Posts Tagged ‘socialist’

« Older Entries

Individualism vs Egoism

Thursday, July 29th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that when a millionaire ten times over says he or she will hurt the rich and help me… I know I am being lied to. Because for a rich person to hurt the rich violates human nature. They would have to hurt themselves. No one hurts themselves… No one. Unless they are mentally deranged. I hope not many of our lawmakers are mentally deranged… but their actions an the other hand…

John Kerry is a perfect example. He went to New Zealand to buy a 7 million dollar yacht. (Apparently he doesn’t like union workers in Massachusetts). Then he moored it in Rhode Island to avoid paying the five hundred thousand dollar sales tax bill and the seventy thousand dollar a year excise (luxury) tax, (that Kerry supports). Here is an example of a man who claims to help the poor by hurting the rich. I.e. Raising taxes on the rich. Apparently he doesn’t believe himself rich… People who have exponentially less money then him are rich. Their taxes are going up. But the billionaire is not.

The best part of this story is that a reporter asked Kerry; if he docked the boat in Massachusetts would he have to pay the Massachusetts tax then. Kerry responded, “It depends on who owns the boat.” [A very rare example of honesty in a lawgiver.]

The premise of this statement is that some people are subject to taxation and others are not. I ask you… What incentive does this set up in society? Where the people who set tax law are not held to that law? Is it likely, self interested, human beings will keep tax law fair if they are not subject to it? Of course not.

It is not human nature to hold the interests of others as high as one hold’s his or her own. In this instance Hsun Ching is correct that the congenital nature of Man is evil… Self centered. Philosophies that hold human nature to be wrong and force whatever the Elite believe, today, is “virtue” are flawed. To have at the core of a philosophy of ruling people a premise that is diametrically opposed to human nature is like building a gasoline motor and trying to run water in it. It is flawed. Not the motor… or the water… just that they will not work together.

Over and over we have examples of why people cannot self police yet we staunchly believe that the Elite will violate human nature. I.e. be un-self-interested. Even when we have grievous examples like the one above before us many say; “so what.” To them tomorrow is a white fog. Impossible to predict and mysterious as a Stephen King novel. I dare say too many people are of this persuasion. When the fruit of their nonchalance is visited on them they will lament that it was unforeseeable.

“How could this possibly have happened? I voted for the same people over and over but things never got better. They only got worse and worse.” is the lament of the willfully ignorant.

Another sophist argument that I hear and am dumbfounded at is that I personally have it ok now so why worry about the future. To make this argument and believe it a person must live in a one dimensional world. A point in time with no past no future, and no other possibilities then what is.

I love the way de Tocqueville called American individualism as opposed to egoism; “The doctrine of self interest rightly understood.” What a beautiful way to explain the truly civilized person. Someone who understands that sometimes we have to subordinate immediate gratification for long term gratification. To understand that self interest is intricately tied to societal interest. And that safe streets are in our own best interests. Of course the progressives are working to undermine this character trait in the American ethos.

The Elite are not held to the law in most places and times on the Earth. Their self interest need not be rightly understood. If they are not subject to a law will they give it the same scrutiny that they would if they were subject to it?

The modern Elite (progressives) seek to change people from individualists to egoists. Then the egoists will willingly forge the chains for the Elite and even bind themselves with them. Egoism is stupid self interest. It requires that one not think critically about our leaders. An egoist lives in a singularity. Egoism makes a person think a job flipping burgers is beneath him but being on the public dole is honorable. An egoist believes that the world owes him or her. An egoist calls another greedy because he doesn’t want to give more of his hard earned money to the lazy egoist but the egoist will scream like a scalded cat if a dollar of his money is missing.

By the way… did you hear about Barney Frank flipping out over not getting a senior citizens discount that he was not entitled to?

It cost him an extra dollar for the ride.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, Law, Mercy, philosophy | No Comments »

Arizona Law and Illegal Immigration Law

Thursday, July 8th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the stance of the Federal government as stated by Eric Holder is idiotic. To say that state authorities have no ability to arrest people found to be in violation of federal law opens a whole can of worms.

