Posts Tagged ‘usurpation’

Government has Rights… We have Priviledges

Monday, April 11th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if you have to ask permission to do something, it is not a right. That should be pretty obvious. Unfortunately, it would appear that such a statement flies in the face of modern governments. They demand the people ask permission to do everything, while they do whatever they want, without question. The concept of liberty has changed, from the freedom to do as the individual wants, to the ability to do whatever the government wants us to do. What it really means is that we no longer live in liberty but a form of soft tyranny. Soft tyranny where in theory we are free but in fact we are limited by government in every way. Since we live in soft tyranny, what will the government or more precisely, those who run government, allow us to do. Obviously they will not allow us to act against the interests of government or the elite that run it. Moreover, it is in the best interests of the rulers to keep us from getting too rich, too much power or too much independence, that would threaten the elite and their monopoly on power, as well as their total freedom to exercise that power. What we are allowed to do then, under the regime of soft tyranny that we live under now, are things that don’t threaten the elite, go against their interests or get us too much power.

By dribs and drabs we have allowed our rulers, those who were once our servants, to usurp our power, political, economic and cultural. We have allowed our government to do for us. Government is only too willing to do for the people, in fact, government would prefer to do everything for us. The more dependent we become on government the less able we are to do for ourselves. The less we can do for ourselves the more power we cede to government. Eventually government becomes omnipotent and we are impotent. We have allowed, no encouraged, government to usurp our sovereignty. Once government is all powerful only violent bloody revolution can return the people back to liberty.

Either the power of government grows, while the power of the people shrinks, else the power of the people grows as the power of government shrinks. It is impossible for both to grow at the same time nor is it possible for both to shrink at the same time, one grows as the other shrinks. Every law, regulation, ordinance and edict, diminishes our power and grows the power of government. The more efficient government becomes at passing new rules for us to follow the faster we devolve to autocracy. Now with the advent of bureaucracy, government has tens of thousands of bureaucrats working diligently in the dark, passing regulations controlling every aspect of our lives. The power of government has never expanded so fast or so efficiently.

Government on the other hand sees less and less oversight. The media that is supposed to keep us informed, is on the payroll of the democrat party in the US, and is beholden to other partisan political ideologues in other nations. The media is the most biased it has ever been. Government itself today routinely breaks it’s own laws, violates our Constitution and the elite get away with the most clear transgressions of law, without any negative consequences. The government itself allows us less and less information into it’s workings, using excuses like national security, executive privilege and an arcane maze of rules to hide the workings of government.

We are barred from even the most mundane knowledge of what our governments are doing, how they are doing it and even why. The why is assumed to be in our best interests but does that really make any sense at all? Does government work in our best interests or the best interests of the elite? Look at every government program ostensibly designed to “help” some politically favored group. Farmers have been coddled since the FDR administration and the family farm has for all intents ceased to exist, the steel industry has been given a great deal of attention from government and now steel is mostly produced overseas, education has long been a leading project of government and now our children graduate school unable to read, write, do basic math or pick the US off a globe. Everything government touches, in the name of helping us, is destroyed.

Government and the elite on the other hand are empowered. Government hatches whole new departments to destroy that which they have pledged to help. The department of energy is the poster child for government failure but has a budget that exceeds 9 billion dollars annually! NASA, which was initially designed to allow the US to put human beings into orbit and beyond, has failed so bad that only now since the 1950’s, the US cannot put a man into space but needs to rely on Russia. There is not one single department, program or initiative that has not failed. Failed in their stated objectives, but succeeded wildly in growing the power of government. That is because, if they were to succeed, the need for them would go away… and that would be unthinkable!

The government need not ask permission of the people to do anything anymore. A handful of elite change the Constitution, as they see fit, altering the very nature of the relationship between the governed and the governors. Naked violations of law like Fast and Furious go unpunished therefore encouraging more law breaking. Even the elite themselves get caught red handed violating their own laws without consequence. Remember Al Gore saying there is no overriding legal authority? There wasn’t for him, but when Dinesh Dsouza was caught breaking the same law to a much lesser extent, there was. We on the other hand, need to ask permission to do anything. Buy a gun, get government permission, start a business, get a license and permits, engage in religious acts, get government’s approval else pay stifling taxes, even driving a car is a privilege for citizens but a Right to illegal aliens. There is not one aspect of human endeavor that does not require first, the government’s permission, as the limits of government evaporate away like so much dew. The only question left is, how long before soft tyranny becomes hard tyranny?


