Posts Tagged ‘meritocracy’
Thursday, June 20th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, government is the only place where the worse job you do, the more job security you have. Union bosses would be wise to rip a page from the political elite’s handbook. For screwing your employer even the much vaunted unions have nothing on bureaucrats and politicians. Government under their watch is the most inept facet of our civilization. We all know it. We all want better, but all we get is more laws, poorer results and more taxes. Unless we step in and solve the underlying problem… our society and indeed our civilization itself is doomed.
Politicians claim a minor problem is a crisis, they propose some legal “solution” for that “crisis,” the law makes matters far worse, making a new need for another law to rectify the problems created by the first. They pass another omnibus law and lo and behold the problem grows exponentially. Now it actually has become a crisis and lawmakers propose a new comprehensive law… From this simple example we can see that the poorer the results of their governance the more desire we have of their services.
Some might say that a carpenter always sees every problem as needing a hammer, a logger believes a chain saw is the perfect tool for building stuff and a plumber is of the opinion that every problem can be solved with pump pliers. In the case of politicians they see every problem as needing a legal solution. Each seeing problems and solutions through the eyes of his occupation. If the solution doesn’t fix the problem it is because the wrong tool is being used… is the logic. This would hold water better, if laws that don’t function were removed from the books, but once a law always a law. How much is the US government spending this year on the mohair subsidy? You know, the one to protect our vital access to World War One Army uniforms…
I think the problem is more pernicious even than that. If we believe that politicians are human beings, and that human beings are indeed rational in most cases, then we can conclude that politicians are rational. If they are rational then they must see that the worse they make society the more need there is of their services. Unless politicians are the dumbest people this must be true. Since they claim to be much smarter than you and I, with the knowledge that their laws generally make matters worse, then why would they continue to pass them? Self interest, or to be more precise, egoism.
If laws were the be all end all of civil tranquility, then why is society so much more roiled now, with our millions of pages of laws, regulations and ordinances, than it was at the turn of the Twentieth Century, when people self regulated? As the pernicious laws pile up and up, outcomes get worse, the politicians chime in with the old sophist song, “Government has a valid role to play in making people’s lives better.” Knowing in their hearts that every word of it is tripe. Clearly, it is not law that is the source of wealth, happiness or love, law only subtly protects property if it is right and seizes that property, if it is being used by an egoist. Human history shows unequivocally, that law is most often a source of oppression, theft and murder by those who wield it, against those who do not.
We have a system where the worse our leaders do the more we need them, the elite know this and use it against us, and we suffer in a myriad of ways because of it. The answer is not to give the elite more authority, to continue down the road to serfdom… it is to take back the workings of government. Do away with bad laws, that don’t have a function, make matters worse or unreasonably infringe on the Rights of the people. We must think and do for ourselves! To have eyes and not to see is a shame, to have ears and not to hear is a tragedy, but to have a mind and not use it is criminal.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: bureacrat, capitalism, civil ills, economics, economy, elite, government, government spending, incentive, International Capitalist Party, jobs, Law, market system, media, meritocracy, omnibus, pernicious incentive, rational maximiser, redistribution, regulation, society, Sophistry, tax, tyranny, World Government
Posted in economy, International Power, Law, media, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | No Comments »
Monday, June 17th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, as science advances the philosophy of people must advance as well, else a fundamental tension is set up, that must eventually catastrophically snap. When the growth in science outpaces the growth in moral philosophy, it can be said that our ability to do damage grows faster, than our ability to control ourselves from doing it. Moreover, if the ability to do harm is greater than the individual’s ability to not do harm, harm will result. It follows as certainly as wet ground after rain. This is why I find it so puzzling, why the Elite seem so intent to train out the civilization in Men and women, when if even a dimwit such as I, can see this obvious truth, the enlightened must also have access to it as well.
Science, and the way of thinking that science represents, asking what and how, instead of who and why, is itself a paradigm shift in logic. The study of the empirical world is the basis of science, the sensible universe if you will, not the intelligible world or the world as it can be imagined. In being not only a study but a way of perceiving reality, science can be said to be a philosophy itself, a philosophy about measurable reality. As such, it is an amoral philosophy, it is not concerned with the good or the bad, it has no interest in human suffering, it is blind to moral virtue and all morality, science is itself a two dimensional philosophy, it is terrific at evaluating the physical world, but it has huge blind spots where humanity is concerned.
