Posts Tagged ‘politics’

Islamism, Russia, NATO and WWIII

Monday, December 21st, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if you beat a dog over and over, it will eventually become vicious, then to justify further beatings because the dog has become vicious is just plain evil. Russia is a nation that has been invaded many times and every time has lost a huge percentage of their population, had their economy devastated, industry burned and lost more liberty in the reconquering of their land. In short, Russia has been beaten time and time again, so now the Russian people have become vicious, and now our leaders claim we need to beat them since they are vicious? During the Cold War, global Marxism needed to be challenged and defeated, since the primary global sponsor of Marxism at the time was the USSR, NATO was an alliance that had utility. Today, global Marxism has moved into our own governments and universities and so NATO has lost it’s utility, but the elite want to keep the alliance growing, not to stem Marxism as it was intended, but to advance it.

To the Russians, NATO is a knife at their throat. They rightly see NATO as another approaching invasion force. Since they have become all to accustomed to invasion from the west they are rightly nervous about a growing NATO. As the buffer around them, that the monster Stalin built after WWII, shrinks and NATO gets ever closer to their boarder, Russia will inevitably become more belligerent. It is human nature. They see NATO has lost it’s stated purpose, to stop the spread of global Marxism, and is scratching around for a replacement. That is why Ukraine is at war with Russia, Russia took two territories from Georgia and the Russia people love Putin. All because of the deep genetic fear that their history has ingrained in the Russians.

Russia is not all daffodils and honeycombs. Russia is no different than other countries in it’s use of evil to achieve it’s goals. After the 1917 revolution the Marxists who ran the Soviet Union marched across all their neighbors. Soviet armies marched west conquering the Baltic States, east and south subjugating Ukraine, Georgia, and central Asia. Before Germany invaded the USSR in operation Barbarossa, the Soviet army had attacked Finland driving that Norse nation into the Axis. The crimes of Russia, especially during the Soviet period were heinous, and were more about expanding Marxism than protecting their boarders. The fall of the Soviet Union however changed the paradigm on the planet, to the chagrin of the new class intellectuals, Marxism had been proved a failed system.

Gorbachev and then Yeltsin moved Russia into the world community, they allowed the vassal states to cede and they opened the Russian economy to capitalism. This angered the intellectuals even more. That their chosen system had failed as bad enough, but adding insult to injury, the sponsor of their system had become a turn coat and embraced the hated capitalism. That is why instead of helping Russia overcome it’s transitional pains, the West turned the screws on Russia. The new class elite, who had always thought the USSR would win the cold war, despised the new Russia.

Meanwhile the elite had this powerful military alliance they had built for decades to defeat the USSR, and their enemy had simply crumbled from economic malaise. Loathe to disassemble that which had taken so long to build the leaders of NATO scratched around for a new mission for it. In keeping with the old axiom, the leaders of today always prepare for the last war, they retained NATO and even expanded NATO’s mission. Gobbling up nations, ever closer and closer to Russia, NATO went from containment to aggression. Every time another country would join NATO, the Russian people, out of a deep sense of historical perspective, would become more nervous.

Today, the US and Europe are in the unenviable position of defending the Islamic State against Russian attacks. Our tax dollars and military assets are being used to protect people who are committing Genocide against Christians, Jews and Yazidis. Our military machine is defending those who are raping little girls in ritual fashion and our children are put in harm’s way to stop the Russian’s from bombing monsters. Out of their blind lust for power, ideological hatred of Russia for proving Marxism a failed system and their backward mindset of fighting the last war, our leaders have put us squarely on the wrong side of history and human heartedness.

The former Soviet state have every right to be able to defend themselves from Russia, who they rightly see as a threat to their sovereignty, but expanding NATO, an existential threat to Russia, was not the way to do it. Missile defense systems, arms sales and strong diplomacy would have achieved the result without antagonizing Russia. Moreover, NATO should have been disbanded immediately after the breakup of the Soviet Union. Our leaders have failed us over and over but this failure could lead to world war, and indeed it appears we are on the cusp of world war. Instead of alienating a potential ally wouldn’t it be a more intelligent move to embrace the Russians, and ask Russia to join the European Union, (although I sincerely doubt they would given the way Europe is on a mission to commit suicide), bringing Russia into the West?

The people there have suffered a century of Marxist tyranny, they have withstood multiple invasions from the West and they have persevered. The Russian people are tough and pragmatic, but have been kicked over and over, and so have become wary. Sure Putin might be an ass, although I have never met the man, but the Russian people deserve respect, even admiration. The same people that told us not to offend the USSR as it was tyrannizing it’s own people, are telling us now to be aggressive with Russia, and coddle the Islamists. Perhaps even the war in the Ukraine could be stopped, if instead of putting a dagger to Russia’s throat, we disbanded NATO.

