article. In their hate filled minds, they have no concept that if they succeed, humanity will enter another thousand year dark age with all that implies, but when a mind is blinded with loathing and hatred, it becomes immune to logic and reason. Like the fool who so detests himself, they douse themselves with gasoline and set themselves ablaze, immediately regretting what seemed like a good idea at the time, but once that match is lit… it is too late.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

 

 

The Immorality of Presumption

Wednesday, July 16th, 2014

 

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, most if not all the evils visited on humanity, have been as a direct result of presumption. Someone presumes to know what is best for another, society or humanity and acts according to their prescription of their idea of “right.” Of course, their remedy is never for themselves or their family, it is always for others to pay the price for the presumer’s cure. Behind such presumption lay great hubris. When someone believes he or she is so much more intelligent, wise and beneficent than others, is the path to presumption. Recognizing hubristically fueled presumption as a source for evil in our world, is the first step to solving those evils, so that no one ever has to suffer under the presumption of arrogance again.

 

So much of what is wrong with this world, crimes against humanity for instance, are from those who presume to know what is best. From the Eugenics movement to slavery, those who have presumed to know what is best have done great evil, often in a perverted sense of justice. As I have explained before in past articles, justice can be summed up by the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” No one who was or is a advocate for eugenics would sterilize themselves, their solution is for others, since by their selfish standards, they are the best and brightest. This shows the absolute lack of justice in their actions, since doing something to another that the actor would never allow done to themselves, is in direct contravention of the golden rule.

 

Presumption is the basis for civil crime as well. The bank robber presumes to have the right to the funds of others, because they believe their needs and wants trump those of others, since he or she sees his or her own wants and needs close at hand, while they see the needs and wants of others at a distance. Therefore they presume their need for immediate wealth should come before the needs and wants of those people who earned the money by the sweat of their brow. This same logic applies to those who steal from the wealthy. Even speeding is based in hubris and presumption that the speeder is such a good driver they need not follow the speed limit. No matter what crime you use for an example it is founded in presumption and presumption is rooted in hubris.

 

Politicians are the greatest hubristic presumers there are especially progressive politicians. They presume that because they won a beauty contest, they have the democratically bestowed right to visit evils on others, while they themselves would be deeply offended if they were yoked with those same evils. This is one reason why politicians never hold themselves to their own laws. The biggest advocates for tax increases universally cheat on theirs and when they get caught there are never consequences. This is why politicians whittle away at any restraint there is on their power, because they arrogantly presume they are above any foolish Constitutional limits on their actions. Their hubristic argument usually goes, “Aren’t they the representatives of the people?” While they make this presumptuous contention they violate the golden rule without a thought.

 

Religions also fall prey to presumption. Those who are rabid followers of this or that religion presume they will go to heaven and no one else will. Atheists presume that even though they undermine the religion of others by the spurious worship of science, if they are wrong, they will go to heaven anyway. When one religious community attacks another it is presumption that is the “moral” underpinnings of their actions. Truth told, religion should be the place where presumption is the least, yet it is often where people presume the most, because all saintly religions have the golden rule as their foundation, and the golden rule is the opposite of hubris and presumption.

 

Presumption provides those who would visit the most heinous crimes against humanity cover for their hubristic egoism. To look at a fellow human being, and presume that the other should be sterilized because they are “mentally deficient” by the observer’s arbitrary standard, to be so arrogant one enslaves another, to have such a lack of a moral compass that someone kills another because they disagree with that person’s religious belief, or any of a thousand other presumptions that give people free reign to do what they arrogantly believe is “right,” is always based on presumption fueled by hubris. Moreover, that the hubristic presumer never subjects him or herself to their own remedy, is a naked violation of the golden rule and therefore is the definition of injustice, proves the hubris and presumption better than a thousand pages written on the subject. Yes, we as members of the human race need to recognize this predilection of ours to presume what is best for another, and learn to mind our own business, else we are the the villains in our own story.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

 

 

The Arab Israeli Conflict

Sunday, July 13th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, no matter where you stand on the Arab Israeli conflict you have to agree on one thing, If the Arabs put down their weapons, there would be peace, and if the Israelis put down their weapons… there would be genocide. That one fact is plain as day but is never spoken aloud, except in Arabic, it is only given a nudge nudge wink wink by the UN. That most of the world’s governments are on the Arab’s side, shows that most of the people in governments around the world, support and foster genocide. There can be no other conclusion. This is the unspoken truth behind the Arab Israeli conflict.

 

The argument that Israel was the land of the Palestinians and the Israelis pushed them out is begging the question. How were the Jews expelled from Israel in the first place? How did the Middle East go from an entirely Christian region to an entirely Muslim region? How did the world’s borders get drawn and how is it that America is no longer American Indian lands? The evil history of the human race is one of conquest and usurpation. The argument that the Israelis are occupiers is every bit as relevant as to argue Europe should give back all it’s lands to the original hunter gatherers who the farmers pushed out.