As our knowledge of the empirical world grows our ability to manipulate it grows as well. That ability to manipulate carries with it great power to build, change, and destroy. But, as science takes only two of the three dimensions of human existence into consideration, there must be another philosophy to fill in that missing piece. That missing piece is moral philosophy. Religious philosophies of right living, right acting and human compassion, are nearly perfectly suited to fill the gap. If there is no morality then why should there be self control? The only other way to limit the actions of people, so that society can function, is by fear of the State. History has taught us, if it has taught us nothing else, that laws only effect those who are subject to them. The elite never subject themselves to their own laws, and so, live outside the limitation that fear of the State’s retribution provides, as well as morality.
As the power to manipulate and destroy grow, if those in political power are not held to human morality, and they are not subject to the State’s authority, they have little need of self control. The elite are more free to follow a course that is in their narrow personal interests than the average citizen. They can become so corrupted under these circumstances, they will use science’s power to destroy… to smash civilization. The complex system that is civilization, will produce a long tailed event, and the advances of science and the philosophy of morals will be lowered, perhaps forever.
If we take these things to be true, that if the morality of a people declines even as their ability to destroy grows… their fall will be unavoidable, then why are the elite in our society leading us to just that? The elite in culture show us that the good life is meaningless sex, the capitalist elite show that immediate personal gain outweighs any long term investment that will result in societal as well as personal gain, and the political elite are modeling the most despicable behavior possible. The main thrust of legislation today is mitigating the consequences of negative behavior. Laws lowering access to abortifactants, welfare, and a clear hostility to God, are but a few examples.
The people are not blind to these things, we see what they do, and we follow where our leaders lead us. They are leading us from morality, religion, and being rational maximisers, to become angry, self absorbed, children… with toys that can kill us all. The elite even pass deadly technology to the people on this planet with the lowest humanitarian philosophical growth! Giving the nuclear bomb to communists was a crime against humanity. Allowing such destructive power to fall into the hands of people who have no moral compass, as evidenced by the mass slaughter of human beings at their hands, is an act of anti humanity… Just as today’s political elite are doing in so many ways. Why do you suppose they are doing this, or, do you believe them ignorant and stupid?
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: advancement of science, amoral philosophy, anti capitalist, capitalism, corruption, economy, education, government, government spending, incentive, International Capitalist Party, Law, market system, media, meritocracy, moral philosophy, morality, politics, rational maximiser, religion, religious philosophies, science
Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy | No Comments »
Monday, June 10th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, the European Union and all the countries within it, are in an economic death spiral, and unless they break out of it, there will be a generational depression to pay for it. If you think this is hyperbole, then recall the Greek, Spanish and Italian economic catastrophes. Add to them the Cypriot banking seizure of customer’s assets to pay bank’s liabilities. Take into consideration the negative economic growth in Europe, the festering religious animosity that is rapidly becoming sepsis, the growing welfare state, and the budget deficits that follow, and there is only one conclusion that can logically be reached… Europe is headed for a historic crash… drawing the World with it.
At this point the elite in Europe have only one belief, socialism, in whatever flavor that nation favors. From the two main schisms, the Mediterranean model with one breadwinner and the Scandinavian model where it’s, everyone in… welfare states. There are sub sects of this, Britain’s Labor government is one example of a socialist convention, that fit’s neither the Mediterranean nor the Scandinavian models. Within these governments there are a small sub faction of laissez faire capitalists but they are overwhelmed by the vast majority of socialist factions. Most people in Europe believe in the hands on state, instead of the hands off state.
They all have only one plan of growth, Keynesian, this same plan has failed so spectacularly every time it has been tried, it should be called the Edsel plan. The group think we see in the media, political elites and the academic elites on this subject is remarkable. I am certain that many papers will be written on this phenomenon, in the years to come, but today we have to deal with it. The group’s answer is always to print more and spend more… cut tomorrow. Printing and spending has achieved many notable economic milestones… none of them good. Hyper inflation, stagnant economies, high unemployment, more oppressive government, the list goes on and on. What the Keynesians forget is that not all spending is equal.
What is needed to improve economic outlooks in any nation is, a total overhaul of the regulatory, taxation and standardization schemes, (Japan should take heed by the way). In the last part, standardization, Europe is way ahead of it’s rivals. Unfortunately in the areas of taxation, and regulation Europe is strangling itself. If, for example, Budgets must be balanced and could not be in deficit for more then three years in a row and that the debt must be paid back within three years, taxes could be lowered. If that were done, taxes could be simplified to a Europe wide percent sales tax system, (or value added system), each country collecting it’s own taxes, and then paying a portion to the European Union… taxation would become less a barrier to business. If regulation were simplified and overhauled, regulated sick time, vacations, hiring and firing rules, etc, the friction these laws impose on doing business would be lifted. Lastly, if the welfare laws were limited, more people, who are perfectly able to work, would move into the workforce, generating even more extrinsic economic growth and cutting the need for high budgets.