John Pepin

Limited Government or Usurpation

Wednesday, March 30th, 2016

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, what limit to the law if the lawmakers are not held to it, furthermore, if the lawmakers do not follow whatever constitution they are supposed to, then what limit on government? Law then must become mere usurpation and government must serve the elite not the people. It is a self evident fact that when a class serves only it’s own narrow interests, economic destruction ensues, social upheaval follows and violent revolution comes shortly after. History is unambiguous about this. In fact, there are names for the various wrong forms of government enumerated by Aristotle, Tyranny when a monarch serves only his own interests, oligarchy when the aristocracy (elite) serve themselves and democracy when the polis is tyrannical. Everyone is served best when everyone serves everyone.

The class warfare theory of human history is undeniably false, at least as it pertains to economic classes since most of human history has seen tension between factions of the elite, and only rarely between the elite and the people, but when class is defined as faction then it holds some truth. Faction is like fire, it consumes a nation, leaving it in ashes. Every great nation, city state and empire has seen this happen to it. At the outset all the people work together to build a great society. Once the society has been built, the people split into factions, each vying for themselves. The more prosperous the nation becomes the more factious the people become. Naturally, the faction that has the most power is the one to come out on top, these are almost always the lawmakers.

Those who write the laws may be the people as in ancient Athens, the aristocracy as in Venice or a monarch as in feudal Europe, but in all cases there is a defined group that writes the law. When a monarch writes law that benefits all of society, that society flourishes, and when he or she writes laws to serve him or herself, then the country crumbles. The same holds true if the lawmakers are a class, faction, heirs, elected or appointed. The type of government is also irrelevant. Monarchy can have liberty, private property and prosperity while democracy can be illiberal, usurp private property and be filled with poverty. What generates wealth, liberty and prosperity is that the factions, classes and groups work for the benefit of the whole.

Lawmakers usually are not constrained in their actions. There is no overriding legal authority to hold them to their laws or constitutional limits, except the police and military, which they have total control of. If the lawmakers choose not to hold themselves to their own laws then why would they limit the law? They could freely use law to advance their personal self interests with impunity. Passing laws that move ever more of the national wealth into their own hands would be a snap. Money isn’t the only thing that can be usurped. If they sought sexual gratification rather than wealth then they could molest interns as they wanted, if they wanted to never be criticized they could pass laws to jail anyone who criticized them and if they desired godhood they could merely have statues made at the public’s expense and placed in city centers. If those who make the law are not held to those laws there is no limit to the usurpations they can engage in.

Constitutions were an invention to constrain those who write the law, but even under a constitution, if the lawmakers don’t hold themselves to it, no matter how well written, how insightful or how intelligent the framers were, it is moot. Since people are usually unwilling to hold themselves to a rule that limits their self interest, especially egoists, then constitutions cannot function alone. To argue those who make law are somehow not human but angelic is to argue up is down. Especially in the light of past human governments, where the lawmakers were not held to their own laws, or indeed the constitutions that were designed to constrain them. Until the lawmakers are forced to follow every law and letter of the constitution, there can never be real liberty, true prosperity, no one’s private property or person is safe from usurpation. Until there is a NUMA or Fourth Branch, creeping tyranny will ever hold mankind in it’s cold selfish clasp.


John Pepin

The Right to Keep and Bear Arms… Worldwide.

Thursday, February 12th, 2015

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, much of the violence we see around the world would be stopped, if the US Constitutional Right to keep and bear arms was universally adopted. That may seem like a crazy statement… to those who have never been around guns, and have the irrational fear the new class and socialists have placed in them, but to those who grew up with a gun leaned up in their closet, it is utterly rational. Irrational fear based in ignorance is never a good place to argue from. Even a cursory glance at violence around the world, shows that the victims of violence are always disarmed, while the villains are always armed. Especially where guns are illegal. The real reason the elite want to keep guns from the hands of law abiding citizens, is that the elite don’t see us as citizens, but as subjects. We are to be controlled by whatever means necessary and the threat of violence, along with the state’s monopoly on violence, is the “ideal” way. This discussion has deep repercussions for the future of Mankind, will our children live in a world with increasing violence and tyranny, or will we change it to a place where evil men don’t have a monopoly on violence, and so in their utter cowardice, evil men withhold from visiting violence on others.

