whosez

Culture

For over 50 years, I have been trying to show people, on both the left and the right, the importance of culture to a cohesive, relatively peaceful, relatively successful, relatively prosperous society. My comments are usually received with quiet dismissal.

The politically correct diversity police have led us on to believe that culture isn’t important. That cultures may be different but they are equally preferred. This belies the historic and current observation of world wide cultures: Some of which are basically peacefully providing abundance for their members and others that are barbaric, in constant turmoil, unable to feed its citizens and constantly at war either with itself or with its neighbors.

If you understand this, then you must understand that the United States is in serious trouble from factionalization resulting from the creation of politically competitive cultural groups exacerbated by illegal immigration.

Many argue that we are a nation of immigrants. Some cite the great immigration at the turn of the nineteenth century. They fail to recognize that it was legal, orderly, that to enter this country you had to meet health requirements, have a sponsor, learn English and if you sought citizenship and wanted to vote, you had to learn about our history and rules of governance.

"In the first place we should insist that the immigrant who comes here in good faith becomes an American and assimilates himself to us, he shall be treated on an exact equity with everyone else, for it is an outrage to discriminate against any such man because of creed, or birthplace or origin. But this is predicated upon the man's becoming an American and nothing but an American. There can be no divided allegiance here. Any man who says he is an American but something else also, isn't an American at all. We have room for but one flag, the American flag, and this excludes the red flag which symbolizes all wars against liberty and civilization, just as much as it excludes any flag of a nation to which we are hostile. We have room for but one language here, and that is the English language...and we have room for but one sole loyalty and that is a loyalty to the American people."

                                                Theodore Roosevelt

                                                 in a letter to the American Defense Society in 1919.

Patriotism means to stand by the country, it does not mean to stand by the president.

                                                Theodore Roosevelt

Finally, the political class loves to engage in presentism: Judging the past by the standards of today. No question that slavery was an evil. But it was common in the past and we overcame it despite the fact that it still exists in many parts of the globe today.

Compromise

We are a badly divided country. All that we hear about, especially from the left, is compromise, compromise, compromise. This is sophistry at its worse because it fails to discuss whether compromise is justified and I’m so tired of it.

If I come up to you and demand that you give me a thousand dollars and you say no way. Then I say OK, let’s compromise. Only make it five hundred dollars. Again you say get lost. And I keep badgering you, four hundred, three hundred, one hundred, badger, badger, badger. Finally you get tired of the nonsense and I’m down to ten dollars. The onlookers are shouting compromise, compromise it’s only ten dollars..You just want me to go away. So you say for ten dollars I’ll get some peace: Here, take the ten and get out of here. We’ve reached a compromise and I’m ten dollars richer than I deserve.

That’s what the Democrats have been doing for over a hundred years. Drip, drip, drip until finally our Constitution is shredded and they get more and more power.

The Democrats had the House, the Senate and the White House for two years from 2009 till 2011. They could have passed any bill that they wanted and there was nothing that the Republicans could do about it. (Example: The ACA known as Obamacare.) Yet they did not pass a budget. Why not?

Because they could then call for continuing resolutions and then under threat of closing down the government demand a compromise on spending.

It is not a compromise when one side demands something that they should not have and the other side yields.

We have clichés like, it’s a win win situation. There is no such thing. You can’t have a winner if there is not a loser. Why not just say it’s a lose lose situation? If both sides don’t give up something it is simply an agreement.

I’m convinced that we are living in the age of sophistry. A sophist is a rhetorician who is able to make foolishness sound like wisdom.

Governments Consume

Governments don’t produce wealth. If this were not true, why do governments collect taxes? Why don’t they just pay their bills out of the wealth that they have produced? The fact is that all governments, from the very first, consume wealth. Everything that the government does, even if necessary or important, is consumption.

Prior to the 18^th century, all Governments acquired wealth by invasion, conquest, enslaving the conquered, various forms of subjection (serf, vassal, coolie, etc.) and by taxing.

Then some genius philosophers came along and said that men should not be subjects but should be free. That they, not the government, should benefit from their labor. That government power should be limited to that which only the government can do such as protect them from enemies abroad and miscreants at home. That the government should be supported by tariffs and if taxing became necessary, all should be taxed equally. They eschewed democracy and created a Constitutional Republic.

Then in 1913 the Republic was turned into a Democracy, a form of government that our Founding Fathers considered suicidal.

·         Equal taxation died with the 16^th Amendment allowing an income tax. When first proposed, we were told that only the incomes of the wealthiest 1% would be taxed and that the rate would be from 1% to 7%. It has been as high as 90%.

·         The 17^th Amendment attacked State sovereignty by changing senators from appointment by State Legislatures to election by popular vote. This led to more power being concentrated in Washington.

