Logic and Emotion

Posted on June 20, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that the minds of anti capitalists are made up and there is no argument that can ever reach their ears that would, or could, remove the scales from their eyes. The romantic anti capitalist is vehement that he or she sit in their cave and only watch the shadows on the wall, their back to the opening, while professing to know reality. Always feeling instead of thinking they sit in judgment of every facet of their neighbor’s lives. Never understanding the irony of a person who is at once the absolute judgementalist while demanding not only no judgment of their lives but approbation, no matter the action, if it is theirs.

We all make snap emotional judgments it is in our nature. There is no one among us who is not afflicted with this trait. Our ancestors lived in a world where snap judgments meant the difference between life and death. It is ingrained in us. But it is also ingrained in us to consider our reaction afterward. That is one of the traits of civilization in Mankind. The ability and attribute of assessing our actions and the outcome of them to garner better outcomes in the future.

This ability to look at the past and understand, intellectually, how our actions and the actions of others, even those of historical figures, have effected the World. It is our intellect that allows us to make these considered judgments. It is our intellect hat Socrates held as the primary difference between Man and beast. It was Emotion that Thrasymachus begged in his argument. By the last days of the Republic Rome had totally devolved into emotional decisions backed by sophist arguments to justify emotional actions. Sulla was no less guilty in this than Marius.

Look at the unquestionable evil that anti capitalists have visited on Mankind. From Stalin’s imposed famines through the Killing fields of Cambodia to Osama Bin Laden’s attack on the World Trade Center. Anti capitalists use logic, as a means only, to justify emotional reactions. Like arguing it would be a good thing to put sterilants in other people’s drinking water. No one argues that they personally should be fed sterilants against their will. It is others that have too many children and should be treated thusly.

As soon as the argument is won logically the anti capitalist flies into a rage. Then the personal attacks come out. No level of vitriol is too low to be leveled at a person arguing for liberty and the market system to cog and the sprocket of the machine of Mankind‘s advancement. The US Constitution is often at the point of attack. The anti capitalist faction seeks to undermine capitalism by gutting the Constitution. They make absurd arguments like the bill of Rights is there to protect the government’s rights to disarm the people. One of the most contemptible things anti capitalists do is redefine the Constitution. Take the redefinition of freedom of religion to separation of church and State.

Separation of church and state is a means to destroy freedom of religion for those anti capitalists that hate God. They believe that they can destroy their creator with rhetoric. Then when confronted with the question, what if there is a God they respond, well he must be a good guy and will forgive me… Presuming there will be no consequences no matter what. A very poor presumption to make; one that will possibly lead to ruination.

The anti capitalist will march all day to call for action in the face of Global Warming. Cite all the fabricated and out of context data the alarmists at the IPCC pull from their butts… and eat every bit. But any reasoning person must consider the fact that there is incontrovertible proof that Mars has warmed in the same time frame as Earth and about the same amount. This is far too coincidental to fluff off as a change in the color. I suppose a planet going from 2/3s ice cap in 1959 to 1/8th ice cap today would change the color from white to red. But the color change is an effect not a cause. It is possible human activity may have a slight effect on planetary climate, but the total effect must be solar system wide, if it is experienced solar system wide.

But the anti capitalist sees red when this argument is presented to them. No! It must be humans! No critical thinking at all. Because the theory fits well within the anti capitalist’s world view. That other people are bad and need to be controlled. Not only their property but their persons even down to their personal reproductive rights. There is no facet of human existence the anti capitalist does not consider himself entitled to control.

How a person can share every philosophical point with the National Socialist party, but call them evil and toss their common name around as an epithet to their political enemies, is amazing to me. But when a person is tied to the world with bindings of emotion, eschewing logical argumentation, it is not only possible but is a necessity. So keep arguing 5.5% unemployment is a jobless recovery but today we are living large at almost 90% employment.

Posted in Group Politics, media, philosophy, polictics of class envy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Cognitive Dissonance

Posted on June 16, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

What does it say about a government’s attitude towards it’s citizens, when that government allows illegal aliens to break the laws of the country with practical impunity (not requiring drivers licenses for instance), allows lawmakers the privilege to break any law they see fit with no negative repercussions (tax evasion for example) but holds the average citizen to the highest standard of personal conduct, even enforcing that conduct with the use of intrusive surveillance techniques such as video monitoring, including breath, urine and blood tests of the citizens (to prove their innocence), coupled with ever more attacks on free hold property rights? What would you think of someone you treated so poorly?

