When Some are Above the Law

Posted on April 4, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me… there is nothing more corrosive of societal cohesion than arbitrary rule. When a double standard exists, no one will follow the law, mores or regulations without the immediate threat of violence. Why follow a rule that only applies to you? Anyone who does would be damaging their self interest so someone else can advance their self interest. Only a fool would do that. Yet when no one follows the laws, we are not safe in our own homes, we cannot conduct business, we cannot safely walk in public, and this necessarily leads to poverty, crime and famine. Obviously, those who favor arbitrary rule expect to be the ones given a free pass, while everyone else is to be punished to the full extent of the law, and more, if they are a member of an unfavored group. Under arbitrary rule, those who make the laws are not subject to them, while those that are subject to the laws have no input in their creation. This is the case around the world today.

People, all people, are self interested. We will go to great lengths to protect our self interest. Moreover, there is not one among us who is not self interested. It is human nature. If we are not self interested we quickly lose everything we have worked for and die of starvation. Nature will not brooch any animal not to be self interested. The lion that refuses to kill starves, the beaver that allows another to take it’s dam becomes homeless, and the ant that wanders into a spider web becomes food. Nature has taught every animal that walks, crawls or flies to be self interested. Arbitrary rule allows some to make laws that others are subject to, which always results in damage to the interests of the subjects, to promote the interests of the elite. It is both a perversion of nature and of morality. Yet the incentive to arbitrary rule is strong. That incentive to arbitrary rule is based on egoistic self interest, while the wise ruler uses self interest rightly understood, as defined by Tocqueville.

The ancient Greeks under the laws of Solon held out the ostracism as the punishment for anyone who merely believed in arbitrary rule. They recognized the corrosive effect of arbitrary rule and would force anyone out of the city state who favored it… especially the rich and powerful. Solon himself, after legislating the ostracism, demanded he be ostracized for a period of time, because he believed himself to have become too powerful to be tolerated in a free society. This arrangement worked for awhile until Pericles exploited the ostracism as a tool to enforce his own arbitrary rule. The lesson here, is that no matter how strongly a people try to protect themselves from arbitrary rule, there will always be some conniver who will think of a way to make him or herself the arbitrary ruler. Once that happens, that civilization will collapse. History is unambiguous about this.

Those who seek arbitrary rule always claim to want equality, and in order to create “equality” they need arbitrary rule. Marxists, socialists and progressives claim to want to force equality of outcomes on society and to do that they need absolute power over the rest of us. Our property, lives and children become subject to the arbitrary whims of the villain who claims to seek equality of outcomes. Even as they write laws they themselves are not subject to, they use state violence to enforce arbitrary rule. When Mao sent the Red Guard house to house taking the food from the people, starving to death tens of millions of human beings, he ate like a king. Which is highlighted by the fact Mao was fat during the famine he created. Even as people who had grown that food from the sweat of their brow had it taken, the elite who did nothing, ate well. The rules are for the little people, not the elite.

Today in the US, congressmen and women are not subject to the laws they force on the rest of us, in Europe the unelected elite live in gated communities protected with armed guards, as they demand the people accept rape, terrorism and murder as the price of tolerance, and in China the cryptomarxists have installed a dictator for life, Xi. Africa has wallowed in abject poverty due to their long term embrace of arbitrary rule, and South America will never be anything but poverty ridden, until they shun arbitrary rule. There is not one continent on the planet where arbitrary rule is not the norm. The West is still riding the momentum of the industrial revolution and the Enlightenment, even as we reject them both for the fantasy of equality of outcomes, enforced by arbitrary rule. Unless we reject arbitrary rule, the world over, our prosperity will be at great risk, and our self interest will be undermined. Like the lion that refuses to kill, the beaver that gives up it’s dam and the ant that steps into the spider’s web, we will have destroyed our self interest for the egoistic interest of the elite.

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 Lord is Risen!!

Posted on April 2, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, we should heed the good news today, on Easter Sunday, and self examine to improve the sad state of our world. Despite the fact we as human beings are blessed by the blood of Jesus Christ, freely spilled for the atonement of our sins, we can’t muster the compassion to even tolerate our fellows. Selfishness, envy and vengefulness are the primary emotions people feel today towards others. We take our salvation for granted while most of us wallow in the sin of presumption. On this day of celebration, of what Jesus did for us, maybe we should at least try to follow his example, for this one day. Open your heart to compassion, forgiveness and generosity. It is easy to see the mote in the eye of another, while it is difficult to visualize the plank in our own eye, but the sliver that is most vexing to us is always our own. How much violence, overt and subvert is happening, in the name of selfishness, envy and vengefulness… needs to happen on this day of miracles?

