The Moral Bankruptcy of the Progressive Movement

Posted on March 18, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the absolute moral bankruptcy of the progressive movement, is manifested in the many scandals covered up by the progressive media. The progressive media is the corporate media, (the media that calls itself unbiased and is owned by three entities), as well as public media. Ham handed uses of the Hegelian dialectic, to undermine the US Constitution’s Second amendment, opening perversion of the reigns of power to political fiends, the progressive faction and their sycophants in the progressive media have proven themselves to be utterly bereft of morality, even lacking basic humanity. They act like psychopaths for only a psychopath could do what they do. So much so, that to deny the moral bankruptcy of the progressive movement, is to deny water wets and fire burns.

The Hegelian dialectic is a means to empower the state by deception. A tyrant wannabe simply has to create a crisis, to get people to demand that which they wouldn’t otherwise tolerate. The beauty of this utterly immoral way of manipulating the people into self harm, is that creating a crisis, is the easiest thing to do! Operation Fast and Furious was just such an attempt at the Hegelian dialectic. Obama created a crisis, the trafficking of small arms into Mexico, a crisis that resulted in thousands of deaths of human beings, the empowerment of El Chappo himself, and the murder of US customs agent Brian Terry. In this video taken before the scandal broke, at 12:30 to 12:45, Obama exploits the violence he created, to bypass the Constitution and eliminate the Second Amendment, by treaty.

In this one scandal Obama and the progressive media proved they share a morality with psychopaths. Obama created a situation, which he had to know many innocent people would be murdered, tortured, and terrorized… to create a crisis. This, in and of itself, is the work of a diabolical human being. This evil he worked for the purposes of undermining our defense against an evil government. Which, by his actions, proved the government under him had bad intent. The very thing our Constitution’s Second Amendment is there to protect us from! The progressive media made it clear they are as evil as Obama himself, by covering his clumsy attempt at the Hegelian dialectic, to undermine our Constitutional Rights. Both the progressive leader and his bootlick media showing who they are.

The recent revelations of the absolute corruption in the Department of Justice, the FBI and the State Departments, illustrate the lack of morality. Under Obama they were so corrupted that every top level executive under his leadership has been disgraced, Strzok, Page, Ohr, Comey, McCabe, the Spygate officials, and the list goes on. Judicial Watch has uncovered damning evidence against Hillary Clinton for both the private Email server and destroying evidence, the DOJ and FBI cover up of the crime, the implication of Obama in obstruction of justice, collusion with foreigners to create a dossier that was used to corrupt the security apparatus to political purposes, exploiting the IRS to silence political adversaries, etc… There was not a thing progressives touched that they didn’t utterly corrupt.

Not surprisingly, the progressive faction today openly undermines US sovereignty, when their sycophant monopolies censor people and by opening the boarders then demanding non citizens vote, which cannot be said to be in any way patriotic or democratic, since those policies are directly opposed to democratic principles, that the people should decide, not aliens imported to undermine the people’s will! The progressive faction, simply by their stance on human life, show themselves to be morally bankrupt, for only the most heartless of people would condone the ripping apart of an innocent human being, depending on some arbitrary definition of humanity. By their actions you will know them, and by their fruits you will understand… by that standard the progressive faction is evil incarnate.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Elevate Individuals and Lift Us All Up

Posted on March 14, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, you don’t elevate someone by lowering him, you elevate someone by lifting them up. Moreover, in no way is lowering someone… elevating them. I know, I know, such a shocking revelation will take a few seconds to process. Now some of you might be saying to yourself, “Now sit down and relax there Sparky. That’s crazy talk. How does someone know they have bad breath, if you don’t rip them about their death breath?” Because a dig can be taken many ways, most of which do not engender a positive response, but a gentile suggestion based in love, can only be taken in one way. Which is more likely to make the person with bad breath deal with it? That is why I say, no one ever elevates someone by lowering her, a person can only be elevated, by lifting them up.

