Posts Tagged ‘politics’

The Law of the Magnification of Jobs Due to Labor Saving Devices

Thursday, January 16th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, there should be a law of economics called, The Law of Magnification of jobs due to Labor Saving Devices. In my conception of it, when new technology is added to an economy, jobs are not lost, but gained. Locally and initially jobs might be lost but in the course of one economic cycle those jobs are not only more than replaced but made easier, better and with higher wages. This effect is not only global but local as well. It is important to keep this in mind when people say that such and such is taking away jobs, because the opposite is actually true.

 

Your job, my job and most other people’s jobs weren’t even invented a hundred and fifty years ago. That is an eye blink in written human history. Think of it, most of the jobs that keep tens of millions of people busy all day, were only invented so recently. Work with computers? They only came on the scene as workable things in the nineteen sixties. But when computers came out they were supposed to wipe out secretaries, instead they erased several levels of management from large cap firms. This freed up smart people with capital to invest and start businesses. Some of those ideas became large cap firms a decade or two down the road, and some in only a few years. Imagine the magnification of jobs this added to the others created by computers.

 

Cheaper, better, and faster ways of doing things frees up human capital that can be better spent on the things humans do best. It also makes the goods of society available to more people. One revolutionary technology that is about to burst is 3D printing. It will do to the creation of goods and products the same thing that word processing did to writing. 3D printing will bring the act of creation to the masses.

 

Every minute of every day, the Eggbert Slokums of the World are imagining new products, new goods, new ways of doing things. 3D printing will give them all the ability, to not just imagine and jot some notes on a napkin, but in a reasonable amount of time have a computer print the fully functional product, good of even mechanism. The abilities of this technology are startling. Unfortunately industries will disappear, people will loose their job, and there will be bankruptcies, these bad things will be the cost of the introduction of this technology.

 

How can anyone fully account for the benefit though? The future intangible benefits cannot be even imagined at. The reason is that no one can tell what innovations 3D printing will lead to. (If they could they would be billionaires). Imagine if we veered off from computers because Middle Managers were afraid of loosing their jobs. There would be no I Pods, no smart phones, no thumb drives, nor mouses. Typing would still be on a Selectric and special effects would be of the Star Wars variety. All the jobs that are now done by computer, for computers, and with computers, would cease to exist. Imagine how materially damaged our society would be if that had happened?

 

The last example I will use is the mechanical loom. Marx said, the mechanical loom would put so many people out of work, the people would starve, ushering in the revolution. “As the forest of arms grows ever thicker while the arms themselves grow ever thinner…” Some people did loose their jobs when the mechanical loom was introduced. Those that still worked on the looms, were no longer subject to the tendonitis from throwing the shuttle, their legs and backs didn’t ache from constantly peddling the loom and their wages went up. What is never mentioned however, is the mechanical loom has to be maintained and it takes a trained person to do that, parts for it must be imported, the demand for wool to feed a mechanical loom is much higher than a craft loom, the list of added jobs goes on and on.

 

The take away here, is that labor saving devices don’t destroy jobs they make more and better jobs. The people against the introduction of labor saving devices into the workplace are engaging in sophistry, making false arguments that appear logical for selfish ends. Classic liberal tactic… but like everything liberal, it makes perfect sense, as long as you don’t think about it to long.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Hubris or Humility, Which is Best in Our Leaders?

Monday, January 13th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, tyranny seeks to change the people to suit the State, free States seek to change the State to suit the people. Tyrants presume wisdom to know what is best for humanity, and with that hubris that necessarily comes with such presumption, they dread what would happen to them if someone else took over their power. In free states however, the state simply forms a framework for the markets, society and culture to work. It doesn’t take charge of any facet of society that it doesn’t belong in. The free state does not presume to know what’s best, it simply provides standards as a structure for human society to grow on, while the oppressive state, wants to not only provide the structure, but everything else as well, to protect their power. To that end the dictatorship must change the very essence of humanity, evolve us to something different, to become socially aware, ubermensch or whatever the mastermind connives the name to be. This is the fundimental difference between liberty and tyranny, the one respects who and what we are as human beings while the other must change who and what we are to something else.