The death spiral can be escaped but it will not be easy. Today, the group think way to lower the huge debt burden the welfare state has imposed on Europe, is by “austerity.” Which is, cutting spending and raising taxes. Cutting spending is what they need to do, raising taxes will inevitably undo any good the lowering of spending accomplishes. Moreover, it makes the public believe that taxes will be higher in the future, (Because they will be), and the people will react accordingly, to protect their assets instead of spending or investing them. Cut spending, simplify and cut taxes, simplify regulation and move immigrants from welfare to work. To accomplish these goals, commissions could be set up to pour over every line of regulation on the books in Europe, then, every month submit a suggestion paper of those that should be removed, to the various parliaments. In America, when we make ad hoc committees for this type of thing, we call them blue ribbon panels, this one should be a permanent fixture in every government. Maybe in Europe you can call them red tape panels. Nevertheless Europe has a great deal of work to do to become more of a Meritocracy. Let’s pray and hope they get started, before it’s too late.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: anti capitalist, capitalism, capitalist, communist, constitution, corruption, economics, economy, elite, european recession, European riots, european union, government, government spending, group, group think, incentive, International Capitalist Party, jobs, market system, media, meritocracy, politics, progressive, rational maximiser, recession, redistribution, regulation, riots, socialist, Sophistry, tyranny, unrest
Posted in economy, Group Politics, Law, media, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | No Comments »
Thursday, June 6th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, there is a huge opportunity for economic innovation. This opportunity is not only game changing, in the way it could lower the overall cost to run a company, but the efficiency that would be gained in reacting to new opportunities, agility that could enable much larger companies to have such nimbleness, would increase the longevity and profitability of any company. This game changing, fountain of youth for corporations, could stabilize and drive stock markets to paying a larger percentage of profits out as dividends, instead of bonuses. This innovation stands at the very edge, within our reach, but at the very limit of our grasp… it is, innovation in corporate governance. It would generate as much growth as the internal combustion engine or the transistor.
There is not a one who is reading this, who has not heard of a family business or solely owned company that was sold to Wall Street, and shortly after went into bankruptcy. Stories abound of this business or that firm who made the best wing wang there ever was. The owners were called stupid and the management style of the founders was universally criticized. Then, the owner retired or died, and the company went public. The buyers immediately take out a huge loan in the business name and give them selves a fat bonus. Some then move directly on, leaving the business and stockholders, with the debt for their bonus. A few years later, struggling to cover the loan debt for the bonuses, the company fails, the stockholders loose their hard earned money and the workers loose their jobs.
A few of the companies that come to mind, IBM, Apple, Digital, and Orrick, along with thousands of others. They were run by families and entrepreneurs. The founders were ridiculed by the apparatchiks of finance and business, all of the firms were profitable and grew extrinsically, by getting new customers and intrinsically, by meeting those customer’s needs more efficiently. When each of those companies was sold to Wall Street they were run into the ground. In the case of Apple, when the founder came back, he took the company from bankruptcy to the most valuable company in the World, IBM only just survived total collapse, Digital is history.
Since this paradigm plays out over and over in the corporate cycle it would seem a logical place for innovation. The underlying problem is… the principle agent dilemma. The principles, the stockholders, own the company, the agents, the managers of the company, are supposed to work in the agent/owner’s, the stockholder’s, interests. They often don’t. The individual stockholder is limited in his or her knowledge of the company, how it is run, the direction the senior management is taking etc… and thus his or her power to protect their own interests. Due, legitimately, for protection of the company’s assets, this necessarially sets up a further problem… asynchronous knowledge.
Even if the individual stockholder has such knowledge and seeks to make change he or she sees fit, it is exceedingly difficult because each of their voices is very small, due to the widely distributed ownership. Unless a sufficiently large group of them get together, their voices are irrelevant. Moreover, the system as it now exists is set up so that a small group of people can give themselves fat bonuses, at someone else’s expense. The incentives in this system, are for those that are profiting by it to keep it in place, at all costs.
The next clear opportunity in today’s system, ripe for innovation, is how to run the company, after it is sold into the public market. Assuming the company has not been looted because of some other new innovation in corporate governance, or even if it has… the people who take over at the top always come in with big ideas. Well, I am a big believer in big ideas, but they are only big ideas if you yourself are willing to put your own hide at risk, like the founders did. When gambling with someone else’s money one’s risk tolerance goes up considerably. At the same time as big ideas are implemented, rigid structures are put in place, to shore up the sloppy ones that existed before. The one two punch is devastating to the corporate ecosystem, and in the case of where the firm was looted beforehand and has a high debt load, the third punch is a sure knockout blow.