Lets take a quick look at violence around the world, shall we? The Charlie Hebdo attacks in Paris are fresh on the world’s mind so we’ll start there. Had the editors at Charlie Hebdo been armed the attacker would have got one or two shots off before the return fire stopped him. The cold blooded murder of the police officer would have been avoided and the massacre at the Jewish deli couldn’t have happened. In Africa, if the Christians were armed, Boko Haram couldn’t slaughter thousands with impunity and their daughters would be free instead of sex slaves. In the Yugoslavian conflict had the Bosnians been armed they could have staved off the incursions and the bloodshed of that war would have been exponentially less. During the Second World War the Japanese Imperial Army took and invasion of the US off the table… because the US citizenry were armed.

When Australia banned guns the violent crime rate skyrocketed. That is because the evil element in any nation will have access to guns, as they do drugs and other illicit items. Moreover, those who are intent on doing harm have no compunction about breaking the law. The same thing happened in Britain. Whenever guns are outlawed only outlaws have guns, their victims don’t, and the outlaws know it. To sharpen the point further, even in the absence of guns evil people will do evil acts, because they know their victims are defenseless. The youths who ran over the British soldier and cut off his head, then stood there with blood dripping from their hands, finger up and lecturing to the crowd how great their religion is, couldn’t have done that if the citizens… sorry, subjects, had been armed.

The argument that violence would increase if the citizenry were allowed to have weapons is spurious and those who make it know it. In the US, the places where gun crime is the greatest, are those places where guns are the most outlawed. Chicago has the toughest gun laws in the nation and violence is out of control there. Take out the places where guns are the most illegal in the US and the US crime rate drops to one of the lowest in the world. Vermont has no gun laws whatsoever and is 49th in the nation for violent crime. What crime there is is almost entirely crimes of passion. Moreover, when guns were even more prevalent in the US, the 1950’s, where gun safety and shooting skills were taught in the public schools, (along with the Lord’s Prayer), there wasn’t a single school shooting… and gun crime was rare, despite the wide availability of guns… even in school!

The elite however, knowing their ultimate goal is to progress the world to a one world government… with a planned economy, big brother watching our every move and arbitrary rule, know that the human population needs to be disarmed for that to happen. No one who plots usurpation wants to face armed men, they seek disarmed poltroons, armed men shoot back, disarmed poltroons cower in fear. Had the Mencheviks in the 1920’s had guns the Bolsheviks couldn’t have rounded them up, cut a slice into their abdomens and pulled out a small piece of intestine. Then nailed the intestine to a tree and whipped the victim, until he or she tied themselves to that tree by their inwards, and left to die. Instead, the Bolsheviks would have had a firefight on their hands, and no murderous evil bastard wants that! They want their victims disarmed and cowering for their lives. Che Guevera loved shooting someone grovelling and pleading for his life, it made him feel like a man. More like an evil villain if you ask me. Disarm the people and you arm evil.


John Pepin

Freedom, Conniving and Rice’s Non Speech

Sunday, May 4th, 2014


Dear Friends,


It seems to me, Condoleezza Rice’s withdrawing from giving the commencement speech at Rutgers, bespeaks of a serious problem all of our republic’s face, that of the crushing of free speech, freedom of association, freedom of the press, freedom of thought and even freedom of conscience, by exploiting political correctness. This phenomenon is not new. Control of information has always been the first act of a new king, autocrat or emperor. There was a tacit law in all old style nation and city states that one never speak ill of the king. In the modern form of nation states, with constitutional rule, the people are supposed to be free in fact as in theory. That one faction of the political spectrum has managed to shut down freedom itself, by screaming “justice,” is what makes the whole thing so absurd. This ridiculousness that we live under, not only in the US but the World over, gives far too much power to the most provenly corrupt faction in history, as is further verified because they are willing to undermine these fundamental human freedoms, for their mere political gain.