There is a psychological term called cognitive dissonance. Without going into a long lecture on every connotation and possible meaning of the term I will simply explain it as, Mental moment of inertia. We do what we do and we keep doing it. So for example if we stop at an Arby’s for lunch, the next day we are slightly more likely to stop at Arby’s for lunch. If we do, then the likely hood of stopping the next day grows, so on and so forth… If we are mean to a stranger… then we like that person less. It is in our nature, to justify, in our minds, that which we do, as occasioned by the other. So if we are accidentally mean to someone or intentionally unkind we dislike that person more after. Our attitude must comport with our actions. We have started Mental moment of inertia and the next time we see them we will be more likely to be unkind to them… etc.

So when a government treats it’s citizens as enemy combatants while treating illegal aliens, foreign terrorists and seditionists better than citizens; that government starts to dislike it’s citizens. To offset cognitive dissonance. The more it is done the less the Elite in government like the people they “serve.” This is a fundamental fact of human nature.

If you are a thinking person, you have already considered the slippery slope dilemma, that is the obvious outcome. The slope is, an Elite that increasingly, and at an increasing rate, come to despise the people. Once the Elite actually despise the citizens the government has every incentive to attack the people’s rights in every way. The attacks become more loathsome and less based in pseudo logical rhetoric (sophist or spurious logic), and grow into more emotionally based rhetoric. Once the cycle has completed the Elite will disarm the people, eliminate the market system and it’s feedbacks, and once and for all reduce the people to slaves. The normal state of Mankind; Not the Right state of Mankind. In a few hundred or maybe a few thousand years…

If you think about it, what is a sobriety road block or a safety road block, but a violation of the 4th amendment to the US Constitution? Not that I in any way advocate drunk driving or unsafe operation of a motor vehicle but I do believe a slippery slope that has the obviously terrible consequences as this should be taken seriously. Because it has far more dire consequences for Mankind, than the carnage that drunk drivers wrought on our highways, but less obvious. The one is not shown at all in the unbiased media while the other is sensationalized. Which kills more children every year in the US, guns or bicycles?

Consider this; In Germany in the 1930s the economy was destroyed by a foolish government that spent far too much money, was too liberal in their social policies and not liberal enough in their economic policies. This inevitably led to a backlash in society and a cultural philosophy catching on that liberty was in conflict with good economics. Liberty was seen as the threat not illiberal economic policies.

So if we accept that those in government are human beings and we accept that the theory of cognitive dissonance has merit, then we must also accept that the Elite in government are emotionally affected by their actions in the day to day running of government. The actions and rhetoric of the Elite in government for once agree, the people cannot be trusted.

Who is vilified when the economy goes bad? Business. Who is vilified when energy prices go up? Energy producers. Who is vilified when children cannot read? The parents. The list is endless and the point is clear, we cannot be trusted. But who is always blameless? The people running the show. They are faultless in everything and in every way. Unless something goes right…

Cognitive dissonance explains a lot. Look around at reality and get a good look. Take it in. It may be ugly and revolting but even the ugly and revolting can be avoided if we look at it and actually see it. Otherwise we end up scraping it off our shoe.

Is there anyone who thinks this is a good thing? And is there anyone who doesn’t see it?

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

Good and Bad; Black and White

Posted on June 13, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems amazing to me that, as a great Chinese philosopher (Mo Ti) once said, “This is something that confuses us… Take the case of a man who when shown a few black objects calls them black, but when he is shown a large number of black objects calls them white. He would have to admit his eyesight was in disorder and that he did not know the difference between black and white.” The “objects” he referred to were evils in the World. A few evils committed by a few men are obviously evil. But many evils done by many appear, (or are called) good. This philosophical distinction has implications in our daily lives and in the way our respective government’s assemble into political organizations.

When we see a person rob a store we say that is a bad thing. But we don’t examine the question further. Why is it a bad thing? Because the clerk could have been hurt? Because property was taken by someone other than the rightful owner? Because the environment is harmed by the burning of gunpowder? Or maybe because all these things amount to the same thing… that the good ordering of society is upset.

But when politicians cheat on their taxes or enact laws and regulations that benefit their political faction at the cost to society as a whole, people laugh it off. When confronted with the reality that a new regulation put in place for no purpose other than to protect a bureaucrat’s job will result in the ruination of someone they will laugh. Take another example that of war. How many people have been saved by NATO attacking in Libya? None. A grinding war takes a huge toll on the people and their welfare in a country. The destruction of infrastructure will result in hunger, disease, and poverty. The toll on the population doesn’t end there however.