Is this a blanket statement? If it is then what about machine gun laws? They are federal. If a local law enforcement officer comes across a person brandishing a machine gun, that officer wouldn’t be allowed to even notify federal law enforcement about it… according to Holder. Let alone arrest him or her for it. Does this make sense to you?

If it is not a blanket statement then why the constitutional carve out for illegal immigrants? What legal basis could there be for it? So, if Mr. Holder claims that there is a carve out of federal law for illegal aliens, then is it because, there is a clear need for them in the US. One that is so important that it outweighs the mass of legal precedent. Legal precedent that is… all people are equal, under the law. Or has it changed to… all groups, are equal. There are some that are more equal then others. Illegal Aliens for example…

But if the administration is right, that local and State law enforcement cannot enforce Federal law, then I expect people will be getting out their printing presses and printing up $100 dollar bills. Only the FBI can enforce Federal law under the Holder leadership. A person could knowingly pass a printed counterfeit $20.00 bill and the Federal government would frown on a local police officer taking notice.

Slavery is another example. Does it make sense for local and State officials to turn a blind eye to a slavery ring operating in the US? Say…Trafficking in young girls? Under Holders assertion local and State police would be barred from reporting Human traffickers to federal authorities. To do so would make it less likely that people would report crime to the police. Using Holder’s logic.

What if Local police came across a treason plot that was about to be hatched? Holder would argue that it isn’t local police authority to intervene. If the government was overthrown and a communist regime set up, that then murdered twenty five million Americans, according to Eric Holder, that would be the price for liberty…. Or something. All to overturn a law Mr. Holder has not read.

No… Holder and the administrations want to use illegal immigration as a lever. A lever to use to move the American people to accept “comprehensive” reform. The law, as it is written, is “unsustainable.”

The definition of “comprehensive” is making all the illegal immigrants citizens… again. It had such a negative effect on illegal immigration the last few times it was tried it should definitely be tried again, and again, and again… Government loves to re-try things that have failed in the past. The bigger the failure the more it must try again.

The definition of “unsustainable” is anything the government wants to take over and control. If the government wants to take over and control health care they call it unsustainable. A word that, I am sure, has been thoroughly polled and tested… for it’s public palatability.

The real issue is that a faction of the American political Elite see an opportunity. They believe, if they make millions of poorly educated people who can’t speak English citizens, then the new citizens will reward that faction with their political support. It is not totally unfounded. Most of the poor and uneducated in South America vote reliably for communist governments. The faction of the American Elite that want to make them citizens agree with communist philosophy… they just call it progressivism. Their (illegal immigrants and the Elite’s) interests seem to be aligned.

Of course this would make a true underclass in the USA. Something the progressives have wanted for years. Real inequality… Not the ginned up, pretend variety they have been claiming is in the US. Real poverty, enforced by a language barrier and an education ceiling. Trapped in poverty and ignorance the Elite believe the Latinos will keep them in office forever…

Forever trapping the “undocumented workers” in poverty. Because to ever let them get up would undermine the power of the Elite… And if the power of the Elite is ever threatened… The Elite become dangerous even to their old allies.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, Law, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | No Comments »

Adam Smith and Recent Chinese history… on the American Elite

Thursday, June 24th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that Adam Smith once said;

“The statesman, who should attempt to direct private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals, [money], would not only load himself with a most unnecessary attention, but assume an authority which could safely be trusted, not only to no single person, but to no council or senate whatsoever, and which would nowhere be so dangerous as in the hands of a man who had folly and presumption enough to fancy himself fit to exercise it.”

The wisdom of this single statement is profound. What Adam Smith is saying is that government officials cannot be trusted to control private money. Their self interests will get in the way. He goes on to say that to do so is even dangerous of liberty. We have seen over and over the prophetic nature of this quote.

Today we see China… the first Maoist State. It has entered the world economic stage as a Capitalist nation. The Middle Kingdom is becoming a world superpower. Exactly because the autocratic government there has let the Chinese people have use of their own capital.

