Posts Tagged ‘politicians’

The Voting Dead…

Thursday, September 29th, 2016

 

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the one thing that gives any governmental unit true authority… is the consent of the people, absent that consent, government has no real authority and the power it wields is mere usurpation. The way government gets the consent of the people is by the electoral process. If that electoral process is undermined, whether the people know it or not, consent is not given. Therefore, any government, or faction that seeks to undermine the democratic process, is unjustly assuming power. Moreover, anyone who seeks to govern without the consent of the governed, especially where that consent is artificially created, is engaging in the most heinous kind of crime. Crime that is far worse than stealing, abuse and even murder, because the very lives, liberty and property of everyone is at risk. In other words… The single crime from which tyranny flows in the modern world, is vote fraud.

Vote fraud usually comes from hubris and presumption. Those who engage in vote fraud have the hubris to fool themselves into believing their cause is the most just and presumption in they presume to know what is best for everyone else. They see their own arguments close at hand while they see the arguments of others at a distance, crediting themselves, as we all do, with the most enlightened wisdom, they willingly pervert the electoral process to benefit their preferred faction… themselves. Hubris and presumption are the natural result of misplaced pride.

Some people believe themselves to be smarter, wiser and more caring than everyone else, this is especially true of people with college degrees. They consider themselves smarter than everyone else because they went to college. If they find they are incapable of holding a job, it cannot be because of any deficiency in themselves, the system must be wrong, after all, they are smarter than the rest of us who do have jobs. So they gravitate to socialism, with themselves as the rightful leaders, in this violence is acceptable but if that isn’t viable, vote fraud becomes thinkable. Since they see themselves as more deserving and caring than everyone else, they appoint themselves as the master who forces all those other uncaring louts to provide for the less fortunate. If they personally benefit, what is the harm, aren’t they the most deserving anyway?

People have an amazing ability to justify their actions in their own minds. Psychologists call this cognitive dissonance. If a person treats you badly, even if by accident, their opinion of you goes down… they like you less. That is because since they treated you badly, in their mind’s eye, either they are bad for treating a good person badly, else you are bad and deserve it. Since no one believes themselves bad the fall back is always that you are bad. This concept can be applied to vote fraud, in that someone who believes their cause just and themselves wise, engages in vote fraud, they must believe others who seek free and fair elections are bad people, otherwise the fraudster is bad, plus those others don’t see what they see or care like they care. Even the voters themselves are seen as less than human to people who manipulate the vote through fraud. Otherwise, those who pervert the electoral process would be bad, and cognitive dissonance forbids that.

This is why efforts to stem vote fraud are met with such vehemence, vitriol and violence. Anything that limits their ability to pervert democracy to their own ends cannot be allowed to stand. Anyone who wants free and fair elections must be personally destroyed else society might not go the way the self appointed masters think it should. Moreover, people who seek the honest consent of the governed must be ignorant, since fraudsters are so much smarter, wiser and more caring than the hoi polloi. You can reliably tell who is in favor of vote fraud by how they react to efforts to stem it. Their silence at obvious vote fraud screams they consider the people fools to be manipulated and trod underfoot. When a district votes 100% for one candidate, and turnout is 120% of the registered voters, or dead people have come back to life simply to cast a ballot, clearly either the laws of physics has been upended, or vote fraud on a large scale has taken place. Those who find identification to vote obnoxious are those who seek to pervert democracy to their own ends. Of all the crimes, vote fraud has the potential to result in human suffering far greater than even murder, and should be treated as such.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Political Evolution

Monday, September 12th, 2016

Dear Friends,

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Debating a Crypto Marxist

Thursday, September 1st, 2016

Dear Friends,

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

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Human Rights and Progressivism

Monday, July 18th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… progressives have never seen a human Right they don’t despise and want to get rid of. Their rhetoric and actions prove this. From their zealous attacks on the right of self defense, to their undermining of the freedom of religion, progressives show their absolute antipathy to human rights of every stripe. In their zealous crusade to rid government of the burden of having to labor under the odium of the people’s individual rights, progressives have rolled back the advancement of philosophy, humanity and government, to a time well before the Enlightenment. Progressives are only too happy to use human rights to destroy human rights however. They pick and choose who gets rights and who doesn’t, in an effort to undermine and corrode basic natural law, which is the font of all human rights. Progressives are never happier than when they are overseeing a genocide which makes them the antithesis of human hearted, making Progressivism and all progressives, diabolical.