People are the tinder of war. Human beings are consumed in the furnace of war. It is powered thusly. Therefore war should be taken seriously. Only engaged when the material welfare of a countries people is directly threatened. Because war is a large number of black objects and it is the definition of upsetting the orderly functioning of society, it is a bad (black) object that is often called good.

What about when a small faction believes it has the moral authority to demand others relinquish their personal right of self determination? Or that others relinquish their personal property. For such dubious reasons as protecting the Earth form Mankind. There is no bridge some of these people will not cross then turn and burn behind them to get their way. I have experience with people of this kind. They cannot be reasoned with or compromised with. There is no action they will not take to meet their ends. But they are portrayed as heroes in the unbiased press.

The example of abortion is glaring. Here we have the producers of modern culture claiming that abortion in the aggregate is good. To do so requires a change of rhetoric and abortion is deemed freedom of choice. The irony of people who despise other people’s right of self determination to claim to protect a freedom of choice is lost on most people today. But won’t be in the future. No one who witnessed an abortion would call it a good and righteous act. But veiled under a new name and it is a large number of black objects that are called white.

To what end are large numbers of bad things called good? Do you suppose it is for good ends? Is it in your experience that good things come of bad actions? Pile bad upon bad and will the result be good? I personally don’t think so. But the unbiased media and others, that create modern culture disagree with me, and now (hopefully) you.

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

Falkland Islands

Posted on June 9, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that everyone on the planet should be concerned, by the Obama administration’s backing of anti capitalist regimes in South America, undermining the Right of Self Determination in the Falkland Islands. Isn’t the Right of Self Determination the basis of Democracy? I thought these people, (the Obama administration), were blindly democratic but apparently only when it leads to famine, violence and bloodshed, but when undermining Self Determination leads to violence, famine and bloodshed they take that position. Two positions counter to each other… This leads me to conclude that the Obama administration likes, and wants, violence, famine and bloodshed in the World. This being the common thread.

The people of the Falkland Islands consider themselves to be British. They want to remain British citizens and they have representation in Parliament. But the Argentine government wants the land because in 1882 they landed a raiding party. Britain has exercised sovereignty over them since 1883.

Here is an excerpt from Wikipedia, a very leftist, biased organization that skews truth subtly and sometimes not so subtly, knowing it’s extreme bias, Wikipedia shows the attitude of the communist government’s, (and the attitude of any government that sides with Argentina), to the people that inhabit the Falklands, (and therefore you and I);

“Contemporary Falkland Islanders consider themselves to be British. They gained full British citizenship with the British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983, after the Falklands War. Argentina argues that the islanders do not have the right to self-determination, arguing that they are not aboriginal and were brought to replace the Argentine population that Argentina claims was expelled after the re-establishment of British rule in 1833.[2] The United Nations have called on both countries to begin dialogue over the sovereignty claim.”

So it appears, (reading between the lines), that the Argentine government is not interested in the people’s interest that live there and would rather the population of the Falkland Islands  emigrated, or in other words, ethnically cleanse the Falklands. I suppose this is acceptable since the people in question are British subjects…

Obviously Britain cannot abide such foolishness and neither should any civilized country. Not only abide, but condone, is what the US government is doing however. Yes the communist countries of South America all signed on to a pact, urging Britain to negotiate the ethnic cleansing of it’s citizens, and yes the Obama administration also signed on to this pact negating US and British common law regarding Self Determination, and yes there are some corrupt oligarchal capitalist countries in South America that agree that people are subjects and not citizens… but are these the human hearted people and goals we should be following?

In Libya the US is bombing people to protect their Right of Self Determination. In Afghanistan the US is bleeding it’s youth to protect the Afghan people’s right of Self Determination and in Iraq the ground has been fertilized with the blood of Men and Women who died and were maimed, to grow the Right of Self Determination for the people of Iraq, (but this was done by a prior administration).

The Obama administration has stabbed many allies in the back, (I predict Hosni will die at the gallows), and brought a faction to power in Egypt that has, as it’s central goal, the extinction of a race of human beings. It has delivered Yemen into those same hands and is in the process of delivering Libya into those same filthy hands. All in the name of democracy (self determination)?