Easter is when we celebrate the fact that Jesus Christ rose from the dead after dying horribly to atone for our sins. Everyone is allowed to be granted his grace… all we need do is accept it. It is said that in the garden of Gethsemane, the greatest trial Jesus had, was that many would not be saved. It wasn’t his own pending torture and humiliation that bothered him… but that his torturers might not be saved! Imagine the humility, love, compassion and generosity that Jesus has for us. His is the example we are asked to follow. Clearly, if we are to follow Jesus we must also be generous to the less fortunate, compassionate to others, love our neighbors and humble in our good fortune. To follow our savior is not to be self righteous, haughty, or demanding like the pharisees, never expecting from others that which we would never give, and certainly not exploiting violence to force others to submit.

The sin of presumption is the sin of our age. Everyone thinks him or herself saved no matter if they work tirelessly against the teachings of Jesus. We believe ourselves such good people, because after all, my sins are not THAT bad, that no matter if we accept Jesus or not, we will go to heaven. We presume that we are so important that God would never condemn us, no matter how vociferously we condemn him. Ask any atheist who is intent on turning our children from Jesus and God, “What if you are wrong and God does exist?” They will smugly tell you that if God does exist, he should be big enough to let them into heaven… presuming they are far too important to go to Hell. This logic fails to understand that none of us are worthy of heaven, our toll was paid for us, by Jesus, with his blood and pain. Unless we accept him into our hearts… we refuse that free ride.

Many have claimed they serve God while they visit violence on others, envy, seek revenge for no harm, enslave the poor, and demand from others that which they themselves would be loathe to give. Someone who harms others in the name of God is not doing it in his name but in actuality in the name of Satan. To serve God and Jesus is to follow the Golden rule. To serve Lucifer is to eschew the golden rule in favor of rule by violence. Christianity has been sullied by people who claimed to serve God, when in fact they served themselves, and exploit God to their selfish ends. Is it logical that someone follows Jesus when they do the exact opposite of what he would do in any given situation? On the other hand, how disingenuous is it when someone who despises God and Jesus, demands others submit, by appealing to the authority of Jesus?

Our world is fallen and that is why Jesus came in the first place. We are flawed in that we seek our own good above all others, are egoistic, prideful, vengeful and lack basic compassion. We faithlessly believe that it is generous to force others to give, at the point of a gun, while we wouldn’t give a beggar a penny. It is the opposite of love to husband hate in our hearts. We spit in the face of our savior when we presume that no matter how we work against God… we will go to heaven. There is wisdom in recognizing our own flaws, and working on them, rather than demanding others change. To protest the state of the world, even as we wallow in our sins without any mind to self improvement, is the definition of arrogance. So, follow Jesus, harbor compassion in your heart, constantly strive to self improvement, love your neighbors and enemies, and hold yourself to the same standard you hold others. It is very difficult, since it goes against our egoistic nature, but rewarding in ways that transcend the ordinary. Have a blessed Easter and may God be with you.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

Posted in Group Politics, International Power, Mercy, philosophy, polictics of class envy, Societal Myth, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

To Hold Others to the Same Standard You Hold Yourself.

Posted on March 28, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, the criterion of human heartedness, is the capacity to hold oneself to the same, or better, a higher standard then one does everyone else. This is much harder than it appears at first glance. We tend to demand from others that which we would be loathe to cede. Obviously, when people demand others are held to a higher standard than they hold themselves, society must have tension. The more people that hold others to a higher standard of conduct than themselves, are hypocrites, the more societal tension is built up. The criminal will fly into a violent rage, if someone treats her to the actions she dishes out, and the tyrant never oppresses himself. This is one of the fundamental flaws in human nature. Our egoistic self interest goes against our true self interest. A civilization where people hold themselves to the same standard we hold others, is one that will be prosperous, safe and peaceful, in other words… human hearted.

This is one reason liars always believe they are being lied to, thieves worry they are being stolen from and cheaters constantly worry they are being cheated on. We judge others by ourselves. Living in our own heads we believe everyone else thinks and acts as we do. We are all to some extent hypocrites, so when a thief steals he protects his own things, when a cheater runs around she demands faithfulness from her spouse, and when a liar prevaricates he expects everyone else to be selflessly honest. Hypocrisy is the quality of humanity that runs throughout cultures and time. Most are either lazy but demand others be industrious, greedy and expect everyone else to be charitable, envious as we deride jealousy, lustful but demand chastity, prideful as we laugh when others get their comeuppance, even as the wrathful expect forgiveness.