Lets face facts, political parties exist to get and hold power, pure and simple. Anyone who argues otherwise is cherubically ignorant. This has been pointed out by many political philosophers throughout the ages, Joseph Schumpeter for example, moreover this is patently obvious given the history of the human race. To their own end, getting and holding power, political parties will engage in various levels of conniving and nefarious means to get that power, then being as ruthless as is politically expedient to get and hold it. The faction that is the most ruthless in getting and in holding power then, will naturally have the upper hand… until the people become aware and exasperated at the conniving.


One way to get people to believe in the most ludicrous things is to control information. We are all merely human beings. We respond to our environment else we cease to exist. That has been the paradigm since the first man and woman walked the Earth. Today our environment is the modern media led by culture responding to the modern media. If our environment can be controlled through manipulation of our environment, ie, the culture – modern media feedback loop, we must naturally respond to that change in our environment, because it has been the necessary paradigm for so long.


So, the faction that is sufficiently ruthless will use the most nefarious means to control information, and thereby gain and hold political power. To that end, we introduce upper middle class youth, the most dangerous people on Earth. They have time, knowledge and are sufficiently prosperous they can travel and insert themselves into any question at a moment’s notice, shutting down free anything. They are the incarnation of the New Class. This faction went into action as soon as they heard Condoleezza Rice would be speaking, since her views run counter to theirs, and therefore she needed to be silenced, else her views might give the students a different perspective than the one they have been programed to have. You have to admit, as a measure of ruthless conniving, this is pretty low.


That is why our freedoms are so important, that of thinking, of speech and especially of conscience, even if that conscience is absurd, these freedoms are to protect us all from a corrupt faction gaining power, that is willing to manipulate our freedoms to their own ends, and all the other usurpations that fact implies that faction would submit us to. The reaction to the protests should have been loud and pointed. Condemning the protests against Rice’s speech in no uncertain terms. Showing our exasperation. Anything short of outright condemnation will, and has, led to the empowering of that faction that is willing to step on Our rights for Their political gain. Not to put too much onus on the people of today, who ignorantly allow it, this same faction has been exploiting these very weaknesses in us since the French Revolution, and slaughtering hundreds of millions in the process.





John Pepin


Constitutional Usurpation

Monday, February 3rd, 2014

Dear Friends,


It seems to me, if I am not held to the Law, I will not follow the law. Moreover, if our elected leaders are not held to the Constitution, they will not follow it either. This not only applies to the US, where the Constitution has been bastardized by the New Class to their own purpose, but around the World. Human nature is unyielding. We do what we can get away with due to our egoistic self interest. No one among us is immune we are all subject to the demands of our egos. It is said that our emotions are like an elephant and our reason is merely a rider. Since politicians are human beings, they are as subject to this weakness in human nature as anyone, perhaps more, since they seek egoistic power over others. If we are to leave our children and their children, a World where people are free and prosperous, we must realize a means to counter this predilection in our leaders.


Think about it this way, if the laws against speeding are not enforced, people will speed more and more. As a result accidents will become more and more frequent and deadly. If the laws against drunk driving are not enforced as well the trend of more deadly accidents will accelerate. This is incontestable, we all know that we will do what we can get away with, and we all understand the repercussions. What we fail to realize however, is the same holds true for our elected leaders, but with far greater negative consequences.


The elite, like everyone, seek to exceed limits on their actions. In the case of the elected leaders, they want more freedom, to limit the freedom of others. Like the guy late for work, if he believes he will get away with exceeding the limit, he will do it. The repercussion to the society and culture from the elite exceeding their authority, as limited by the Constitution, are far more dangerous than merely allowing drunks to careen down the road fast as bullets. If we allow our leaders to surpass constitutional limits, the results include but are not limited to, famine, oppression, poverty, social strife, and hopelessness.