All human rights come from natural law. Before governments were invented all human beings were created equal, had innate rights like, the right to self defense, the right to privacy, the right to own the fruits of their labor, the right to own property both personal and real as well as, the right to think and believe as each chooses. Government and powerful men stole those human rights by the sword. People were enslaved by those powerful men, who needed an excuse for their evil, so they came up with the theory of arbitrary rule. Once that had been thoroughly debunked, the powerful changed it to the rights of kings, today that philosophy has been renamed social justice. All in an attempt to destroy human rights to justify people being exploited as slaves. Which of course is the direct opposite of natural rights, or as Socrates called it, justice.

The right of self defense is their most important bugaboo. Progressives and indeed everyone who has a penchant for tyranny loathes the right to self defense. How can you enslave a person who is capable and willing to defend themselves and their children from your evil? The basic human right to self defense is the first right from which all others flow, for if one has no right to defend him or herself from the usurpations of a monster, than all other rights become null and void. Everywhere and every time human beings have been denied their basic human right of self defense, it has resulted in slavery, suffering and death, there are no historical examples where this is not true. From ancient China to the modern Syria masters had arms and slaves were disarmed. Before a person can be enslaved they must be disarmed whether by force or trickery. Now they are using trickery but soon progressives will become anxious and will resort to violence… as they always have.

Today progressive make a compelling case to get rid of basic human rights. They seek to control thought, whether by hate crimes or political correctness, progressives seek to control not only what we do, but what we think as well. The right to freedom of religion has been perverted to separation of church and state, which actually means the elevation of atheism, as the state religion. The right to privacy doesn’t exist in a surveillance state, where your every move is recorded and stored in a government data bank, for use against you when the elite see fit. Moreover, how can anyone argue, with a straight face, that we are protected in our personal papers and effects when government can hack into our phones, computers and phone conversations without warrant? Instead of “interpreting” our Constitution, as it was written and intended, progressives claim it is a “living breathing document,” which means they get to change it’s meaning arbitrarily, eviscerating the protections our Constitution is supposed to provide. What is most distressing is that a huge number of people fall for such chicanery.

Justice is not arbitrary rule no matter what they call it, freedom is never submission and humanity cannot be imposed by the state’s monopoly on violence. Our basic human rights come from God or nature but not and never government. Government is the opposite of freedom. While in a state of nature you can go out and kill a deer to feed your family, grow whatever crop you want to fill your children’s bellies, worship whatever deity you please, protect your family and self from thieves and murderers with violence if necessary, build a home, and think whatever you want, progressives always seeks to take these rights away. If you need permission from government… they have taken away your right to do it.

That progressives loathe and despise human rights is an open secret. Their every action serves to undermine human rights and humanity itself in the process… all in the name of “equality.” Progressive’s, socialist’s and Marxist’s version of equality, however, is where some people are more equal than others, to borrow a phrase. While they zealously defend their own “right” to control our thoughts, actions and religious beliefs, arbitrarily as in the rights of kings, they actively destroy those of everyone else. The quiet of Woodrow Wilson when the Armenians were being exterminated, FDR’s silence as Jews were being slaughtered on an industrial scale, and now Obama’s defense of those massacring Christians in their original lands, shows progressives, socialists and Marxists passion for genocide. The master has every right while the slave has not even the right to life. They hold us to every word of their law, constitutional or not, while openly arguing law doesn’t apply to them. Listen to what they say, consider what the outcome of their argument will be… exercise your basic human right to think, before it is taken away.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Justice, Honor and Arbitrary Rule.