·         And, finally, the Federal Reserve Act was passed which, with other changes, allowed the printing of fiat money. As we print more money, the dollar loses its credibility. In time, like the Soviet ruble, it will have no exchange rate and no value on international money markets.

Today we are 12 trillion dollars in debt* and counting. National wealth production is on a descending trajectory. With increased government activity, wealth consumption is on an ascending trajectory.

Since we no longer teach the basics of economics (we teach a lot of advanced gobbledygook that few understand and is forgotten as soon as finals are over) few people understand how wealth is created. They demand that the government create jobs not understanding that any jobs created by the government just consume more wealth. They believe that we can create wealth with a service economy. They don’t understand that wealth consists of transferable assets. Where do you find services listed on a balance sheet?

Wealth can only be created in the private sector. People growing, building and making things that others will give up time and energy to acquire. Private sector jobs are what we need not jobs created by Washington.

Washington is so busy trying to tell us how to live that they are failing at one of the things that they are supposed to do, as stated above, protect us from miscreants at home. Despite repeated warnings, since 2000 by Harry Markopolos, Washington failed to act to stop Bernie Madoff.

But they are quick to tell us what to grow by consuming wealth in order to provide subsidies to farmers to grow corn for ethanol which resulted in increased costs for food. Then cotton farmers planted corn instead of cotton so as to profit from the subsidies. This resulted in cotton production moving to South America. For those of you that are slow learners, growing cotton produces wealth, subsidizing corn consumes wealth. And ethanol from corn consumes more energy than it produces.

The con artists in Washington tell us that they will pay for their hand outs (including those to farmers and businesses) by taxing big business and the wealthy. They get away with this lie because, due to economic ignorance, we don’t understand that businesses don’t pay taxes the purchasers of their goods and services pay the taxes for them, even when the buyer earns less than $250,000 or is poor. And taxing the wealthy doesn’t work, because they don’t become wealthy by being stupid. When income tax rates on the wealthy reached 90% it became cheaper to pay lawyers and accountants fees than to pay the taxes. If you lower taxes it becomes cheaper to pay the tax than to avoid it. This results in more revenue.

So, they say, we’ll just pass more and more laws to prevent them from avoiding the tax. Well, Washington expanding or creating agencies to enforce these laws just consumes more wealth increasing our debt. And, the more laws you have the more of a police state you become.

That’s why our founder’s made a distinction between “Natural” law and “Man Made” law. Natural law can be thought of as law for which nature extracts a consequence if broken. Freedom is possible when the culture informs the law. When the law informs the culture, you have tyranny. The road to power and tyranny is paved with Man Made Law. That’s the road that we’re on. The question is: How do we get off this road?

American History education has been corrupted. If you want to learn the 28 principles our Founding Fathers used for creating the Constitution and the United States, you will read The 5000Year Leap, by W. Cleon Skousen and go to: www.nccs.net

 

*As of August 10, 2009. Go to: http://www.usdebtclock.org/ for updates.

Hate as a political weapon

Resentment turned to anger turned to hate, along with fear, has become a political weapon. Hate and fear are dynamic while their opposites, love and contentment, are passive. So if you want to build a constituency and mobilize people you need only give them something to hate or something to fear. Love and contentment will result in their sitting back and enjoying their good fortune.

Because of this reality, politics has degenerated into the demonizing of opponents and scaring the public with issues for which no one has a viable solution. Then the demagogues can claim that they have the solution and that if you just throw out their evil opponents and give them control life will be wonderful.

They claim that if they are in charge they will ensure social justice, end poverty, homelessness, hunger, illness, crime and war. Oh, I forgot, and they would also guarantee total freedom. Wouldn’t that be paradise? If only you would support them and put them in charge.

This is how all the tyrants of the 20^th century came to power, Lenin/Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Castro to name the most famous.

It’s interesting that in their rise to power they all had the support of academics and intellectuals both native and from around the world. Once they consolidated their power the first thing that they did was persecute, incarcerate or execute the native academics and intellectuals.

The question you must ask yourself is: How can these demagogues give you paradise without taking away your freedoms and making you totally dependent, which is the definition of bondage? They can’t.

Today’s left, the Progressives, are the current incarnation of the ancient Greek Sophists. (Sophist: A rhetorician skilled at making foolishness sound like wisdom.) Their Siren song permeates academia and the national media thereby luring their trusting victims into crashing on the rocks of subjectivity.

History shows that their goal all along is the wealth and prestige that accompanies power. In the words of Benjamin Franklin:

“Sir, there are two passions which have a powerful influence on the affairs of men. These are ambition and avarice; the love of power, and the love of money. Separately each of these has great force in prompting men to action; but when united in view of the same object, they have in many minds the most violent effects. Place before the eyes of such men a post of honour that shall at the same time be a place of profit, and they will move heaven and earth to obtain it.”  