The predilection of the elite is only exacerbated, when those that are empowered with limiting the power and scope of government by their Constitutions, cheer and applaud when a would be usurper publicly announces he fully intends to practice arbitrary power. In this case the Constitution is nothing more than a cloak that gives the new tyrant’s usurpations a veil of legitimacy. When this happens the people have two options. Rise up and demand the Constitution be followed to the letter as intended or fall into line like lambs to the slaughter house. In such a society, where the people rise up immediately, the change back to Constitutional rule can be done with little or no blood shed, but where the people fall into line, whether it is for free stuff or fear of being called a name, eventually they will be led to slaughter and terror. Once that happens, if the people become enraged at the usurpations and rise up, we will be put down by deadly force and much blood will be shed, like in Tienanmen Square or Iran.


The right thing to do is never the easy thing to do. Most of the time we know the right thing to do but withhold action because it is seen as too difficult. Mo Ti wrote volumes about this facet of human nature, that we will do the hard thing to avoid the easy thing… In the case of a blatant usurper the right thing to do is to immediately write letters and articles, demonstrate, demand the Constitution be followed as written and intended, and otherwise act out. This is not easy, especially when the elite in the media, government and culture, back the usurper. But if it is not done and we fall into line like lambs the slaughter house cannot be far away.


In the US today we have a President who is so blatant about his usurpations he announces them to standing ovations like Adolph Hitler did. He is so confident that the American people will fall into line like lambs he openly avows he will practice arbitrary rule, like following laws as he sees fit, changing laws to suit his moods, bypasses other Constitutionally empowered branches of government and otherwise acts the dictator.


Using the spurious logic of “living breathing document” wasn’t undermining the Constitution fast enough, and we have become such sheep, he can do all these things without complaint from the very people he is avowing he will oppress. He knows the media will not hold him to any standard, the cultural elite back his incursions, and all other political factions behold his usurpations with admiration, drooling at the possibility they will get the same power if and when they come into office. The last hope to such a society, are the people who are awake and aware, we must demand our Constitution be followed. A NUMA is only a means to maintain Constitutional limits once they are reestablished. Like I said, if we do not hold the elite to the Constitution, they will not follow it, with all the consequences that will ensue. Lambs don’t write letters and don’t fight, they cry as their throat is slit, but to no avail… they have entered the slaughterhouse of their own free will.





John Pepin

Obama’s Kill List

Monday, February 18th, 2013

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, Obama’s new found ability to order American citizens killed without charge or trial, is not only a slippery slope, it is the beginning of the end for our republic. It is hard to fathom that anyone who has knowledge of the US Constitution wouldn’t be screaming to the highest heavens about this usurpation of our Constitutional rights. Obama drapes himself with the flag, the Constitution and uses jingoistic rhetoric, to destroy these very things! It is amazing how few people are upset by this, and possibly the reason we are rapidly loosing our liberty, to this progressively communistic administration. If you don’t care that your children will be slaves to the state, you should stop reading at this point, because I am sure dancing with the stars or Gilligan’s Island is on TV.

The US Constitution is adamant, that no single person has the power to order an American citizen killed, regardless of his or her actions. The most heinous criminal is given a trial. Even predators of children are given this most basic of Constitutional protections. The right to a jury trial is one of the basic building blocks of our republic. The removal of which threatens to destabilize the very structure of our government. No edifice can stand the removal of critical support members and our government is no different.

Usurpation always start at the extremes. Caesar didn’t announce himself dictator of Rome overnight. He built support among the masses by handing out money and food. Later Roman Emperors called the practice Bread and Games. The Roman republic rotted from the inside by the continued usurpation of the Elite. It eventually became so hollowed out by the corroding of it’s founding principles, the republic that had lasted almost a thousand years, collapsed into the dark ages. The whole of humanity suffered as a result. The hollowing out of the American founding principles will result in no less catastrophe for the peoples of the World tomorrow.

Every time a founding principle is undermined for expediency it becomes a slippery slope. Abortion couldn’t be passed by the legislative branch so the Judicial branch overstepped it’s legal bounds and unilaterally ordered it. (A usurpation in it’s own right). Abortion was originally only to be done in the first trimester of pregnancy, but over time, it has perniciously grown, so that today it can be legally done the day before birth! Not only that, but the US CDC has issued a paper calling for “afterbirth abortions,” up to a year old! The slide continues. Seat belt laws were originally sold as a secondary offense only but in almost every state they have become primary offenses. The political Elite always struggle against the bonds put on them by the Constitution, and we see all to well that the Elite have succeeded in creating a government, where we have the appearance of Constitutional limits but in reality, they are no more restraining then toilet paper. These are but a very few examples of the slippery slope in politics.