Thursday, July 7th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the mask has come off, we in the US now officially live under arbitrary rule and our leaders have no honor whatsoever. The fact Hillary Clinton has not, and will not be indicted for destroying evidence, keeping top secret information on an unsecured server, using a personal email for government business and/or lying under oath to congress, is proof positive we live under arbitrary rule. If anyone with less political power did one of those things they would be in jail and everyone knows it. That is an undeniable fact. The US has become, no longer a constitutional republic, but a banana republic. That a member of the elite can get away with multiple infringements of federal laws, without consequences, consequences that you or I would face, shows there is a double standard at work that is as pernicious as it is destructive. Moreover, recent news articles have shown that the rest of us no longer have the protections of law, or our Constitutional rights. Just as Rome was no longer a republic after Caesar crossed the Rubicon, the US is no longer a republic since the elite have the audacity to rub our noses in the fact they are above the law, and we are below it’s protections.

There is no true rule of law whatsoever the world over. This is not just happening in the US but is a world wide phenomenon. Human history is nothing but a story of the elite holding the people to laws they will not hold themselves to. The US was different, for a speck of time, because the US had the rule of law. True, the elite held themselves to it by their honor… but at least they did. Since FDR broke the unwritten rule that a President only run for two terms, our elite have increasingly lost all honor, and have disgraced themselves in every way possible. It is a quality of a civilized person to hold others to a lower standard then one does him or herself. To hold others to a higher standard then oneself, shows a lack of character, moral indifference and conniving which is on full display in the Hillary Clinton case.

Throughout history the wise have opined about the need for honor among the rulers of a society. When the rulers have no honor they will resort to every evil known to Man. History shows this to be true but goes further. In a society where the elite have no honor the people quickly loose their honor. Confucius said it first, (at least as far as I know), the people follow their leaders into corruption or virtue. In a nation where the leaders have no honor, the people will have no honor, where the people have no honor crime, chaos and beggary are rife. Economies grow in serenity and collapse in chaos, wealth flourishes in the absence of crime but erodes like sand when crime is rampant and where the economy is collapsing and wealth is being destroyed, poverty becomes the norm. All because the leaders have no honor.

The question of whether justice or arbitrary rule is best was considered in Plato’s book, The Republic. In it, Socrates argued for justice, while Thrasymachus the sophist argued for arbitrary rule. Thrasymachus claimed the great men, (those with political power, intelligence, wealth and ambition), should not follow the law, only appear to do so… law is only to make the hoi polloi believe there is justice to facilitate the control of the people and trick them into being obedient. Socrates made the argument justice in and of itself is a good. Justice is both a good that we do because it is good and a useful good as well. By allowing arbitrary rule to come back into fashion we become the dupes of the “great men.” Do you want the elite to exploit law to enrich themselves, amass political power over us and eventually tyrannize us? Or do you agree with Socrates that justice is a good in and of itself, one that is useful in creating a peaceful, wealthy and safe society?

Why would the people follow laws even those who write them don’t? Every one of us is a hypocrisy detector and hypocrisy is the surest way to make people despise the law. As a lack of honor flows from the top down a society will increasingly only follow laws by force and threat. Whenever they believe they can get away with breaking a law they will. Once dishonor reaches the lowest rung of a society no amount of punishment will suffice. People will not be not safe in their own homes, business cannot be conducted, children are at risk, people’s oaths are meaningless and every chance meeting becomes a danger. Clearly, to allow the leaders of a country to become utterly corrupt, dishonorable, conniving and lustful for power, can only lead to human suffering on a national scale.

One way to tell how dishonorable your leaders are is to look around with open eyes. Do people need bars on their windows, are all children safe on the streets, can you look at a passerby in the eye, is poverty rampant? Corrupt leaders will claim all this is due to worthless, lazy and ignorant people, but will never look in a mirror. The Duke of Lu asked Confucius one day, how he could get the people to stop lusting after other men’s wives, stealing and murder. Confucius said, the duke could lead by example and stop doing those things himself. Shortly after that Confucius and his disciples had to flee Lu state in fear of their lives. Let the scales drop from your eyes and really see.