Russia is like a dog that has been kicked too much, but is there any question that in a fight, the guy with a dog on his side will almost always emerge victorious? We have to ask ourselves, what do we want to happen in the world? Do we want war with Russia to defend the Islamists? Do we want Ukraine to keep bleeding? Or do we want to defeat the Islamists who are slaughtering their way across the globe, invading Europe and will soon take up Nazi Germany’s role in world history? Do we want to restore Ukraine to peace and prosperity? What we do, or more to the point, what our leaders do, will answer those questions.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Argentina’s Election of Macri

Thursday, December 17th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, Argentina is one profoundly corrupt nation, and that bodes ill for any possible economic prosperity. This isn’t news from the perpetual failure, Argentina, is no exception it is the rule. Argentina seems to have an ability to choose the wrong path as an intrinsic attribute. The corruption in it’s government is as legendary as is it’s economic failures. Argentina has become the poster child for everything wrong with modern government. Lately we have prosecutors found dead in their bathtubs, who have the audacity to write up criminal charges against the former President over collusion with Islamic terrorists from Iran to kill Jews, and is it a shock to anyone that the new prosecutor and the courts refuse to hear the case? Such endemic corruption would be unthinkable in a market based country, but Argentina is a socialist nation, and so such corruption is merely the way to do business, which is the future of any nation that chooses socialism. Argentina however, has just changed course, for how long no one can tell but electing a capitalist is a start.

In 1900 Argentina had the same GDP per person as the US. Since then Argentina has gone down the path to socialism in a big way. All governments like to hand out other people’s money, it makes the government appear generous without costing the elite that run it anything. Argentina has taken that strategy to a new level. Their healthcare system is open to anyone who needs healthcare from around the world. People flock to Argentina from all over South America to cash in on it which costs the Argentine people tons of money. The costs are paid for by the people through lower wages, lower standards of living and a shrinking middle class. The costs are born by the people and the benefits are given to the elite.

This year Argentina elected Mauricio Macri who ran on a platform of economic transformation. He claimed he will change the direction from socialism, which has failed so spectacularly in Argentina, to laissez faire. We will have to wait and see if he does, but that the Argentine people elected someone who will change course from socialism to capitalism, is encouraging. With it’s history of socialism and the outright destruction of the middle class through many bouts of hyper inflation is worry some however. It shows the people of Argentina will likely be expecting an immediate economic miracle, which after so many years of corruption and economic absurdity, will inevitably be slow, especially since Macri will have to fight against the entrenched bureaucracy.

The corruption became even more evident after Macri’s election. The record office had a suspicious fire, which destroyed all the records of who is owed what from the Argentine government, as well as all the pay offs and corruption of the last regime. Convenient eh? Then dozens of armored trucks left the Central bank will all the Argentine gold reserves and foreign reserves delivering them to waiting airplanes to be whisked out of the country to private accounts only God knows where. Such shenanigans highlight the results of socialist governments. Socialism is not for the benefit of the people but for the elite. The elite live like kings while they steal everything that is not nailed down.

The endemic corruption within the government will not just go away because a new president has been elected, it will need to be dug out and excised, like the cancer it is. How such a feat can be done with people who are corrupt themselves will be an enigma, unless Macri can somehow get the government and people to agree on a Constitutional amendment that establishes a NUMA. Drawn from people outside government such a branch could effectively root out the corruption that has so hobbled Argentina. Anything short of a NUMA would be smashed against a wall of corruption decades in the making.

Argentina has a long hard road ahead of it to get their economy and government functioning again. The new President Macri is facing an entrenched bureaucracy that will try mightily to stymie his every effort at reform, corruption in every nook and cranny of the government, a people anxious for results, and a media that is at best hostile to his reforms. He does have the benefit however of presiding over a nation that is rich in natural resources, has good access to the ocean, has an educated people willing to work, and fairly good infrastructure. We should pray for the people of Argentina, that Macri’s reforms do the trick and that Argentina puts its socialist past behind it. Not just for the Argentine people, but as an example for all the people in poor countries beset by socialism and corruption.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Bigotry is Never Progress…

Monday, December 14th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, bigotry is alive and well today, and the very same people are responsible. They claim we need institutionalized prejudice to fight former institutionalized prejudice. Those people are the heirs of progressives of old, like Margaret Sanger, Woodrow Wilson and their ilk, who created the institutions of prejudice that are active today. The victims of their bigotry are different but their bigotry is obvious to anyone with their eyes open. Moreover, they use the term racist to quell debate and have bandied the terms, bigot, prejudice and racist so much, the despicable nature of the words and their negative connotation has lost most of their value. The reason progressives use bigotry is several fold, they get power from it, they get wealth from it, it allows them to own the debate, and most of all, they get a feeling of superiority from it. Humanity needs to move beyond such childish tactics before our philosophy can rise to the heights it needs to, to support our scientific and technological advancements, because unless our philosophy keeps up with our technology and science, those two legs will become unstable and fall, bringing our whole society down with them.