It seems, that is what this administration does best, stab friends in the back and sow the seed of violence and war. Poland is another example of a friend scratching at a blade left in his back. Poland and several of our European allies, had the promised missile shield unilaterally taken away by Obama, to appease Russia and Putin. In return Russia has accelerated it’s help with Iran’s nuclear program and Iran will be producing nuclear bombs in 2 months.

Even the media have discovered evidence Iran is making nuclear bombs and modifying it‘s missiles to receive them. Yet when the uprisings appeared in Iran… Obama was silent. Silent of an uprising that could overthrow a suicidally apocalyptic regime soon to be equipped with nuclear bombs while stabbing allies in the back at the same time. Again it makes me conclude The Obama administration is not working to promote peace only sow and tenderly care for the seeds of war.

The only philosopher, (I know of), to say “the way to the over-man is under.” is Nietzsche. It always gives me the shivers reading him. I feel as if I am reading something Lucifer himself might have posited…

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

Arab Spring

Posted on June 5, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that his Arab Spring has taken some alarming turns. Changes in the apparent nature of the collective movements that signal a situation that will become more unstable not less unstable. This is very concerning to each and every one of us because it has implications, not only for World prosperity but more importantly, World peace.

The Arab people are perfectly well suited to living in a liberal democratically represented republic. The philosophy that they have lived under is not compatible with a liberal democratically represented republic however. The cultural ethos is that of a tribal/feudal system. So while there is no deficiency in the people whatsoever their philosophy is at odds with liberal democracy, which is the siren call of the unbiased media.

In Egypt events have traveled in a decidedly illiberal direction. Calls to quit the peace treaty with Israel are growing in frequency and amplitude. Calls for war with Israel are becoming more mainstream in Egyptian society than ever before. I remember what Machiavelli said about democracy, “A stable tyranny is better for the middle class than an unstable democracy.” Because in an unstable democracy there is no safety or security in one’s person or property but in a stable tyranny it is only the aristocracy that are actually tyrannized. In this context the average people of Egypt have gone from a stable tyranny to an unstable democracy. One that is becoming more unstable instead of less unstable.

Couple this with the fact that the largest and most violent demonstrations come directly after Friday Mosque says a lot about the root of the vine. With the rebellions in Yemen, Bahrain, Syria, and elsewhere driven by radical clerics calling on the people to Jihad against their rulers, to what end do you suppose those radical clerics are working… a liberal democratically represented republic?

It should make us all wonder what is the goal is in Libya. We are told it is to unseat Moammar. But then what? To give Libya to the radical Islamic clerics who are ginning up the rebellions around the rest of the Islamic World? That is suicidal foolishness. But it looks like that is the actual policy of NATO. Without effective control of the ground air power can only smash and destroy. It cannot enact political change. It’s like using a sledge hammer to filigree a tin ceiling…

Combine all these things together and we have a building disaster on our collective hands. Growing in magnitude due to the demolishing of infrastructure in the effected countries and the growing anger at the deteriorating living conditions that the rebellions are creating in their societies. Anger and hunger are easily channeled into mindless violence by the evil among us.

Just as 18th century France rage at the Aristocracy and hunger fed into the French revolution, or the massacre of the peaceful demonstrations in Saint Petersburg by Tsar Nicolas led to the rebellion that eventually brought Lenin and the Bolsheviks to power with all the intendent bloodshed. These examples give us some warning signs to look for. Like, the execution of old leaders, total triumph of secularism over religion or the reverse, and lastly the wholesale changing of the modes of people’s lives (treating people like lab rats).

We see the beginnings of all these things happening in the Arab Spring. In Egypt, where perhaps, the rebellion has evolved the farthest, Hosni is under indictment along with most of the old ruling guard. The outcome keeps sliding down the slippery slope…

What is lacking in these countries that would allow for an actual liberal democratically represented republics, is a capitalistic ethos, it is unfortunately not trite to say. As the great thinkers of the Enlightenment concluded, market thinking pervades every aspect of our lives, making us measure and weigh the good and bad in every decision. This has the effect of making people pragmatic and tolerant.

It is not virtue to be tolerant in a feudal or tribal society. These types of societies must be tempered by the introduction of a functional market system, before it can be imagined that democracy can be thrust upon a people who have been conditioned, not to be pragmatic… Doing so insures the splintering of a society into hard core factions and all the violence that entails until a new strongman brings all the factions under control.