The biggest violators of the tenet, to hold oneself to the same or higher standard than they hold others, are the elite. History is nothing but a long story of wars, famine and poverty brought on by elite who held others to a much higher standard then themselves. What crime boss or cartel kingpin holds himself to the same standard he holds his minions? Draco the original lawgiver of Athens, said that all crime should be met with the death penalty, but since death is the ultimate punishment, it would have to do for the capital crimes as well. Obviously, he wouldn’t have ordered himself killed for some minor crime, that was a penalty he held out for everyone else. Meanwhile, Solon demanded from everyone else that which he himself was willing to give, even demanding himself be ostracized! The first being a fiend while the other remembered as one of the greats. The politician who runs around on his wife, lies to get power, steals from the treasury and sells favors, is the norm, while the lawgiver who tells the truth, gives to the treasury and is chaste, is the exception.

We follow the elite and do what our idols do. That is why laws always evolve into oppression, because those fiends must pass laws to regulate us and protect their ill got gains, as well as their own worthless hides. What use is power unless one can safely engage in lust, greed, gluttony, wrath, sloth, envy and pride? When the elite’s “lessers” engage in these things, society crumbles and there is crime, poverty and revolution. So, to protect the greedy, lustful, envious, slothful, prideful, gluttons, and protect their purloined wealth, the elite must force the rest of us, at the point of a gun, to be honest, humble, industrious, chaste, charitable, content and accepting of injury. Perhaps that is why so few politicians or aristocrats have been human hearted… and why there are remembered so fondly. Like Harry Truman, Marcus Aurelius or Confucius’ sage kings. The primary attribute that made them great is that they held themselves to the same or higher standard than they held others.

If someone is a thief and doesn’t expect more from anyone else, while she may be a sinner, she at least is not a hypocrite. We as a species are hypocrites… and it is in hypocrisy that we fall. Our children see our hypocrisy and emulate it just as we see the hypocrisy in societal, cultural and political leaders and imitate it as well. The more power one has the more this vicious quality shows itself. The psychopath is the epitome of the hypocrite and is the standard for political leaders. Those that are not are the exception and are rare as hens teeth. They demand we are virtuous so they can be more villainous, to protect themselves and their property, even as ours is subject to confiscation. They require we surrender our rights as they amass privilege, our wives husbands and children are their playthings while theirs are sacrosanct, and we must tremble at their wrath while we humbly accept our lot. The answer is not to be hypocrites but to force the elite not to be. To have a prosperous, civil, crime free society we need to hold ourselves to the same standard we hold others. Be human hearted and the rest will come along.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

The Notion We Can be God’s Equal

Posted on March 25, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, every huge fall Mankind has ever experienced is due to our arrogant nature, especially when we envision ourselves, or some segment of us, as equal to God. The fall of Satan was from his arrogance and pride in trying to unseat God, Adam and Eve were tempted by the serpent into believing they could be equal to God, and today, many in the progressive, Marxist and atheist ranks believe they are indeed Gods. Such hubris can only lead to catastrophe and has throughout history. Many science fiction stories are all about people who consider themselves God’s equal, from The Island of Dr Moreau to Altered Carbon, the theme runs deep in most science fiction. All human hearted philosophies warn us of the danger of arrogance and pride. The Holy Bible itself says pride goes before the fall. Yet despite all the cautionary tales we still fall into the trap of believing ourselves God’s equal.

Arrogance inevitably leads to disaster since arrogance is by it’s very nature not self aware. Self awareness is a means to control our more foolish instincts. How many stories feature a villain who is utterly unself aware? That is the basis for so many comedies. The villain who lacks self awareness is easy prey, because their arrogance is without limit, and unlimited arrogance is itself comedic. Think about Dr. Evil in the Micheal Myers movies. He is the epitome of the arrogant unself aware villain. The arrogant villain always thinks he is a God. He or she attempts to change that which should not be changed and disaster results. That catastrophe can be humorous, as in a comedy, or can lead to tremendous suffering in the real world. In fact most comedy is based on ridiculing the arrogant and unself aware.

Mindfulness leads to humility and humility is the path to happiness. How many arrogant people have you met who are happy? Not one I bet. When we are aware of our faults and weaknesses, we are be humble, but when we believe ourselves Gods, we cannot recognize our weaknesses or faults. This inevitably leads to depression because those who believe themselves Gods, when confronted with the reality of our frailties, have their self image shattered. Arrogant people who believe themselves God’s equal, are angry all the time and cast blame on others for their own failings, since they are God’s “equal” and therefore unable to make mistakes. Which creates the conditions for nothing but mistakes. Meanwhile, the humble who fail at some endeavor can tolerate it, since they understand they are not god and mistakes are inevitable.

Those who lack mindfulness and are arrogant are the most flawed. Especially today, with scientists holding out hope that soon human beings will be immortal, that proves the insanity of believing we can be Gods is still alive and well. How many who are unable to run their own lives arrogantly think they can run the lives of the whole human race? The advances in medical science has made many doctors arrogant to the point of believing themselves Gods. Despite the fact that you and I are more likely to die at the hands of a doctor, than at the point of a gun, coupled with a tsunami of malpractice, all of which is based on the arrogant notion that doctors are Gods. Our society’s primary fallacy, that we are Gods or soon will be, is proof positive we are not and never will be.