Science and technology require as a prerequisite, a philosophical underpinning to support them, else they falls over due to ignorance and bias. Civilization has three legs, philosophy, (which includes religion), Science and technology. Unless they grow together the civilization becomes unstable. If one shrinks as the others grow a fall becomes inevitable and most human civilizations throughout history have become unstable this way. They grow in science and technology as their philosophy becomes more human hearted, but once they have reached a new pinnacle of prosperity, the people are led away from their human hearted philosophy, by the elite who have become arrogant and egoistic. The leg of the philosophy supporting the civilization and society shrinks and the collapse becomes inevitable. In hind sight all civilizational collapses are obvious but the people within that civilization are blind to it, even attacking those who point out the obvious as crazy, like the Romans did Titus Livius.

Bigotry is any time people are lumped into groups by a characteristic. It is most foul when that characteristic is considered negative. Whenever someone says, “All of these people are…” they are demonstrating bigotry. It doesn’t matter who the group consists of nor the characteristic described, whenever someone groups people by a characteristic, it is bigotry. We can also deduce that group politics is based on bigotry. To factionalize the people and pit each group against the others is to use prejudice as a political weapon. Such scheming has been the progressive playbook from the beginning. There is no difference between Jim Crow and vilifying gun owners. Both pile dispirit people into a group, assign that group certain negative characteristics, and then pits society against that group for the negative qualities they have been assigned.

Progressivism cut it’s teeth on bigotry and racism, today progressives use it their fall back position, prejudice as a bulwark against debate. There is not a debate today where progressive don’t use their ace in the hole. They play the race card at every opportunity, sometimes to claim preferential treatment for this or that group, sometimes to vilify a group or to simply stop a debate that is skirting the truth about a subject. Progressivism is all about group politics. Without lumping people into some artificial group and either claiming that group is put upon or evil, progressivism would have no place. It is all about groups, like all socialism, the very term, socialism, means politics for the benefit of a certain group. Just listen to them deny the sovereignty of the individual for the group, “People need to start thinking about what is best for the greater good instead of themselves…” Such utterances put the group ahead of the individual and thereby are bigoted in the most general sense of the term.

The most pernicious form prejudice takes is when the bigot gets a feeling of superiority from his or her prejudice. This is perhaps the greatest sin of progressivism. Progressives get a feeling of moral superiority from their prejudice and bigotry. While denying moral authority that comes from the divine they find moral superiority in the banal. That is possibly the main reason progressives and all socialists, are so attached to prejudice, is that feeling of superiority it gives them.

At their very core, bigotry, racism and prejudice are comparative. “I am better than them because…” It is foolish to compare yourself to others, because there will always be those who are greater and lesser, and that leads to arrogance and anger. Bigotry, racism and prejudice have no place in modern society, especially as a political weapon. When you see it point it out, not as a means to stop debate, but to protect open debate and nullify the power bigotry has over us. In order to continue expanding in science and technology our civilization must advance philosophically. True philosophy is not bigoted, no matter the group protected or harassed, true philosophy is human hearted, inclusive and includes the divine, never the banal.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Freedom Must be Defended

Thursday, December 10th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the moment opinion is met with death threats, there is tyranny in the land. Donald Trump, who is not my first choice for President, recently said we should stop all Muslim immigration to the US and that statement has caused a firestorm. The RNC has condemned Trump in the harshest of terms, the media that calls itself unbiased has gone into anaphylactic shock, and now there are death threats from the religion of peace. His opinion has resulted in death threats and so there is real tyranny, the tyranny of intolerance, censorship, blind ideology and outright hatred. Such outright tyranny should send a chill down the spine of every freedom loving person, in America, and beyond. Calling for the death of a person because you disagree with his or her opinion shows a presumption that boarders on the demented. Moreover, to presume to call for the death of someone else because of their opinion, by reciprocal attribution, means anyone else has an equal right to call for another’s death for their opinion, which is a road to chaos and violence.

Carter not only stopped all Iranian immigration in the 1970s but forcibly shipped back all those Iranians who were here legally! His measures were not called draconian and there were no calls for Carter’s death. Many of the people, if not most, were horrified that the Shaw was overthrown and the crazies won the government. I had a friend, Sayeed, who was here on a student visa. He cried at the thought of going back, but the government came, arrested him and sent him back to certain death. I asked him why he was so afraid of the new government, and he told me, “They are more crazy than you can imagine…” Sayeed didn’t agree with the Ayatollah nor was he a nut job, he was a good person who happened to be Iranian and had to be arrested and shipped back because of Carter’s decree. Agree or disagree with Carter, no one called for his death, even though he went way beyond what Trump called for.

There is an old saying, “If you want to know who your masters are look at who you cannot criticize.” It can also be understood as if you want to know who wants to be your master look at who refuses criticism and calls for your death if you do. Here in the land of the free our forefathers have always resisted would be tyrants. To accept such rhetoric as calls for the death of people is tantamount to accepting the yoke of slavery. Such intolerance has no place in our society. Not just calls for the death of Trump because he has an opinion that some find unacceptable, but all calls for the death of others, like Black Lives Matter calling for police to be “fried like bacon…” or Louis Farrakhan calling for 1000 murderers to kill white people, such rhetoric demands tyranny over others and is the antithesis of freedom.