 

Even the Koran acknowledges that Israel is the historic homeland of the Jews. The Christian Bible, the Jewish Torah and Talmud, as well as the Koran all agree, God gave Israel to the Jewish people.

There are Egyptian steels that record Israel was the land of the Jews. Roman historical documents from the era tell of the Jews being dispersed from Israel by Roman legions. Archeological evidence is piling up proving that the Jewish people did indeed live and rule the land of Israel, and so, as a matter of primary ownership, the postage stamp of land we are talking about, and make no mistake, it is nothing more than a tiny dot of formerly arid land, is the historic home of the Jewish people.

 

Imagine a small Jewish city on the outskirts of Yemen randomly firing rockets at the Yemenite population while chanting “Death to Yemen!”. How do you suppose the government of Yemen would respond? How would any Islamic state respond to a Jewish, Hindi, Buddhist or Christian enclave, shooting rockets at them while calling for their extermination? How would the UN respond? Would the UN criticize the Islamic state for defending it’s citizens? No, of course not. What if the Palestinians win and wipe the Jews from the face of the Earth? How would the world respond? When Hitler was asked, what will history record about us if we exterminate the Jews? Hitler responded, “Who remembers the Armenians?!” Well, I ask you, does anyone remember the Armenians? Do you?

 

Moreover, does anyone in their right mind believe for a moment that if Israel were wiped from the map, and every Jew on the planet murdered, there would be peace? Only a fool of the highest order would fall for that scam. No, the fact is, if Israel were wiped away, those that did it would be emboldened to continue their crusade across the world. World war would inevitably result with all the horror, violence and terror that would entail, but every single one of us would experience it. To hate someone who is different, is an unfortunate part of the human condition, but to hate so much that one would commit genocide, must be inculcated from an early age.

 

Since everyone knows, but dare not speak the truth, that the goal of Hamas, Hezbollah and every other terrorist organization, and sadly, many governments Islamic and secular, is to kill every Jew on the planet, it is clear that anyone who supports that genocidal movement, must also support the genocide it calls for. But unlike a tree that falls in the forest when no one is around, there will be millions of voices proclaiming the crime, millions of villains who’s souls will be blackened by their villainy and millions of bystanders who will have abetted the slaughter. Imagine having your soul tainted by genocide when you stand before God almighty? How would you answer that damning charge? Pascal’s wager would be a truly stupid bet at that point… wouldn’t it?

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

The Logic of Liberty

Wednesday, July 2nd, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, chaotic liberty is the single best means to societal prosperity, as controlled dependence is the best means to universal poverty. This is true not only in an economic sense but in humanistic terms as well. When people live in liberty, we must self control and by doing so we focus our minds, strengthen our spirit and become self reliant, chaotic liberty makes us more human. It is in a focused mind, spirituality and self reliance that we gain the economic advantages of liberty. Controlled dependence dulls the mind, crushes the spirit and destroys self reliance, in short controlled dependence reduces human beings to mere selfish animals. Human heartedness grows in liberty and shrinks in dependence. This is so obvious it is sad that government should seek to put people into a state of dependence while eliminating liberty. Because by doing so, it is equally as clear that diminishing humanity to a herd of egoistic animals, that see their fellows as a means instead of an end in themselves, government undermines the very argument for government.

 

That is not to say Chaos is liberty or that control is dependence, it is to say that some level of personal chaos is requisite for liberty and dependence breeds people who must be controlled. If a people who have become dependent are thrust into a state of liberty, chaos, violence and poverty will immediately result. If a different people who have become used to liberty are forced into dependence there is a faux sense of control. In a state of liberty, people self control and are do not need a heavy handed government to force them to be virtuous, but where people are dependent, people do need a tyrannical government, to enforce civil equanimity. The one is because the people self regulate and the other because people have lost the ability to self regulate.

 

When people are used to living in liberty we must control our emotions, actions and thoughts. When living in a state of liberty, everyone is at liberty, and so disturbing the civil weal is counter productive. People learn this lesson at an early age when they live in liberty. Laws need not be draconian to keep people from each others throats because people have learned to be self controlled. The society becomes more mature, civil and polite. Moreover, when people are self controlled and at liberty, it is the nature of the human being to seek to better him or herself. As each improving their situation all of society is economically improved.