Remember what Aristotle said about democracy, “There are three right forms of government and three wrong forms of government, the three right forms are, monarchy, aristocracy and polity, the three wrong forms are, despotism, oligarchy and democracy… for democracy is the tyranny of the majority over the minority.”

Where there is no pragmatism there can be no polity. Even the most pragmatic people must alloy democracy within a republic…

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

It’s the Economy Stupid

Posted on June 2, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me no matter how many times anti capitalists are wrong or how badly wrong they turn out to be, over and over and over, they are always the ultimate authority on any subject, especially the economy… Their economic prognostications that are wrong effect our personal economics.

Today’s economy is a perfect example. The beautiful people told us that if they spent trillions of dollars on infrastructure the economy would come quickly out of the recession, create or save millions of jobs, and they would pass smart regulation that would prevent too big to fail and fix past problems with the economy and the banking system.

What they delivered is replacing some road signs that did not need to be replaced, handed out gobs of money to ACORN and other political organizations, gave bailouts to the corrupt industrialists that had a hand in the economic downturn, prop up corrupt businesses that were (and continue to grow) too big to fail, gave money to foreign banks, gave money to corrupt dictators and such blazing successes as cash for clunkers.

On the regulation front, they delivered thousand upon thousands of pages of regulation that has not addressed a single problem that led to the economic collapse, has created new economic problems, added huge costs to doing business in the US, driven up health care costs while pretending to “fix” health care, taken away much consumer flexibility in the form of credit card regulation, driven up the cost of energy through not only regulating new drilling away but reckless printing of dollars.

The results are dismal at best, the unemployment rate is still going up 2 years into the “recovery,” the number of people who have fallen out of the job market and given up is around 35%! Gdp growth is being revised lower as I write this, housing starts are dropping still, the US budget deficit has hit the ceiling, and the stock market rise is entirely due to Quantitative Easing 2, (QE2).

QE2 is simply the Fed printing dollars then spending them buying US bonds. Today the fed is buying 70% of US bonds! That means only 30% are bought by US citizens, foreign citizens or sovereign funds (other governments). QE2 is supposed to run out at the end of June 2011. People who read this blog after then will know the answer, but I believe when QE2 stops, the Dow Jones industrial average will fall off the table… Unless the Fed steps in and announces QE3. If they do that it will be purely a political tool to keep public opinion positive about the anti capitalists that run the show today in the US government.

The simple fact of the matter is the US government has over promised and has painted itself into a corner. The ability of the economy to produce the things the government has promised is being materially harmed by the government’s regulation and taxation of the economy. Raising taxes or increasing regulation during a downturn in the economy is risky but to do both is ridiculous. That is what the anti capitalists that run the US government have done, in fact the first thing they did when they came into office was to raise taxes on the poor.

Yes, that’s right one of  Obama’s first action was to raise the cigarette taxes. Who smokes cigarettes? The Vanderbilt’s? The Lintilhacs? Maybe the Rockefeller clan… No, believe it or not, it is the poor who largely partake of cigarettes. So, when government raises taxes on cigarettes, government raises taxes on the poor. Balancing the budget on the backs of the poor.

Boil it down and spending will come under control. No matter how much the anti capitalist element in the US government raises taxes on the entrepreneur government spending will go down. The real question is, will it go down in a controlled manner, or will it collapse when QE3 runs out. The fed’s ability to print money will be extinguished, the dollar will be worthless and no one will be stupid enough step up to buy the trillions of dollars of bonds the US government must sell to continue the profligate spending.

Collapse or controlled, it depends if the American people fall for the anti capitalist advertisement, of Paul Ryan throwing grandma off the cliff or are smart enough themselves to see through the rhetoric. In other words stop believing the people who are constantly wrong about the economy.

I wonder… If the anti abortion people made an ad showing, graphically, (like throwing a person off a cliff for example), an abortion gleefully performed by some pro abortion politician… would that too, be acceptable political rhetoric, or would it be offensive? What is the difference?

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

Graphing Government Economic Friction

Posted on May 29, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me it is a self evident fact that government could regulate poverty. In other words, government could enact regulations that are so absurd, all economic activity would come to a halt. In fact we see this very thing in North Korea and in other impoverished places around the World.

Let’s make a ruled line, with this level of absurd regulation at one end, and the other end being zero government regulation. The ruled space between the ends will be the various levels of regulation that a government can have as they pertain to economic activity. The scale would be 1-10.