China has come from a total communist state with rampant starvation to a wealthy industrial powerhouse. This immense change couldn’t have happened, had the Chinese government, that had been steeped in communist ideology, not woken up and released their grip… and let the people control their own money.

After all isn’t money simply a convenient representation of work? You exchange units of work value for other units of work value. In this exchange both interests are raised. The communist government of China woke up to this fact, and, with great courage they changed paths.

This change in paths has resulted in the greatest rise in the standard of living of mankind in the shortest time ever.  All by letting people do what they want with their own money. Simply because a government let up it’s grip on the people…

No one hear is saying China has no problems with it’s government… Far be it from me. The rise in it’s militaristic attitude, It’s quashing of free speech, Tiananmen Square the list goes on and on. No… the government in China is totalitarian. Nevertheless, it has made some good choices… it has allowed the free market to work. The consequences of this cannot be denied.

We see what a great man once said… and we see the evidence of his clairvoyance in front of out eyes. Yet the Elite in America claim that capitalism is dead. Like Nietzsche claiming God is dead. The claim presupposes the consequence but the consequence makes the claim impossible… making them both an impossibility.

To what end are they uttering such an absurdity? To lay claim to more and more of the people’s capital. The Elite seem to think that there is no level of taxation and intrusion that is too much. The healthcare intrusion’s effects haven’t even been felt by most people and the Elite want to forge ahead with their plan to; Cap and trade, raise taxes, increase regulation of every sector of the economy, etc…

With the undeniable evidence of China… Why are the American Elite, engaging in this… taking of the people’s economic sovereignty? Or “direct(ing) private people in what manner they ought to employ their capitals“, as Adam Smith Said it…

Abraham Lincoln once claimed in a debate; that he didn’t need to be told that a house was being built… He could tell, simply by looking… I bet most people can. But they have to open their eyes and look.

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Law, economy, philosophy | No Comments »

Progressivism and Education

Sunday, May 16th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the way our children are taught has a great influence on them in their adult lives. Education is a means to not only teach children to read, write and do arithmetic but is a means to civilize them.

American schools today have taken a new path. They have eschewed teaching reading, writing, arithmetic and logic and have replaced them with progressive propaganda. Anti American adjectives like imperialism are often used to describe the USA. These are definitions taken directly from the Manifesto of the Communist Party and anti American Soviet handbooks. The schools teach homosexuality and the mechanics of it. They teach that God is dead. One of their favorite lessons today is that the American Constitution is a living breathing document. What do all these new evil societal myths have in common?

They serve to demean the children. They all serve to make children believe that simply the color of their skin determines if they are good or evil. This is not a very inclusive philosophy. But it has always been the philosophy of the progressives. Propaganda to the contrary aside…

I watched a show on PBS today, Need To Know. The show had a long segment about the Texas school board’s revue of new textbooks. The thrust of the piece was that a few members are wrong and bad by trying to force their conservative view of society on the whole country. Because Texas buys so many textbooks that the whole industry caters to their needs and wants. The news story never mentioned if California or New York have a similar effect on the textbook industry… At least that angle was never explored. I wonder… Would California drag the industry further to the right or the radical left… And if that had any bearing on the coverage of California’s effect on textbook slant.

Of course a hit piece on a conservative in the unbiased media is proof of their lack of bias. The show, Need To Know, also talked about the Texas Freedom Network, an organization that monitors the right’s effect on school curriculum. Amazingly this progressive organization agrees with the unbiased PBS and thinks America should be characterized as imperialist. PBS didn’t mention if there are any organizations that monitor the left… Why would there be?

The unbiased media today use evolution as a straw man argument. They constantly hammer that people of faith are bad because they deny evolution. They equate evolution deniers to holocaust deniers. The argument is used to as a means to disqualify any argument made by the right whether or not evolution is brought up. If I argue that The United States has liberated almost as many people in the twentieth century as the communists have murdered… The left argues that I deny evolution. The unbiased media agree. And the argument is changed to whether or not I believe in evolution. It has become a tool of the progressives to change the argument.