 

Those poor shells of human beings that have become used to living in dependence never grow out of childhood. They become disconnected from the greater society and demand their wants and needs be met by someone else. Since the very definition of dependence is to be dependent on someone else, the fruits of another’s labor, for everything, so dependent people see others as a means to their own ends, instead of ends in themselves. To put it another way, people who have become used to being dependent see others as things and not as human beings. It is much easier to steal from a thing, the morality of killing a thing is irrelevant and you don’t open the door for a thing that is handicapped. Civility in society is destroyed and all that matters is instant gratification. This shows that controlled dependence is the path to chaos while chaotic liberty is the path to civilization.

 

How to change people who have become used to controlled dependence into self controlled, spiritual, civil and focused human beings? Obviously if liberty were thrust upon them they would devolve to a state of anarchy. We have seen this many times in history. A people get liberated, not by their own action, and the entire society falls into violence, chaos and corruption. The means to maturing a people is by the elite, the leaders of society, leading by example. The leaders must be spiritual, self controlled and honest. That would be a giant step but not all that is required. A market system must also exist. This is because the market system trains people to be human. If someone comes into your store to buy a couch, you care nothing if they are Hindi, Asian or Hutu, those groupings become subservient attributes to their being buyers. If the way to get ahead in a society is to meet the needs and wants of others, people will happily become civil, spiritual and self controlled.

 

Unfortunately governments prefer people to be dependent. Dependents have no independent voice only as a screaming mob can they get heard. If government likes what the chanting mob says they simply give in and are seen as benefactors, if government doesn’t like the message they clamp down violently and are seen as the protectors of societal tranquility. Since the reason political parties exist is to get and hold power, nothing more nothing less, and dependents depend on their benefactors, if those benefactors are a faction of government, that faction can count on their dependents for support against other political factions. This is not only a path to getting political power but of holding it as well. This is why there have been so very few examples in human history of liberty, and so many of dependence, poverty, and despotism.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Anthropogenic Climate Change Hoax

Thursday, June 26th, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, the man made part of global warming is a hoax, a fallacy perpetrated on us by the New Class in a bid for power, the type of power Nietzsche said the uberman should strive for. They know it is impossible to prove a negative, and so they have convinced many that we are in dire straights if we do not follow their dictates and commit economic suicide, else we might face economic Armageddon. For the same reason I am skeptical when a cigarette company claims cigarettes are good for you, we should look at the arguments of those who stand to gain essentially arbitrary rule if we believe them… with a skeptical eye too. Climate change alarmists stand to gain tremendous power, wealth and prestige, by having the hoi polloi fall for the scam, and power is a compelling incentive to lie. It is in our self interests to be rational maximizers and look at the facts not the rhetoric.

 

I used to believe in anthropogenic climate change. It made me hopeful we can terraform Mars into a world we can live on. I looked at all the facts with a hopeful eye. As time went on, and the “facts” became ever murkier and confounding facts came up, my enthusiasm waned. As I began looking into the political reasons someone would perpetrate such a hoax on the world, the reality of human nature opened up to me, and I became a man made climate change denier.

 

Their arguments are based on spurious logic and have no real bearing on what is really happening. Many of the temperature data is knowingly fallacious. As land is industrialized, the same location that once was forest and fields, has become asphalt and buildings. The localized warming of a city is a well documented theory, and as civilization has encroached on locations that are cited by the climate change alarmist, the temperature will certainly go up. This is called the Urban Heat Island effect. That is not to say however, the temperature of the planet in it’s entirety has gone up, only those locations where temperature has been traditionally taken has. This makes the temperature data decidedly biased and thus dubious at best.

 

The nail in the coffin for me however, was finding out by reading Science News, (a strong voice for anthropogenic climate change), that planets around our solar system are in fact warming at a similar rate to Earth. I admit I was a bit depressed, because if planets around the solar system are warming, that pesky fact makes the likelihood of “man made,” evaporate like so much dry ice. Mars is the example most cited but there are other examples too. The planetoid, or asteroid, Ceres has been shown to be warming, Pluto seems to be warming even though it is traveling away from the sun, along with other planets and moons. The measurements of these planets and moons is not based on local temperature fluctuations, they are based in infrared measurements of the entire planet or moon, and so are more telling of the actual planet wide temperature than localized data. In other words, we have better perspective on them, then we do our own planet.

 

 

The alarmists argue that this is irrelevant because at any given time a planet or moon could be warming or cooling. It is mere coincidence that they are warming. Many pages of sophist arguments have been written with this perspective. They also claim the Sun has cooled so it is impossible for these places to be warming, and some simply deny the facts. These arguments are of course the pleas of a huckster who has been exposed trying to justify the utility of his snake oil. If their argument, that any one could be warming or cooling, then why are they all warming, and none are cooling? Logic would at least incline one to believe that if they could be warming or cooling, the ratio of planets and moons warming versus cooling, should be about fifty percent. The data flies in their face. Since there is not a single example of a planet cooling in our solar system, but many examples of planets and moons warming, this is at least strong evidence the warming trend is a solar system wide phenomenon. Since there are no carbon spewing cars on Mars, (as far as we know), Jupiter, Triton, Ceres or Pluto, the solar system wide warming cannot be human generated.