If government regulation is at the zero end, it is peddle to the metal, economic growth (as far as regulation is concerned). With the all the shenanigans that go along with zero regulation. Like the 1920’s in the US. Low regulation very high growth. Or regulation can be closer to the other end of the scale like the slow growth of the 1930’s in the US.

Another factor in economic output is the level of taxation. It is self evident that government could enact such a high level of taxation that all economic activity, above the table, would cease. This would be the end of another ruled line with zero taxation at the other. The scale would again be 1-10.

We can then place the two ruled lines on a graph. Regulation being the x axis and Taxation being the Y axis. Then we can plot the level of government interference with economic activity. With this scale we can clearly see the implications of government policies on economic activity in a country. The other factors effecting actual economic outcome are cultural effects like animosity to capitalist, thought, behavior, work ethic etc… These cultural effects can outweigh anything a government tries to enact to improve the lot of it’s people.

That is not to say, if cultural effects are such that economic activity is effectively suppressed, that government should not try to be as frictionless to economic growth as possible. Doing so allows the paltry local relative advantages to be better exploited. This in turn allows the people to better their standard of living.

To use cultural animosity to market activity as a reason to coddle people is simply a means to trap them in poverty. Government providing for people who have been taught to hate market activity is a recipe for famine and want. People live best when people can provide for themselves. Independence in a market economy is as close to real independence a human being can have.

Engaging in the market system in this way knocks the rough edges off cultural ethics that are in conflict with the market system. Just like it did Christianity at the end of the Dark Ages. People who grow up in later generations will find the market system to be less vexing. The cultural animosity will be lessened by the obvious improvement in the standard of living of the people.

This scale of government’s friction to an economy is helpful to countries with mature economies as well. Mature economies tend to build up more and more absurd regulation. It might have had a place and time but the nature of government is to grow not to self control. So regulations tend to build up on the books. Leading to needless Red Tape. The bureaucratic friction gums up even the lowest taxed economies.

It is important for government to occasionally look at it’s regulation. Perhaps even having a semi annual audit of it’s regulation. Every effort should be made to find people who are honest brokers to pour over every page of regulation and suggest ways to lower not only the amount but the intrusiveness as well.

Were this to happen; I believe the economies of the World would be unleashed. The standard of living of the people of the World will go up dramatically in every way. Take government‘s foot off the throat of the people and people will thrive. But step down even harder to maintain control, because the Elite have destroyed the people’s ethos, and you have universal poverty.

So it boils down to this… Measure and control government’s effect on the economy and have universal opulence or allow government to bear down harder and harder on our collective economic throats and have universal poverty.

In the end it is our choice; not the Elite’s.

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

Cultural Knowledge

Posted on May 26, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that most economists are looking at the extrinsic facts and drawing conclusions that are in fact at odds with the intrinsic qualities of those very facts. Extrinsic facts are like “a blade of grass is green…” Intrinsic quality of that fact would be “… because it has chlorophyll in it.” Extrinsic qualities are what is immediately visible, felt, heard etc… Intrinsic qualities are what the extrinsic qualities are from.

The example that immediately comes to mind is the personal spending of the American citizen. Economists are surprised at the resilience of the American spender. While the savings rate has gone up slightly the rate of spending, a major factor in economic output, has remained remarkably stable despite the high energy prices. -These are extrinsic facts.

Economists then draw their multitude of reactions to these extrinsic facts. They wax poetic on Bloomberg radio every day. Their conclusions have one flaw however… Few tunnel below this extrinsic layer to plumb the intrinsic qualities of those facts. Then plug the intrinsic qualities of those facts into their theories to see how they hold up.

Something that effects the way we, the masses, think is cultural knowledge. This cultural knowledge is sometimes urban legends, common knowledge, streetwise or any number of names connoting cultural knowledge. American cultural knowledge is based in a capitalistic ethos. An ethos that weighs benefits against liabilities.

The Elite have been trying for generations to erase our capitalistic ethos and replace it with egoism. Egoists are as stupid as they are self centered. As such they are easily manipulated and led. They vote regularly against their own self interest out of ignorance and hubris. But I digress…

Part of the American cultural knowledge is that the level of spending in the US capital is actually unsustainable. We know this in our guts. No one is ignorant despite those that claim otherwise. This gut feeling leads us to the inevitable fear of hyper inflation. This fear of hyper inflation is a powerful motivator.