Indeed it is our very freedom that has allowed our society, based on the free exchange of ideas and opinions that has propelled the world into the heretofore unimagined standard of living we enjoy, the globe over today. Those places where opinion and ideas were met with death threats have always been backward and barbaric places where the advancement of civilization, science and culture has retreated. Humanity has only advanced when individual liberty has been protected. It is not unoffensive speech that needs to be protected, but offensive speech, otherwise civilization corrodes and the human condition worsens. Freedom, of action, speech, self protection and thought are the cornerstones of civilized man, censorship, intolerance and oppression are shifting sand that will collapse a civilization no matter how well it is constructed.

To presume to control another’s speech, thought or liberty is hubris of the highest order. Such hubris forgets that if one believes he can control another, then that other has every right to control him! Any attribute foisted on me, I can reciprocate, and foist back on you. Call for my death and I have every right to call for yours. That my friends is the path to chaos and violence and can only result in the lowering of the human condition. Take a long look at what people say. If they call for the silencing of others, limits on liberty, thought laws or religious fidelity, especially with threats of death, they serve chaos and violence and have no place whatsoever in modern civil society. They are an anachronism that belongs in the dark ages where people had slaves, burned others at the stake and beheaded people for idolatry. Those that call for the death of another because of the other’s opinion should be forcibly rounded up and shipped away, or denied entry, because such attitudes lead to retribution thereby becoming a spiral to unrest, famine and want. Whether they are college kids, radical racists, the media that calls itself unbiased, climate change alarmists or Islamists, they have no place in the land of the free. They can go live in those places that have earned the wages of tyranny and intolerance, to practice their tyranny and intolerance.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Why the Elite Do Such Absurd Things

Monday, November 30th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, chaos, terrorism, crime and fear create conditions where tyranny is not only likely but inevitable, and so anyone who seeks tyranny or in other words, arbitrary rule, merely sow these things and their job is almost done. To argue that no one would want tyranny is to argue no one would want to eat. It is human nature to seek power over others, as evidenced by all of human history, just as it is human nature to eat. Moreover, those that seek political power do so usually to use that power, else why seek it? So, those in political power, not all that have or seek political power, but a large majority, actually want tyranny, (as long as they are the tyrant) and therefore will actively sow chaos, terrorism, crime and fear in society, as a means to that goal.

It was the ancient Greeks who actually admitted and debated the faction that favored arbitrary rule. Today our schools, colleges and universities avoid teaching about arbitrary rule and so most people educated by the new class have no concept of it, as a philosophy or even that there are always those who favor it. To understand the philosophy of arbitrary rule one has to read Plutarch’s Lives, Plato and Aristotle. Since few actually read them, and many are told what they said, few really know and many think they know. The philosophy of arbitrary rule is, that the people are better served when they are ruled by a person or group, that can pass laws arbitrarily. It is as simple as that. Those that favor arbitrary rule believe humanity is better off if we are controlled by our “betters.” That people are so ignorant of this philosophy is damning to our education system but even more telling of the intentions of the new class.

Rationally self interested people, rational maximizers as economists label us, and self interested rightly understood as Tocqueville put it, struggle with those who favor arbitrary rule. We believe that humanity is better off when we the people have a say in our laws, customs and economy. We believe that people in the aggregate are better equipped to understand what society needs than a group of “superior men.” We understand that it is only through the protection of individual liberties that society can flourish… and our philosophy is born out by empirical testing. The period since the invention of Constitutional rule, a form of government that intentionally limits the elite and explicitly forbids arbitrary rule, has seen the greatest advancement in the human condition since the first man and woman walked upright. Those times where arbitrary rule has reasserted itself have seen famine, slaughter and suffering, without exception.

If you listen to the rhetoric of the elite, every solution they offer, is always more power in the hands of the few. Each time a problem pops up, a new regulation, law or form of surveillance is the only answer the elite allow us to debate. It is logical to conclude that due to their default position, of more government power and their favorite economic system socialism, that the elite favor arbitrary rule. It would be absurd to claim someone who always and everywhere seek more power in the hands of fewer and fewer people, favors individual liberty and eschews arbitrary rule! So since they favor and seek arbitrary rule it follows that they will do what it takes to create the conditions favorable to establishing arbitrary rule, for the good of humanity as they see it.

Perhaps that is why the political establishment goes to such lengths to create chaos in society. The elite have been undermining those institutions that create stability for over a century. The nuclear family is the most stabilizing force and is increasingly under attack by the elite. From the welfare state to gay marriage the elite have launched an all out war against the family. Christian religious institutions also create stability and so have been cowed by the elite. No church is willing to give up it’s religious tax exemption and so is unwilling to speak out, afraid to offend those who have the power to remove it, and so they have made themselves irrelevant. The list of stabilizing institutions is far too long to go into here but I am sure if you try you can think of many that are under attack or no longer exist.