 

Karl Marx argued in many of his writings that people will evolve out of our individual selves into species self. Once the revolution happens and the people live communally we will forget the individual self that so alienates us from others, and embrace our species self, that will end our alienation from each other and our work. Never mind, almost everything Marx said is provably wrong, the immense human suffering that has been committed in the name of communism, or that every “revolution” has been led by the intelligentsia and soldiered by the peasants, never the workers, think of the presumption of this as a philosophy. That fellow human beings be forced by violence, (what else is a revolution but violence), and then given such little respect, we are to be the lab rats in an experiment in human evolution? Can presumption possibly be raised to a higher level than that?

 

The example of the United States serves to show the other side of the coin. For most of it’s existance the US has been a place where the individual has been allowed to do his or her thing. The nation was founded on the concept of maximum liberty. The founders tried mightily to put in place a system of government that would protect the rights, priviliges and property of it’s citizens. This system has yeilded some pretty startling results. There has never been a place in the annuls of human history or lore, including the tales of Atlantis, where a country brought about such seismic change to the standard of living of people the World over, led science to such heights, achieved such measures of efficiency in the production of the goods of humanity, restored a people to liberty then left, nor reached the Moon. That the US is turning away from it’s heritage of liberty and freedom for the individual, and to the oppression of a state that seeks to become everything, will be the verfying counter experiment. Where we change the fundamentals to the opposite so the outcome reverses fundamentally as well.

 

If those who have such egos and presumption actually had faith in their ideas they wouldn’t have to change the essence of who and what we are. It is the nagging uncertainty, that produces a disquiet in their hearts, that forces the would be oppressor to seek to change the very nature of what it is to be human. They know in their hearts that they are not God but have the hubris to presume to supersede him. The leader, senator or government that has humility will not try to force change through oppressive control. The state that is free will have a great diversity of people, busy working away at whatever each finds the most rewarding, or whatever he or she falls into. Humility gives a leader the self assured tranquility to trust that liberty is truly the best policy, while presumptuous power corrodes the oppressors’ self assuredness and sense of safety, until they go insane and hang their uncle.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

We Have Become Inured to Hypocrisy

Thursday, January 9th, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, folks who advocate the State has the power to dictate how others live, should be forced themselves, first, to live that way. Were this the case I think we might see a bit more leniency in the thinking of many presumptuous people. Imagine for a moment, a World without hypocrisy in it’s leaders. It is of course not ours, but an imaginary one, where the elite are held to their own laws, regulations and orders. Do you suppose the laws, regulations and orders would be, let’s say, better thought out? If the people making the rules were held to them, doesn’t it seem reasonable, those people would make as few as possible? Wouldn’t everything, society, the culture, and the economy, be better if the laws were minimized, better thought out and applied equally?

 

But we all know that land is fictional, the land we live in is the land of hypocrisy. The First Lady advocates the rest of us living as aesthetic a life as possible, walking to work, easing the thermostat, eating nothing but kale and green beans… while she lives and eats like a queen. Now, I couldn’t care less how she lives nor should I. How she lives is her business, not mine. She, however, has a totally different way of thinking. She would like nothing better than to order me how to live. If I do something she finds objectionable she would love to regulate it, but if she does something I am offended by, her attitude is that I should be forced to pay for it, to open my mind.

 

People who seek political power almost always seek control over others. Why else seek political power? The only other reason is to lessen the power of government over the people. Those that seek power over others cannot run on that. It would be absurd. Vote for me, try a session with my oppression… Those who seek power over others have to couch their rhetoric with platitudes and handouts. The whip doesn’t come out until they have total power, but how offended the tyrant would be, if he felt a lash!

 

One thing about people who seek power over others, their egos are so fragile, they demand others applaud everything they do. You see this in how politically correct our speech has become. How many words can you think of that you would never say in public in the next ten seconds? A dozen, or more, is my average. Those that seek power over others have changed our language, and since we think in that language, they have also changed our thinking. They have become the thought police, but is their thought policed, for the betterment of mankind too?

 

Some people do seek political power to lessen the reach of government however. They are the ones who the elite call heartless, bigots who hate the poor, minorities, the environment ETC… When a politician is called heartless, that is a sure sign he or she seeks to limit the scope, role and reach of government. Those that seek power over others, must delegitimize those that seek to lower the power of government, because if those that seek to lower the power of government are successful, the potential power over the lives of others, of those that seek power over the lives of others, will be reduced.

 

The blatant hypocrisy of those that seek power over others using ad homonym attacks against those that seek to lower the power of government, is lost on most people because we have become so used to it. Live in a sewer and the smell will be invisible to you after awhile. We have steeped in the hypocrisy of the elite for so long we have become immune to it. Yes occasionally someone will point it out but we are quickly told, there is nothing we can do about it, so we go back to ignoring the stench.