Changing the subject is a underhanded way to keep an opponent in a debate off his feet. It is the job of a good moderator to keep arguers on point. But unfortunately with the media being so unbiased only the right is kept on point the left is given free reign to move the debate as they see fit.

What is the inevitable outcome of this? The lowering of debate. Which leads to keeping the people in the dark. Which leads to the lowering of the quality of decisions made by the American people. (Exemplified in the last election). Which leads to the lowering of the lot of the American people. Which leads to the lowering of the lot of all Mankind. Because, in this World, we are all economically connected .

As long as the progressives control, the media, education and both political parties, our fortunes will continue to go down. Only until we have a media that is actually unbiased instead of pretending to be unbiased will the cancer that is progressivism be exposed by the light…

Only foul things grow in the dark… Progressivism withers in the light…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, Societal Myth, media, philosophy | No Comments »

Pragmatism

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that most people are pragmatists. We have to be. To lack pragmatism is to ensure future insanity. Because when you live in an insane world you must either be pragmatic about it or go crazy.

Since most people are pragmatic we seek to get along in the world with as little interference as possible. As Thrasymachus said. Most people do not want to impose on others. But they are afraid of being imposed upon. That is why most people like the idea of justice… So by his measure most people are good. There are others who are bad. (I.e. They want to impose their will on others).

We are pragmatic in many ways. We add up the costs and benefits to most things we engage in. This is a form of pragmatism. We sometimes don’t fight the good fight because we have determined that it would result in diminishing returns.

To be the avatar of pragmatism one would have to be immune to all the pitfalls that await all of us. Like the sunk cost effect, group think, etc… We all vary in our pragmatism. (Or maybe we vary in our assessment of the cost benefit to a certain action).

Pragmatism breeds happiness. People who are pragmatic give up their anger quickly. They are less prone to hopelessness. These are the antithesis to pragmatism. Because to be angry has a very high cost both in health and relationships. The payoff is not as distinct. So pragmatism says, stop that which give us diminishing returns. To be angry for too long has such diminishing returns that the pragmatist eschews it. Hopelessness is the same. To be hopeless has great cost with no benefit. So why do it?

But pragmatism has costs as well. For example, take a good person living among those who are bad. Machiavelli says that a good man must necessarily come to ruin among so many that are bad. To be pragmatic in such a situation is to become bad enough to fit in. Mencius talked about this very thing.

Mencius said that the “Jen” man (gentleman, lord, Brahman, enlightened man, etc…) strikes the golden mean. When the jen man lives among many that are bad he doesn’t go to the extreme of bad. He seeks the middle ground in that bad land. When the jen man finds himself living among saints, again he looks to the mean of the society that he lives in. Mencius said that Mo Ti would run himself into the ground to help anyone. While Sang Yang wouldn’t pull a loose thread from his cloak although it save humanity. They went too far, claimed Mencius. Aristotle was curiously similar in his philosophy of the mean.

Pragmatic people do the same. Seek the mean in the society they live in. Pragmatic people look at their leaders today (and historically), and see people who make law to benefit their friends, making tax law and don’t pay taxes, regulating banks to make bad loans to people they know cannot pay back the loans then blaming the banks for the failures, have illegal aliens for maids, nannies, gardeners to save money but claim to be hard on illegal immigration, To name a very few examples. A pragmatists may not like what he or she sees. We may not want to emulate the behavior. But pragmatism, Machiavelli, Mencius, and Aristotle all say in unison, “follow the mean.” when the rulers are this corrupt society must be corrupt. Like virtue, corruption flows down from the leaders to the led.

Unfortunately the culture that we find ourselves in is a wretched as it can be. Corruption is endemic in the Elite in government, industry, entertainment and in society. They have been so corrupt for so long it has moved deeply into our society. Political corruption oozes out of government and onto everything government touches. Like a child, the grubbier the hands, the more they want to touch. They even have the gall to call evil good and good evil. Simply by changing the language, abortion becomes choice, freedom of religion becomes separation of church and state, freedom of speech is now too much information, the list goes on and on. I am sure you can think of quite a few I have left out… if you try.