Unlike a house that must be ripped down to be renovated, a human being is a sentient organism, with consciousness, awareness, a soul and agency, we are far more intricately built than anything man made. Every human being is extraordinary, we are all different and alike in a myriad of ways, each of which makes us special. The melded aggregate making up humanity and the human condition. As a result, improving such complexity is not a mount Fuji problem, it is a dancing landscape. This is a fractal in that it applies at all levels of investigation. From the individual person’s anxiety about spiders to the macro economy, no matter what scale we are looking at, the picture remains the same, You cannot build up someone, nation, race, person, religion, culture, etc… by lowering them, they must be elevated.

On the individual level, Tearing a human being down all day every day will never make him a great husband. On the other hand it will make him more likely to run around, do drugs, hang around bars, go to work late, get fired, and otherwise be the person you tell him he is. Complaining in earshot that your wife is fat, lazy, a terrible cook, was a slut, is frigid, and cold hearted… will get that husband the exact woman he tells her he wants. The child told she is stupid may strive and get good grades but will always be held back on some fundamental level, and the tot coddled so he does not have to walk will also be permanently handicapped. It is simply impossible to raise someone who you are destroying. You must either raise them or lower them and realize that you are doing it.

On the national level, economies, crime rates, drug addiction rates, etc… are not solved by ever more draconian police states, they are solved by the culture deciding not to do those things. A culture that lowers us by holding hedonism as the highest good, is one that lowers, it doesn’t lift up. Watch television today and think about the messages on both the commercials and the shows. Certain politically disfavored groups are portrayed as stupid, ignorant, lazy, racist, etc… which is hardly a means to elevate them now is it? That is the cultural elite telling impressionable people to be stupid, lazy, ignorant, racist, etc… Which can only lead those who are most susceptible to cultural pressure, to adopt a nihilistic attitude and get into drugs, crime, avoid work and responsibility, etc…

On the cultural level, apologizing for individual crime based on someone’s culture is lowering them, it is no different than comparing a human being to a monkey, dog, cat, scorpion or bacteria. Whenever someone allows behavior from a group, that is not tolerated by others, that group is being told they are really subhuman, not civilized enough to be held to that standard. Kissing their derriers with empty rhetoric only lowers them further. People act as they are expected to, if they are expected to be barbarians they will be barbarians. Lowering people will never elevate them. The way to help civilize uncivilized people is to hold them to the exact same standard you hold everyone else to. Elevate them, and you elevate their own expectations of themselves. Elevate people and humanity will be lifted up.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Transgenderism

Posted on March 11, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, this transgender thing will be remembered in the future as eugenics is today, notwithstanding it is a form of eugenics. Convincing children to change their sex is convincing a child to sterilize themselves. It is a form of forced sterilization because what child is competent to make such a life changing decision? If the argument is that a child of eight is capable of deciding to change their sex, they should also be able to drink in a bar, vote in elections, fight in war, adopt children, etc… Anyone who takes the position, that a child is too immature to decide whether or not to drink a gin and tonic or smoke a cigarette, yet the same child is sufficiently mature to decide to sterilize themselves… to become a sexual plaything of a pervert, that person is in fact manipulating children into self harm.

History remembers the progressive movement as the founders of eugenics. Many of the present heroes of the modern progressive movement were eugenicists, and strongly favored the forced sterilization of people, based on racist, bigoted and “compassionate” grounds. The same movement, after it was discredited in the US and in turn had discredited the progressive faction, for nearly a century, was taken up by the Nazis. Yet today, when confronted by the eugenics of their predecessors, a modern progressive will argue, the movement has changed. So, if that argument is valid… would a Nazi get the same use of it? Could a Nazi say, we have given up our racism and have progressed. Would Nazism become acceptable then? Of course not! Evil is evil. Evil doesn’t change… it mutates.