Maybe the elite’s drive to tyranny is why the elite seek more terrorism instead of less. No one in their right mind believes that mass migration of Muslims will not create more terrorism in Europe and the US. To argue that it won’t is to argue up is down and down is up. Moreover, flooding a country will people who despise the culture and the people, then giving the invaders free everything is a terrifically destabilizing force, and can only lead to resentment, violence, backlash and more violence. Smashing the stable tyrants in the Middle East intentionally sowed the seeds of the migration which will inevitably lead to violence in Europe and the US on a wide scale, that violence can only lead to fear.

It is possible that the people who want to establish themselves as arbitrary rulers create the conditions for crime to flourish. More law doesn’t prevent crime, it only makes more people criminals, moreover, more regulations makes it harder to start a business or make a profit in an established business. This leads to less employment opportunities, lower wages and more crime because of it. History shows that periods of rapid economic expansion see very low crime rates and periods of low economic expansion and recession see rising crime, social strife and hate groups. All of which makes the people afraid, of their economic outlook, their property and their very lives.

Fear is the uniting element that makes the others so effective. Terrorism, chaos and crime all create fear, and a human being who is blinded by fear will run into the arms of anyone claiming they can put that fear at rest. Since we have been carefully conditioned to believe that more government power is always the answer to every question and all exigencies, most people will turn to a strongman who will “get them” and “fix it.” Like Germans did after Wiemar. Fear limits the mind and terror shrivels the soul, making people little more than animals, willing to burn another at the stake for causing the plague, behead a Virgin to restore the crops, and wipe out a race of human kind. Fear that will answer all the dreams of those that seek arbitrary rule, because the end justifies the means, and in the end, they believe arbitrary rule is in all of our best interests, especially theirs.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

NATO, Turkey, War Crimes and Acts of War

Thursday, November 26th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, a bar fight is usually started by the smallest person in the bar, Turkey’s shooting down of a Russian plane is no exception. I have heard it called little man disease, when a short person starts a fight, then slips away as his friends trade blows. Smart people stop hanging around with someone like that, because they are troublemakers, and smart nations would boot Turkey from NATO, for being a troublemaker. Turkey is a liability to NATO. It is fast descending into an Islamist intolerant tyranny. Erdogan has corrupted the Constitution to allow himself to become president for life, and install the Islamist agenda and so, Turkey no longer shares any values at all with Western nations. Moreover, should we allow a pint sized bully like Turkey to get the world into a nuclear war to protect IS and their genocide against Christians, raping of little girls, tossing gays from buildings, burning to death Captives, crucifying children and slaughter of any Muslims not Muslim enough? Is that a valid reason to end the world?

The killing of a pilot as he or she is parachuting down is a war crime. If you own a business and one of your employees runs over a child, your business is held liable, not the driver. That is because he is working under your auspices. In the same way, those rebel groups that are the vassals of the US and Turkey, operate with the support and auspices of those nations. So, war crimes committed by the sanction of another country, are the responsibility of that country. Therefore Turkey and the US are responsible for the war crimes of those that they sponsor. In other words, war crime are being done in your name, do you support that?

Turkey claims the plane was in their airspace but the events around the downing belie that claim. If it was indeed in their airspace, then how could the pilot have been murdered by rebels in Syria? The claim that the plane continued on back into Syria is just as damning as the claim the pilot was shot by rebels. Think about it, If the plane was in Turkey’s airspace and headed back to Syria, then why shoot it down? If the plane was in fact in Syria, then the downing of it was an act of war, if the plane was in Turkey’s airspace and wasn’t headed back to Syria, then the plane couldn’t have fallen on Syria, and the moment the plane was hit, the pilots ejected, they don’t continue like the plane would, and so drop pretty much below where they eject, since everyone agrees they landed, or would have landed in Syria, then the plane must have been shot down over Syria! What we have is an act of war compounded by a war crime, done by our “ally.”

Turkey is responsible for genocide against the Armenians, in the 1950’s it tried to detonate a bomb in it’s own embassy in Greece to stoke nationalistic outcries, which resulted in the slaughter of hundreds of Christians, and Turkey backs IS. Turkey has no business being in NATO in the first place. Turkey has waged war against the Kurds, the only Muslim people to protect Christians, Yazidis and others, the Kurds who have been the only true allies the US had in Iraq, and the only people in that part of the world with any real virtue. Turkey is a criminally run nation, that has worked against the interests of humanity since it’s inception, that is now becoming an Islamist stronghold.