This problem translates into lost jobs, lost opportunities, and the lost earned wages that make up most of people’s retirement funds. Everyone in corporate governance knows the problems, but no one seems to be fond of catching the wrath of the power brokers, who get fat from the system. Remember, under a truly capitalist system, anyone who is making overly high profits quickly meets equally high competition for those profits. In cases where this does not happen, it is usually government regulation that stands in the way. Regulation that was supposed to fix some other problem, that was caused by other regulation that was supposed to fix some other problem, and on and on… Adding a regulatory element to the question. Perhaps what is needed, is not more regulation but… a company constitution for new firms? What do you think it should say?
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: capitalism, company profits, corporate governance, corruption, dividend, economics, economy, government, government spending, incentive, innovation, International Capitalist Party, jobs, Law, market system, media, meritocracy, politics, principle agent dilemma, profitability, rational maximiser, regulation, return on investment
Posted in economy, Law, media, polictics of class envy | No Comments »
Monday, June 3rd, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, we are being trained to fear that which is less dangerous, and to embrace that which is more dangerous. Just as, to so fear water… that you turn and face a lion, is a sure way to a short life, turning from a mundane danger to an existential threat is suicidal. Rational people don’t readily make this type of emotional and intellectual move unless we are tricked into it. Our own sense of self protection, inhibits us from putting ourselves and our children into greater danger, to avoid a lesser danger. Yet if we continue following the elite without even glancing around, that is exactly what we are doing… embracing lava, for fear of hot wax.
Every time the unbiased media show a news story of a civil murder or other violent crime our perception is that our fellow man is dangerous. The more often these stories are shown to us the more fearful we become of our brothers. This holds true even if the actual amount of violent crime is down both as a percentage of population or in totality. The more we are told, other people are dangerous and only want to do us harm, the more we believe it. This is not to say that other people cannot be dangerous or that crime never happens, it is to say, our perception of the frequency is heightened when we are shown it more often. Since there is always violent crime there will always be some to show.
We are told both explicitly and implicitly that the answer to all the violence in our society is more regulation and more laws. If only this or that law was passed crime would go down. But, as I have explained above, even if crime does go down, but we are shown more examples, we will become more worried about it and more pliant to greater government intrusions in our lives, “to keep us safer.” The unbiased media don’t have to be explicitly involved however their complicity can be implicit. As the old saw goes, “if it bleeds it leads,” shows why violent news stories are always so prevalent, they are in demand. We have a prurient interest in societal violence. This is used against our own liberty whether we know it or not. So it is best to know it.
If a business has a camera on it’s premises to prevent theft or even predict what a consumer will want, is no intrusion on privacy because it is on private property, which you and I can boycott if we find it obnoxious. The private property owner has an economic incentive to have people at his or her business, and providing a safe, helpful environment is part of meeting that incentive. Government however, cannot be boycotted, it is everywhere all the time. There is no escaping government. The pro government argument goes… If only we had a government camera on every street corner crime would go down. The media shows murders happen often in front yards and… we take the next step down the slippery slope, why not at everyone’s front door… Eventually leading to, why would the honest citizen care if his phone is listened to by the government, it is for his own good.
Statistically, over the last thousand years, you and I are far more likely to be killed by our own or another government, than by any common criminal. I have seen one example where it is estimated 20 people are killed by their own governments, whether by famine, genocide, war or a myriad of other imaginative ways, to 1 person killed by a jealous husband, armed robber or other common criminal… in the last century. Yet, despite these facts, most people are more in fear of our neighbors and passersby, than we are of government. In that irrational fear we turn from the less dangerous to the more dangerous.
We are being trained to fear the mundane menace and to embrace the existential threat. Crime reporting is the propaganda arm of this effort. The more we see violence on television them more we fear each other. Our increasing fear of one another makes us emotionally react, turning to government, as a way to be safe. By doing this we loose sight of the fact we are in far more danger from our government than we are from crime. Our unmeasured emotional reaction makes us run from possible crime to certain oppression. A measured reaction however…
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: brothers, constitution, corruption, crime, crime statistics, economy, fear of our fellow man, fellow man, government, government spending, incentive, International Capitalist Party, jobs, Law, media, meritocracy, oppression, propaganda, regulation, society, tyranny, violence, violent crime
Posted in Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | No Comments »
Thursday, May 30th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me that I refer to William James theory of pragmatism often but have not really explained it. The theory of pragmatism is what I call the quintessential American philosophy. Not because William James was an American philosopher but in that it sums up the heretofore American ethos. That ethos being explained earlier by Tocqueville in his concept of Americans being, “Self Interested Rightly Understood.” These two philosophies dovetail into a whole that, I believe, is the reason the American experiment worked so well. Understanding this should be the first responsibility of anyone who want’s their representatives voted in, instead of, barged in at the point of a gun.