 

So when you hear someone claiming to want political office to help people you know they seek power over others. When you hear a politician called heartless you know that politician seeks to lower the power of government over others. Many other things can be seen, and smelled, once you open your eyes and nostrils. The way to do that is to clear your eyes and nose, by imagining a land where politicians are held to their own laws, regulations and orders…

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

What if Life Were a Game?

Thursday, January 2nd, 2014

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, it would be really cool, if people lived under a system in which we all competed to help our fellow man the most, top prize going to the guy or gal who succeeded by helping the most, the most. If the competition were dynamic it would be even better. In other words, the system wouldn’t pick just one winner, but millions of winners every moment every day everyplace. Winnings piled upon winnings. The incentive would clearly be for every man woman and child to help their fellow man and be a blessing on mankind. Cuz that’s how you win!

 

We could set it up as a game. People would go out and provide some service or good for their fellow human beings to consume, then bring back the amount of products or service given and each would get a weighted prize based on the volume. The person who moved the most would get the top prize unless that person used underhanded measures to achieve the numbers. Inflating the numbers entered for example.

 

Perhaps we could allow entrants to lever their sales and positions with sublets. A sublet could be another contestant who gives a portion of his or her handing out numbers. This would be in exchange for some material help. Allowing people’s needs and wants to be met even more efficiently. If within the game contestants could combine freely and as needed to meet the needs of society.

 

New products and services could be scaled differently and by a different standard. One that leverages the producer of a new good, service, or way of combining resources. Contestants who invented such things and made them available to the public, could get a special scale that measures people served instead of volume of services or goods. The creator of new stuff could get top prize many years.

 

The contest would be free to enter, but a contestant could use money he or she has, to enhance their ability to provide products or services, or perhaps invent new stuff. The ability to add in new money to the game would improve the efficiency of the process. It would allow way of creation to get abilities sooner than it otherwise would or could have. Obviously, making creation of a product cheaper by the introduction of better ways of creation, sooner rather than later, would make the game more dynamic.

 

Imagine how much good that game would be, not only for humanity that would directly benefit, but for the entrant, who would get benefit both through societal improvements and by personal enrichment for having taken part in the rejuvenation of society. In this way entrants to the game would get multiple benefits, a third possible benefit would be one of the top prizes, which would be far more likely than the lotto. The incentives in such a contest would be to improve the lot of Man, not lower the lot of Man.

 

But of course, this contest exists. It is called the market system, or meritocracy, the same system Marx derided as Capitalism. In a truly market system there is nearly universal prosperity, while in the most socialist countries there is universal poverty. The difference is as stark as it is irrefutable. In a market system, but not under crony capitalism, the creator of new stuff, or the entrepreneur, is well rewarded for significant advances. We freely combine or in other words self organize, to meet the needs of society, economic efficiency and to include those who otherwise couldn’t be included. No person needs to be rich to enter the market system, just willing to work. If he or she is so inclined they can use the resources they have put aside, to purchase the way of creating, or in other words, means of production.

 

The way to have a prosperous society where no one falls through the cracks, unless they want to fall through the cracks, and lets face it, who are we to presume to deny a human being the right to fall out of society, unless they are escaping moral, rational justice. The contest we are engaged in, the market system, is why we are so much more wealthy than those who labor under socialist systems. Ours, is a game to improve the lot of Man, while theirs, is a game to take the largest portion of a dwindling pie.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

 

Incentives, in the Long and Short Term

Thursday, December 19th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, incentives count, in every facet of human existence. People can be relied on to do what is in their immediate interests. Long term interests however, have less bearing on what we do, because the consequences are distant, while the consequences of short term actions are at hand, so they count more. As more negative incentive build up in society we can reasonably expect more negative actions by people. This is a fundamental fact of economics. That is why the incentives in a society are possibly the most important factor in the real standard of living of that society.

 

If the building you are in is on fire and you are trapped in a room on the 20th floor, what can you do? Jump out the window, landing is simply the next problem you have to solve. The world we live in demands immediate actions and our thinking has evolved to satisfy those needs. When we get up we think about the day at hand and not so much about the coming year. It is mere human nature. So when our immediate needs and wants are blocked by regulation, or encouraged by culture, we react within those constraints. The long term results of those actions are rarely considered.