History will remember the transgender movement, pushed on children by progressives, exactly the same or perhaps worse than the progressive eugenics movement. This is because children are being tricked, manipulated into self harm, in an act worthy of Lucifer himself… or a psychopath. Even as the media that calls itself unbiased covers up the atrocities of their progressive heroes, future 5th columnists will feel the need to apologize for today’s transgender atrocity, as well as abortion. Yet the reality of the evil progressives are doing is lost on many people today. Tomorrow will be quite different however. Without the incessant propaganda and with a little perspective, the malevolence we are foisting on our youth will be recognized, for the crime against humanity it is.

Those who really believe they were born into the wrong body have a mental illness. Mental illness is not treated by surgery, it is treated by compassion, therapy, drugs and patience. The proof is in the pudding, because studies show that people who “transition,” commit suicide at astounding rates. Far exceeding that of the general population at large and even other at risk groups. Obviously, post modernists care nothing for facts like these, so they are offered for people who still believe in objective truth. Objectively then, treating people with that form of body dismorphic disorder with surgery is a form of abuse. Subjectively though, creating artificial boys and girls, who’s sexual function has been perverted from procreation, to a sex toy, is a good thing, for the people who will use and abuse them.

The way to keep such evils from happening in the first place, is to stay connected to reality, and never lie to oneself. These evil notions like eugenics, abortion and transgenderism, are all based on lies. Moreover, they reject the Golden Rule, in that no one who is abusing on another, would want that done to him or her! The same goes for being manipulated into any form of self harm. By every measure, the golden rule, compassion, truth, patience, love and caring… this transgender fad is evil, and will end in human suffering on a magnificent scale. For such evil to become so powerful, it took many good people to remain silent. We have been silenced by fear, fear of being called a racist, bigot, intolerant, etc… by people who are all of those things, but far worse. We allowed it, we must stop it. Speak up!

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

Ostracize Post Modernism!

Posted on March 7, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, it is time to recognize post modernism for what it is, and ostracize it, like the ancient Greeks did to anything or anyone that threatened their liberty. Post modernism, the philosophy that posits, every idea, scientific theory and mindset are mental constructs based on the acquisition of power. Therefore even that which is empirically proven… is wrong. Since all thought and exercise of power is a means to more power, they believe, even mathematics itself, the quintessentially unbiased science, is racist. One cannot argue a point with someone who eschews reality as a construct to forward power over others. Without some frame of reference discourse cannot happen. Without discourse the only thing left is raw power, violence, and we see the post modernists advocating for it’s use.

The ancient Greeks, under the Laws of Solon, practiced the ostracism. Solon was elected the equivalent of dictator of ancient Athens. A problem had arisen and civil war was about to break out. Solon was seen as the only man wise enough to solve the problem. He did, and also changed the laws of Draco to his own. The most important of which is the ostracism. Anyone who had amassed too much power, according to Solon, was a threat to Athenian democracy, (liberty) and should be ostracized. The people would take a vote on shards of pottery called Ostracon, and if they voted to ostracize the individual, he was banished from Athens for a period of years. This innovation gave the ordinary citizen the novel power to forestall tyrants, before they became too powerful.

The US founders were adamant, both the Federalists and the Anti federalists agreed with Solon, that massed power is always a threat to liberty itself, and unaccountable power being the greatest threat. All the great thinkers have understood this fact, from Solon to Lord Acton. Post modernism, on the other hand, seeks to mass power from around the Globe… and place it in the hands of unelected new class apparatchiks. Which makes it a philosophy worthy of ostracism on it’s face. Moreover, post modernism as a philosophy, is intended to overthrow the nation state, and therefore is anti constitutional. Since all Constitutions are based on the nation state they were written in. Eliminate the state and the constitution is defacto eliminated. Making post modernism a direct threat to our Constitution as well.

Our Constitution is based on the advances of the Enlightenment. We know that Enlightenment principles are good by their fruit, plus we know that the philosophy of envy, any way it appears, is bad, because it always has evil results. Enlightenment principles seek to use mankind’s self interest to improve the lot of man, while the philosophies of envy seek to improve the lot of man by harming those who get ahead. That the principles of envy are evil was the singular lesson of the Twentieth Century, yet they live on in post modernism. Philosophies that are based on envy, far from being innovations are throwbacks to the time before the Enlightenment, and are antithetical to it, and thereby our Constitution, (which is based on Enlightenment principles), as well.