Pragmatism looks at the results of philosophies and actions. It takes past results and extrapolates them into future outcomes. As such we can say Pragmatism is a results oriented philosophy. We can also say that pragmatism is only really a means to test other philosophies or actions. It is more a measuring stick to reconcile outcomes of actions than a play that orchestrates all actions. Some philosophies are idealistic and some are rationalistic. Pragmatism falls closer to the rationalistic than the idealistic, but recognizes that if the outcome is good the philosophy should be followed, even if it isn’t totally rationalistic and is in fact moralistic or even religious.
Close association with capitalism trains the minds of people to be, Self Interested Rightly Understood, or put another way, Rational Maximisers. To engage in the market, in almost any function, one must weigh this action against that action. We test in our minds what the outcome of producing a million of this product at cost of that production. The very act of work then trains the mind to weigh costs versus benefits. It is only natural that we bring this understanding into other aspects of our lives.
When we do we start to become a Rational Maximizer. But to get all the way there, we must also have the understanding, that our good is in fact tied up in everyone’s good. Not that we have collective duties… we have individual duties. To the extent we have collective duties we have become subservient to the group. So, when we get the habit of weighing the cost versus the benefits of all of our actions, and we have a proper moral template to apply the actions, we can be said to be Self Interested Rightly Understood.
If someone has children their understanding of the universe is different from someone who doesn’t. Once a person understands that there are considerations outside ones self, considerations that we value so highly they outweigh our own worth, then the person who is Self Interested Rightly Understood, will be heroic. Even though that heroic act may cost the individual his or her life he or she will act, because they will have weighed the cost of doing so, against not doing so. This tally is done without conscious thought. This is the essence of what it is to be Self Interested Rightly Understood. It is sometimes to do that which is not in our immediate interests but meets our larger interests. Even such a mundane act like putting a few dollars away each week is the act of a Rational Maximizer.
To use pragmatism comes naturally to someone who is Self Interested Rightly Understood. As I said before part of being Self Interested Rightly Understood is to weigh costs versus benefits. This is the essence of pragmatism, to weigh the probable outcome of an action or philosophy against the probable benefit. The outcome can be reliably predicted by past examples and the benefit can be placed against that measure. Couple pragmatism with rational maximisers and you have a society that is geared to win. People will strive to get ahead but will have the self restraint that comes with civilization. Because really, isn’t that exactly what we are talking about, when we imagine people who are Self Interested Rightly Understood and Pragmatic… Civilized people.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: civilization, constitution, incentive, International Capitalist Party, market system, meritocracy, politics, pragmatism, rational maximiser, self interested rightly understood, william james
Posted in economy, Group Politics, Law, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | No Comments »
Sunday, May 26th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, the primary election system for President in the United States, is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The bastardized system we now have, to decide who will represent either of the two major political parties in the US, insures the will of the people is not met. Such a system, one that undermines the people’s wants and needs in favor of the Elite’s preferences, is one that is in great need of renovation. To continue with such a flawed method, is to perpetuate the horrible election options we have had for the last few decades, along with ever lower voter turnout.
Today the Presidential candidates have different elections in various States at assorted times. The system is such that if a candidate that the Elite don’t like, wins the first State, the Elite have sufficient time to undermine his or her candidacy to get their man in. This insures the Elite’s candidate gets both the Democrat and Republican candidacy. The Elite cannot loose, and the people cannot win.
We are given the illusion of fair elections by this fatally flawed system when in fact we have very little say. Take the last election. Mitt Romney, who by all accounts is a decent and good person, was the least liked by the Republican electorate. Yet he won the primary. Other candidates, like Michele Bachman was far better liked and even won the initial straw poll. That initial win put her in the crosshairs of the media and political elite however. They pulled out all the stops to vilify her at every turn, undermining her candidacy to the point of making her a laughing stock.