The main difference between the Left and the Right is that the Left lives in a theoretical world while the Right tries to understand reality. The Left believes that more government is the solution, the Right believes that too much government is the problem. The world is a dangerous deadly place and the above listed tribulations will always be with us. The most we can do is try to minimize their impact on society.

Again, history tells us that the way to do this is to nurture a civil culture where self-discipline and a devotion to personal responsibility permeates: This was the teachings of Christ distilled to their simplest construct. Our Founders understood this. That is why, despite the corrupt history being taught today, they all supported the teachings of the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule and the Judeo/Christian Bible. To read their pronouncements, go here: http://www.wallbuilders.com/libissuesarticles.asp?id=63

There is a subtle almost unrecognized conflict taking place in America. The conflict is between those who believe God is the ruler of the universe and those who think that man is. Those who believe in God’s law and those who believe in man’s law. God’s law is codified, divine and immutable. Man’s law is situational, emotional and subject to the whims of whoever happens to be in power.

While no law is without violators the efficacy of a law should not be judged by its violators but by its impact on society.

Man made law is subject to the passions and prejudices of those in power and therefore ever changing with the transfer of power whether peaceful or violent. This results in those in favor escaping penalty while those out of favor suffer persecution. This creates chaos the result of which is a tyrannical society that uses force to create order.

Natural law based on a set of principles the first of which is that all men are equal under the law. When the principles are codified in a constitution and taught and understood by all the result is a peaceful orderly society in which force is only needed for miscreants and enemies of the state. This was America until the ‘60s when the Corruption of the Constitution by the 16^th and 17^th Amendments and the Federal Reserve Act began to impact our society.

Today the law has become malleable with selective enforcement and executive orders and our market economy has become the victim of Crony Capitalism.

When Benjamin Franklin exited the Constitutional Convention, he was asked by a woman, “Sir, what have you given us?” His immediate response was, “A Republic, ma’am, if you can keep it.”

A very prophetic reply.

Historically man’s law results in a civic structure consisting of a ruling elite with all the power and wealth, a military to protect the ruling elite from foreign conquest and domestic rebellion, and the rest of the people who are considered subjects (slaves?) of the ruling elite and do not have the  rights of property necessary for liberty. (Either all property belongs to the “king” (read ruling elite) or as in communism all property belongs to the  “people” (read state).

In ancient times there was a sect called Jews that tried to live by God’s law. They pretty much worshipped and kept to themselves not assimilating into the dominate culture ruled by man’s law. Then the Jew Jesus was born and began to teach God’s law to the masses. As the numbers of his followers grew the world began to change from one of barbarism instructed by man’s law to one more civil instructed by God’s law.

Those who tried to live by God’s law tended to be persecuted: Sometimes by men using God’s name to justify man’s law.

A new land was discovered 3,000 miles from old world religious persecution. Those seeking freedom of worship (mostly Bible reading Christians) began to migrate to this new land. In time towns, counties, cities and states emerged with one thing in common: They tried to live their lives according to Biblical teachings.

The left thinks that they can pass laws to accomplish this so they spend their time passing more and more laws usually called man-made-laws. As a result it is almost impossible for an active person to get through a day without breaking some law even though he is not caught. This results in selective enforcement which is the main instrument of tyranny. Another problem with man-made-law is that it does not endure: It changes with each passing of power from one person or oligarchy to another.

Our Founders favored Natural law. Natural Law is immutable and defined as: A body of unchanging moral principles regarded as a basis for all human conduct.

This is not an argument for giving up and ending the fight to reduce these tribulations. Nor is it an argument for ending freedom. It is an argument for recognizing the complexity of the problem and rejecting simple, feel good solutions offered for the purpose of gaining political advantage.

Another problem with the Left is that once they formulate a theory they marry it. No matter how many times it fails, they cling to it “till death do they part.” A classic example is Communism (Socialism). Instead of questioning the theory every time it fails, the left just proclaims that it wasn’t done right but if they were in charge they would do it right.

Since the Left emerges out of the theoretical world of the university, their influence spreads even to the world of science. The most important attribute of a scientist is to be skeptical about his own findings. Due to the influence of the Left, scientists are more and more becoming advocates for their initial findings. Scientists talking about a “consensus” is an oxymoron. Either the experiment rising from research can be consistently replicated or it can’t. If it can’t, then the theory that initiated the research is flawed and therefore should be discarded. There should not be a poll as to how many scientists agree with the theory. It is just as foolish to accept scientific evidence without question as it is to reject empirical evidence out of hand.

Finally, it has been my experience that any attempt to have a philosophical discussion with a Leftist is turned into a “right fight” by the Leftist. If you offer them an unassailable fact, they ignore it, go off on a tangent, or make an ad hominem attack (Bush lied, Bush is Dumb, etc.) They are right and anyone who disagrees with them is evil because they are just trying to make the world better. Of course whenever a theory fails, the theory wasn't flawed, it just wasn't properly implemented.