With almost our entire legerdemain of lore showing us the foolishness of trying to usurp God’s role, we as a species knows full well what the consequences are of such idiocy, but many of us ignore the entirety of human wisdom and arrogantly seek to be God. The times we live in is nothing but a huge comedy and the joke is on us. Today we are living in Mars Attacks but we are the stupid Martians. We mix human and animal DNA, we seek immortality, we wholeheartedly believe the stupidity of the “rational” economy, and our professionals fall into the trap of unwarranted hubris. Most if not all the troubles we as the human race face, is due to our arrogance, in believing we are or can be God. Yes, we live in a comedy, that comedy is about a people so arrogant and unself aware they (we) have become abject fools.

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

Natural Rights

Posted on March 22, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, government does not bestow us rights, we cede our natural Rights to government, In exchange government agrees to promote social harmony and advance mutual prosperity. The distinction of where Rights come from then is a vital one in deciding what role government is to play. Natural rights, the Right to the product of one’s own hands, the Right to self defense, the Right to personal property, etc… are the natural Rights we had in a state of nature. Government is an expediency, to fairly adjudicate disputes between citizens and for the common defense, A mere tool to meet those ends. We cede some of our natural Rights to that expediency to meet these mutual goals. To then cede so much of our individual sovereignty to that expediency, so as to construe the expediency granted us those Rights to begin with, is to put the created over the creator. Since natural Rights not only predate the expediency of government, it supersedes government in that government gets it’s very authority, in all cases, from the presumption of natural Rights. Else who then would have the “right” to rule? If that expediency then is allowed to overstep it’s role, as human history shows, results in continental scale human suffering. All because people mistook the tool for the hand.

The reason for government is to harmonize the people. Government is no more than a machine, or construct, that people put together and get enough of the people effected to agree to. People could not agree to something if they did not have natural Rights. You couldn’t sign a contract, buy, sell, or even vote, without the presupposition you are an individual and that you have sovereignty. So the presumption of all government must be that individuals have natural Rights. No matter what propaganda they are selling. Take away natural Rights, and those trying to impose their laws on society have no Right to do so, because they have no more natural rights than the people they are ruling. It is one cog ruling over the other cogs. To argue otherwise would be begging the question. Moreover, no amount of military force changes what is right, it only enforces wrong, because right is an option usually taken, unless forced otherwise. The construct of government then, is based entirely on the presupposition that individual human beings have innate Rights, that predate government, else we could not have created government in the first place.

The reason people first banded together is to protect us from lions, the reason we formed communities is because we are human beings, the reason we formed governments is because we can be miserable to each other. Carneades said, and I paraphrase… that mankind imposed upon himself a set of laws and mores as an expediency. But men, being like animals, each seeking his own self interest, true justice is impossible, because for a man to be truly just he would have to do violence to his own self interest. Being self interested, no man would do that… Government, or put another way, the expedient human construct, built to harmonize society, promote prosperity and provide for the common defense, instead creates chaos, wastes the seed corn of prosperity and invites war by numerous contrivances… that ad hoc social construct, government, is acting contrary to it’s goals and needs to be “adjusted” to get back to doing what it was intended to do.

We could say that government is a tool, and since human beings wield it based on our natural Rights, we then are the hand. It would be foolish to say the tool gives the hand life. Yet that is exactly the premise when someone says, or believes, that our Rights come from government, they are saying the tool gives the hand life. In any context, such thinking will lead to injury, on a sliding scale of degree depending on the magnitude of mistake. Like the old philosophical question goes, “What makes a king a king… public opinion.” If when everyone woke up they forgot the king was the king, he would no longer be king, he would simply be a lunatic. The same question applies to any governmental structure. What makes it’s rule legitimate? Public opinion. Since government’s existence depends on public opinion, and human beings are the ones that have that opinion, and our right to that opinion is based on natural rights, then natural rights predate and supersede government.

To argue against natural rights, is to tear down the stage one stands on while speaking… since our very right to speak is based on natural rights. So clearly it is illogical to say our rights come from government, because government is a mere tool, a construct, built for expediency. It is manned by people, who’s right to man it is based on natural rights, that are the very fabric upon which the tapestry of government is woven, is entirely predicated on natural rights. Government is a means to allow us to work together efficiently, to adjudicate arguments fairly, set standards and provide for common defense. When taken to the extreme, and people start thinking their rights come from government, it becomes an impediment to it’s right function and so should be returned to the factory settings. This should happen every once in awhile. Just like you reboot your computer.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Government Fairness is an Oxymoron

Posted on March 18, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, anyone who believes government has ever been, is, or ever will be fair, is hopelessly Pollianish. Government has nothing to do with fairness, government is all about power, and power is the primary quality of politics. It only seeks to appear fair, but in fact any politician who was actually just, would quickly lose his or her position of power. That is because the opponent who is not fair will use that power to enrich those who are able to help them get into office. Everything government does is to gain power, retain it and protect it. Fairness never comes into the equation, except as a means to silence those without power, and to claim they need more power. To pretend that government is just is to imagine those in government are not human but saints. Obviously they are not saints those in government are more like demons. So, to place your trust and the future of your children in an organization that seeks only power, is to put them in harms way.