In 2008 Hillary Clinton was the most qualified on the Democratic side, yet she was crushed under the wheel of the unbiased media and the political Elite, in favor of Barok Obama. As it turns out the candidacy of Obama was terribly flawed. Had he gotten even a smidgen of scrutiny by the unbiased media, he couldn’t have won a single State. The media gave his drug use a pass, they ignored his associations with domestic terrorists, they gave his lack of experience no mention, Obama’s anti American pastor Jeremiah Wright was glossed over, they never reported on his questionable birthplace, they overlooked his overtly communist leanings and they pilloried anyone who brought these flaws up. Compare Obama’s treatment at the hands of the unbiased media to the treatment Herman Cain got.
When you have a system that insures the Elite’s selection of both candidates in both parties, you have a system that is set up to protect the interests of the Elite, at cost to the interests of the people. Such a system is tilted in favor of candidates that have the political leaning of the Elite… in academia, media, culture, politics and wealth. The interests of the people to have limited government is undermined, so the power of government can be exploited, to protect the interests of the Elite. The result is that we have elected representatives that are unilateral in their political view, progressive. The unbiased media decry that there are any politicians who have a different political view and take every opportunity to paint the non-progressives as extremists and anti American.
The answer to this dilemma, is to have a primary election in June or July, where every State votes at the same time. This would curtail the Elite’s ability to push the primary election to their man. Such a system which would essentially mirror the November election, giving power to the people, and removing that power from the Elite. To continue with a system, one that empowers a small faction of the population to have outsized influence on the outcome of elections, is to anoint that faction an oligarchy. Modern history shows this to be the case. Once government is essentially an oligarchy, the machinations of government can be used to do such things as… leave soldiers to die if it is politically expedient, lie under oath without real consequence, use the taxing power of government to suppress their political opponents, mislabel their political opponents as enemies, tap the phones of the press to suppress distribution of information, send guns to drug lords while vilifying the Second Amendment for it, and act above their own laws while ignoring the Constitution. Such a system cannot be said to lead to tyranny, because it is in fact tyranny, disguised as democracy. No matter the quality of the sheep’s pelt the wolf in it is insatiable.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: anti capitalist, capitalism, communist, constitution, corruption, democrat, economics, economy, elite, exploiting the power of government, government, government spending, group, incentive, irs, jobs, Law, left behind, market system, media, meritocracy, oligarchy, perjury, political expediency, primary election, redistribution, regulation, republican, second amendment, socialist, society, wolf in sheeps clothing
Posted in economy, Group Politics, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy | No Comments »
Monday, May 20th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, nothing discredits a philosophy more effectively than violence. Those that resort to violence, to hold practitioners, convert people to their way of thinking or punish those that disagree, disprove their philosophy more effectively than any logician. Violence is the ultimate admission that one’s ideas are bad, and that the practitioner of violence has ceded the ground of logic and persuasion, proving the wrongness of their ideas. This is a lesson that seems to be lost on societies today. We unlearn this basic simple truth to the detriment of us, our neighbors and our children.
This is not to say we must not defend ourselves. To be a pacifist in the face of violence is to relinquish the future to the evil and pernicious. The lot of humanity would be forever lowered by this, and as rational maximisers, we are duty bound to defend ourselves and our fellows, whenever violence, and thereby fear, is the means of persuasion. Those sophists who would use violence to extend the reach of their bad philosophies, have no self imposed limits on their actions, and would twist logic to their own ends without a qualm… Ends that are clearly not in line with a human hearted civilization.
In the Tao Te Ching, Lao Tzu said, the utility of a vessel is in emptiness. Meaning, if you need to store something and all you have is a full jar, it is not useful. The human mind is a vessel that can have the quality of emptiness or fullness. The amount of knowledge it retains has no bearing on it’s fullness or emptiness however. The attribute of emptiness is a factor of presumption. If someone presumes to know all that is needed then their mind is full and has no further utility. When a person understands that they don’t know, their mind can be said to be empty, regardless of their knowledge.
We must be discerning what we fill our minds with however. If we put dog poop in a bag that bag becomes unsuitable for popcorn. The dog poop effecting the quality of popcorn… and it doesn’t take much poop to corrupt a lot of popcorn. The popcorn does not effect the quality of the dog poop however. From this we can say, if we put evil in our minds then we corrupt the good in them, but the good does not purify the evil. There are several measures we can use to determine the goodness or badness of an idea.
Pragmatism shows us, those concepts that result in lowering the lot of humanity, are bad, those that raise mankind are good. Pragmatism is the quintessential American Philosophy invented by William James. From this we can see that results outweigh intentions. No matter how much we may want some idea or concept to be true, if the results are counter to the good of mankind, it is not. Therefore, we must discard those ideas that are evil, because by holding them they corrupt the goodness in us.