This all adds up to an insane society.

How does this apply to the International Capitalist Party? Pragmatism is the cornerstone of our philosophy. Pragmatic in our view of humanity, pragmatic in our opinions about how to best effect positive change in the human condition, but, not pragmatic in our goal. To be pragmatic about a political goal is, not to fall into the status quo, it is to set a new status quo. Progressives, communists and socialists are pragmatic in their goal, total government, but not in their assessments of people… Unless most people do want to live under a tyranny, in poverty, with no voice or ability to change the situation…

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Societal Myth, philosophy | No Comments »

The Three Attributes to Being Human

Thursday, May 6th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, that there are three parts to a human being, Physical, Mental and Spiritual. These three attributes make up a human being. A brute animal, as far as we know, has no spirituality. A brute animal has physical and mental attributes though. So we can say that one of the things that differentiates humans from animals is human spirituality.

We all know on some level that when one part is ignored it becomes wasted. Lack of exercise makes muscles weak. Lack of mental exercise makes one dumb and a lack of religion makes a person susceptible to all sorts of negative ideas. Like moon worship or some other foolish idea. Out of the very human need for spirituality comes a worship of the created instead of the Creator.

These three attributes make up the person. Weakness in any lowering the sum total of the person. We all know someone who ignores one or more of these important attributes. And by this we see what the consequences are.

But as we have said above it is spirituality that separates human beings from the brute animals. So if that is the case we can also say that spirituality is, if not the most important of the three, at least no lesser then any of the others. If being human is the goal.

A person could theoretically evolve into a brain in a glass case. Only thinking great thoughts. But would this be a human end? Of course not. Another could devolve into a beast to rival the strength Hercules. But to regress to the beasts is not a human end either. What about spirituality? What if a person developed his or her spirituality to the point that they became a spirit. They would be an angel.

Which of the three outcomes seems to you to be the best for the actor? We can apply William James philosophy of pragmatism to glean the correct answer.

So why is it that spirituality is the most ignored? Our churches in many cases are full. We (Americans) have traditionally been a strongly religious people. But we seem to be moving the way of Europe. In Europe the most exquisite churches in the world are empty on Sunday morning. I wonder how many Europeans pray daily? I hope many but I fear there are few. Americans seem to be following the European example in more than just economics.

Part of the problem is that States have established State religions. Uniformly in the West the State religion is atheism. The Progressives in the USA have argued for generations, “separation of church and State.” They cannot abide the traditional, “freedom of religion.” Because if they can change the societal myth just enough they can legally codify atheism as the State religion.

Popular culture demeans Religion. Today it is popular, when asked, to claim to be spiritual but not religious. To say that is like saying “I eat… but not food.” It fails logically. But it sounds smart. All popular culture is, is foolishness that sounds smart… but if you think about it…

Of course the Communist Manifesto claims that religion is the opium of the people. Communists, and progressives more than socialists want people to revert to beasts. Beasts are easily herded, bridled and made into beasts of burden for their masters. Remove religion and you have removed that which separates us from the animals. Lowering us to the status of animal. What rights does a guinea pig have?

Probably the most insidious trouble that comes from lack of following an established religion is the threat of some mind bender like Jim Jones. The people who followed Jim Jones and drank the coolaid were people who disavowed established religion and followed a false prophet. There have been many false prophets and there will be many more. They seek to channel good intentions into bad actions. That is the surest way to spot a false prophet.

All these problems and potential problems as well as many more come from lack of religion. It is no more enlightened to be anti religious than it is enlightened to be anti science. Enlightenment involves looking at the world as it is… not as we want it to be.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Societal Myth, philosophy | No Comments »

Flawed Societal Myths

Sunday, May 2nd, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that there are no flawed people, there are only flawed societal myths, (philosophies or ethos).