So you see, this is not a matter of hate of an individual or gotcha politics, it is a matter of justice and human suffering. If we allow our noses to be rubbed in the elite’s corruption, we have given our consent to the elite to be even less honorable, in doing so we sentence our children and grand children to a life of poverty, fear and tyranny. Just because you like a politician, is no reason to allow them to get away with blatantly breaking laws, laws you or I would be severely punished for. Such actions are those of children, sycophants and imbeciles. Say nothing, do nothing, and the US will join the ranks of other failed experiments in human governance like Rome, Athens, Sparta, etc… with the same catastrophic results, human suffering on a grand scale. To do nothing is to abet a crime against humanity, to do something, even if it is small and of little consequence, is to make a stand against corruption. The choice is yours, lay down and let the elite walk over you… or stand and push back. It may be too late to have an effect, since we have allowed our leaders to be villains for so long, but maybe not. Regardless, do you want to be hated by your own grandchildren for your lack of back bone, or be a champion for liberty, prosperity and equality?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

In Government, Size Does Matter…

Sunday, June 26th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, as a matter of fact, that the farther government is removed from the people, the less it cares about the people and instead, it’s own power. At the city level you have some power, if you can muster several people to show up at a town council, but at national level you have to muster millions of people willing to act to effect your senators, how much more if government is taken to a supranational level? At a supranational level could government be coaxed to reflect the needs of all the people instead of the faction that keeps them in power, moreover, independence would be an impossible dream. Today everyone is talking about the possible dissolution of the European Union. In as far as, that supranational government and it’s pernicious bureaucracy is undermined, the better for humanity. As a free trade area it is a great idea… and that was where it should have ended.

A government that is so far from the people, those in it need bodyguards, is too far from the people. Think about it, does your state representative need a daily body guard? In most cases no. In those cases where they do, they are far removed from the people they “represent,” that only a select few get to meet and talk to him or her. Moreover, if they need a body guard, they probably done something to warrant a body guard. Those who have no or very little power over others never need a bodyguard. If government didn’t have such an outsized power to make, destroy or crush someone, or some business, government wouldn’t warrant the time to threaten… they wouldn’t need bodyguards. It can be reasoned then that the more a government official needs a bodyguard, the farther they are removed from those they represent along with they have too much power to effect the lives of others, negatively or positively.

Distance itself give a person a feeling of superiority, a feeling of superiority gives a human being a god complex. This is especially true, when the levers of power are shared, but by few. The responsibility for wrong decisions is shared, while the credit for right decisions or any decision that can be spun as right, can be taken direct credit for, even as all the cronies do too. How liberating, to be able to use humanity as a lab rat in which to try, this economic regulation or that experiment in immigration, without responsibility. No way that could go wrong, eh? Meanwhile, even as responsibility is shirked, negative consequences are averted. So, even if a government far removed from the people, constantly poked the people in the eye and called it ice cream… the people would have no way to do anything about it.

This is not because this party is good and that party is evil, nor that all representatives are bad people, there certainly are a high percentage that are bad people, but… they are all human beings. People are self interested. You are, I am, she is, and he is too, we are all self interested, that is a fact of human nature. Economists call us rational maximizers. We rationally maximize our outcomes in any given situation. So if a situation has very very strong incentives to act a certain way, even if that way is immoral, add to the incentives a strong disincentive to act in other ways… and a rational maximizer can be induced to sell their very soul. A government distant from the people will always have those pernicious incentives and disincentives.

The supranational governmental structure of the European Union itself not only creates distance from those it is supposed to represent, but in and of itself, creates a regulatory structure that hinders small businesses in a host of ways. This is a natural outcome of the pernicious incentives that our leaders are awash in. Those who can effect the outcome of an election can then effect the outcome of legislation to be on the winning side of that legislation. It follows that only those with money today can do that while those who have potential money, from an innovation they have have had tomorrow, cannot. As Milton Friedman said in Free To Choose… why improve your own quality and lower your price when you can go to government and get your competition shut down?