Post modernism’s mother brought us the Killing fields, the classicide of the Kulaks, the famines of Stalin and Mao, WWII and National Socialism, the atrocities of the “Shining Path” and the rivers of blood the flowed from Paris after the Revolution. While it’s father is, Thrasymachus’ sophist philosophy of injustice masquerading as justice in service of power. Post modernism if given a chance promises to deliver human suffering on a scale we have yet to see nor could we imagine. Such evil must be pointed out and then ostracized else it will metastasize into a horror that cannot easily be solved. Solon was right, too much power in the hands of too few men is a mortal danger to liberty, especially if those men are psychopaths. We lock up dangers… maybe it’s time to ostracize the mortal danger of post modernism.

Post modernism is like a hydra, cut off a head an two more grow out. The way to kill a hydra then is not to cut off heads but to cut out it’s heart. The heart of post modernism is the lie, that people should be judge by the character the hegemony defines of their group, rather than the content of their character. Stop tolerating such bigotry and call it what it is. Stop lying to one another that bigotry to “stop bigotry” is no virtue, it’s the worst of vices. It self servingly justifies it’s own bigotry, by pointing at bigotry past, by people long dead. Cut the heart from the hydra and point out the self serving privilege of post modernists. They can harm others by rhetoric but are immune themselves because they deny logic and science. The philosophy of post modernism must be ostracized.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Centralization Versus Decentralization

Posted on March 4, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the functional difference between progressives, socialists, Marxists, and constitutionalists, conservatives, liberals, etc… is between centralization and decentralization. Sadly, since the Liberal label has been seized by the most illiberal people on the planet, we will call traditional liberals “libertarians.” Progressives, Marxists and socialists of all stripes seek centralized power… while Libertarians, Conservatives and all individualists seek decentralization. What then is centralized power versus decentralized power? Centralizing power means to move all decision making up, to the highest level possible, while decentralization means to move the decision making power down, to the people most effected by those decisions.

A progressive might argue that, decisions must be made at a high enough level, so those making the decisions have sufficient perspective to make them correctly. Moreover, sometimes hard decisions must be made, decisions that will result in human suffering and even death, those decisions must be made by unbiased professionals, trained to make such decisions. This requires that all decisions be made at the highest level possible. Having all decisions being made by top level officials, with the least accountability, gives room to make those hard decisions. This, according to our theoretical Marxist, would lead to society being better ordered, because order must come from the top down and be imposed, else it will become chaos, and chaos is itself evil.

Centralization is to hold the good of the many above the good of the one. Modern culture bandies this meme about like a new pair of skates. It is considered by progressives, socialists and Marxists as self evident, and so their mouths are full of it. Thrasymachus took the same stance at the beginning of his diatribe in Plato’s Republic. He said that the gods care nothing about a man, only mankind… and took his sophistry from there. All those who favor centralization however, would never apply that argument to themselves, where their personal interests lie. Yet they are “strong” enough to apply it to others. This in and of itself shows the philosophy of “the good of the many,” is hypocritical and obviously counter to the Golden Rule, therefore is not in any way human hearted.

While a Libertarian might counter the “Perspective argument,” with Mise’s “distributed knowledge” contention, to show that decisions are best made near the ground, to take advantage of distributed knowledge. Those decisions that are “hard,” that involve human suffering, if we are to be civilized human hearted human beings, can only be made by those who will bare the suffering themselves. To impose suffering on one, so others can have less suffering, is oppression, it only leads to negative outcomes. Take the food someone grows for his family, and while a few starve to death, many others can live slightly more comfortably, but who will grow the food next year? Plus, whenever those hard decisions are made at a high level, millions die, but when made near the ground, almost no one dies.