Would it have been so hard to try Anwar al-Awlaki in absentia? Is there a jury in America, given his anti American rhetoric and traitorous actions, that wouldn’t have convicted him? Why then was a trial so onerous to Obama? He wanted to try The mastermind of 911 in New York? He wanted to release all the inmates in Gitmo… because Obama was offended that they had not received a trial. But Obama denies American citizens trial? Maybe he didn’t want the precedent set that a traitor should be executed? If a person displayed this level of inconsistency in anything else they would be called hypocrites at best and insane at worse.

News reports say Obama has a whole kill list! Why not try them all in absentia? Is it because they couldn’t be found guilty? If this is so then how can Obama justify his kill list? If, as is more likely the case, they would be easily found guilty, then why not try them? The legal system and Constitution provides us the means why don’t we use it? Is it because the administration wants the precedent set that it can unilaterally execute anyone they find inconvenient? What is the likely outcome of this precedent? Initially, those murdered by Our government in Our name, will be Islamic terrorists, but eventually the crime that begets presidential sanction, will slide down the scale of heinousness to mere political crimes. That, it would seem, is the goal. To allow the President to execute citizens who are politically opposed to this President and his successors. The history of communism shows this is the way Communists, like Obama, rule. Note, this is that very same path that brought Rome to it’s ruin. We travel down the same road to the same destination, extinction of our founding values and the total collapse of our republic into what, a new dark age? Who would want that other than a psychopath?


John Pepin

Faction in the Modern World

Monday, August 20th, 2012

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that faction is a bigger threat to our Constitutional republic today than at any time in our history. That is a pretty big statement, considering that we have fought a Civil War, as atonement for the evil of slavery, and all the other times faction has threatened our liberties. The threat of faction has been known and understood since Madison wrote Federalist Paper #10. That faction is a bigger threat today, speaks more about the characteristic of faction in modern society, than the nature of faction as a whole. If I am correct, and faction poses a greater threat to our freedoms and the liberties of our children than at any other time in American history, we must all wake up and address this threat, else we will leave our children a far worse state of affairs, than our parents did us.

In Federalist paper #10 Madison wrote that faction is the biggest threat to a republic. Faction, being like fire and liberty being like oxygen, the way to control faction is not to starve it of oxygen, (liberty) but to pit faction against faction. I am of course paraphrasing his words but the meaning is correct. By pitting faction against faction his theory, and the theory of the US Constitution, is that if faction is always fighting turf wars, no one faction can grow sufficiently large to take over the apparatus of the State. Madison warned that if some faction gained total control of two of the branches of government then our liberty would be threatened. He was adamant about this.

One of the bulwarks against this happening is the free press enjoyed in the US. The free press being able to point out when any single faction in society is becoming too large. A free press was considered one of the controls on the predilection of the Elite to usurp power. This control has worked sometimes better, sometimes worse, but all in all it has been a moderately sufficient safeguard in the past. Today however, we have a media that calls itself unbiased, yet they have a demonstrable bias toward a single faction, showing absolute contempt for our intelligence. This faction was briefly in charge of all three branches of government and still has hegemony over two. The Executive and the Judicial. Control of the Legislative branch is tenuously limited, by the inclusion of a few that are not in that faction, but they are incessantly vilified by the unbiased press for it.

The two party system was another protection against the vicissitudes of faction. If there are only two parties, then all factions must squeeze into one or the other party, thus limiting their overall power. Various factions would have to commingle within each party in order to have some seat at the table. The two party system worked well throughout most of our history but recently has become an impediment due to the pernicious nature of the one faction. This faction has penetrated both parties. The democrat party is under total control of this faction and the Elite in the republican party are loyal to this faction as well. There is only a small minority, growing to be sure, but nevertheless a small faction within the republican party that resists the advance of these people.