If the European Union is struck a mortal blow then so be it. Of course the elite who have suckled at the teat of the state for so long will not let it go without a fight. They have become so used to having no responsibility and acting without consequences, they will shriek and wail, at the very though of having to sidle up to the unwashed peasants, they represent. The fact they appear to be in such a panic shows either they are so gullible they believed their own hype, else a conniving that would make a conspiracy lover wince, because this referendum was known about for years… so why didn’t the elite prepare plans for this contingency? Adding weight to my assertion, Government close to the people is best, the farther government is from the people, necessarily, the less power it must have, in relation to the distance of the governors.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

On the Brexit Vote…

Thursday, June 23rd, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, tomorrows “brexit” vote will tell us if the people in Britain favor liberty… or tyranny. It is as simple as that. On the one hand leaving the European Union would create chaos and uncertainty but allow the British people to have a say in their futures. On the other hand a stay vote would keep the apple cart from upsetting and the British people will be governed by unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats who care nothing for the welfare of Britain or it’s people… the technocracy of Europe will be saved. Nevertheless tomorrows vote should be interesting, if for no other reason then, to see the machinations our “leaders” are willing to go to keep their power, privilege and prerogative. So far it appears the elite have manipulated the odds on leaving, used naked fear mongering, lied, open threats and even possibly a false flag attack. To the elite the ends justify the means, especially when the ends are their goal of total control of the hoi polloi.

Liberty is always chaotic, that is the nature of freedom, while slavery is always stable, that is the nature of slavery. A slave knows what he or she will be doing every day, sun up to sunset, no matter if that is tending to plants on a farm, toiling away in a sweatshop or servicing filthy men’s desires, there is the probability of a severe beating now and then… but a slave knows their place, their life, and future, while the life of their master is stable as well. Free men however cannot possibly know their future. A freeman might wake up in the morning after a strange dream and come up with an idea to get rich, a rich man who is free might make a bad decision and loose everything, someone might get fed up with their job and quit, all of which leads to chaos and disruption that a slave society doesn’t have. To argue that slavery is better because it is stable is like arguing death is better because it is changeless.

Simply looking at who favors staying within the European Union tells us a great deal about what such a vote would mean. Those who openly avow a one world government uniformly want the British to vote for their servitude. People like George Soros are threatening Britain with economic Armageddon if they vote to leave. Soros connived to destroy the pound sterling and admitted he made a billion dollars on that “deal.” Such a person, it must be acknowledged, doesn’t care for the British people having visited on them the suffering a destroyed currency brings. A list of those supporting staying is like a who’s who list of globalists and favorers of arbitrary rule.

David Cameron has been caught lying about future Turkish inclusion in the European Union. He said that question was decades away but it just came out that Turkey’s admission will be debated immediately after Thursdays vote. This is perhaps the single biggest reason the Brits are seeking exit. If Turkey is included in the EU, Muslim immigration, immigration that now threatens the very nature of Britain and indeed Europe itself, will go from a flood to a tsunami, washing away all vestiges of European culture, like freedom of speech, freedom of religion, the permissive sex characterized by Amsterdam, British pubs, and everything that makes Europe, well, Europe. Yet this most important issue was lied about to the British people to calm fears that, as it turns out, are very real.

A British Parliamentarian was murdered the other day by someone who supposedly is in favor of a leave vote. That hideous crime was welcomed by the stay supporters and triggered a world wide stock market rally. The globalists have tried to use that killing as a means to put off the vote indefinitely. Such actions are tantamount to dancing on the grave of Jo Cox. Now some conspiracy theorists believe her killing was a false flag attack to undermine the referendum, I have my doubts, crazy people are everywhere and by definition, do crazy things. If the killer actually wants Britain to leave, as he is said to want by the media that calls itself unbiased, he wouldn’t have created sympathy for the stay crowd… unless he was a nut job.

Of course there is always the possibility that the European Union bureaucracy will not let Britain leave anyway. Look what they did to Greece. The European Union’s Bureaucrats ordered, by fiat, the rightfully elected leaders of Greece to vacate their offices, who were replaced by apparatchiks from the EU. Greece is now a technocracy. Such actions are not the works of accountable leaders but of autocrats who rule arbitrarily. That such firebrands obeyed the orders of unelected unaccountable despots can only lead us to believe there were threats behind the scenes. Greece is now basically a protectorate of the EU. Philip Dru would be pleased.