Decentralization is to hold that the good of the one leads to the good of the many. It understands emergence in complexity theory… that order can arise from chaos. People do what is expected of them, if we are expected to be hoodlums, we do as expected and become criminals, if we are expected to go to college, we go to college. Therefore, if we are treated like human beings, and not cogs… we will act like human beings. Which is the path to low crime, high employment, intact families and low poverty. Give the person growing the food his due, and there will be plenty of food next year. Moreover, those who believe in “the Good of the One,” will gladly apply it to themselves, showing it to be human hearted. So, which do you believe in, centralization or decentralization?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

The Reality of Property

Posted on February 28, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, one thing that is known but not spoken, is if you steal a big thing from a small person, there will be little chance of facing consequences, but if you steal a small thing from a big person, you will most certainly be punished severely for it. We all know this yet no one speaks of it. Is this a good thing, that those with little property are less entitled to it, than people with an abundance of property? Our government, culture and society seem to believe that is the case. Yet, I don’t believe we as a society have had the debate necessary to determine, if that is the kind of society we want to live in. Perhaps it is a good thing that society values the property of the rich far more than that of the poor, although, I tend to think that all property should be equally valued because of natural law.

My yard stick for all new ideas, is the Golden Rule, how does a novel idea comport with that measure of human heartedness? The Golden Rule, do unto others as you would have others do unto you, keep the fences to the right as you would have your neighbor to the left keep his, “the treatment you would not have for yourself, do not hand out to others,” etc… there are as many ways to describe the Golden Rule as there are ways to implement it. As a measure of the human heartedness of any word, thought or action, there is none better than to think how would you feel if someone else were saying, thinking or doing what you are doing, thinking, saying to you? People who embrace this Rule live better lives than those who don’t, but those who don’t argue their lives are theirs to live… and I agree.

For a society to be free it must live under natural law, or as close as possible, since natural law is the law God, or the Universe, placed us in the state of nature. The farther a society gets from natural law necessarily, the more despotic it becomes. Because it moves the individual away from the state of nature, (perfect liberty). Under natural law all men are equal as is their property. If two men owned similar implements made of iron, and they placed those implements outside in the rain for a year, would the tool of the wealthier man corrode less? Would the tool of the poorer man corrode more? No, all other things being equal, the tools will corrode at the same rate. This is common sense. Therefore, nature itself does not draw a distinction, between the property of the wealthy to that of the poor.

How do we know that poor people’s property is less valued by society, than that of the rich, by example, if a homeless man comes to a police station and reports he has been robbed of everything he has but the clothes on his back, (and those are shabby), he can further identify the perpetrator and his property… will he be taken as seriously as a man in a thousand dollar suit, who claims to have been pick pocketed out of fifty bucks? Maybe it’s a good thing the police are more interested in the pickpocket rather than the two homeless fighting over trash in a stolen shopping cart? Or is it? I am sure you can think of dozens of ways the property of the poor is less valued by government, culture and our society… than that of the rich.

So maybe we should think this through, and decide as a society, if we want all people’s property to be valued equally. Maybe we don’t? The argument would probably follow two tracks. The human hearted and the pragmatic. While they would appear to be at odds, I would argue they are one in the same. To value the property of one over another is clearly a violation of natural law. Moreover, the market itself is based on the concept that all property is valued equally. If one person’s ounce of gold is worth more than another’s, by dint of wealth, than the market must cease to function. Those are both pragmatic arguments. Plus, to value one person’s property less than that of another, is to hold that person as less than the other… which is counter to the Golden Rule by any measure.

Sincerely

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Is the Constitution Itself… Constitutional?

Posted on February 25, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, it shouldn’t be long now, before some judge declares the Constitution itself unconstitutional, because obviously, times have changed. The first time it will probably be overturned in another court, but sooner or later, given time, the elite will progress us away from rationality and common sense, to embrace as self evident… that up is down, blue is red, sweet is sour, hot is cold and right is wrong. That is the logical end of progressive post modernism and it’s philosophy of absolute power. With such obvious examples of judicial malfeasance, as Wickard v Filburn and Roe v Wade, the courts have shown themselves to be poor protectors of our Constitution. As the court system becomes another of the progressive faction’s monopolies, it will also become more and more perverted.