A person who has money to give to a politician for his or her election campaign, is able to talk to a politician, while you and I must wait for our turn at a town hall. You and I are unable to go to the White House and discuss our problems with the President. Yet people no different than you or I can buy access with campaign contributions. Pay a few thousand dollars to a politician, and you can meet them for lunch and discuss any problem you might have, and that politician will move heaven and Earth to get it resolved. They want to keep those contributions coming in. That is why it is far more profitable to engage in lobbying government, than to improve products or come out with new and better ones. Feed the beast and the beast will be your friend, starve it and you will be eaten by it. As a result, while you and I the voters are on the outside looking in, the people with money are inside, laughing at us as they eat our lunch.

Those who can reliably insure a block of votes also have access to government to feather their nest. If you can provide a block of votes your personal problems become those of government. If a road is to pass through your property and you don’t want it to, make a call and that road will be rerouted around your land, even if it takes millions of dollars extra and creates a hazard. Because those millions are coming from the taxpayer, who has no say, and the benefit goes to a patron, who provides the means to power. A business competitor undercutting your prices? Go to your local politician and demand they be forced to get permits, be audited, or maybe just shut down altogether. That is the might government, and therefore politicians, wield. To be in the good graces of such a monster is only smart, because remember, government is not fair, it is powerful.

That is why some are above the law. They provide the votes and money needed for corrupt politicians to gain power, and so the same government that would jail you or I for taking a ten spot from a cash register, would turn a blind eye to the most outrageous criminal behavior of the powerful. Stories are too numerous to tell, of judges, senators and congressmen getting away with murder, DUI, sexual assault, insider trading, disclosing state secrets, wiretapping, and even more heinous crimes. Imagine for a moment what would happen to you, if you were careening down a highway drunk with the secretary you are having an affair with in the car, and you put the car into a canal drowning the woman, then fled the scene? But then again, you and I have no political power, while Ted Kennedy did. Clearly it would be against the personal interests of those in power to be fair. Since people seldom go against our self interest, this will be the paradigm as long as humans make up government.

Perhaps this is why everything government does is by default… secret. The naked unfairness, or put another way, injustice, of government would be open for us to see and the scales would drop from our eyes. Even the most ignorantly trusting of us couldn’t deny that government works for the powerful and against the weak. Trade deals that are secret to the people are set by the powerful, like Google did the Pacific Trade agreement that Trump canceled. He also poked Google/Alphabet in the eye by tossing out the “net neutrality.” That is why Trump is so loathed by Alphabet, he got in the way of their monopoly profits, costing them billions of dollars. Would you like someone who cost you billions of dollars? Secrets provide the darkness needed, for the slime mold of political power to grow, while the light of open government is caustic to slime.

Fairness is a sure path to powerlessness for any politician who practices it. Any politician who is actually just is immediately at a disadvantage, because why give money to his or her campaign, if there is no payoff? Why direct votes to them if that road will go through your land cutting it in two, and why would anyone provide cushy well paid lobbying jobs for ex-politicians, if they are kept in the dark during trade negotiations like everyone else? That politician who is fair will face attacks from not only those who are corrupt but from government bootlicks as well. Firms that stand to lose their special access will do everything in their power to destroy him, journalists will create new shades of yellow to describe her, and those who suckle at the teat of government will ratchet up their donations, to get the just out of office. So again, anyone who believes government has ever been, is or ever will be fair, is hopelessly Pollianish.

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

Diffusion of Responsibility, Group Crimes and the Golden Rule

Posted on March 15, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, if something is immoral for an individual, it is many times more immoral for a group of individuals, but here’s the rub, despite a group’s sin being orders of magnitude worse, the distributed blame is far more bearable. The person who pushes the button is just following orders, the person ordering him to push that button, well, he isn’t the one pushing the button, it is all merely theoretical. This is the way the greatest crimes against humanity happen. While the crime may be many times worse, those involved find the burden of that involvement much easier, due to the blame being distributed, and human beings having an innate way of passing the buck, even in our own minds, will wash away any personal sins, dissolving them into the group. I wonder how many Nazi death camp guards actually had Jewish friends before the war? The litmus test however, is that which is wrong for the individual, is then also wrong for a group of individuals.