Presumption is the very essence of fullness of mind. Those who presume to know best are, by that very notion, closing their minds to other possibilities. Their mind is not empty, because they are unwilling to accept different ideas, it is closed off. But, as I said before, we must not accept all ideas unquestioningly. We must discern, by pragmatism, what is good and what is bad. To put evil in our mind is not to be open minded it is to corrupt our minds with a vile contagion.
Violence flows naturally from presumption like effluent from a sewer pipe. Once we accept the evil of presumption, we pollute any good intentions we may have had, turning them to evil. The results will be bad regardless of the intentions. To be free of presumption one must have an empty mind. Again, as I explained before, to have an empty mind is not to be ignorant, it is to reject presumption. Violence as a means of persuasion then, is the result of a full mind, (a presumptuous mind), a mind not empty but corrupted by the bad notions we have accepted, crowding out all others. Those bad ideas, ideas that preach violence, whether it is personal violence, State violence or any other violence, discredit those ideas. Just as dog poop corrupts popcorn… violence pollutes intentions. We must be empty of presumption, knowing that results trump intentions and if we embrace the evil of violence, we pollute our very own minds.
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: civilization, corruption, government, human hearted, Human Heartedness, incentive, International Capitalist Party, lao tzu, media, meritocracy, philosophy, politicians, politics, pragmatism, presumption, rational maximiser, society, sophist, Sophistry, tao te ching, violence, violent faction
Posted in Group Politics, International Power, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | No Comments »
Monday, May 6th, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, charity cannot come at the point of a gun it must come from the heart, else it is not charity, it is robbery. At first glance this doesn’t seem to be a very controversial stance, but if we look into it a bit, we see that this basic, common sense statement is politically charged. That such an intuitive position could be politically charged, shows the total lack of wisdom in our society and how far politics has encroached into our lives, politicizing that which should not be political. If this encroachment is allowed to continue, our society, children and our very spirits will inevitably suffer.
For charity to be charity it must be given freely. As I pointed out, if you are coerced into giving someone alms by the threat of violence, it cannot be called charity. The moment the threat of violence enters the equation we are talking about robbery. Robbery can never be charity they are fundamentally different actions. To confuse the two is either stupidity or a means to confound. If it is mere stupidity, simply pointing out the error would be enough to rectify it, but if it is a sinister means to confuse then it cannot be stopped by merely pointing out the folly of it, in fact, logic will garner character assaults and ad homonym attacks.
We give alms to the poor not only for them but for us as well. Giving to the less fortunate is a form of exercise for the spirit. All three parts of a fully actualized human being, must be exercised, else they atrophy. We understand this when it comes to physical and mental exercise, but the most neglected part of the human being today, is the spiritual part. Charity is a good way to exercise the spirit. When charity is turned to robbery, it ceases to be charity and the good that charity bestows on the giver and the receiver is not only lost, it is undermined. We become less charitable when we equate charity to robbery. This has the pernicious effect of weakening our spirit and at the same time it builds resentment to the needy. From this we see the negative effects are not only on individuals but on society as well.
The welfare state is predicated on robbing one to give to another. If you don’t think taxes are taken at the point of a gun… try not paying them. This is what makes the statement, “Charity cannot come at the point of a gun it must come from the heart, else it is not charity, it is robbery,” politically charged. Those that use our natural sense of compassion for those less fortunate, to turn charity into robbery, are tricking us into turning charity into robbery, with all the negative consequences this brings. These people get to seize the moral high road even as they take the low road. They are Thrasymachus’ heirs. They seek to appear just while actually being unjust. Are we to assume that famine would exist if the State didn’t coerce money from some to redistribute to others? This question is answered by history, and history is clear, in a capitalist society, charity is available more and more but is needed less and less. In the socialist society however, where charity is robbery, charity is needed more and more, until eventually all need charity, and none is charitable.
Those who point out, using taxes to pay for charitable endeavors turns charity into robbery, are vilified as heartless and mean, by the unbiased media, the Elite and those who have fallen for the deception. But, the reality is that those who seek to use robbery for charity, are the ones who are the villains. They weaken our spirits, create resentment for the poor, confuse reality with rhetoric, lower the lot of Mankind and use unjust means to unjust ends… while trying to appear just. To these people logic and common sense are an anathema. These villains undermine the philosophy of a rational maximizer and turn him into an egoist. Rational maximizers, or to use Tocqueville’s term, people who are self interested rightly understood, are rationally charitable, because they know the benefits, both personal and societal will come back tenfold, while the egoist has no such wisdom, they resent the poor, they may be strong physically and mentally, but they are spiritual weaklings. All societies are well served when the people are charitable, making us spiritually strong, strengthening societal ties, and giving us a stake in the society we live in. Rational maximizers keep charity in their hearts and are sharp enough to see sophist rhetoric when they see it. The question then becomes, “Are you a rational maximizer… or have you fallen for the deception?”