Today, most lawyers believe the Constitution is a “living breathing document” that changes with the times, as determined by the legal oligarchy. This is of course a self interested position to take, since it empowers lawyers to change the very foundational document of our system of government, as they see fit. Such awesome powers for a faction to have… no wonder they believe the living breathing document fallacy with such gusto. Obviously, for a Constitution to have any validity at all, it must be interpreted as it was meant at the time of signing. Clearly, if it is a contract the stronger party can change to his benefit as he sees fit, it is unjust. Yet most attorneys will affirm strongly, that the Constitution must be changed to fit the times, as if human nature changes like hem lines.

Those who believe themselves enlightened, and cut from a better cloth than the common man, typically have the hubris to impose their wills on the hoi polloi, for our own good. It should be evident to anyone that those who see themselves as crusading angels, will resort to any means to force the peasants to knuckle under. It is after all for the serf’s best interests. Such enlightened men are to be feared above all others for, as has been said before… they oppress and visit the worst horrors on mankind, with a clean conscience. Such men seek the comfort of bureaucracy to wield their “benevolent” power. From the comfort of their cubicle, they can right one wrong at a time, their own prejudice, ignorance and biases notwithstanding, and no one can stop them. Such is the cloth from which bureaucrats are cut.

In Wickard v Filburn, the Supreme court progressed the Commerce Clause from regulating interstate commerce, to a wide open door to regulate anything that the Federal government wanted. By stating that Filburn could not grow wheat on his own land, even for his own consumption, because his not buying that wheat would effect the price of wheat, and thus interstate commerce, the Court opened a portal to let in the dark force of bureaucracy and bureaucrats. The explosive growth of the National Register since highlights the point. At least in Wickard v Filburn the Court stayed within the confines of the text, in Roe v Wade the Supreme Court pulled a new “right,” directly from their bum, writing the murder of babies into our Constitution… and we ate it.

The absurdity of the findings are coming as quick as they are becoming ludicrous. A court recently found, a draft that doesn’t include women is unconstitutional because, the times have changed. The progressive faction will, by hook or by crook, destroy our Constitution to forward their agenda of world conquest and unaccountable absolute power. They are making great progress you have to admit. The progressive faction is in monopoly control of the bureaucracy, the media that calls itself unbiased, the legal oligarchy, the education system top to bottom, culture and the banking system. Once they feel comfortable enough, they will declare the Constitution itself unconstitutional, and will deem a new one in it’s place. Because, obviously, times have changed.

Sincerely

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Political Prevarication and Classicide.

Posted on February 21, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, this latest hoax by the progressive faction, highlights several realities in the world we are living in today. That white conservative MAGA hat wearing working men are some of the most nonviolent people on the planet, the progressive faction has a large contingent of outright liars in it’s midst, the media elite are deceivers and progressive leaders are also frauds. These truths become self evident, when one considers the pile of hoaxes and outright stochastic terrorism directed at school kids on a field trip, that the progressive faction is guilty of… in just the last few years. Yet this same contingent of prevaricators, both demand we consider them real news and call those who call them out on their lies and hoaxes, fake news.

Clearly, white working class conservative males are the least violent people on Earth, so much so, that to vilify them, progressives have to manufacture hate crimes. In recent years there have been literally dozens of hoaxes to make MAGA hat wearing people appear as villains. From mosques and churches attacked and vandalized, that turned out to be hoaxes, to the poor little angel who was shot by a passing car, her family claimed the man was white with blue eyes, he turned out not to be. With each passing fake hate crime, hoaxes, to make white MAGA men appear to be violent villains, a smear campaign worthy of Madison Avenue, the operators come further out in the open and their lies become harder and harder to cover up.