Genocide would be impossible if not for people’s ability to let their personal culpability for crimes dissolve into the crowd. Otherwise imagine for a moment what a burden that would be to an individual. Such a burden would crush the normal human psyche. War is the most obvious example of how human beings can be coaxed into acting inhuman. PTSD is the manifestation of those who don’t effectively divest themselves of guilt at their own actions. At least at the time the burden of the responsibility for the immoral actions, ordered by government and carried out by individuals, is distributed back into the group, later the mind recognizes the magnitude of it’s blame. No one has to take on the conscious totality of his or her actions… unless their sense of right and wrong force them to. This ability allows people to be animals. Distributed responsibility is the lubricant for the most heinous machinations.

Other, more easily “justifiable” immoral actions, that if the individual did them, they would be called stealing, racketeering, home invasion, etc… are done by government, (a group of individuals), all the time. Most of us allow it and take it for granted, considering it is justified, because government is doing it. To say that something is justified because government is doing it, and that since government says it’s just, so must it be just… is begging the question. What is just can be summed up by the Golden Rule, “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.” By simple logical extrapolation, we can conclude… that what is just, is that which we would have others do unto us, and what is unjust, is that which we would NOT have others do unto us. We are the subjective standard. Despite there being a multitude of us, the bell curve of the limit of what we would personally accept, and therefore what is just… is very narrow.

Dating back to Aristotle, the idea of “right” government was, that government who served the interests of the whole body of the people in it’s territory, and “wrong” government served only the interests of the rulers, usually at the cost to the rest of society. Clearly, a wrong form would regularly violate the concept that what is wrong for the individual is much worse for a group of individuals, because they lack a conscience, as is displayed by their selfishness in serving their own narrow interests ahead of those they are supposed to serve, and because getting the crowd to steal for them, is very very lucrative. The fiend can manipulate others into violating other people’s Rights, in the most personal and violent ways, and everyone involved can get a good night’s sleep after. Well… except for the victims. Oligarchs and democrats also experience the purifying distributed blame not available for autocrats.

Human government will never be human hearted, until it embraces the fact that what is immoral for an individual, is more immoral for a group of individuals. Not just the elite but all of society has to hold fast to the concept. Then after it is inculcated it must be protected on the level of a societal myth. Far from being a myth however, the enlightened idea that, what is inadmissible for the individual is more inadmissible for a group of individuals, frees Mankind by removing our government regulated shackles. Shackles that were forged by us, yet don’t restrict our baser instincts and instead restrain our ability to act, while our complicity in great evil is removed by diffusion into the group. Every instance of oppression, cronyism, usurpation and state violence can be traced back to violating the precept that, what is wrong for the individual is more wrong for a group of individuals, and that the test of what is just for the individual and even more so for the group… is the golden rule.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Trade Wars, Tariffs and Free Trade

Posted on March 12, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, trade wars are always really about political favor, and as such are oligarchical in nature, however, a system of absolute reciprocal tariff system would be fundamentally fair. No matter what form of political favor involved, the foundation of all trade wars is political, possibly the faction in power pays back it’s political backers with tariffs or import restrictions, to lower their exposure to foreign competitors, it could be strategic in the threat itself to pry some concession from a high tariff nation, or it could be in the name of populism, all of which are nakedly political. Anything that is political helps one faction and harms the rest, which makes it oligarchical. Not only are trade wars political and therefore oligarchical, free trade is the best policy if human prosperity is the goal. This seemingly inevitable trade war with China is no exception… in that it is political.

Tariffs say more about what faction is in control than anything about what is best for the people. Government tends to split into factions, that fact has been established for centuries, each faction vying for the best interests of it’s supporters. To that end almost all factions will, when in power, bestow favor on their political backers. If one of those backers comes to them and mentions, a tariff would restore domestic production of this or that, it is better received than if a stranger said the same thing. Initially domestic production might jump up a bit, but the same forces that quashed it in the first place haven’t been addressed and it will falter again. Those issues effecting the ability of domestic producers could be, lack of brainpower, regulatory hurdles that impede startups, cronyism, cultural hostility to new businesses, class issues, infrastructure issues, etc… none of which can be overcome by making domestic producers less efficient. Those issues need to be identified and addressed by any faction that pretends to follow right government.

The only kind of tariff system, that would provide incentives for all nations to lower tariffs and thus create free trade, is reciprocal tariffs. With modern computer technology such a system would be a breeze to set up. Simply establish an international standard of label that must be affixed to every container entering or leaving a port. The container would be scanned and the exact tariffs the sending nation applies to the receiving nation would be applied. The fees would be charged instantly. This would have the effect of creating a strong incentive for any nation that sought to increase it’s level of foreign trade to eliminate all tariffs on all imports. If the US conformed to a reciprocal tariff system, then all tariffs and restrictions on products from that much smaller nation would be eliminated, giving it’s producers a direct unhindered avenue into the US market.