Take any group of impoverished people. There is no deficiency in the people themselves. This has been proven by the fact that many impoverished people have been enriched when they change their philosophies. China for example. The people can be very industrious but languish under an unproductive ethos. Without a proper societal myth any people will falter.

The most destructive ethos a people can have is the mantle of victim hood. No matter the quality of the individual he or she is at a loss if their philosophy tells them that they are nothing but victims. It fosters inaction. Why act if you are only a victim? It fosters anger. Why be happy if you are a victim? It has absolutely no redeeming effects on a people but to make them slaves to their victim hood.

You can judge the ethos of a people by their prosperity. Not the people themselves but the ethos they live under. If they live under a negative ethos then they will live in poverty. Unless some external source of income temporarily disrupts the natural course of their lives. Like oil income for example. If a people cannot sustain themselves it is a sure sign that they labor under a societal myth that makes this so.

Look at the places people have flourished and the places people have floundered. The arctic is an extreme example. The Inuit and Eskimo people have thrived under the most inhospitable conditions the Planet has to offer. Temperature extremes and lack of easily accessible food. No shelter and high winds. Wind chills of over one hundred degrees below zero! No other people on Earth have, not only lived under such hostile conditions, but have thrived doing it!

Another example is Africa. The availability of growing season is unparalleled on the planet. Wild game, nuts and berries abound. There is no end to the opportunities in Africa for an enterprising people. But there is absolute poverty there… as well as no innovation. The problem is the ethos… not the people.

Examples abound of people that have risen in prosperity when they followed one societal myth but have fallen into poverty when the societal myth was destroyed. Rome is but the most obvious example. Ancient China is another example. Many times before and after the warring states period China went from prosperity to poverty then back to prosperity. Confucius explained this as, when people follow the philosophies of the sage kings, Yao, Shun and Yu. What Confucius basically said is that the philosophy of a people determines their prosperity.

So we can rest on the fact that if the same people have been both, impoverished and enriched, it is more dependent on their ethos then the people. To argue otherwise would require a advocate the likes of Daniel Webster.

Thomas Jefferson said in his book, Notes on the Sate of Virginia, that it takes a temperate climate it foster innovation. His argument went like this. If people have it too easy they will not innovate, it is redundant. If people have it too hard they do not have the time to innovate. They must spend every moment surviving. It is only where people have difficulties to force innovation and the time to think about and do innovation. If this is the case maybe innovation in societal myths is best at temperate climates as well.

Now lets examine the societal Myths that foster poverty and hopelessness. As we said before victim hood is one destructive philosophy. Another is decadency. It presaged the fall of every great civilization on Earth to date. Another is dependency of the State. Every time this has been tried it has resulted in the corrosion of societal cohesiveness. Another that has had bad ends is treating barbarians as equals. This has lowered many great civilizations. Groupism is a philosophy that results in the splintering of societies into angry factions. There are many more lessons that we can take from history about good and bad societal myths. The overriding point is that societal myths that reduce people’s reliance on themselves has always had bad results. While those philosophies that have greater reliance in individual actions have had good outcomes in the past.

With this as obvious as I can make it in such a small space, why is it so important for our elected leaders to change our societal myths from the productive ones to the unproductive ones?

Why do you think?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, Societal Myth, economy, philosophy | No Comments »

The Congenital Nature of Government

Sunday, March 21st, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the congenital nature of government is evil. But before we can consider that government is evil we must first consider what definition of evil we will use.

In this instance we are not arguing that government is demonic. Or that it is controlled by some supernatural malevolent force. In this instance we are using secular definitions of evil only. The malevolent force is human.

Hsun Ching argued the congenital nature of Man is evil. His definition of evil was that evil is chiefly characterized by profound selfishness and self centeredness. He went on in his logic to claim the goodness in us is a learned trait. His definition will work quite well for our usage. In the case of the congenital nature of government we will define evil as pure self centeredness. Without regard to others.