 

Governments around the world have taken on a new role in the lives of people, to mitigate the negative consequences of negative behavior. Even a cursory look at the goal of most modern regulation and laws illustrates the point. Abortion free of charge and for any reason is one such example. It’s sole purpose is to allow people to engage in socially damaging conduct without short term consequences. What is the welfare state except a means to encourage men to abandon their families? Even a seemingly benign law like Social Security encourages profligate spending during the high earning years of a person’s lifetime, despite the fact it leaves people with insufficient funds to actually retire on.

 

Economic incentives that are socially damaging abound. Regulations that demand banks lend money to people who cannot pay that money back directly led to the banking crisis of 2008, environmental laws that drive businesses into bankruptcy fill thousands of pages, while unemployment benefits are extended regularly, the Federal Reserve is printing billions of dollars a month to mask the negative effects of government policies, like high taxes and stifling regulations, savers are punished by the low returns driven by the Federal Reserve’s monetizing the debt while spenders are encouraged, class warfare are encouraged by the elite, while government officials are allowed to skirt their own laws with almost total impunity.

 

These are just the tip of the iceberg of negative incentives government rakes our virtues with. Many are a crass means to grasp political power, by manipulating our compassion, only serving to increase the very things they are supposed to eliminate. Perhaps the most pernicious thing about negative incentives is the way they lower the outcomes of individuals. There is a story about a woman in her 60s who lives in her father’s basement, while her father, in his 80s, travels the world. If we apply that story to the next generation, their economic outcomes will be lower than hers, and the next’s will be even lower. As government creates more and more negative incentives the economic future of each generation gets worse and worse. Eventually lowering the economic outcomes of Americans to that of the third world.

 

Young people, who are most negatively effected, get to have their immediate wants met. Sex with strangers at any time anyplace fueled by changing cultural mores and free birth control, if that fails, (or they fail to use it), free abortion on demand is the backup. This clearly leads to a promiscuous society. Those babies that slip past the abortionist’s knife are born fatherless, because the State is ready to step in and take his place. This leads to men who never mature. Why save when the savings of others are at your disposal? The elite have created a system where virtuous behavior is punished and bad behavior is rewarded. Is it any wonder there is so much bad behavior? It can truly be said that today’s young people will pay the highest price.

 

Now we stand here, reading the latest results of the negative incentives our society and government promote, aghast at the news we are assaulted with daily. The knock out game both horrifies and befuddles us, school shootings become more common, people have less money for retirement, wages get lower even as jobs get fewer, 60 year old women live in their father’s basement, while he travels the world, and our own government monitors us with increasing intrusiveness, to counter the negative incentives… and we sigh, how could this happen? In our hearts we know, but we are loathe to do what it takes to turn the ship around. The right thing is always the hard thing, because it is painful in the short term, for rewards in the long term.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Principles Versus Party

Monday, December 16th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, most folks will give up their beliefs for their team, but very few will give up their team for their principles. We all want our team to win. It is merely human nature. When we allow that want for connection to supersede our self interests then we become our own enemy. This happens in many places in life but no place more so than in the arena of politics. Too often we will subvert our principles for our party. If our party is caught lying, we forgive them, but if another party lies, we hold a grudge forever. While it is natural it is counterproductive. We follow out of a sense of connexion but as we do we do great damage to our self interests. It is through following principles that we protect our self interests, and the interests of society as a whole, party is only a means to that end.

 

Human beings need to be connected with others. Team sports is an example of this paradigm at work. We root for our team against all others. Like people in ancient times, and in less advanced societies allegiance to their clan. To a person raised in a capitalist society, where allegiance to clan is out moded we don’t understand their thinking on an intellectual level, but as human beings we are subject to it nonetheless. Those of us that live in a market system weigh the good against the bad and keep a mental tally sheet that guides us as to the right course of action. When we root for our party over our principles we fall back to a less evolved way of thinking.

 

We all would rather believe a glittering lie than an ugly truth but it is in facing ugly truths that we grow and mature. It is in indulging in glittering lies that we devolve as human beings, becoming a force for evil, regardless of the loftiness of the principles we have abandoned. Those that shriek about freedom to do this or that need to do the math. Weigh what we are all loosing for their team to win. Because what is a principle, if we don’t hold ourselves and our team, to them? They become nothing, but an egoistic means of controlling others, that we eschew ourselves. When we abandon our principles for political expediency, for the team, we participate in the destruction of those very principles. It is a hypocrite that expects others to follow his principles when he won’t follow them himself.