People who would fabricate a hoax hate crime are liars. Isn’t that self evident? Moreover, you should not trust a known liar. That is mere common sense. Machiavelli on the subject of a prince, was in favor of constantly shouting how forthright and honest one is, going on and on, while at the same time lying through their teeth. Because people tend to believe what they hear and disbelieve their “lying eyes.” Yet in the case of hoaxers, caught over and over, their lies smeared across the secondary media market, the ones the liars and hoaxers call fake news, even the most zealous and strident oaths of having the utmost honesty and total fairness, with absolute lack of bias… starts to become stale. So, we know by this that a large portion of the progressive faction follow Machiavelli’s rules, and are masterful liars.

Those who knowingly abet the hoaxes, media and politicians, are just as guilty as the fraudsters themselves. Because a hoax is only as effective as it’s media attraction. Time and time again, even the most absurd story that forwards the narrative, MAGA men are violent lunatics, is given hours of coverage, while dozens of powerful counter narrative stories are ignored. This is in and of itself a form of lying. More to the point, it is abetting the hoax itself. I understand that the big three networks spent hours debating this latest hoax, explaining why it proves how violent MAGA hat working men are, before it was outed as another total fraud. They had to know that the story was fishy from the get go. Else they are foolish, and have probably also purchased the Tappan Zee bridge… twice.

Perhaps this crime should be called, political prevarication. Prevaricating to promote a political narrative that is both counter to reality and one that fosters violence in society. Because it is the violence this type of rhetoric, is both intended to create and usually results in, that is the real evil. You could say that the slaughter of the Kulaks was the result of political prevarication. They were targeted as reactionaries, then systematically starved to death. That is the usual path for those targeted by political prevarication. Further, we can conclude that there are those in the progressive faction that, as their own actions indicate, are liars in favor of large scale human slaughter. Because that is what the results of hoaxes designed to vilify a group result in… classicide or revolution.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

It’s like we live in the 1960’s today.

Posted on February 18, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… we are living in times that are very much like the 1960s. Socialism is all the rage, students are becoming activists rather than professionals, there is another generational schism in our society, we are in another protracted war with a hydra, and another great leap forward is proposed by the progressive faction. Alternatively, today, we have a President apparently dedicated to preserving our Constitution rather than subverting it, the media that calls itself unbiased has competition with a media that honestly admits it’s bias, the cultural elite however are trying to destroy the nuclear family and established cultural norms. While in the 1960s there were still shows like The Beverly Hillbillies, where good common rural people were lionized, while connivers and liars got their comeuppance.

As the intellectuals of the 1940’s created the conditions for the 1960’s, the intellectuals disaffected by the fall of the Soviet Union in the 1990’s, created the conditions for the late 2010’s and early 2020’s. If you asked the German soldier in 1940, why he was fighting and why the Soviets, French and British were fighting, he would say, “I fight for socialism, the Soviet fights for communism and the British and French fight for capitalism…” and he would have been right. Ostensibly, that is why the Second World War was fought. It was a global struggle between those three economic systems. The racial superiority angle, as well as the eugenics movement, Hitler borrowed from American progressives like Sanger and Shaw. The real thrust of the Second World War was between Marxism, Socialism and Capitalism.

We all know which side won that war… right? It was the Allies, the side that fought for Capitalism and Marxism, Socialism lost. The intellectuals who had favored socialism over outright Marxism, were forced to become Capitalists or Marxist, and so most chose Marxist, since they so despised capitalism. They infiltrated the Universities and spread their pernicious memes into the minds of young intellectuals, from all over the world, some of whom went on to start bloody Marxist uprisings in South America and elsewhere. The generation most effected by the progressive innovations in the public schools, came of age during the 1960s, kicking off the societal upheaval that were supposed to usher the Marxists to power, even in the US… but it didn’t work. There were no peasants in the US.

Because as Gouldner said, all socialist revolutions are started by unemployed(able) intellectuals and are manned by peasants. There has never to date been a Marxist revolution that was not… Therefore, if you take away the unemployed intellectuals, or the peasants, a communist revolution is impossible. Meanwhile, Reagan’s economic reforms, deregulation, flatter and lower taxes, reversed Carter’s economic malaise and began an economic renaissance in the US, while Thatcher did the same in Britain. At the same time the years of socialist friction had brought the USSR’s economy to a standstill. In many industries, instead of adding value, factories were so inefficient they subtracted value! The upshot is, the entire Soviet bloc collapsed and was integrated into the Capitalist West.