How is government born? Almost every government that has ever come into existence has done so by violent means. Non violent revolutions are very infrequent and often are short lived before some strong man takes over… violently. People not used to liberty quickly vote it away for mere baubles.

Government is born of violence and government exists by violence. That creational violence is always followed by reprisals for past violence. Government uses violence so much we don’t even notice. Every police action is violent at it’s soul. Government sponsored violence. Violence done to the individual for some perceived societal good. Seldom are other enticements offered by government. Violence is the main tool in government’s tool box.

What if you or I refuse to pay taxes? If we are adamant about it we will have our homes assaulted in the middle of the night by armed government agents. Like in New Hampshire. Violent means will be used on our person to extract money for government to use to some other evil end. Committing violence on some people on the other side of the world.

Even when government seems to be benign… it is evil. Government will “help” this or that group that the Elite want to garner political favor. How does government do this? By violently taking the property of one and giving it to another.

If it is wrong for an individual to put a gun in my face and force me to give money or property… why is it good for government to do worse? One black dot being seen as black but many black dots seen as white. Are our collective eyesights that bad?

Those that advocate for total government, progressives, communists and socialists, always want a draft. They love the idea of coerced servitude to government in the form of military service. They decry a volunteer force. Because a general requirement for military service gives them colossal powers. Power to defer politically connected sons and daughters from service (to political ends). Power to threaten anyone with forcing their son or daughter into military service if they don’t do as ordered. There is no end to the mischief that can be done when the Elite have a general draft.

Moreover I never understood and still don’t, how a person can have a pitifully low opinion of his fellow man. Such that they believe that he should not be trusted with arms. His free speech should be limited by a fairness doctrine, his decisions should be made for him by government, and that he is so corrupt he cannot be trusted in any way without government oversight… can possibly believe that people in government can be trusted at all? How does that jibe? If all people are corrupt, stupid and menacing, how can you believe that people can be trusted with unlimited power in government? These people always protect the caprice of power. They defend corruption in government but decry it in the private sector.

Government holds others to a much higher standard then it does itself… in every way. Not only in outright corruption but in personal behavior as well. Politicians daily get away with personal conduct that would land you or I in jail. Running a prostitution ring from one’s apartment for example. Ignorance is no excuse under the law… unless you write that law.

What is more selfish than holding others to a much higher standard than oneself? Therefore, what, is more evil?

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Group Politics, Mercy, Societal Myth, philosophy, polictics of class envy | No Comments »

Poison Ivy in our Gardens

Monday, March 15th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that all legislation that makes the citizen get services from government are like poison ivy in our economic and legal gardens. It takes up space but produces nothing of value. It is intractable and very hard to eradicate. And whenever anyone brushes against it they sustain injury.

The faction in power in the USA today follow Machiavelli’s maxim that, “The wise Prince makes his people depend on him for everything and in every way, thus he will insure the loyalty of the people.” As the Elite make more and more people dependant on government they make more people dependant on their benefactors in government. The vote of a dependant is assured. The democratic system can and has been, (many times), undermined buy this very tactic. Many people have happily voted in their tyrants.

The legal system is under attack in such a case. Government does not allow itself to be sued unless the Elite have a political agenda and allow it. So if government does not deliver on planned services there is no legal recourse. Moreover if those that need the services that by legislation only government can provide, but government is not providing, have no recourse at all. Unless they find a political patron. Those that run afoul of bureaucracy find it increasingly stubborn as they place more pressure. There is simply no leveraging a bureaucrat. Except with a political patron.

The unwise politician who correctly sees the natural weaknesses in government delivered services, that dares threaten the gravy train, is always wounded… sometimes badly. All government programs set up current flows. Like water current these capital currents form a channel. It forms to the level of the capital and then simply moves funds along it‘s course. Trying to change the course of water… or largess, is difficult and dangerous.

Anytime any legislation that moves government in that direction is dangerous and should be though through very carefully. Stopped if possible. Especially under a government that has no NUMA. As we have mentioned above, when government delivers services, and they are delivered poorly or not at all, there is no recourse. Couple this with the fact that, like poison ivy, this type of legislation is very hard to get rid of, anyone who wants to spread this must be nuts.