 

Without values society crumbles. A society that is devoid of any real principles is a society cast adrift. Great nations, societies and civilizations rise in virtue and fall in vice. This is the sole lesson of history. A great people rise to power, wealth and prominence by following their principles and fall into weakness, poverty and ignominy when they abandon those principles. It follows like water flows down a hill. There is not one example where a people rose to greatness without principles, in other words a societal myth, or where a society thrived by ignoring those principles.

 

Apparently this is a lesson of history that needs to be taught over and over. The results are always the same, the factors that lead up to the fall are always the same, but humanity refuses to learn the lesson. The vast majority of human suffering that has been experienced has been due to this. Today we are no better than the Athenian who abandoned Solon’s laws, the Spartan who turned his back on the laws of Lycurgus, or Rome when it embraced an emperor instead of the consular system. We are no different when we abandon our founding principles, the market system, limited government and individual liberty.

 

Our society is no stronger than the Athenian, Spartan or Roman, because our system is made up of flawed human beings, who are more than happy to give up our principles, for political expediency. The new class seek to regain the power they lost to the bourgeoisie, when the new class was called the aristocracy, and so they need to destroy the principles that gave rise to the bourgeoisie, the market system, limited government and freedom. They seek to restore the old system of political favor, total government and oppression.

 

When we the people participate in abandoning the principles that brought us to such a height of technology, wealth, and freedom, we are as villainous as the politician who lies, connives and usurps. If our team is part of the problem, it is our duty to sand up and demand our leaders return to our foundational principles, else those principles will wither away leaving a destitute society that is controlled by the few using violent oppression, which is the normal case in human affairs. We will have delivered our children into slavery, by abandoning our principles for the team. So I ask you… is the victory of your team worth the enslavement of your children?

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

The Commodification of Human Suffering

Thursday, December 5th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, human suffering has become a commodity, to be traded and exploited for political power. If someone’s suffering can be misused to that end, it is displayed in neon lights, but if it serves no political purpose, or works against the elite’s design, it is ignored. In this truly diabolical scheme, the media are the major players, acting at the behest of the political elite. Both of which are members of the “New Class.” Our innate repulsion at suffering is being played upon, to steer us into a course that is profoundly against our own interests, but in the presumed interests of the elite… or in other words, the New Class.

 

We have an innate revulsion to suffering be it human or animal. It is a human thing, that when we see someone in pain we are made uncomfortable, (except for the sadist). When something makes us uncomfortable we try to make it go away. In the case of human suffering we turn our eyes from it or we do something about it. The political elite know and understand this vulnerability of human nature and use it to manipulate us as best they can. It is up to us then, to be rational in our assessment of what we are shown, judging what is real and what is being used for political purposes and act accordingly.

 

The commodification of suffering is why we are reminded of certain misery constantly, often fictitious ills, like the tragedy of a lack of unlimited access to birth control paid for by someone else, but true human suffering, like the deprivations of Mao, are ignored. The “war on women” is an example of fictitious human suffering, while the genocide against Christianity, that is happening around the World right now, is ignored. The first serves the new class’ objectives while the second undermines it. The fact of illegal immigration is abraded like a perpetual cold sore, so the elite can lower our wages and water down our vote, while the evil of abortion and the suffering it causes, is not only ignored but anyone who points it out is vilified. Our compassion for the uninsured was the tool the elite used to jamb Obama care down our throats. These are only a very few examples of human suffering that the new class uses to promote a political agenda, and that which they keep us ignorant of.

 

Yet the political elite constantly use the suffering of others, to guide us to making decisions that are not only against our interests, but will actually create more suffering of the type they propose to stop! The war on poverty, was ostensibly a means to eliminate poverty, but the results are the opposite. Despite spending trillions of other people’s money the war on poverty has created more poverty than has ever existed in the US before. This misguided program, where the State took the place of the father in the familial relationship, has led to an explosion of out of wedlock births. Out of wedlock births are the biggest source of poverty there is! This malicious program has made millions of people incapable of engaging in the market system, and thus escaping their poverty, locking generations into a cycle of dependency and want. Yet our society was guided to making this terrible decision by the elite playing on our compassion for the impoverished.