NATO has a responsibility to defend it’s members who are attacked, but in this case Turkey wasn’t attacked, it was the aggressor. The original reason NATO was started in the first place was to stem the USSR, a country that no longer exists, and the advance of Marxism, which our governments have embraced, so there is no reason for NATO to exist anymore. Especially since it obligates Western nations to protect a petulant country that is becoming a despotic Islamist tyranny. Like a smart group of friends stops hanging around with a troublemaker, NATO should be smart and evict Turkey from NATO, before Turkey commits another war crime or act of war obligating us to burn our cities to the ground in nuclear fire to defend the slaughter and rape of innocents. In fact NATO itself has become a liability instead of a asset.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Foolishness and Wisdom

Monday, November 23rd, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the more ignorant and foolish a person is, the more secure they are in their beliefs. Where a reasoning man or woman questions their assumptions and biases, a fool never burns a calorie in their mind at all, they see no need. The foolish and ignorant are the first to resort to anger and violence if their beliefs are questioned. Being foolish, they would rather fight than think, and that quality of the foolish is fundamental. Ignorance is a condition that can be repaired, but the foolish will see knowledge, especially knowledge that questions their world view, as heretical. So sure are they in their beliefs that they need not learn. All of which make the foolish and ignorant easy to pick out, they refuse to listen to argument, instead making personal attacks, are quick to anger, resort to force rather than reason, have religious like faith in mankind and government, and most of all they are certain about that which cannot be known.

Young people have little life experience and so are more foolish than someone with a great deal of life experience. This is both a benefit and a curse to them. It is beneficial because they are willing to innovate in the face of almost certain failure. This is often the source of human advancement and is why most advancement comes from the youth. It is a curse however since most tyrannies have been ushered in by the youth. They foolishly follow some charismatic villain and find they have forged their own chains. The foolish youth are quick to resort to violence and that tendency has been put to good use by many despots. Che Guevara lauded that tendency of the youth to engage in violence. Once they grow up however most people loose their foolishness in the passage of time.

Unlike religious faith, which is based on rational self interest, the foolish have faith in that which has proven itself unworthy of faith. To digress for a moment, Religious faith is based on rational self interest for a host of reasons, those who have faith in God lead happier lives, live longer, live healthier, have more success in life, have stronger family ties and the retirement benefits are much better than the alternative. Religious like faith in some person, system or idea is the path to catastrophe. Get enough zealots to follow a villain and tyranny results, blind faith in an economic system like socialism and the economic future of the people is forever lowered, unquestioned belief in an idea is how entire cultures are destroyed.

A recent poll of generation x concluded that as many as 40% of them are in favor of government restricting speech that might be offensive. The real number is probably lower, (I hope), but the vehemence of those that see no problem with government deciding what speech is acceptable, are so sure of their position they need not question themselves or their assumptions. Disagree with them and they immediately attack you as a hater. They can’t be bothered with reason, like the slippery slope argument, the history of such movements or that innovation requires free thought which flows from free speech. They are willingly forging their own (and our) chains, and are helped along by professors who never grew up and dropped their foolishness, because they never left the coddling cradle of academia.

A person need not be young to be foolish and some who are foolish are not ignorant but the two go together like chocolate and milk. Ignorance is not only a lack of knowledge, but the inability to apply knowledge, which is in itself a form of foolishness. There are people who don’t have a great deal of knowledge, but are wise, which again shows that knowledge is not proof against foolishness, and ignorance is not proof of foolishness. To be foolish is to be willfully ignorant, self inflicted and self directed. To be wise is to be open minded and willing to question assumptions, but not to abandon those concepts that have been tested in the crucible of time, to do so is to be foolish.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

A Gun is a Tool of Liberty

Monday, November 16th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, for a society to be truly free, the people must be armed and be able to defend themselves, and for the same reason, before a people can be enslaved they must be disarmed. While it is obvious that a slave must be disarmed, the other side of the coin, that a person be armed and able to defend themselves, is not as clear. There are many who in their ignorance believe a helpless person can be free, such thinking is muddled at best and pernicious at worst. The state of freedom, by it’s core definition, is one of independence from coercion. A disarmed person is helpless and is at the mercy of anyone armed with intent to force submission. Therefore anyone disarmed is a slave. Only those people who have the ability to defend themselves can be said to be truly free.

Ignorance is the closest ally of the despot. Many people who have never been around guns falsely seek to limit their availability. In their ignorance and fear they can’t imagine the safe use of a gun. They believe their fellow man is incapable of virtuous actions. Maybe because they know themselves and judge others by that standard. Yet millions of people own guns and have never shot anyone. In fact, those who use guns for violence are the exception, those who don’t are the rule. The would be autocrat plays on the ignorance of people to get them to go along with their own enslavement. The elite know that sowing the seeds of fear is always a means to separate people from their Rights and ignorance is a breeding ground for fear.

A gun is nothing more than a tool. That a gun is a dangerous tool is evident, but many tools are dangerous and many people are harmed by their misuse. A chain saw is a dangerous tool, ignorant people are scared by a chainsaw’s noise and potential for dramatic harm. Many people are wounded badly, and even killed by the misuse of chain saws, but there is no call from government for their banning. ATVs are very dangerous, but not as scary, many people are critically injured by their misuse, in fact more people are injured in ATV accidents than by guns, yet there is no widespread call to ban ATVs. A ladder is a very dangerous tool, in fact falls from ladders is one of the single biggest sources of personal injury, but government doesn’t try to outlaw ladders. The argument that guns are dangerous and so should be controlled only by government is false, and is designed, not to enhance safety, but to enslave the people, because a gun is a tool to fell tyrants, while a chain saw is a tool to fell trees.