Such a system would benefit all nations. A small nation that eliminated all trade impediments, to gain access to the US market, would then have the cost to consumers of some products drop. Which would increase the standard of living immediately. If the wages of the people can be made to go further, that is equal to raising wages. Nations that drop trade restrictions must also have a corresponding drop in the prices of those imported goods. Even as the demand for workers increased in that nation due to it’s unrestricted access and presumably lower wages, would drive up that wage, even as the money bought more. As long as the smaller nation addressed any underlying problems that prevent small businesses from starting.

Unilateral targeted tariffs are the most obviously political, and therefore oligarchical, but a perfectly reciprocal tariff system would be elegant, provide positive incentives for the US’s trading partners, make US firms operate on a more fair international playing field, hold down inflation, provide positive incentives for US manufacturing to become more efficient, and in the end increase the lot of Mankind. As long as Trump also addresses the problems that have held back US firms, over regulation, a legal system that has become a drag on the economy rather than a facilitator, a tax structure that puts US firms at a disadvantage, cronyism, and any other factor that inhibits small business start up and growth. While a trade war would be tragic and foolish, reciprocal trade would be enlightened and smart.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

Meritocracy Versus Political Favor

Posted on March 8, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, those who are low in conscientiousness and orderliness, always seek to move society from a merit based system, to a politically based one. They do it out of simple self interest. Those not able to compete in the marketplace, if they are to get ahead, must change the system from merit based to something they can compete in… and that is almost always based on political favor. Alvin Gouldner hinted at this when he said, all Marxist revolutions are commanded by university graduates who couldn’t get a job. Those with a work ethic only tangentially participate in politics. They are too focused on their job and being good at it. Those who lack a work ethic however participate in politics as their main career. This results in a strong tension within our society. The one side pushing to politicize everything, and the other trying to keep merit, as the basis for getting ahead. Obviously, those who see politics as their be all end all, have more political power than others who focus on their work, and so society tends to evolve from merit to political favor as the measure of a man.

The market system is merit based while socialism is based on political favor. Capitalism is all about merit. All true capitalist transactions are a win win. The customer gets something he or she needs, in trade for something the firm needs, ie, money. Therefore, employers hire those with superior skills, work ethic and intelligence over those who are ignorant, lazy, and stupid. This is only logical since the role of business is to produce a good for the customers. If customers do not receive a good for their money, they will not purchase the goods and services the firm produces. The market system must operate on a strictly rational basis. Those work places that hire the ignorant, lazy and stupid, cannot meet the needs of their customers and therefore go out of business. This is a powerful motivator to give opportunities to those who merit them.

Empirically, merit based systems deliver a much higher standard of living than politically based systems, and that higher standard of living increases over time. When people who deserve their positions by their personal merit, get those positions, clearly, the jobs are done with more efficiency than if they were given out of political favor. This was highlighted during WWII, by both the German and Italian armies. The German army based promotions on the merits, coolness under fire, strategic thinking, intelligence and fortitude. The Italian army however based promotions on political merit. As a result, despite the fact that there was little qualitative difference between the German soldier and the Italian soldier, the German was commanded by officers who merited their positions, while the Italian soldier was commanded by poltroons, who lacked even a basic understanding of tactics. The difference was obvious, and the results were clear, by the fact the Germans had to bail out the Italians in both North Africa and the Balkans.

The big five personality traits are, openness, agreeableness, neuroticism, conscientiousness and extroversion. The work ethic is based on orderliness and conscientiousness. Agreeableness and low narcissism are handy but are of secondary importance. Openness is mostly helpful in the creative pursuits, and there is utility in both introversion and extroversion, depending on the job requirements. Those who are low in conscientiousness and orderliness then, are at a very powerful disadvantage in any merit based system. They often are high in openness, and so will embrace any idea they see that helps them better their situation, as all human beings are self interested… regardless of their score on the big five. Open people, especially those with low conscientiousness and low orderliness, will gravitate to political favor as the basis of who gets ahead, and therefore those ideas that may have been shown to be antithetical to prosperity. Because they will both be open to the possibility of it working sometime in the future, and out of self interest, since their personal interests are served by moving the paradigm from merit to political favor.

This is why the political establishment is so full of people who believe that political favor should be the final arbiter of who gets what. They argue unendingly that their system is “rational,” when it clearly is not, but instead based on naked self interest. Their lack of conscientiousness allows them to work against the best interests of humanity as a whole, while their openness keeps them clutching to a glittering lie. They mistakenly believe they are the most empathetic among us. This is why we see those with political favor are above the law, while they hold the rest of us, below it’s protections. It is the reason we as a society are moving away from a market based meritocracy and to a politically based socialism. While these changes may be against the best interests of humanity, prosperity and civil accord, they do work to advance the interests of the ignorant, lazy and stupid. But that is progress for you, or is a better word for it… progressive?