 

It seems reasonable that those in the new class, who have had the benefit of the very best education, should have known the logical outcome of disrupting the nuclear family. Otherwise they are stupid and shouldn’t be allowed in charge of a MacDonalds. If they did know, and used our compassion as a tool to get us not only to damage our own interests, but to damage the interests of the very people they purported to help, then it is clear evidence they have malevolence in their hearts. If we look into this one example further, we can see that the only people to really benefit from the war on poverty, are the elite and their minions…. the bureaucracy.

 

To exploit human suffering as a political tool is evil. Human suffering is not a tool like a hammer or wedge, it is a wrong that good people should try to stop. Those that exploit the pain of others to forward an agenda are psychopathic. To do so requires a certain level of malevolence and enjoyment of that suffering. Moreover, to purposefully ignore true human suffering because it is damaging to a political agenda, is sociopathic. To lack a conscience. I think we can all agree that sociopaths and psychopaths should be barred from holding any power over the lives of other human beings at all.

 

I am sure you can easily think of many other examples, where human suffering has been exploited for political advantage, and where human suffering that works against an agenda has been ignored. The pain of another human being is never a tool and to make it such is diabolical. To make suffering a commodity, like oil, gold or lumber, is the very definition of evil. Those that exploit human suffering for their own narrow objectives, should be thrown out of office and barred from holding any power over our lives ever again, and in a sane World… they would be.

 

 

Sincerely

 

John Pepin

 

The Persistence of Prejudice

Monday, December 2nd, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, people today have no real concept of racism, bigotry and prejudice, in fact our definition of these terrible social ills has been corrupted by bigots who peddle prejudice, by calling others racists. Prejudice has been with us since the dawn of time. It is rooted in the human ability to group things. We recognize similarities and group things, and people, according to what we see as their basic properties. That is how we come up with the grouping of various plants and animals. What is a mammal, a reptile or a sedge? They are artificial human descriptions based on our innate human ability to group things. In many ways this has served us well, but in others it holds us back and more perniciously, stifles debate and is a means to illegitimate political power.

 

The fundamental definition of prejudice is to group people. We all do it to a greater or lesser extent. Those Red Sox fans are all… or, those darn lawyers are all… . As I explained above grouping people and things is an innate human trait. It becomes prejudice when we interact with people we have pigeon holed based on our narrow definition of the group we have tossed them in. If we hate Red Sox fans, because they are Red Sox fans, we are being prejudiced. Moreover, when we hate someone due to the group we define them as being in, we are engaging in bigotry.

 

Bigotry is prejudice based in hate, envy or in a false sense of superiority. When we hate someone solely due to an artificial categorization then we are being bigoted. No matter if that bigotry is rooted in envy, or superiority, we are being bigoted. This social and most human of evils is part of why people can justify slavery. Those that are enslaved are inferior, because of some group they belong to, IE… Romans enslaved Aqueans and Aqueans enslaved Romans, despite their both being Italians. At least “they” don’t belong to “our” group. This allows all sorts of evils into the world, justified by bigotry. When this bigotry is based on a person’s race it is racism.

 

Racism is perhaps the oldest form of prejudice. We categorize individuals as members of a race and give all members the same attributes, wants, motivations and morality. This is simply another form of prejudice, and when it results in hate for members of that artificial group, then it is bigotry. As I said earlier, this has been used many times and in many places to justify all sorts of deprivations, slavery, forced migrations, and genocide along with many other evils. All these evils are based on bigotry rooted on a racially defined group.

 

Prejudice doesn’t always have to be negative. We group ourselves into virtuous classes and sometimes castes. We polish our own egos by saying to ourselves “we are superior because we don’t do this or that,” or “we are better because we do this or that.” We might say this race is better at math, that race is more athletic, or those people are more philosophical. These are all false categorizations because no human defined group is a monolith. We are all individuals and to be truly virtuous we must interact with all people as individuals. The moment we group people we are engaging in prejudice, whether for the good or the bad.

 

This is why prejudice, bigotry and racism are evils that we should strive to eliminate. It may not be possible, like it is not possible to actually be as godly as Jesus, but it is the duty of all Christians to try. We are called to act kindly to one another and ignore our artificial groupings. Grouping people, and then interacting with them based on our narrow definition of the group we have tossed them into, is despicable, and lowers us.

 

Today, prejudice, bigotry and racism are at the same time less obvious and more pernicious than they were in the past. Bigotry is still acceptable… if it is against politically disfavored groups, as it has always been. “The rich” are despised in many sectors of human society. “The Jews” have been the subjects of racism and bigotry for millenia and still are. In many places on this planet today it is still acceptable to call for the extermination of the Jewish people. “Tea Baggers” are vilified as racists and bigots proving the claimant a bigot him or her self.