Like the WWII defeat of socialism forced intellectuals to choose between capitalism and Marxism, the fall of Marxism forced the intellectuals to admit, capitalism had won the economic wars. That indeed was the quintessential lesson of the 20th century. Yet, they so loathed capitalism, they embraced post modernism, a philosophy that justifies socialism on grounds other than economic. They set themselves to change the world and today we are seeing the fruits of their labor. As the elite import peasants to man the revolution, and control the distribution of culture, they have an advantage they didn’t in the 1960’s. The Internet in no small way counters much of their advantage, in that information is now freely available to the people, so the next few years will be interesting, and historic… no doubt.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, International Power, Judicial Sysytem, Law, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The Answer to Biased Journalism

Posted on February 14, 2019 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, next to the author of every news article, there should be a chart showing their stances, politically, economically and socially. It could be set up as a three by three matrix. The X axis could be, globalist, neutral, nationalist. The Y axis could be, laissez fair, neutral, socialist. This would allow the reader to know the perspective of the author of the story… he or she is reading. This would solve the asymmetry of information problem in journalism, leading to problems of unconscious bias, since the reader would have access to information to alleviate that asymmetry. Moreover, place a rating of the accuracy of their past articles based on empirical evidence, not appeal to authority. Nothing else would go as far in resolving the public’s antipathy towards the media today.

The media that calls itself unbiased has, for at least a decade, sought to hide it’s bias in the name of “journalism.” The organization, Media Matters, had as it’s platform, that no matter how biased a main stream media outlet might be, it was more important to maintain the appearance of fairness. Listen to ten year old recordings of On the Media, from NPR, to get a better grasp on what I am saying they said. The media has staunchly held to that position, while at the same time attacking those who openly and forthrightly announced their biases to the world, so their listeners could know the hidden biases in their stories. The media that has called itself unbiased, has done great damage to their own names, especially recently. While holding the mask of fairness just off their faces they go full zealot against Trump.

Nothing good grows in the dark. Corruption needs the darkness to grow, like mold. Light sterilizes it. That is why those who seek to grow mold as well as corruption seek the darkness. In this case, the dark, would be someone pretending to be unbiased, when that would make them inhuman, we all have biases, some we admit and others we do not, even to ourselves. Hiding our biases behind some cloak of “journalism” is just a way of procuring darkness for corruption to grow. Because why would anything good need to be hidden from public view? If it is exposing some evil, then it is better to keep the investigation in the public sphere, so no unfortunate suicide by a witness beating himself to death, with several iron pipes, in the parking garage of his condominium, couldn’t happen.

Having one’s bias in front of a writer helps him or her overcome that bias. Having our political as well as economic biases out there for the public, allows us to see them as well. Which, like a sore finger, keeps us from using it, which would help real journalists avoid the old ruts. There is nothing as focusing as a having grade next to your name. Having an accuracy rating, a grade, would drive anyone seeking to be called a journalist… to better journalism. This would allow more people to become journalists outside the gatekeepers. Gatekeepers who, as we all recognize, are the appeal to authority that organizations, such as Media Matters, control like a puppet. The system would help not only readers but authors as well, and creating a path for neophytes to enter journalism.

Obviously for such a system to work it would have to be widely used. For that to happen however, only a few news organizations need to adopt it. If it is liked by the public, other news organizations would be forced to adopt it, else how could they charge someone else with bias while they hide theirs? How could they proclaim another fake news when they operate in the dark? As more news organizations adopt the system it will become standardized, eventually loosing some of it’s effectiveness. Until then, it would go a long way to restoring not only the reputation of the media, but the accuracy and quality of it’s reporting as well. Once all readers judge an article by the author, not the outlet, the system will have become mature.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Group Politics, Judicial Sysytem, media, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , | Leave a comment