The Healthcare legislation is the worst manifestation of this principle possible. It is nothing but two thousand pages of seeds to be planted in everyone’s backyard. They will have ten tears to sprout and grow before we will reap their real fruit.

Trying to get healthcare will be like mowing a lawn infested with poison ivy. The results will be similar. Elevated blood pressure. Elevated temperatures, Elevated pulse rate, a stinging rash and time spent with sticky ointments (bureaucrats).

The Elite keep trying to convince us that it will be great when the government runs our lives. Healthcare is the narrow end of the wedge. Let it in and there is a whole wedding party behind. The mess will be left for our children and grandchildren to clean up.

We need to ask ourselves… How much closer do we want to get to 1984? Or are we already there and just don’t know it?

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Law, economy, philosophy | No Comments »

Republicans Repurposed

Tuesday, November 3rd, 2009

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that if the American Republican party wants to know why they are no longer in power in Washington they need look no further than Diedre Scozzafava. The republican Elite chose her to run in a very conservative district. She is, as has been proven by history, far to the left of the constituents in the area. So much so that the people felt they must make a stand. So they put up Doug Hoffman as an independent.

It would be like an extremely liberal community having a very conservative democrat and a conservative republican running. Regardless of their vote they would be sending a conservative to congress from a liberal community. The congressman or woman wouldn’t reflect the views of their constituents. In this case liberals would certainly put up another candidate to run against the two conservatives… as would be their right.

So in the end the republican Elite chose, that the people of a conservative district, must have a socialist (democrat) or a progressive (republican). This reflects the purpose of the republican Elite. If they had at their core values smaller government, less intrusive regulation, lower taxes or even conservative family values, they would have chosen someone who more accurately reflected the people of the district and theirs. They didn’t.

Further proof of the point is that, after Diedre Scozzafava backed out of the race, she backed the democrat! (I wonder how many of the republican Elite do too). I recall Newt Gingrich backed Diedre Scozzafava. Do you think he still agrees with her point of view now? There are even rumors in upstate New York that she was going to change her affiliation to democrat.

We know the leaders of the American democratic party are communists, progressives, and socialists. Now we have further proof that the American republican party is led by the same type of people. (At least people who have the same aim). So why vote for a wannabe democrat? Why not vote for the real thing? If both parties of a dual party republic, like the US, are headed by exactly the same people, what is the difference from China? Single party rule.

But the Leftists in the unbiased media declaim that republicans should stand for anything. (Goaded by the republican elite). They circle hawkishly over conservative lawmakers while turning a blind eye to their friends minor infractions, like, trading postal vouchers for money to buy drugs with, lawmakers caught taking bribes, tax evasion, DUI death resulting, sex with pages, and on and on. If you look at who has the get out of jail free cards in our society you will see who the real Elite are.

Republicans (who should stand for nothing) must accept all points of view under their tent else they are a small tent party. This sophistry is promulgated constantly in the unbiased media. Of course the democrat party is never called to include. People who are right to life are prevented from giving speeches in the democratic convention. People that disagree with any plank of the democrat platform are shouted down.

Is it a good idea to take advice from those that want to see you dead? Sane people argue no. So why does the republican Elite agree with the unbiased media that they need to include people that disagree with every plank of the republican party? Like Diedre Scozzafava… Because they share the same goals!

Popcorn; If I say I like popcorn yet act like I don’t… The actions of the republican Elite show they don’t have the best interests of the USA and the World in mind…. Regardless of their talk. They don’t want to divest the National government of power. They want to increase the power and role of government in the lives of the people… just like the democrats. So, given these two choices, how do the American people vote? For the (Communist, Progressive, Socialist) candidate or the (Communist, Progressive, Socialist) candidate? Is it any wonder that the American people are frustrated at their government?

Tags: , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | No Comments »

« Older Entries