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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

The Network Business Model and It’s Destruction

Posted on March 5, 2018 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me, Facebook, Youtube, Twitter, etc… monitoring their customer’s usage and using that surveillance to demonetize and even outright censor content, is like the phone company monitoring their customer’s calls, and shutting off the phones of people who say the “wrong” things over the phone. Companies like Twitter, Instangram, Youtube, electric companies and Ma Bell are networks. Another example of a network is a railroad. Imagine if a railroad decided what cargo to transport depending on the political affiliation of it’s various customers! The shareholders would go ballistic! Networks are mere roads if you will. A means to transport whatever the network is designed to carry. The phone company transports calls, the electric company hauls electricity, a rail road moves cargo, Youtube carries videos while Facebook and Twitter convey ideas. The side of the bread the butter is on is the customer’s good will. So why go to the huge expense of building a network then urinating on your customers? Doesn’t that seem a bit stupid?

Networks, as a business, are expensive to set up but cheap to run. Once they are set up and there is competition, that competition tends to become “perfect competition.” Perfect competition is where profit margins are squeezed by cut throat pricing, to gain customers at competitor’s expense, in a limited market. The railroads in the 1800’s faced just such a quandary. They cut their prices to the bone, then cut them some more, finally the government stepped in and regulated them to protect the politically connected railroad owners from competition. That resulted in the falling away of real competition and the railroads became government regulated monopolies. Each serving a certain geographical area exclusively… as they do today. Of course government only grants monopoly to those firms who pay for it through campaign donations, lobbying and graft. Modern networks might end up going that way as well. Facebook, Twitter, Alphabet and Youtube pay their tolls in campaign donations and spend gobs of money lobbying, but also pay graft in the form of censoring those ideas the elite want censored.

Networks like Facebook, Twitter and Youtube were very expensive to set up, but are cheap to maintain, once they are up and running. The paradigm of networking is exactly the same, the only difference is the traffic they carry. Facebook, Youtube and Twitter carry ideas, in the form of videos, articles, pictures and declarative statements. The people that produce the ideas are those firm’s customers and the consumers of those ideas are Facebook, Twitter and Youtube’s customer’s, customers. Since they are all vying for monopoly in their respective fields, to protect themselves from perfect competition, they must make the regulators happy, else regulations will be passed that grant the monopoly to others. So these firms censor ideas their regulators cannot themselves censor. They have become censors by proxy. While this is a tragedy for the free flow of ideas, it also endangers the investments of their shareholders. No firm, even one granted a monopoly by government, can withstand the exodus of it’s customers. Because why advertise on a network that has no viewers?

The most important factor in keeping a network profitable is by serving customers. While it is easy to believe the customers are the viewers, or the advertisers, that is not the case, the real customers are the content providers, as I said before, the viewers are the customer’s customers. Just like a railroad’s customers are the people and firms sending merchandise on their trains. If however, the railroads carried the cargo but wouldn’t release it to the end users, firms transporting their goods would turn to other means. In the case of Twitter, Facebook, and Youtube, the ideas are the cargo and by outright censoring their customers, and demonetizing them, those networks are in fact refusing to release the cargo to their customer’s customers. That is why we see people scrambling for alternatives to those networks… that have sullied their names as a means to garner the favor of the elite. Even with their huge advantage in being the first to market, and the political favor they get from the elite, their customer base is starting to corrode. Which also means their advertisers will leave and the shareholders will at some time get fleeced.

By poking their customers in the eye, Youtube, Facebook and other networks insure they will be a flash in the pan. They might burn bright for a few years but alienating customers is a certain way to get them to leave and use another network. I have stopped using Twitter altogether. I tried to delete my account but Twitter makes it next to impossible, spending an hour in the attempt, but capitulated, and instead just don’t use it, and send any email I get from them directly to the junk folder. Others are going through the court system to force them to carry all content without bias, but in the end, I believe that is a fool’s errand. Because those networks are doing the bidding of the new class progressive elite, it is obvious the elite will not force their lackeys to go against their interests. Eventually however, producers of content will migrate away from those networks, to others that are not as hostile to their customers, and so will the advertisers. The market system that the elite so hate will force the issue. Until then, I would pull any investments in those networks. Why should an advertiser pay to put ads on a network with a diminishing users base? So it is clear that the wise investor should pull their investments in those platforms intent on destroying their own business model, and invest in others that are not polluting their own drinking supply… That isn’t rain you feel running down your back.

Sincerely,

John Pepin

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