Such obvious conniving should be a clarion call to all the British people and indeed all the people of Europe. Germany, France, Sweden and Belgium are rapidly loosing their identities as well. Protests fill the streets regularly in those rapidly disintegrating former nations. Europe is promptly loosing it’s unique culture and societies. Of course that is the plan for the globalists who seek one world government. They call it “multiculturalism,” when it is in fact the destruction of all cultures, to be replaced with a culture of slavery and subservience. In this one instance I agree with Nietzsche, and it makes my skin crawl to do so, Europeans have as a matter of history had the mindset of slaves, now that mindset is showing itself to be a suicide pact as well. May the vote be free of tampering, honestly reflect the will of the British people… and be the spark that sets the fire of freedom blazing in Europe again.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Our Machiavellian Elite

Monday, June 20th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… the elite today are more Machiavellian than in any time in the past. Machiavelli would have been proud of the elite, or put another way, the new class, to have taken Machiavellian principles to such an extreme in pursuit of their agenda. The reason Machiavelli’s works have stood the test of time is that they speak to our congenital human nature. His ideas span the gambit of human government and the amassing of power into the hands of those willing to use any means necessary to forward their agenda, which is always more power, money and prestige in the hands of the elite. The elite have always been sociopaths or psychopaths who are all too willing to lie, cheat, steal, murder and make war to get their way, indeed a lack of basic human compassion has been the hallmark of the aristocracy since time immortal. Since this is obviously the case as evidenced by all of human history, it is only rational to examine the actions of the elite in this light, furthermore is is Pollianish to believe the elite have our best interests at heart. It is and has always been the Pollianish, who are the useful idiots the elite exploit and manipulate by Machiavellian means, to create tyranny.

Machiavelli is most famous for his treatise The Prince. He wrote The Prince in an attempt to win favor from the new Medici prince who had recently overthrown Machiavelli’s sponsor the Borgia. In it, Machiavelli tried to prove that he could be useful to the Medici, by showing his political acumen. Unfortunately for Machiavelli the Medici didn’t look favorably toward those who has served the Borgias. That book, The Prince, however became a world wide sensation that has real points to teach us, even and especially today.

While Machiavelli sought favor from the Medici family his ultimate goal was to unite Italy and to that end he thought a strong man would be best suited for the task. At his core Machiavelli was a patriot. He believed that the Medici prince of Florence along with the Medici Pope could unite their forces and power bringing Italy under one prince. Machiavelli cared not if that prince were a Medici or a Borgia, because in time Italy could become a republic, Machiavelli’s favorite form of government has he espoused in his other famous book, Discourses on Livy. Today the global elite seek to unite the planet under one governemnt.

In The Prince, Machiavelli explains how a prince, (or politician) should be as untruthful as he or she needs while constantly claiming to be the most truthful person in the world. He used the example of a prince who lied constantly, even when the truth would serve him better but incessantly and vociferously claimed to be the most honest man on the planet. While everyone knew the prince was lying they still held him to be an honest man, believing his rhetoric rater than their own eyes and ears. Politicians today follow that rule religiously. We all know of politicians who have been caught lying over and over, but are still regarded by many as honest and trustworthy, and are even running for President.

Machiavelli’s term, “The end justifies the means,” has been taken to heart by the global elite today. The global elite believe in a one world government, they have been writing about it for decades. Ever since Marx wrote his manifesto the elite have been enthralled with the idea of a one world government, where everyone would be “equal,” except for the elite, who are always a little more equal than everyone else. To that end the elite lie, cheat, steal both our property and our elections, create fear and motivate us to act against our own interests with false flags, wage endless wars, destroy our money, intentionally overwhelm our economic system and create societal chaos, all as a means to the end they seek.