Those who have a mind to enslave others know that first the victim must be disarmed. You never see a thug tossing his victim a gun before the criminal robs him do you? Governments intent on becoming tyrannical understand this all too well. Since it is usually bloody and inefficient to try to forcibly take guns from the citizenry, subterfuge becomes the means of choice. Government, for example, can create conditions where the society becomes ever more randomly violent. As the people feel less and less safe, some, perhaps many, will turn to government to become tyrannical, to prevent the violence. That government which has a mind to become despotic will be all too happy to comply. Such a government could also vilify gun owners by sending guns to a neighboring country’s villains and blame the resulting violence on their own citizens. The elite could import hundreds of thousands or millions of people who they know will engage in crime, undermine the society and sow chaos.

Violence is a reflection of a society, not the tools it has. Where people have no stake in society, they will be more prone to violence, when violence is glorified the unstable will adore the excitement of violence, the less moral a people the more acceptable violence will become, and whenever a government condones violence against the most innocent, (as in abortion)… violence will appear honorable. Violence in any society comes from the elite, the cultural elite, government elite and business elite. A society that is violent is violent because the elite have made it so, removing the tools of liberty will never remove the violence the elite sow in society, it will only make the violence more personal.

A gun is a tool and only a tool… of liberty, those who are armed are free while those without guns are slaves. Slaves to their fear, their ignorance and their government. They are dependent on another for their individual security. We all know in our hearts that where guns are outlawed only outlaws have guns, and where only outlaws have guns, you are in constant danger, but in their ignorance and fear born of that ignorance, many are willing to subject themselves and their fellows to the slavery of criminals. Violence in a society is the fault of the elite, who sow it’s seeds, nurture the culture of violence and condone it’s use. That the elite benefit from violence in enhancing their power and enslaving a nation is lost on most. Villains prey on the weak, not the strong, to be disarmed is to be weak and therefore prey, to be armed is to be strong, and therefore free, therefore, only those people who are armed and are able to defend themselves can be said to be free, those without the ability to defend themselves are slaves, in every sense of the word.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Actions have Consequences

Thursday, November 12th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, actions have consequences, both individual and collective, some immediate and some delayed, but they all have consequences. Government actions, (collective actions) however produce a special kind of consequence. Of all the entities that have ever existed, only government benefits from mistakes, to a point, then the cumulative weight of those bad actions come crashing in and destroy that government which has profited so much, by a series of mistakes. Elitist theory says that every fall of every government is the product of a series of mistakes that led to it. When observed by a person however those downfalls might appear random, this country lost a war and so was destroyed, that country experienced a drought that triggered a famine, and so on. But when looked at in the long term, it becomes obvious that each failure was predicated on a series of poor decisions by the rulers, that led to their own downfall. The same paradigm work today with our modern governments and institutions leading inevitably to our downfall.

If you make a bad decision, the likely hood is that you will experience the effects pretty soon, sometimes you have to make a series of bad decisions before the consequences appear, but given enough bad actions consequences become inevitable. This is how we learn right from wrong, smart from stupid and profit from loss. The immediacy of the negative consequences is a great teaching tool for individuals. Governments however work under a far different paradigm.

If a government makes a wrong decision, the people suffer, but the government prospers. Each bad action leading to more power and more money for those in power. The consequences for those in leadership are profit for bad decisions and loss for good ones. If a government passes a law that is supposed to lower the cost of health care for example, and instead that law raises the cost making health care more unaffordable, the people will turn to government again to fix the problem government created. Government, and those in government profit comes at a cost to the people. If a government regulation drives down economic output, more regulation is demanded to improve the economy. Again government profits while the people loose. This can work for generations, each wrong action resulting in more government power and more money for those in power.

It works only to a point however. Each bad decision creates tension in the economy, society and defensively. One bad action might lower economic output driving a call for more equal distribution of economic output, which further lowers economic output. Eventually the economy of such a nation will be destroyed. Then the collapse of the economy will be blamed on some extrinsic shock, that is said to have “caused” the economic meltdown. Had the economy been left alone and those cumulative bad actions had not been taken, the economy would have survived the external shock and probably would have profited by it. As government regulates it’s citizens, and so corrodes the people’s stake in the nation, those who have lost a stake in the nation will care less for it’s future and will turn to drugs, crime and the dole. As more do such things, more regulation is needed to control those who have lost their stake in the nation, further corroding others stake in the national outcome until no one cares about the nation. If a war were to break out, no one would fight for a country they have no stake in, and so the war will be lost. As we have shown, it wasn’t the war that destroyed the nation but the cumulative decisions of the leaders. The war was merely the catalyst that triggered the consequences of the cumulative bad decisions of the leaders.