 

 

The scientific method is not a popularity contest. If it was, then the world would be flat, since most scientists believed at one time it was. There was a philosopher, Karl Popper, who posited a theory of science. In it he said that scientists are exceedingly bigoted people. They work diligently in their labs testing and proving ever smaller bits of fact about a theory, until it is proven false, then there is a paradigm shift culminating in a new theory. Since scientists have worked so long and so hard on their piece of a theorem, they have cognitive dissonance, in other words they are very resistant to change. In the case of anthropogenic climate change anyone who offers a different view is attacked as a heretic. No differently than Galileo, Kepler or Newton were in their day. Their ideas led to a paradigm shift in scientific thinking however, and are worshiped today, even as the modern equivalents of these great thinkers are vilified. Couple the propensity of science, and scientists, to cling to an idea, with the potential power such an idea as man made global warming puts in the hands of the new class, and you have the modern equivalent of the inquisition.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Justice is a State of Mind not a State of Being

Monday, June 23rd, 2014

 

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, justice is simply treating everyone the same, to argue otherwise is to twist wrong into right by spurious means. Justice is not to force everyone to be, act, or think the same, it is not to give everyone the same stuff… it is to treat everyone the same. It doesn’t seem like that is such a difficult concept to understand but it is not understood by most people. They have been fooled into thinking justice is a state of being and not a state of mind. We have been deceived into thinking justice is some concept of economic equality, (a state of being), when this is only a spurious way to trick people into acting and thinking, unjustly. To be a rational maximizer, or put another way, civilized, a person has to be sufficiently mature and thoughtful to grasp this basic concept of justice, rejecting those sophist ways the elite enforce injustice, by calling it justice. Our compliance with their absurdity, even if most who honestly believe justice is a state of being, creates a fundamentally unjust society, where people cannot leave the station they are born into, which is true economic, social and cultural injustice. In other words, unless we wake up and wake up our friends, our children and grandchildren will forever be trapped in the station they are born into, living in a fog of fallacy, with no ability to transcend it, regardless of their personal merit.

 

Justice is equality in treatment not equality in some physical instance. What if the elite claimed blond hair is the best and it is unjust for anyone to be burdened with brown or black hair? Would it then follow, that the government had a legitimate role to play in improving the lives of it’s citizens, by forcing everyone to dye their hair blond? What if the elite managed to convince the people that blond hair is indeed the best, would it be just then? What about if government forced blonds to shave their heads? No, of course it wouldn’t be. Justice is not a state of being but a state of mind. To conflate the two is a path to injustice. It is however, a sure way to trick people into doing unjust actions, while thinking they are actually being just.

 

Like the terrorist who believes he is blowing himself up and killing innocents to advance the interests of God. He doesn’t examine the absurdity of the notion, he simply follows the orders of the guy who would never blow himself up, and in the end advances the goals of Satan. The ostensibly pious person damages God’s ends and advances the ends of Lucifer while all the time thinking he serves God. Ironic as it can be, people can be easily tricked into doing the opposite of what they seek, by the diabolical means of fooling someone with sophistry. When we don’t think an argument all the way to the end, we can be tricked into the opposite of what we want, and end up doing injustice when we intend justice.

 

To be civilized, is to think things through and take concepts to their logical conclusion, to do otherwise is to be a member of a mob. Unthinking brutes who act on orders instead of logic and a sense of right. Do you suppose the Nazis thought they were evil? No, they thought what they were doing was good. People cannot be convinced to do evil, for evil’s sake, the packaging of evil must appear to be good. Yes, there are a few psychopaths out there who would happily serve Beelzebub, but the throngs of humanity seek goodness, and eschew evil. To get them to serve evil requires spurious logic and sophist arguments. Twisting justice into injustice by claiming justice is a state of being and not a state of mind, is just as absurd as tricking a child into thinking that committing several mortal sins at the same time, will get him or her to heaven and serve the goals of God, when it is the exact opposite of the truth.

 

Justice is clearly a state of mind and not a state of being. To force people to be the same, economically, socially, culturally or in any other way, is effecting their state of being. Moreover, to effect one’s state of being, forcing equality in some state of being, requires as a prerequisite that an injustice be done, in other words, some must be treated differently than others, which as we have already shown, is the definition of injustice. If you treat everyone you meet the same, with gratitude for their help, courteously recognizing their humanity, and avoiding hurting those who society tell us are “the other,” you are acting justly. If you visit evil on someone because their state of being is other than what the elite have defined as “fair,” then you are acting unjustly, and no amount of twisted logic can make that wrong a right.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin