Merry Christmas!!!

Posted on December 25, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the old saw that Christmas improves the economy, is false. Most people believe it is a self evident fact that Christmas shopping is a huge boon to our economy, but that is a pernicious meme that runs throughout out society. The long lines at the stores, the people bouncing off each other vying for the new pet rock, and eating out, all give the impression that if not for Christmas, most retailers would go broke. Yet what is unseen is that all the money spent, would still be spent. People don’t burn their money if not for Christmas, it would be spent anyway, and probably more efficiently. How many ugly ties does a man need that he will never wear? Instead, we should experience the Christmas season as a time to see loved ones, meet old friends, meet new ones, visit our acquaintances and help the poor.

It doesn’t matter if money is spent or saved, both help the economy. I suspect very few people burn their money if they don’t spend it on useless Christmas presents. Money spent increases the velocity of money, which has a host of add on benefits to an economy, and if saved increases the capital stock. Both have economic advantages. When the velocity of money increases, wages go up, demand for workers rises and inventory turns over much quicker. That can only lead to an increase in demand which makes factories run more. When people save, the increase to the capital stock allows firms to expand, people to start businesses, and loans become available for consumers to buy homes, cars, and the means of production. Money is the blood of the corpus economic. However, when it is wasted it is like bleeding, instead of doing it’s job… it covers the ground.

In Things Seen and Things Unseen, Bastiat uses the example of a boy breaking a window. A lad throws a rock and it smashes a shop keeper’s window. The shop keeper then has to get the window replaced. People marvel at the economic activity the breaking of the window causes and laud the boy for creating such economic progress. But in fact, the money the shop keeper used to replace the window would have been used for something else. Clearly the shop keeper wouldn’t have burned it. Perhaps he would have used it to buy a pair of shoes. In that case we can say that the glass cutter’s windfall comes at cost to the cobbler… and the shop keeper will have to wear worn out shoes until he gets enough money to replace them. As we see by Bastiat’s example, money is always used but the difference is, in the one case the economic activity is seen, and in the more efficient way it is unseen.

Debt only leads to economic progress if it is spent on utile things. Take the example of two men, one gets a loan to gamble on the horses, and the other uses his loan money to buy a store. No matter how lucky the first is, eventually he will lose that money and have to pay it back with interest, for zero gain. Which will make every other aspect of his life more difficult. The second will have an income stream with which to pay back the loan and derive income from it. Which will make every other aspect of his life easier and better. Obviously, or maybe not so obvious to some, creating an income stream is “more better” than flushing money down the toilet. Debt is only good if it is used for productive purposes, the worst kind of debt is credit card debt… and that is the form of debt people go into, to buy Christmas presents the recipient might never use.

Christmas is not for spending on useless gifts, it is for gathering with people we love, helping people, staying in touch with those around us, it is a time of celebration for the magnanimity of Jesus Christ, who suffered and died on a cross for our sins, instead the Christmas season has been taken over by calculating people, ignorant of economics, to enrich themselves. So… go visit your neighbors and bring them a hot toddy, call your aunts and uncles wishing them Merry Christmas, donate to charity or cook for the poor. In that way you will be paying homage to the suffering of Jesus Christ, it will improve your human heartedness and indeed you will be a better person for it. Rather than lavish your children with toys, that won’t even make it through the day… lavish them with love. Our economy will be more efficient for it and we will all be better people as well. God bless you, have a very merry Christmas and a blessed new year!

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, media, philosophy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Our Culture is Vying for a Darwin Award…

Posted on December 21, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, our culture’s abandoning of common sense… can only lead to catastrophe. Common sense is the result of our species grasping the philosophy of causality. That our actions cause outcomes. It is common sense, for example, to believe that if I jump off a cliff, I will be dashed to bits at the bottom, but it is a violation of common sense to believe that if I jump from that cliff, I will learn to fly without wings. Common sense has allowed us to survive in a world where we are in many ways the most fragile animal around. In an effort to replace causality with pure logic, our leaders have utterly abandoned common sense and causality, and have instead embraced absurdity and the illogical. There is even a prize for those who have proved their lack of common sense… it is called the Darwin Awards. The more people that abandon common sense and embrace foolishness the more tragic will be our outcomes.

The logic chart for common sense goes something like this… We recognize that action A has always led to result B, then acknowledge that if we engage in action A we will have to deal with result B. Therefore if we don’t seek result B we withhold taking action A. It’s pretty simple actually. Common sense tells us that if we engage in action A, take drugs, it will cause us to become addicted to drugs, result B. If our neighbor shouts at us all day every day, how he will kill us and rape our daughter, it would be a violation of common sense if he burns down his own house, NOT to take him in and let him sleep in the same bed as our daughter. It is the same as taking in a rattlesnake as a pet and being shocked when it bites your child. Our leaders on the other hand, claim that he, (or the rattler) will realize what great people we are and instead of making good on his threats, (or biting) will embrace us and we will live together singing kumbaya.

Our leaders prefer pure logic to common sense. Pure logic ignores past results. Hegelian logic dictates that just because every time I have raised a pen over my head and dropped it, there is no logical reason it will fall, it could just as likely float away. Or, just because I bought the carton at the store that says “milk” in it, doesn’t mean there will be milk inside it. Pure logic need not take into account causality, as it is only a mind exercise, a thought experiment, and as such is not the least predictive. Pure logic in fact is in the realm of fantasy, anything that can be imagined can by logically commented on. Take socialism as an example of pure logic, every case of socialism has led to disaster, from the Acts of the apostles and the Mayflower pact, through the French revolution and Modern day Venezuela, socialism has always resulted in poverty and famine, but the elite today believe that if we had world socialism, it would work this time, because pure logic says so. Pure logic allows our leaders to believe in such absurdities, that are based on their living in a fantasy land, which can only result in catastrophe.

The elite in our society have lived in a fantasy for so long they have disconnected from reality. Their lives are disconnected from their actions. When a congressperson can legally engage in insider trading, they must therefore loose their understanding of how real people, who are not allowed such violations, have to live. A member of the elite can imagine a world where no animal has to die so someone can eat, because they get their meat cooked to perfection by top chefs, and never need to see or understand the backstory of where their food came from. The elite pretend they can take people from a place where it is unsafe to walk the streets, move them enmasse to Europe, and they will be peaceful… because the elite don’t have to live with the violent newcomers. The elite can act like printing money in the billions will jump start the economy for the working man… because the more money Central bans print and give the elite,,, the richer the elite get. Fantasy land is only a good place to live if you are protected from the negative consequences of your actions, as the elite are.

Common sense is an ugly truth and most people, especially those who are disconnected from reality, prefer a glittering lie to an ugly truth. If I put my finger in a fire.. it will get burned. The result is fast and undeniable, which is an ugly truth. If I put someone else’ finger in a fire, I will feel nothing but perhaps a sense of compassion, but the results of my actions are felt by others, not me, and so I can imagine that it is a good thing, I can believe a glittering truth. Yet, the result of the action is still there, it’s just that the person who engaged in the action didn’t feel the pain… and so common sense can be ignored. The more immersing the fantasy one lives in the easier it is to deny common sense, and pure logic can easily take the place of common sense where people live in a fantasy. For the common person however, common sense is the means to stay alive. As more and more of us follow our leaders and abandon common sense for glittering lies, inevitably, there will be more and more people putting their wagging fingers in fires, jump from cliffs, move rattle snakes into their homes… and our society that has abandoned common sense, will deservedly win a Darwin award.

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

Abuse of Power

Posted on December 18, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, of all the abuses a wrong form of government can engage in, abuse of power is both the source and therefore the worst. Using the powers of government to forward a political faction’s power, is the source because, all other abuses of power stem from that initial usurpation of power. It is the worst since abusing the power bestowed to a politician, aristocrat, monarch, bureaucrat or tribune, is a fundamental violation of the trust placed in him or her. It is a personal, willful violation that shows the low caliber of the individual(s) and it bestows too much power on just those people who, as highlighted by their actions, should have none. Since abuse of power both violates the trust placed in our leaders, and it also opens the way for other abuses of the people and our trust, it also inevitably leads to oppression, chaos, poverty and war. Yet, all of those ills can be fended off long before they become real existential dangers, by simply making examples of those politicians who engage in abuse of power, so others in the future view the danger of being caught, as sufficient to cause them to withhold action.

What I mean for the purposes of this article by abuse of power is, the use of the apparatus of government to forward a political agenda, rather than a national one. Using the IRS as a political weapon for example. An executive who exploits his or her role and wields the IRS as a political weapon, has both violated the fundamental trust we place in that leader, and is an obvious attempt to undermine the legitimate political process, which can only lead to hegemony of a faction, which opens the door to every other usurpation imaginable. A leader who engaged in exploiting his position and violating the trust we placed in him, to create oppression, is someone who should be made an example of. Moreover, once the abuse of power goes unpunished, it becomes commonplace.

That is how societies evolve over time, what was once unthinkable starts happening, then mushrooms until it yields up it’s fruit. Either poison or blessing, the first leading to such catastrophes as the Black Death, and the second like the introduction of potatoes to Europe, saving the lives of literally millions of children over the ages. To allow the small end of the wedge of abuse of power into a governmental structure, especially if one faction is allowed while others are not, is a sure path to evolving a society to a catastrophe like the Black Death. Sadly, calamity is so easy to see, yet we refuse to look. We blindly glom along, as our society and culture are led to catastrophe by our ignoring the abuse of power. This is why abuse of power leads to poverty, oppression and war.

Another example of abuse of power would theoretically be… a corrupt executive abusing his power to listen in on conversations of people who are legitimate national security threats, to listen in on a rival political party’s communications, email, PM and voice, then used the intelligence gained to get the upper hand in an election. Any allegation of that nature, in a society that cares at all about corruption free government, would be investigated immediately, and by people who can demonstrate their lack of bias. Any nation where such an event happened and it wasn’t immediately investigated, is a nation in which the unthinkable abuse of power is rapidly becoming commonplace.

Nixon didn’t face impeachment hearings in the Senate, because some people affiliated with him broke into the Watergate hotel, without his knowledge… The overt reason, the one we are given by the unbiased media is that he engaged in a cover up of the crime, while not being involved with the crime he abused the power of the Presidency to cover it up. The subtext, the real reason never mentioned, is that Nixon was impeached by the House as payback for prosecuting Alger Hiss. Nevertheless, in the 1970’s, even abuse of power to cover up a politically motivated crime, was sufficient to generate articles of impeachment, how much worse to actually abuse power so fundamentally, as using the IRS as a political weapon, or the national intelligence service to spy on political foes? Our acceptance of such corruption will not make it go away, our acceptance by not speaking up, emboldens it. Inevitably leading to poverty, chaos, oppression and war.

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 Oligarchy and the Upstart

Posted on December 14, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me…

There was once a nation that was ruled by two utterly corrupt political parties. That nation had been born in virtue and now became awash in vice. The political elite had it great though, they passed laws that didn’t apply to themselves, created slush funds to pay for anything they wanted and even broke the universal laws with impunity. So pervasive was their corruption it had oozed to the very bottom of the bureaucracy. The nation had become an oligarchy in all but name. One of the chief means the elite used to get their power was through factionalization and dependency of the electorate. Once some arbitrarily defined group became dependent, they could be relied on to vote against common sense every time, just threaten their government check. The national debt grew and grew, while so did crime, racial tensions, the militarization of the police and a seething underclass of illegal immigrants. Then something came along that threatened to spoil their soiree.

The new class elite, that made up the intelligentsia of both political parties had made their pick in the next election for executive, and all they needed was a challenger. Someone strong enough to get a few votes, but certainly not strong enough to get close… To face the corrupt elite’s choice, a woman, capable of finalizing the break from the nation’s founding principles, and joining a glorious thousand year new world order. A new system where the masses would have their lives benevolently controlled by government administrators. The administrators would be chosen, as much for their political ideology as their university credentials, which in that nation were highly correlated anyway, to insure they would continue to be politically correct in their abuse of power. She was the perfect tool for the corrupt to exploit against the nation’s Constitution and her people.

Then, out of nowhere, a stumbling stone. A crazy half witted Marxist, who had never held a real job in his life, drunk on the wealth he had derived from political office, (since he had been on welfare when elected), challenged the queen and was on a path to win! The epitome of the man Harry Truman referenced in his famous phrase, “Anyone who gets rich in politics is a God damned crook!” Apparently, the masses had recognized how crooked the queen really was, (since she had got even richer in government than the Marxist), so much so that the people in her own faction tried to choose that crooked half wit, over her crookedness. If not for the machinations of party stalwarts, the elite’s choice might have been knocked out in the first round! Fortunately, she was in the more corrupt of the two parties, and so the choice of the elite seized the prize, and the people’s choice had to settle for another mansion on the lake and a super car.

The other corrupt party had their choice, a milk toast who came from a long line of milk toast executives, that could be relied on to say one thing and mean another, which met the corrupt elite’s purposes perfectly. His family had even stumbled the nation into wars, which the deep state loved as it gave them even more power. Again, out of nowhere, came an upstart! Not just one but three. People who didn’t have any of the right credentials, and worst of all, actually wanted to change course! Obviously, the corrupt elements of government, the deep state (bureaucracy) and their bootlicks, simply couldn’t let that stand! So, the elite chose the one they thought they could destroy the fastest in the general… and gave him rope to hang himself, to their amazement, he tied them up with that rope! The other two, the media in the pocket of the corrupt elite, destroyed, as best they could. Once the general came, the elite had the election they wanted. Their choice, the queen, versus a buffoon they could burn down with two sticks.

To the shock and horror of the elite however, the buffoon stayed in the game and even had a path to victory! So the corruption that permeated every corner of government went to work. Those wealthy that had “supported” the upstart’s party changed and supported the elite’s choice. The media came out as a unit to destroy him and the deep state grasped for any reason to investigate him. The queen’s party even paid a rival nation, to write a fictitious document to sway the election, implicating the upstart as colluding with the rival nation to sway the election. Both the elite’s choice and the rival nation had aligned interests, because they had colluded a few years earlier to transfer ownership and thus control of uranium, from the treasonous queen’s nation, to the rival’s.

Imagine the dismay in the ranks of the corrupt elite, that despite all their vote fraud and full control of the legacy media, the upstart won! They immediately used the dossier, paid for by the elite’s choice, the would be queen, and written largely by a rival nation to sway the election, to get a special prosecutor to meet the upstart at the door to the executive offices. This special prosecutors office, stacked with people who openly avowed hate and loathing for the upstart and who had protected the queen in an earlier investigation, begin investigating every act of anyone in any way, connected with the upstart… as their bootlicks buy accusers. Meanwhile, the upstart commences… getting some of the most corrupt elements out of government, ridding the laws of needless regulations, the economy begins rolling again, pushes to lower taxes, stymieing the world’s dictators who had been encouraged by the last administration to acquire nuclear weapons from continuing, as people get off welfare rolls and onto employee rolls…

With the fate of the world hanging in the balance, the story isn’t over… we’ll have to wait and see how it ends.

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 Hypocrisy of Censorship

Posted on December 11, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, to paraphrase Alexander Solzhenitsyn, no one has the right to silence another. Now, I have not read The Gulag Archipelago, I have only read excerpts and watched videos about it, so please forgive me if my arguments supporting his philosophy mirror his. It is important to understand both the negative effects of the arrogant attitude, that one has the right to silence another, as well as the logical fallacy underlying the notion. To believe that is to be a hypocrite… because no one wants to be silenced themselves. Moreover, the same attitude underlays most of the greatest sins against humanity and God. Many may ignorantly accept such pernicious and destructive notions… and doing so only creates more evil in the world. So, if we want a world with as little evil in it as possible, we must strive to expunge all hypocritical concepts.

All sins are based in hypocrisy, which is the antithesis of the Golden Rule. The very understanding of the term “hypocrisy” requires as a prerequisite… empathy. Every major religion but one, for example, has as a basic tenet that rape is evil. Yet, even those who loudly claim rape is perfectly acceptable, would never want to be raped themselves! Even as they pretend rape of another is acceptable. Slavery is another example of a mortal sin couched as good, because how many people who advocate slavery as not evil, would want to be enslaved? How many of those despicable subhumans, who own slaves or enslave others, would say that their own slavery is acceptable? Murder is another example, how many who feel justified killing someone for whatever reason, would claim that they themselves should be murdered, for the same reason? The list of examples of the hypocrisy of such acts is endless. To silence another is just such a hypocritical sin.

Obviously, or maybe not so obviously, just because someone has the power to silence another, does not make it moral or just. A man has the power to rape a woman, a woman has the power to kill a man, everyone has the ability to steal and there is not one among us who cannot lie… but does that power make it right? Of course not! That we have the ability, and do not do evil, is proof of civilization in us. True goodness is not the lack of evil in a man’s heart, true good is having that evil and also the will NOT to do evil. It is not good to be powerless to do evil, because we are all capable of bad acts, especially those who pretend to be harmless. Those who wield the power of the state, have the full force of the nation at their disposal, to silence dissenters and other political views. Those leaders, who have the power to silence others, but do not, are good, and those who use power to silence others then, are evil.

Hsun Ching said, The congenital nature of Man is evil and the goodness in us is a learned trait. Our parents provide for our needs, and one of the most important, is the need to be civilized. We are born selfish, it is only through our interaction with our family that we learn to control ourselves, our family teaches us empathy, which leads to the understanding of hypocrisy. Those who haven’t been civilized are horrible to be around. Think of a brat. No one wants a brat in their home, no one makes friends with someone who is out of control, and those poor souls who have been poorly served by their parents by not being civilized become bad people. It s not their fault, the evil in them was not overcome by their parents. Yet those uncivilized among us would have us all believe they have the right to silence others. To that end, we are deluged with logical fallacies, like the notion some should be silenced for the good of the many.

That anyone claims the right to silence another is pure hypocrisy. What rapist wants to be raped, what murderer wants to be murdered and what censor seeks her own words censored? No, those prescriptions are for others, never the hypocrite engaged in them. Having the power to do a thing does not make it right or just, in fact, having the power to do evil, and not, is the definition of good. Since the nature of mankind is evil, and the good in us a learned trait, we are all subject to believing in self serving hypocrisies, like slavery, rape, stealing, lying, murder and censorship. Solzhenitsyn lived a life of oppression and terror at the hands of self serving uncivilized people, bereft of morality and empathy, who justified their lack of human compassion by claiming the “right,” to not only silence others but execute anyone who stood in their way, for the “good” of the many. Clearly such an attitude is in and of itself, self serving, and can only lead to evil. So, if we seek a world filled with evil actors, then accepting hypocrisy is a sure path to it, but if we seek a world of peace, love, prosperity and compassion, we must reject those who play word games to justify their evil deeds. It is as simple as that. As John Bradford said, “There before the grace of God go I…”

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

How To Limit The Power Of Corporations

Posted on December 7, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, both run of the mill progressives and conservatives agree, that corporations have too much power, where we vehemently disagree however, is how to curtail that power. Sadly, the average person has been spoon fed anti libertarian, conservative, and anti Christian propaganda for so long, many of us believe human beings who are categorized as such, by the intelligentsia, are at heart bad people… when nothing is farther from the truth. This is because it behooves the globalists to keep us focused on our differences, rather than realize we have so much in common… and become cohesive. Were we to come together, we could actually move the world away from where only psychopaths want us to go, to where we all know we want to go. We all agree that the “military industrial complex,” the “deep state” and “corporate America” are all tied together and are existential threats to individual liberty, the environment and oppression, where we differ is in how to control them.

Progressives believe that the only way to control such powerful actors is with a more powerful actor, namely, the government. They see the government’s role as in limiting the power of corporations over us. To that end they don’t have any problem granting government ever more power to control the ever growing power of corporations, a kind of race to the top. They believe government through the use of enlightened regulation, written by thousands of Philip Dru administrators, working diligently in their cubicles, can curtail the power of large corporations. Like the the Lilliputians tying up Gulliver they believe regulations can shut down the caustic power of corporations to rape the environment, stomp on worker’s rights, pay a livable wage and help mankind transition to a sustainable paradigm. All these glorious goods can be achieved, if only we cede enough power to government… according to progressives.

Conservatives believe that the power of corporations is derived from their control of government, through their access to so much money with which to lobby, buy senators and create “non profit” groups to sway government’s actions their way, and so to limit the power of corporations, conservatives believe we must first limit the power of government. Elected officials are above the law, they have little fear of reelection and they even have the taxpayer pay for their indiscretions. They only fear their donors. Corporate donors know this, and along with the occasional blackmail evidence, have our elected officials under their thumbs. With that power, our corporate masters can wield regulation like a long sword, cleaving the head from any would be competitor, enabling them to grow into fat cats. Even the most anti big corporation regulations serve to help big corporations, because they have the resources to meet burdensome regulations, where their smaller competitors don’t.

Everyone agrees corporations seldom work for the favor of their shareholders, almost never for the environment or their employees, and usually take customers for granted… but work only for the advantage of the executives. Glaring examples are like looking for rain drops in a downpour. From the fact Goldman and indeed all the “too big to fail banks,” regularly get hit with billion dollar fines for breaking the law and no one even loses their job let alone goes to jail, to sweeping regulations that are closed to the public but written by corporations, Net neutrality and The Trans Pacific Partnership come to mind. Even as a corporation hemorrhages customers and market share, the executives feed deeply at the trough, until they declare bankruptcy and wipe out the shareholders’ investment, while landing softly with their golden parachutes. In the new class lust for power, wealth and fame, everything else gets trampled underfoot.

So what then is the best answer? Give government unlimited power, in hopes it will use that power to limit the power of their corporate masters, or limit the power of government and take away the lever corporations have over the rest of us? It is clear the direction corporations want us to go, it is the direction they lobby for… give government absolute power over everything. That would benefit corporations the most. Since they pull the levers, behind the scenes, they will really be the ones we are handing the keys to the world to. On the other hand, we could try limiting the role, scope and power of government over the people, and force cumbersome top heavy corporations to face actual competition from entrepreneurs. Were that to happen, the foundation of giant corporations, their wielding of government to their own ends, would collapse, and so would their bulwark against real competition. The rise in small business would increase the demand for workers lowering base unemployment, the rise of entrepreneurs would increase worker productivity and also the standard of living, while the creation of a smaller sized business economy, would increase innovation to a much faster rate.

So… which method do you think will work better?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Family

Posted on December 4, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the singular advantage the human race has above all other species, is our capacity for love, and nowhere is that more evident than in the family. We are nurtured, protected and taught by our family. It is within the family that we learn to cooperate, share, act selflessly and indeed, love. Without the lessons we learn from our siblings, mothers, fathers, beloved aunts, and uncles, without those important lessons we would become barbarians. That is why the most touching stories are about orphans. A “brave new world” would not produce people capable of being civilized but only automatons, walking in a fog through life, wills crushed, hopeless, helpless and without mercy for one another. The family then should be protected at all costs as it is a font of humanity itself.

The world does not care about your existence let alone your feelings. Set a random man down in the wilderness, alone and without tools, and he will surely perish. Only in those places where the temperature stays moderate all the time, water is plentiful and food is easily available can a man survive naked, anyplace else, and let’s face it, every where is other than such an Eden, has as it’s singular purpose to kill you and I. If it is warm enough to survive, there are every manner of poisonous spider, snake and scorpion lurking, where they cannot live, we could freeze to death on a summer night. The world is set against our very survival and it is only through our tenacity, intelligence, skill and cunning that we have even survived, let alone thrived. Why then should a world that actively seeks our very destruction care about our feelings?

Whenever we see those poor souls in utter misfortune, you know they are separated from their family. The homeless come immediately to mind. People only become homeless because they do not have family to take them in, or if their family is too selfish to. It is within the protection of the family that we find shelter from the world’s most horrible wages. Most homeless have mild to severe emotional disorders, or are in the lower percentile of intelligence, and so have no place in a self centered society, especially in a world that seeks their death… except the family. A statistic we don’t ever see, and I wager will never see, is the number of people with mental illness and are functionally retarded, cared for by their family. The vast majority of are cared for with love and familiarity. Those who are dutiful to family then, discourage the worst outcomes for not only their own loved ones, but society as a whole and the human race by extension.

We are born not only fragile but needy as well. Babies can die if they are not held… even if all their other needs are met in spades. We, as human beings need love. It is as vital to our well being as food, water and air. Our uncles take us hunting, our aunts teach us sewing, our grandparents teach us family lore while our parents give us unconditional love, and do their best to civilize us, so people will not shun us when we get older. No other invention could teach such lessons as effectively as the family. There are some who say that those lessons could be taught by force, pain and usurped autocracy, rather than the family method of, softness, love, caring, and genuine God given authority, but I disagree. Moreover, our need for love, if not met early in life, leads to emotional disorders, which then lead to poor personal outcomes, like homelessness. Once one considers all the angles, the nuclear family must be protected and nurtured, it becomes a self interested solution.

Obviously, most of us are denied some facet of family, we may be missing our grandparents, lacking uncles, aunts, even parents and siblings. Each loss, even if we never knew them, diminishes the richness, familiarity, comfort and love we experience in our lives. As we age, we lose more and more of our family but at the same time we gain as well. Children add to our lives by giving us purpose and joy. They renew our zest for life simply by being around them. In the end we have to figure our gain is worth as much as our loss. Even if our loss is unbearable. Thankfulness for our time with our loved ones, gratitude for the ones we still have, and anticipation for those loved ones to join us in the future, is what makes healing possible. Every one of us will lose a loved one. The world cares nothing for our well being. That is up to us and our family. So, thank God for your family, no matter how messed up each of them are, they think the same of you… and all of you are right, so be generous with your love to your family, because there isn’t one of us who deserves it, nor one of us who doesn’t need it.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in economy, Group Politics, Mercy, philosophy, Societal Myth | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

That’s Racist!

Posted on November 30, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, when one lacks a logical argument… the resolute rascal can simply use the pejorative “racist,” as it is a good all around replacement for logic. Many times someone may lack a logical argument, when confronted by common sense, accosted by unassailable argument and when peddling a prevarication. Many times the sophist will have to change the subject rather than face a truth, he or she either cannot or would rather not answer, and so it is much better to go on the attack, inferring the other person is fundamentally a bad person, and since they are a bad person their arguments should be ignored by that fact alone. That attack is very effective. Our modern sophists, progressives, have elevated the slur to such heights, it can be used not only to attack a person directly, but to indirectly attack him or her, by attacking the very argument itself as racist. Anyone promoting lies has only this one tool to remember, the moment you have nothing to say that will not further your cause, call the other a “racist,” and you win by default.

When winning the argument is more important than what is right, truthful and correct, often it is necessary to use spurious logic and underhanded means to achieve that goal. Lets say, for the sake of argument, you wanted to be the supreme despotic autocrat of the world. To actually be that person, one must be by definition, cold to the suffering of others, else that position would never be attained nor held long if dropped in one’s lap. To be the despot is to be more than able to put someone to death for not doing what you ordered them to do, even if it was in direct violation of their personal self interest and human Rights… but to relish the act. Such a person would care nothing for lying or connivance. The tactic of changing the subject, sandbagging, ad homonym attacks and using the Hegelian dialectic would be well practiced.

Calling someone a racist shuts down real conversation. It changes the subject from what was being discussed, to the ad homonym attack implied, “why are you such a bad person?” One cannot argue under such circumstances. Not only does it both change the subject and make an ad homonym attack but it lowers the status of real racism. Exploiting such a tactic shows the person using it to be callous to the suffering of real racism, unwilling to argue the point on it’s merits, and by that admission alone, they concede they lost the argument. Because, if they had a real logical response, clearly that would have been the superior choice in the retort. Moreover, no real discussion, no exchange of information or meeting of the minds can be had, when one party is accusing the other of being a bad person.

Changing the subject to vilify the foe gets the winning argument off the table and replaces it with how bad your opponent is. Obviously, the conniver wants to be in the position to argue how bad his or her opponent is, rather than defend a lie they are pushing. Obviously it behooves the conniver to argue logically as long as permissible, but once a loose thread is pulled, the nuclear weapon… racist, can be pulled out, obliterating all conversation from that point on. The swindler believes he or she has won the argument but indeed they have instead admitted defeat. Diligent unbiased observers will quickly discern this, while partisans on the side of the deceiver will be blind to it, and those on the other side may not know in a fully articulated sense, how the floor was pulled from under them, but they will feel it. Because why argue a losing point when you can argue how bad a person your foe is?

What a wonderful tool that liars, connivers and reprobates have… in the word racist. To the true schemer, the question is not when to pull that tool from the tool bag but when. Should they change the subject to redirect the discussion, sandbag and claim it never happened, starting a crisis then feeding hysteria for that crisis to get people to demand what they would never have accepted before the crisis, (the Hegelian Dialectic), or change the subject to how terrible a human being the person arguing against them is. To someone willing to kill to make others do as they demand, such tactics are child’s play. Using them on the other hand, shows a callous nature to the suffering of others, no matter what propaganda they might spout. It shows to the disinterested observer that the swindler admits defeat in the arena of ideas, and so must go on the offensive in the arena of reputation, to save face. The diabolical tool or argumentation nuke, changing the subject to an ad homonym attack by claiming racism, is truly the tool of the infernal… and is used by progressives every chance they get.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Exclusion, Hate, Bigotry and Poverty.

Posted on November 27, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, there are many ways exclusiveness masquerades as inclusiveness. For a culture to be successful, economically, socially and technologically, it must integrate all people. Clearly, it is not possible to exclude some people, and have an integrated society. An integrated society is one in which, individuals are free, government serves all the people, everyone is given a stake in society early on and everyone is included. Denying one, so another feels better, is not the path to including everyone, it is the path to excluding some. I personally do not believe those who are peddling exclusion as inclusion are so stupid they believe it themselves. I think they have another agenda, but since that is pure a priori conjecture, or perhaps better put… a hypothesis. Nevertheless, if we actually do want an inclusive society, we must be on guard for logical fallacies, fallacies that lead us the exact opposite way we seek to go.

Denying Christians the town square, does not protect minorities, it excludes them. Keeping our religious practices from each other separates “us” from “them.” Including “them” in our religious services creates “us.” When a Christian says, “Merry Christmas!” To a Hindu, it is an inclusive act. That Christian is including that Hindu in the holiday season. When a Jewish person tells me “Happy Hanukkah!” I feel a kinship to him or her. That they thought enough of me to include me in their solemn worship, makes them seem less foreign to me, more like me, and that I am not alone. We all feel more kinship to people who include us and less to those who exclude us. So, including everyone in the Christmas season by placing a Koresh in the town square is an inclusive act. Embracing all non Christians by including them in our festivities, makes others no longer “them” but a part of us.

Allowing certain people extra leeway when it comes to violence and abuse, because of their culture and to better embrace diversity, is the very definition of exclusivity. Not only is special treatment exclusive but it is a horrible form of bigotry. The foundational assumption, is that the group that is given special consideration, is subhuman. What can be more bigoted than that? The group, arbitrarily defined because in the end all groups of people are separated by some arbitrary quality, is considered not to be sufficiently human to act civilized. Were I grouped and considered to be subhuman, rather than embrace the definition, I would revolt at it. Moreover, to define a group of people as subhuman, is to exclude them from humanity. Probably fed, clothed, housed and entertained, because after all, they can’t support themselves, poor things… “they” don’t have the intelligence, wisdom, work ethic, self control or strength.

Having “no whites” spaces on university campuses, to create a “safe space” for minorities, is as exclusive as it gets. I don’t find it at all ironic that the same political faction, the progressives, that stood for racial separation in their formative years with such notable Black haters, as Margaret Sanger in their ranks, would stand for racial separation today. Despite all their rhetoric claiming they stand for minority rights, there can be no minority rights if there is exclusion of any minority. When talking about minority, context is everything. In Detroit people of European descent are the minority, in the US people of European descent are the majority, but on the planet Europeans are again a minority. So when exploiting the arbitrary definition of “white,” to arbitrarily classify a group as a majority, we must accept the narrow context the progressive demands as a stipulation. Therefore the notion that there should be safe spaces for minorities that excludes “whites,” for being the majority, is based on two false presumptions. That “whites” are indeed a majority, except under some narrow defined context that in the real world is worse than useless, and that exclusion can in anyway lead to inclusion.