If we know our money may be worthless in a few years then why put money away? It is not in our self interest to work hard for money and stash it away, knowing that if we do, the government’s policies will erase it completely. To do so would be stupid. It makes more sense, if hyper inflation is actually around the corner, to “stock up.”

When things become too expensive to buy, or food becomes so expensive, it squeezes out any discretionary spending, if we bought new durable goods, they will last long enough that we might weather the hyper inflation. Once the economy resets we can resume our lives.

The huge inflation we are seeing in food and energy only feed into this thought process. Especially when the government denies the obvious. If inflation were measured today the way it was prior to 1980 it would be pushing 9-10%. This is not hyper inflation but it is certainly not the placid 2-4% the government would have us believe.

Another extrinsic fact is the small business outlook. Basically a survey of the attitudes of small business owners about their near term prospects. It has been low since the crash of ‘08. It has gone up and down but has remained suppressed as compared to it’s historical average.

Cultural knowledge comes into play here too. Small business owners are integral parts of the community. They contribute to, pass along and keep safe, cultural knowledge. Lately the US government has been vilifying business. This vilification has been against the profit motive, that businessmen won’t put “community” interests ahead of their business interests, even the vilification of Wall Street has spillover effects in the arena of cultural knowledge.

No one likes to be vilified. It makes people feel insecure. Couple this with the rash of regulation that creates much more work for the small business owner and the intendant profit reductions that always hitch a ride with any new regulation… and voila, you have diminished attitudes.

There are many ways cultural knowledge influence the extrinsic facts of economics. All economics being, in large part, the large scale emergence of the effects of cultural knowledge on the behaviors of the masses. To consider the outwardly only is to ignore the underlying reasons.

Posted in economy, Group Politics, media, philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Causality

Posted on May 22, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that if a person, (the originator), points a gun at another, aims at the victim’s heart, pulls the trigger, the mechanism of the gun operates, the hammer drives the pin into the primer, the primer’s explosive goes off, fire is ejected through the touch hole into the cartridge, the powder in the cartridge is ignited, the deflagrating powder and the resulting pressure pushes the bullet from the cartridge at great velocity, the bullet interacts with the barrel and the rifling in the barrel, imparting a spin, thus a gyroscopic effect to the speeding bullet, the bullet flies unerringly to the target, penetrating the victim’s chest, passing through the heart, exiting the back, flying erratically until it impacts some object and comes to a rest…  that person is responsible for the effects of his or her original cause, ie, shooting the gun at someone, and the precognition of the events, that would probably take place from his or her original cause, has relevance to their guilt.

What about if a person had personal knowledge that the ice on a lake was thin. Checked the ice and verified that it was thin. Then gathered a group of people and urged them onto the ice. Some people would complain that the ice was too thin and no one should go onto it. Then the original person called for the complainers and conspiracy theorists to be shut up. The group then taped the complainers mouths shut. Then the group, (except the originator) go out onto the ice, the limit of the ice’s ability to support weight is exceeded and the ice catastrophically fails. The whole group falls into frigid water, many necessarily die. The only person who is safe, is the person who has stayed on the shore, the originator. Is that person not equally as responsible as the person who shoots the gun at another? In every way?

Consider the example of the man who knows the end result of initially “democratic” uprisings, has researched the outcomes of historical events and their ramifications to World history and the effects on Mankind, then urge a group of people to gather and stage a “democratic” uprising, they fire the group up with rhetoric and stories of “democracy.” Some people complain, however, that uprisings are dangerous. Most have not resulted in more liberty they have resulted in less liberty. The originator calls to have the complainers shut up! They are beaten into submission some are gang raped. The originator stays in a “safe” country and keeps his or her assets safe with hard assets like gold and a basket of international currencies. Then when the uprising inevitably kill thousands and results in less liberty, is this originator any less guilty… or more?

How about the originator who has personal knowledge that anti capitalist philosophies such as Communism result in famine, tyranny, despotism and an ever diminishing standard of living, researched the subject to find there were no examples in history where communism resulted in prosperity, then convinced a powerful Elite it was a good idea to force communism, not on the people of one country or nation only, but upon the entire World. Some people would complain that this path led to universal poverty. The originator calls for the complainer to be shut up! Calls the complainer selfish, greedy and counter-revolutionary. His or her followers call the complainer a kook, insane, and dangerous. The complainers are effectively suppressed and ignored. When the World goes out on the thin ice, that is communism, in a one great World government… is the person or group of people, as guilty, for the resulting deaths through famine, torture, political suppression, maintenance of oligarchy, and protection of the Elite… or more guilty?