Our modern countries have profited tremendously from their bad decisions. Our leaders become rich while in government, then become filthy rich after, by selling their access. Each bad action taken by our governments enriches those in power and enhances their power. Those bad decisions have apparently positive consequences for those in power and so they become drunk with their seeming omnipotence. The worst their actions they make the more power and riches they get. This continues until today when our leaders act, to any rational outside observer, absolutely absurd. Sadly, there will come a day when the true consequences of all the bad decisions our leaders have made, come crashing in on them and us. Since they have profited so much by those bad actions, to expect them to change is like expecting a heroin addict to willingly kick the habit, while heroin is freely available and they live in a mansion. In the next incarnation, this same paradigm will work out, because the actions of government appear to have opposite consequences for the elite than the people. The eventual consequences are inescapable, the timing cannot be known, and people will point to some shock, war or outside exigency that led to it… but actions always have consequences.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

The Defective Products of Our Governments

Monday, October 19th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, a carpenter uses squares, levels and chalk lines to get satisfactory results, an accountant uses entries in a ledger to harmonize the income and outgo of a business’ expenses, and a CEO uses profit margins and return on investments to gauge their performance, those in politics however, have no such devices to insure the quality of their work, the effectiveness of their laws nor quantify the benefit of their actions. It would seem then, that the carpenter, accountant and executive is held to a higher standard than Senators, Congressmen, Judges or President of nations. The actions of a Judge has implications for the whole of the society, the economy balances on the laws passed by Senators and Congressmen, a President that refuses to equally administer the laws destroys civil society, yet there are no measures, gauges or regulations on them. The lack of which lowers, not only the quality of the work of government, but insures the sub par performance of everything government touches.

Imagine building a house without a level, square or chalk line. Such a house, no matter the expertise of the carpenter, would be shoddy. The walls wouldn’t be plumb, the floors wouldn’t be level and the framing wouldn’t be straight. Every part of that house would be terrible. Were a house built without the use of these tools it wouldn’t stand a year. If however, a house were built by an amateur, with the use of levels, squares and chalk line, even given the substantially lower skill level of the carpenter, it would be much better then a house built by an expert without the use of such quality enforcing tools. Quality work then requires the tools to ensure quality workmanship.

What if an accountant didn’t use ledgers to keep track of the expenditures of a business and instead kept all the figures in his head? That business would fail in short order. Money would be wasted, employees would get paid correctly, and inventory would be misallocated. No part of that business would function properly. No matter how intelligent or practiced the accountant, eschewing the use of books and ledgers would make her work terrible. Many businesses have no accountants at all however, but the owners themselves do the work with the use of ledgers and software t account for the expenditures and income and run just fine. It s obvious then that the use of ledgers are critical to running a business.

A CEO who didn’t allow the use of profit margins and return on investment would quickly find no one would buy shares of the company, and those who did would quickly loose their hard earned money. Such a corporation would be impossible to figure actual value, no one would know or could know, if it were profitable or not, or quantify the performance of the CEO. No matter how skilled in management that CEO was. The quality of his work could not be determined. Take an unskilled manager and let him used the tools of assessment of a company she runs however, and that company would be quantifiable, people would buy shares in it and the company would be able to function. If the company she runs is not profitable she will be replaced and if she does a good job the stock value will increase. The tools of return on investment and profitability are critical in running a corporation.

Politicians however have no tools to ensure the quality of their work, no tools to quantify the effect of their laws nor tools to understand the return to society of their regulations. Instead, government works in the dark, passing laws and regulations hither thither and yon. If a regulation backfires and makes the situation it was supposed to rectify worse, no problem, glom on another poorly thought out regulation. Which is like a carpenter not using a level to find plumb and so just nails on another board. If a law results in the lowering of a sector’s profitability, who can measure it, there are no ledgers to use to calculate the effect of a new law. If a decision of a judge has a pernicious incentive, who can evaluate it, there are no means of quantifying the societal impact of a judges ruling. Moreover, regulators, legislators, judges and presidents refuse to be bound by measures to improve the quality of their work, measure the effect of their labor or calculate the societal impact of their decisions.

What we have is a system where the person who labors with their hands produces high quality work, the person who accounts for the income and outgo of a business, calculates it to the penny, and the people running businesses performance is measured by the profitability of the enterprise, but our leaders have no such limits. Even the restraints of a Constitution are ignored and argued to the head of a pin. The result is that government, all governments, produce defective goods, deficient laws and inferior work. Such outcomes would be severely punished if a carpenter produced them, but they are accepted every day from our leaders. A Fourth Branch would provide the tools to measure, calculate the performance and quantify the societal effect of our leaders, unfortunately even the people most damaged by the defective products our government produces, recoil at the thought. Until we become as rational at gauging government, as we are about the quality of our homes, the profitability of our businesses and the return on our investments, we will continue to be damaged by the defective products of our governments.

Sincerely,

John Pepin