 

Around the World and throughout time, the political elite have regularly grouped people, vilifying all members of that group, simply to amass political power. Communists have done this extremely effectively. Bigotry can also be a tool to silence discourse… by the artificial charge of bigotry and racism to a group, when a reasonable observer could only come to the conclusion, that the person who groups others… is the real bigot. Hate has always been a powerful tool to gain political leverage against one’s political adversaries, especially when it is rooted in emotionally based prejudice, because emotions cannot be reasoned with.

 

To categorize people as, those greedy rich, conservative hate mongers, tea baggers or homophobes, and then limit debate on important social and political issues, based on that artificial grouping and derogatory definition, is no less bigoted than to openly hate Jews, Blacks or Hispanics. In fact, it is worse, because it is pernicious. Burning a cross on someone’s lawn is an unmistakable evil, and almost everyone sees it, but calling someone a tea bagger is politically acceptable. (Even President Obama has made this defamatory claim about American Citizens without public outrage). Yes, racism, bigotry and prejudice are evils, because grouping human beings is sinister… and should not be exploited by bigots to stifle the free speech of individuals or amass political power.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Obama’s Deal With the Ayatollah

Thursday, November 28th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me Obama’s deal with Iran over it’s nuclear program is the absolute height of stupidity and will usher in human suffering like the World has never seen before. The Iranian regime is not made up of sane people. To abet insane people to get a nuclear bomb is insane at best diabolically evil at worst. No good can come of this deal. The unbiased media are claiming it is a historic agreement… and yes, I agree. It will be historic in that it will be the end of history unless someone who is sane intervenes.

 

The Ayatollah who runs Iran’s theology is not shared by the majority of Muslims or even Iranians. It is called Twelver theology. In it they believe there is the twelfth Imam who is at the bottom of a well. He will remain there until the Earth is washed with blood, chaos and violence. Once this happens he will come out of the well and usher in the end times. It is the duty of those who follow this sect within the Shiite community to bring these things about. It is no matter if they die in the process, because it will be the end times and they will be richly rewarded for their part… washing the world with blood.

 

The Ayatollah may be insane, and following a theology that is on the face of it insane, but insanity does not require stupidity. In fact often the insane are geniuses. The Iranian regime is following in the footsteps laid out by North Korea. The “Dear Leader” of North Korea did exactly the same thing. He played Clinton for a fool. Clinton would sign a deal with North Korea, (to distract from some scandal), supposedly to stop the weapons program, it would appear to stop, and the North Koreans would get billions of dollars of aid. Aid that would flow into the Army and the nuclear weapons program. This continued until North Korea detonated a bomb.

 

George Bush then tried to get North Korea to relinquish the A bomb. They played him for a fool too. They would shut down a plutonium plant, for a few billion in aid, then turn it back on when it suited them. This game went on for the entire term of Bush’s Presidency. Today North Korea is a nuclear state that abuses it’s people with famine, oppression, forced labor, dissidents are punished for three generations, while North Korea acts defiantly, by sinking South Korean ships, shelling South Korean cities and threatening all out war every few years.

 

Every dictator on the planet saw and learned the lesson of the North Korean nuclear program… including the insane theocrats who run Iran. They have learned the lesson well, but to our mutual detriment, Obama and the unbiased press haven’t. The USA Today reported that Iran has “only” enriched five hundred pounds of uranium to within eighty percent of what would be needed to produce bombs. They claimed this would only be enough for one bomb. That is amazing because Little Boy only had fifty six kilograms of uranium, (about 140 pounds) but obliterated Nagasaki. The bomb design the Iranians got from A Q Khan is far more efficient. This implies that Iran has the nuclear pile to create at least three or four bombs.

 

It would only take one bomb fashioned into an Electro Magnetic Pulse Weapon, (EMP), to wipe the US from the map. Detonated in the center of the US at sufficient altitude it would burn out every electronic device in the country and most of Canada and Mexico. Two could be used, Launched in International Waters off each coast, it would accomplish the same thing and would be far easier to accomplish. We wouldn’t even hear a bang. Our cars would stall in the middle of the road, every transformer would fail causing a national blackout, water pumps would stop, farm machinery would stop, pharmaceuticals would rot in warehouses, and we would instantly be thrust into the preindustrial era. The Department of Defense has estimated that if this were done a third of the population of the US would be dead in six months! Over a billion people World wide would be dead within a year from starvation. (the US produces such a large portion of the World’s food supplies). This would indeed wash the World in blood and cause world wide chaos and suffering… sufficient to bring the Imam out of the well.