In every one of these examples we have an originator and the victims. In each case the victims died and in each case the originator had foreknowledge and therefore was guilty for all the deaths…Is the perpetrator evil or good? In the first and second examples the perpetrator would be hunted down, arrested, prosecuted and sentenced to jail and possibly executed. In the third example the perpetrator would be reviled in some circles but have no meaningful negative consequences in his or her life. In the fourth example the perpetrator would be set up as the king of the World. But under a different name… President (for life), Great Leader, Prime Minister, or by whatever name he or she would go by, but they will be, in fact, Caesar.

Now that we have a template lets do a thought experiment… Take a person who urges a group of people to change the borders of their nation, such that it guarantees the extermination of that people, by neighbors who daily say genocide is their goal. Then, predictably, the people are exterminated. Is the originator guilty of genocide? What if he has a Nobel Prize? And what does that say about what the Nobel Prize will have become?

In any case, it is not relevant how long the chain of event, the predictable outcome is what determines guilt. As in the case of the drunken driver not being prosecuted for intentions but for actions and probable outcomes…

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

Diversity in Ability

Posted on May 19, 2011 by john

Dear Friends,

It seems to me that all people are capable. You are a capable person, he is capable, she is capable and even I have some small capacity. That is a fundamental theme of the International Capitalist Party’s ethos. All people are capable human beings. The capacity of each individual is diverse and unique. It is that very diversity of capacity and uniqueness that gives rise to people’s ability to fill the miscellaneous needs of society and even to explore new possibilities.

A perfect government therefore would allow all people to employ their divers talents in whatever way they saw fit. This would lead to zero unemployment because everyone would work. It would also lead to an explosion in the GDP of a country that achieved it because everyone would contribute to it. But is not an easy task.

In a system that is increasingly regulated the diverse capabilities of mankind cannot be effectively harnessed. Regulation does not allow for diversity. This inevitably leads to some people’s abilities not being marketable. The primary benefit of the diversity of abilities is lost to society. This is because regulation is a top down approach to control a complex system, i.e. the diverse abilities of mankind within the market system.

Top down or Command and Control economics is an attribute of oligarchal State capitalism as well as many other anti capitalist philosophies. These systems seek to limit mankind to a single mold. The mold the Elite anti capitalists find agreeable. The mold is for the named, like the bourgeoisie, proletariat, worker, immigrant, rich or poor. The Elite pretend to be members of them all but are a sort to themselves so they need not conform to the mold.

Lasses Fair capitalism meets the diverse abilities of mankind best but has it’s drawbacks. Those are all founded in people’s wanting to use unjust means to go around the market system. Means like, bribery to get contracts, privileges, licenses etc, pyramid schemes, snake oil salesmen, or mere scammers, in short, stupid capitalism. The World is full of those that will jump at the opportunity to take advantage of others who are trusting.

It is an actually legitimate role of government to protect the property and persons of those under it’s care. So it is a legitimate use of government power to protect people from fraud. This comes in the form of consumer protection and creates an ability in people to actually trust each other sufficiently to conduct business. Until the consumer protection grows into a kudzu vine, that overgrows it’s place, it allows the market to operate more smoothly then if there was no regulation at all.

So here regulation is helpful but earlier we claimed it was unhelpful. That is because we are talking about regulation that protects consumers from fraud and before we were talking about regulation that doesn’t set standards or protect consumers it protects, firms from competition, government granted monopolies, the legal oligarchy, the interests of a faction (or Elite) over the interests of society, or society from the complexity that is a functional market system.

It is exactly this complexity of the market system that fits like a hand in a warm glove with the diverse capabilities of mankind. To try to protect people from their very strength is to undermine that strength. Our diversity in abilities is what allows the market system to fit so well with humanities abilities and foibles. We shine in our diversity in abilities and we should celebrate them.

But the philosophy opposite ours, that people are NOT capable, not able, not diverse in our talents and need protection, not only from others but even from ourselves, this philosophy can only lead to tyranny and oppression. It is a poor lot for the children of those that let this pernicious ethic infect into the body politic or the corpus society.

Their children will suffer the tyranny bought for them by their parents…

Posted in economy, Law, philosophy | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , | Leave a comment