In The Prince Machiavelli espoused the virtues of arbitrary rule. Believing the ends justify the means as Machiavelli did, a temporary tyranny was a small price to pay to unite Italy, because afterward he believed Italy would come under a republican form of government. “A stable tyranny is better for the people than an unstable democracy,” was another phrase coined by Machiavelli. He said that under a stable tyranny, it is the elite who suffer being a threat to the tyrant, while the people have a stable society, albeit, a tyrannical one, in which to conduct business, however in an unstable democracy, business is near impossible, since your shop could be vandalized at any time by marauding hordes of angry plebeians. Today however that equation is flipped upside down. With the advent of modern surveillance, data storage and implantable rfid chips, the subjects of a tyrant are even the most lowly.

Anyone who denies the elite are Machiavellian is absurdly Pollianish. The elite have written extensively about their plans and the way they will bring them about. A rational person will look at the actions of the elite, as well as their writings, to decide the elite’s intentions. A fool will only listen to their words. The writers our leaders follow religiously today are Cloward and Piven, Saul Alinsky, Marx, Nietzsche, Herbert Marcuse and George Counts, along with many others, who are uniform in their Machiavellian conniving. Pointing this out gets the speaker branded a “conspiracy theorist,” which is another example of Machiavellian principles at work. To believe a lie in the face of someone’s actions shows a laziness of mind, lack of will and idiotic complacency, but so many do today we have all become lambs to the slaughter.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

It’s for your own good…

Monday, May 9th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the presumption of government always, and must always, stifle innovation. Societies that lack innovation stagnate. Those poor souls living in societies that are in stagnation, have only the past to look at, when estimating the future. A lack of innovation has many results… all of them bad. Alternatively, less government results in more innovation. Innovation that would have been crushed under a pile of red tape and licensing can flourish instead. Everyone doing their own thing and not forcing anyone else to act, think or believe, whether through government coercion, the threat of violence, blacklists or political correctness, allows humanity the ability to innovate, creating the expansionary part of the economic cycle. So it is very true that government has a great deal to do with the state of the economy.

Government presumes to know best for everyone everywhere. Not only do they know what is best for you and I, they are willing to do violence to our persons, for our own good. The whole chain is based on the presumption of those in government. The sin of presumption is to expect to go to heaven no matter what one does on Earth. The sinner presumes, or in other words believes that which is not so. The consequences for society, civilization and the march of humanity by the presumption of those in government not only is a violation of the limits our Constitution puts on government but has been is and will be the downfall of civilizations, past present and future.

Innovation is the lifeblood of a civilization. The very reason ours has been so successful is that we have not only allowed innovation, but encouraged it through patent law, copyright, venture capital, etc… Our civilization is the most scientifically advanced, not because we are at the end of time as we know it, but because we have allowed innovation. Innovation is dangerous to vested interests however. Change is always harmful to those at the top simply because change means they will no longer be at the top, that is the meaning of change. Therefore those at the top of a scientific field, industry, firm, agency, corporation etc… will oppose it. Since they wield political power to match their economic might, they presume to “ask” government to limit innovation in the name of, safety, patriotism, protectionism, apply the RICO statutes, and sometimes, dammit, it’s for the children. What it all amounts to is innovation and thereby, civilization itself, is stifled.

A stifled civilization always rots… Imagine the Roman in the declining years looking forward and saying to his friends that Rome would recover if only a new emperor was inaugurated. When in fact only a slow rotting away of his empire, language, status, wealth, indeed his very way of life was being disintegrated before his unseeing eyes. All the while presuming his and his civilization’s fortunes would turn rosy again… The old ways, the only ways allowed under penalty of law, become ever less effective to meet the always growing demand and so, calamity after calamity ensue. Once a civilization enters the final stage of decline, where each bad decision is met with another that is worse which is, of course, met with an even more absurd decision, the path is set. Even the most resilient societal and economic fabric cannot withstand such shearing force, force that gathers with each stupid decision.

Even when government is most benevolent and kind as it grows so innovation declines. The most wise man of Machiavelli’s time might have prescribed leeches for a migraine. To argue that was quackery would have got you arrested. The consensus of the scientific community is always in flux. The moment it stops changing it ceases to be a scientific community and becomes a cult. Today the consensus of scientists might believe that children are better off never having a pacifier. Regardless of merits of the argument, to force others to follow that dictate shows presumption. Even when the weight of scientific evidence shows a thing to be true to presume to force another to follow that finding is tantamount to the inquisition, the question being scientific consensus instead of Justification.