Joesph Schumpeter said that free markets and liberty cannot long last. His dire prediction was based on the fact that, once a person becomes wealthy their first order of business is to close the door behind them, so that no one else can pass through the portal to wealth, they did. This doesn’t make the rich bad… it makes them human. The means to this end being ever increasing regulation. As Milton Friedman said, when a business man is confronted with a superior competitor he has two options, the first is to ramp up his business to effectively compete and the other is to turn to government and regulate the competitor away. It is the responsibility of the electorate to control the avarice of the wealthy by the popular vote.

Now we have one faction that seeks to regulate the people while resisting the most basic controls on their actions. They use populist rhetoric to convince us that they work in our best interests, but even a cursory knowledge of human nature shows, this is mere folly. No one works against their own interests. Those very few that have, are given the attribution… Saints and the Christ. To believe that people who seek to control us with arbitrary power, only seek the interests of society, eschewing their own is blindness. The progressive faction is nearing their complete victory over our Constitutional republic, destroying their mortal enemy, the free market and imposing arbitrary rule on us and our children.

All is not lost however. We still have suffrage and the unconventional media. This blog being an example. We can use that power given to us by the Founding Fathers and turn the tide, for at best a few more years, or we can stand aside and allow the demise of our republic, and with it, our liberty, opportunity and safety. It is up to us to be rational maximizers, to stand in the way of the progressive agenda, for the sake of those we love most, or, we can accept the part of useful idiot. I for one, have no interest in being a useful idiot and ceding our republic to a single faction, no matter how flowery their rhetoric… Do you?


John Pepin

Property Rights

Thursday, November 18th, 2010

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that there are three general practices that government can follow, in the area of property rights, of it’s citizens and non citizens; They are, government protects the property and free use of it‘s citizens and non citizens, government can allow the corrupt to usurp the property and rights of the politically weak while protecting the usurper from any negative consequences, or government can be the usurper.

Governments that are the usurper of property include but are not limited to, Nazi Germany, The United Soviet Socialist Republic, Cambodia, North Korea, with many others far too numerous to count, modern examples including, Cuba, Venezuela, and Zimbabwe among others. Clearly an historic group of countries contributing much to the historical annuls, the combined knowledge base and lore of humanity, the true misery, visited on a people who follow an ethos based on jealousy.

These countries all had, (have) a declining standard of living. The governments of these countries are united, in their usurping of private property rights, of their citizens and non citizens. Regardless of the original motives behind the government’s usurping property rights the result, universally, is misery.

Other countries have a semi rule of Law, where there is Law, but it is selectively applied. Countries with oligarchal capitalist systems follow this path. Mexico is a glittering example of an oligarchal capitalist country that has a system of Law but it is selectively applied.

The results of the Mexican practice is large scale poverty along with corruption in, government, business and the population. Perhaps the reason is that, if a drug lord killed a person’s son, for example, there would be no government attempt to prosecute the drug lord or any of his minions. If however the person who suffered a real loss takes matters into his own hands and retaliates killing the drug lord and the minions that were directly involved in his son‘s murder, rest assured, that person would be tried to the utmost limits of the Law, and made an example of.

What is the incentive for the average person in such a system?

The last system is where government holds the property rights of individuals equally and as freehold. There are no examples in the world today, of this right government, all falling into some level of the others. Historic examples include the US, Denmark, and England among few others.

History emphatically shows that where this is the state of affairs, government protects property rights of it’s citizens and non citizens, the standard of living increases dramatically. Reading the writings of Voltaire and Hume shows the advancement of the standard of living of the human race directly as a result of the enlightenment. The advent of the Market System could not have happened where government does not protect property rights. It’s not hard to understand why, when Denmark vociferously claimed they would protect, even the property rights of the hated Jews, was where and when the Market System came into being.

The thing I find wonderful, is that the standard of living of people, not even involved in the market system, standard off living went and continues to, go up. Like a desert getting slowly flooded. Plants and animals gather where the water is deepest, but water leeches through the sand, nourishing other places. Especially where there is some attempt to protect property rights… We find cacti and succulents. Imagine how much better it would be if those countries that practice usurpation or allow usurpation changed course?

If they started actually protecting, equally, access to property, including the means of production, controlling the avarice of the Elite, making equal demands of all citizens and holding the powerful to the same Law the weak are held to, Imagine how much better the lot of Mankind would be. Everywhere.

Why not?