 

When the Iranians were testing their delivery system, the missiles would go up to the altitude an EMP would work best at, and explode. The media decried these tests as failures but Ahmadinejad laughed and said they were successes. The path Iran is on was trod and mapped by North Korea and it only takes one or two EMP bombs to wipe the US out, and five to end all civilization. Now Obama has basically given Iran the green light to enrich uranium and soon enough, create plutonium, then build the bombs they need to wash the World in blood. Unless Israel, Saudi Arabia or some sane actor intervenes. So, yes, Obama’s Iranian nuclear deal will in deed be historic… like Neville Chamberlain’s deal with Hitler. Millions will die for Obama’s stupidity… if it is in fact stupidity.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin

Charity, Redistribution, Compassion and Resentment.

Thursday, November 14th, 2013

Dear Friends,

 

It seems to me, charity elevates both the giver and the receiver, while redistribution lowers both. This is a critically important thing for the average person to understand. Those who actually want to help their neighbor will try to comprehend, but those who are simply rooting for their team to win the political battle, will refuse to open their minds. This is a tragic fact of democratic politics. We vote for a team, our team, no matter what. Like the Red Sox and the Yankees, it is all about winning the pennant, not improving the lot of Man. The truly human hearted person wants to improve the lot of Man and doesn’t care about party.

 

Before a problem can be solved it must be understood. The simple fact is, political parties exist to take and hold power. This is their primary goal. Parties deal in votes like a baker deals in dough. In the political arena votes are the currency of the realm. Redistribution is where the government uses it’s power, a monopoly on violence, to take from the politically disfavored, and give that money to politically favored groups. Those who think otherwise are sadly deluded. Money is used by the political elite to purchase votes, whether from firms that support them, or the poor. The recipient of government largess is merely engaging in a crass exchange, a vote and support for money, no different than a baker sells bread else his bakery goes broke.

 

From this we can see that the political elite use the power of government, violence, to take from those they disfavor to exchange for political power. Government alms for the poor are no different. This makes the poor a party to a basically corrupt practice intended to help a party get and hold political power. Those that receive the money from government become clients of the party that favors them, just as a wealthy person or firm that engages in crony capitalism, is the client of the party that benefits them. Being a party to corruption makes a person corrupt. This follows like water flows down a hill.

 

Political parties that encourage people to be corrupt show their disregard for civil stability for matters of expediency. Those, whom the money that will be used for political machinations is taken from, are essentially robbed at gun point. If you disagree that violence is the primary means, simply refuse to pay your taxes, then wait and see if armed men don’t appear at your door. Logically, the person who’s money is seized, resents it. This lowers both the giver, the person who’s money is taken by force, and the receiver, the poor, or the corrupt businessman who engages in crony capitalism.

 

Charity on the other hand uplifts both the giver and the receiver. As I have said many times in these blogs, human beings have three parts, physical, mental and spiritual. If any, some or all of these parts are neglected, they atrophy, while they grow strong with exertion. The person who willingly gives some part of the money he or she has earned is exercising their spiritual part. To not only pay lip service to the less fortunate but to actually give of one’s own hard earned dollar is to show compassion. To demand others pay for the poor are examples of envy and greed. Compassion is uplifting and spiritually invigorating but envy and greed are lowering and spiritually destructive.

 

The receiver of real charity is not only getting money, food, clothing or housing, they are getting a sense that others value them as human beings. If someone is willing to freely give of their hard work to help another, that giver must believe the recipient has intrinsic worth. When we recognize someone has compassion for us we become more engaged in society, and we reciprocate with compassion for others strengthening our own spirit. Those that get largess from the State, understand it is not because anyone believes they have worth, but is merely a corruptly crass political payment for support and so, like any other market transaction they want the most they can get for their product… their support. The understanding that you have real worth outside some crass political scheme is spiritually uplifting and builds a person’s sense of self worth. When we believe we are a pawn in a power struggle our self worth is lowered. Therefore charity uplifts both the giver and the receiver while redistribution lowers everyone involved.

 

 

Sincerely,

 

John Pepin