In the end, civilization only advances when there are many small experiments going on all the time. This country tries that economic policy, that nation over there tries a different legal system, another is an oligarchy while millions of economic experiments go on at the same time. A store opens on 4th street by the bakery, will it last, is it located right to get foot traffic, are the prices competitive, too high, too low… Millions upon millions of little experiments going on, each yielding their results to mankind, showing us what doesn’t work, what works, what works better and how to get around doing it at all. Any smothering of innovation and the mechanism of human advancement stops. All those small experiments cease and the whole thing stagnates… all because some egoists presumed to know what was best.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

America’s Single Party System

Thursday, April 28th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, elections only mean anything if there is a real choice. Not a beauty contest between two people who have the exact same views, platforms and plans, but a choice between two or more ideologies of government, economics and governance. Today, the progressives have managed to ensure that we never get a real choice about the future of our nations, our economic system or whether or not our leaders will follow our Constitution. Every election since Reagan has been between a progressive republican and a progressive democrat. No matter who wins, progressivism, and thereby Marxism, has won. Today is no different. With the near coronation of Donald Trump the republicans have picked their progressive and no matter who wins the democrat nomination they will have theirs very soon. So yet again we will have a choice, between a progressive and a progressive. Just like the old Soviet Union, Iran and many other autocracies. The people are given a false choice.

The United States was founded on libertarian principles. The founders, especially the anti constitutionalists, sought a government system that limited the people the least while limiting government the most. They set up a government that would allow the people to do pretty much as we see fit, limiting government in it’s ability to control us. The constitutional debate was about how to limit government’s power, how to control the tendencies of the elite to abuse power, how to ensure the people have the upper hand and how to limit the power of faction. The founders believed in liberty, a word that has been vanquished from our lexicon today. When was the last time you heard a politician say the word, “liberty?” Most of what we accept as lawful in our government would send the founders of our nation into conniption fits of rage and disappointment.

Libertarians are barred from the table of power. The new class uses a plethora of means to keep anyone who believes in liberty from the reigns of power. Libertarians are labeled with every derogatory meme that can be brought to bear. Since the new class controls the narrative there is never any effective push back even from the most absurd and spurious claims. Any politician who come anywhere near believing in the constitutional limits of government is seen as a threat to the established order. An order of autocracy veiled in peace, control hidden in protection and Marxism obscured by compassion. Reagan was the closest politician to our founding principles elected since Calvin Coolidge and he was hated to the extreme by the elite even today.

Romney typified the progressive republican. During the debates with Obama Romney couldn’t agree enough with Obama’s usurpations. Romney was full of compassion for the poor, he sought peace through strength and protection by control. In every election we are told this or that politician is “unelectable” because they believe in America and our founding principles. Of course the new class elite don’t use those words but that is exactly what they mean. Any politician who believes in limited government is destroyed by the new class controlled media, defamed by the political establishment as fringe, cursed on social media for not dropping out of the race, made a laughing stock by the culture and charged with whatever spurious claim that can be made up. The entirety of our society, government and culture attack any libertarian who seeks office.

This next election will be the same. The libertarian Cruz has finally been vanquished and Trump has all but won. Trump is a progressive zealot and has been his entire life. He supports every progressive policy, usurpation and regulation. He has helped fund the cultural Marxism that is polluting our culture and society like so much raw sewage. Trump has not only supported every progressive cause and politician but has given freely of his own money to promote them. Moreover, Trump has slopped at the trough of government cronyism. Since it is all but confirmed, the republicans will put up the uber progressive Trump, calling him a “conservative.” Hillary Clinton has admitted she is a progressive and Bernie Sanders is a Soviet style Marxist. The monikers the media place on them have as much to do with reality as Star Wars does space travel. Both are fiction designed to entertain and enrich the elite. So I wonder, which progressive are you going to vote for… The crony capitalist, the utterly corrupt woman or the outright Marxist?

Sincerely,

John Pepin