Sincerely,
John Pepin
Tags: anti capitalist, capitalism, capitalist, charity, charity as robbery, communist, constitution, corruption, economics, economy, elite, government, government spending, group, incentive, International Capitalist Party, Law, market system, media, meritocracy, rational maximiser, redistribution, regulation, self interested rightly understood, sophist, Sophistry, tax, taxes, Tocqueville
Posted in economy, Group Politics, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | No Comments »
Thursday, May 2nd, 2013
Dear Friends,
It seems to me, when a millionaire stands in front of me and claims he is going to hurt the rich and help me, I know I am being lied to. Carneades said, people are like animals, each striving for his or her own best interests, and so true justice cannot exist, because for a person to be truly just they must damage their own interests. In the case of a rich man telling me how he is going to damage the rich to help me, he must be lying, because to do that he would have to do damage to his own self interests, and no man, rich or poor would do that. This is a lesson to all those who tend to believe it when a millionaire claims he is going to tax the rich and help the poor. The rich politician only seeks to appear that he is taxing the rich when in fact his goal is to protect the rich. If a majority of us don’t learn this lesson we will continually be disappointed at the economic results of our votes.
Obama is a case in point, he claims to be against the rich and for the poor. But his latest poll numbers show that he is loved, by the very rich he is so intent on taxing to death, and not liked so much by those he claims he is trying to help. The higher the income the higher Obama’s poll numbers. If the results of his tax increases were so damaging to the rich, why do they love him so, and, if his policies are so geared to helping the poor, why do we like him less? A brief look at the results of Obama’s policies will make the point.
The uber rich are doing very well indeed under the Obama regime. Despite Warren Buffet’s claim that his tax rate is lower than his secretary’s, his taxes have not gone up, but his secretary’s have. The Obama administration handed the billionaire investor a tidy windfall when Obama vetoed the Keystone oil pipeline. The oil didn’t go unused it is traveling to Texas in Warren Buffet’s trains. Increasing the carbon footprint of the oil, increasing the danger of a major spill if a train were to derail, driving up the cost of that oil and eliminating the thousands of jobs that would have been created if the pipeline had gone through. In this one case, we see clearly that despite the rhetoric, Obama damaged the interests of the little guy and gave a hand up to the uber rich guy.
The money printing of the Federal reserve is another manifestation of Obama’s policies helping the uber rich and hurting the little guy. The 40 billion dollars a month the FED is printing to buy mortgage loans, to drive down the cost of mortgages, could make 40 thousand people millionaires every month! Add to that the 45 billion Bernanke is printing to buy treasuries and the total would be 85 thousand people made millionaires a month! Think of how this would stimulate the economy! If the FED did a random drawing of 85 thousand people a month, and cut them a check for a million dollars each, the economy would boom overnight. But instead, the FED is buying treasuries and mortgage loans… lining the pockets of the rich with the printed money.
Obama care’s tsunami of taxes and regulation will wash away any economic gain from all the money printing. This is the dirty little secret that economists don’t tell you. Obama care will destroy the American economy and everyone in business knows it. The regulations alone will drive up the cost of labor so much that many businesses will have to lay people off. The confiscatory taxes will drive many out of business altogether. The reason so many firms have been cutting labor and ratcheting up productivity, is that they know the ones who have the lowest labor cost as a percentage of the total cost of production, will be the only ones to survive. Those that have not cut to the bone will be pulled out to sea and drowned by Obama’s tsunami.
Obama’s claims to help the working man have come with policies that damage working people’s interests and helped the uber rich. Money printing to “stimulate” the economy into creating jobs, has only made the rich richer, and the tsunami of Obama care will swamp our economy, eliminating jobs just when we need them most. If we want to live in liberty and freedom it is imperative we learn to recognize shysters when we see them. Clearly we have not, but I am hopeful that the Obama administration has gone a long way, to teaching this generation to recognize one when they see one. So, now you know too, that when a rich person stands in front of you and claims he or she is going to hurt the rich and help you… you are being lied to.
Sincerely
John Pepin
Tags: economics, economy, education, elite, government, government spending, group, health care, incentive, International Capitalist Party, jobs, keystone pipeline, liars, loabor cost, media, meritocracy, Obama, obama care, politicians, politics, poverty, rational maximiser, recession, redistribution, regulation, shystaers, stimulus, uber rich, vote, working man
Posted in economy, Group Politics, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | No Comments »