Successful cultures integrate the people, give everyone a stake in society and insure individual liberty, while right government’s role is to benefit all the people, not the rulers first, their bootlicks second and useful idiots third. One sure fired way to destroy a civilization is to create separated groups of people, angry at each other, considering each other “them,” narrowing the definition of “us,” and seed the whole mess with violence the police are powerless to stop, due to political correctness. Yet… such a paradigm is very effective at harvesting wealth and power from a culture. Obviously, selling exclusiveness is not a winner, so progressives dress exclusivity up as inclusiveness. It is also a reason progressives go after young people, young people have no life experience and are willing to believe in a glittering lie, and will reliably reject an ugly truth. It is up to us then, the awake and aware, to keep our culture and society on track. We can do that by pointing out when people with ill intent are using spurious logic, to move us directly away from where we want to go and where they pretend they are taking us, to a dark place of exclusion, hate, bigotry and poverty.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Tolerance, Stupidity and Weakness.

Posted on November 23, 2017 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, what you tolerate… you will get more of. If you tolerate your children lying to you, they will lie more often, if you tolerate your spouse stepping out, he or she will take on more lovers, and if you tolerate violations of our Constitution, the violations will happen ever more often and become more egregious, until the Constitution means nothing. Really it is mere common sense. Everyone from children to politicians understand that people will do more of what we get away with. It is human nature. While tolerance of other people’s foibles is a sign of maturity, tolerance of barbarism is absurdly and self destructive. A civilized person will ignore minor personal failings, but when the nature of the relationship is changed, due to intransigence, such tolerance is proof of weakness. Rest assured, our children know this innately, our politicians know this by experience, and invaders know this by edict.

People are self interested. We will do what benefits us… as long as it is tolerated. Armed robbery is quite lucrative, but is not tolerated, while rent seeking, manipulating stock and commodity prices, bribery, selling political favor and outright embezzlement, is tolerated. A multiplying factor in the negative effects of tolerance happens, when tolerance is given to select groups of people, and withheld from others. Obviously that is a form of bigotry, but a form that is not only tolerated today, but encouraged by the media, politicians and academia… politically correct tolerance you might say. If our bad actions are tolerated, since they give the person engaged in them a leg up on everyone else, it is only human nature to do more, and be more aggressive. Since certain people are allowed, by political correctness, to lie under oath, block streets protesting and praying, steal directly from their shareholders, sell political favor, etc… it is not their fault… it is ours for tolerating it.

It is ironic, we do not tolerate those things that do us no harm and have little effect on our society, but allow in the name of political correctness, those things that pose an existential threat to our culture, society and civilization. People who never bathe are not tolerated, they are ostracized, while people actively undermining our government with criminal acts are tolerated and indeed embraced. This paradigm is magnified when certain groups are tolerated while others are not. Such “tolerance” elevates arbitrary groups above the law, while others are diminished, to less than human beings in the eyes of the law. The media, most politicians, academia and the new class, for instance, was utterly intolerant of the Tea Party peacefully praying outside congress, while at the very same time, they not only tolerated but encouraged Occupy Wall Street… to smash windows, burn cars, spill human feces in bank lobbies, rape women and batter passersby. Clearly, peaceful praying is not a threat to civic order, while overt violence destroys civic order. Yet ironically, the one was tolerated… and the other not.

Tolerance is only civilized when it is enlightened tolerance. To tolerate that which is of minor inconvenience is a sign of maturity, tolerating a child laughing too loud in a store is a sign of mature tolerance, while allowing people to set up child sex trafficking rings is absurd tolerance. Clearly, it is not enlightened to tolerate heinous crimes against anyone, let alone children. Yet, many of us cannot stand a child laughing too loud as we eat in a fancy restaurant, but turn a blind eye to the crimes of Rotherham. Tolerating our leaders profiting from selling twenty percent of our uranium to an enemy, is self destructive, but intolerance of our President feeding koi in Japan, the wrong way, is childish and mealy mouthed. True tolerance is for idiotic, foolish and innocent foibles, while self destructive tolerance is for crimes against humanity, our Constitution and reason.

You get more of what you tolerate… so why are we tolerating such absurdities? Unless we as a society and people are utterly stupid and foolish, or weak, we must want our politicians to lie to us, our CEOs to steal from retirees, certain groups to create unrest, live under the threat of child abductions, oppression of Christians for their faith, move our nations from liberty to oppression and disarm law abiding citizens… so criminals will not have to worry about being shot when they rob a liquor store at gun point. Today we, encouraged and led by our government, tolerate behavior that threatens our very existence, and we are told to be utterly intolerant of that which is merely annoying. So, we as a people in the West have to ask ourselves, what do we want more of? Do we want more terrorism, political evildoing, crime, incursions on our Constitutional Rights, slavery and violence, because by our tolerance of these things… we must, because if we didn’t, we would not tolerate them.

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