Archive for November 13th, 2016

What is Conservatism?

November 13, 2016

There’s been a lot of people throwing around the term “conservatism” and I don’t think people know what it truly means. Let me try to describe the landscape and show you where Donald Trump lies.

To begin with, conservatism is really simple to explain. It is the political philosophy that our Founding Fathers have, that gave us the constitution, the Declaration of Independence, and all sorts of other things. Conservatism is thus really Americanism boiled down to its essence. There are conservatives in Europe, but they share almost nothing with our philosophy.

For better or for worse, this definition of conservatism means that it really can’t change. Just like the Ancient Greek and Ancient Latin languages are set in stone, the things our Founding Fathers believed in and supported are set in stone. This is why you can’t take Christianity out of conservatism, or why abortion will never be a protected right under conservatism.

Let’s look at some of the other political philosophies associated with the right. But before we do, let me air out some grievances I have with this “right” vs. “left” nonsense. Reagan said it best: We are not right or left, but up or down. Up towards liberty, or down to captivity. That’s the real question that we have to answer: Do we want more freedom or less? Now,  different political philosophies have different ideas about “freedom”, “liberties” and “rights”, but really, at the end of the day, you have to wonder whether you are more or less free.

The “right” vs. “left” are really a broad categorization of these political philosophies. The right has gravitated towards the Republican Party, while the left has gravitated towards the Democratic Party. The philosophies on the right tend to emphasize individual liberty and limited government, while the philosophies on the left emphasize collective liberty and unlimited government. If I were forced to name the single issue that divides the left from the right in America, that would be the definition I would use.

On the right, in addition to conservatism (which I believe is not a majority but perhaps a plurality), you have the following ideas:

  • Nationalism
  • Hawkism (AKA Neo-Conservatism)
  • Establishmentism
  • Protectionism
  • Libertarianism

I did not add “populism” because that is the political philosophy of whatever is popular at the time among those who don’t spend a lot of time thinking about this kind of thing. I believe populism as of 2016 is nationalism, protectionism, and libertarianism, while conservatism, hawkism, and establishmentism are out of favor. This can and will change, and perhaps some of the philosophies on the left will become popular some day.

Nationalism is associated with a lot of bad things, but here in America it means the idea that there should be nations at all. It is directly opposed to Globalism, which believes we should have one world government where all are together. Nationalists like their national identity, their language, border, culture, and customs. They hang on to these things out of a sense of tradition and even duty. For instance, Christians might feel compelled to defend Christianity because if they don’t no one else will. The policies nationalists want are to secure and entrenth our culture in government, ensure that foreign cultures and languages do not dilute ours, and to maintain strong, secure borders. Nationalists also want to treat other nations as peers and be treated as a peer. Nationalists oppose world governments.

Hawkism, sometimes called Neo-Conservativism, is the idea that we should fight lots of wars all the time, and be aggressive on the world scene. These are the people we accuse of wanting to be the world police. Hawkists justify their belligerence with ideas about bringing our American Culture to faraway lands or just taking threats seriously and nipping them in the bud before they become a problem. Hawkists like to talk about how we could have prevented the Soviet Union or Communist China or even World War II had we simply asserted ourselves with military might. Hawkists want a strong military and feel that they should be stationed all over the world, ready to fight anyone and everyone.

Hawkists are out of favor because Americans do not perceive a real threat at this time. Oh, how it was different on 9/11/2001!

Establishmentists are the educated aristocrats who occupy government. They understand the importance of conservatism and the other philosophies but feel it is most important to win and maintain election victories. They are willing to do almost anything to get elected and to stay elected. They fear change. They simply want to maintain the status quo, since we seem to be doing ok and we could do a lot worse. They fear Trump, because Trump is an unknown quantity they can’t influence or control. I should note that although the establishment on the right is now out of favor, there are times when the American people turn to them for guidance, particularly when there is social disorder or trouble. Unfortunately, the Establishmentists lately seem to be working for the other side, and have been just as useful at changing the social order of things as the liberals.

Protectionists are people who feel strongly that we need government to step in and protect our economy. They want trade barriers, they want tariffs, and they want to make sure everything is Made in the USA.These tend to be working-class folk but there are some educated people among them. Unfortunately, it is sad to say, that the protectionists have gotten little more than lip-service from the other parts of the right. They are simply not as powerful as they think. Far too many people like free trade and want more of it.

The Libertarians are the last element of the right, and among these I include the “ancappers”, or Anarcho-Capitalists. These people believe government has very little or no role except in setting the most basic rules to ensure free markets. Libertarians find enemies among the protectionists, the establishment, the hawks, the nationalists, and the conservatives, each disagreeing with various parts of their platform. If it weren’t for the fact that the libertarians were so good at explaining and defending free markets, they might not be around on the right at all.

I can’t claim I know the left a well as I know the right, but let me make an attempt. On the left, we have the following factions:

  • The Unions
  • The Aristocrats
  • The Elitists
  • The Globalists
  • The Communists
  • The Minorities
  • The Deplorables

Notice that I don’t use philosophies to describe them? That’s because the left works on identity politics, and there is no clear vision for any of these groups other than to maintain their identity and their purity.

The Unions are all the hard-working folk who happen to belong to a union but still vote Democrat. It’s sad to say, but they have been taught and they believe that without unions, we’d be no better than slaves. Their union bosses control them with fear and violence, which they don’t seem to mind. Lately, a lot of union members have broken the spell and unions are on the way out. The only place where unions are thriving are among the relatively few places where they don’t abuse their power and also in the halls of government (where they do abuse their power.) The unions have bled one industry after another dry, and they have lost their jobs for it.

The Aristocrats are those people who try to live the most virtuous way possible (but haven’t really spent a lot of time pondering what is truly good and virtuous.) These people are vegans (vegetarians aren’t extreme enough.) They apologize for racism and slavery (of other people, because their ancestors are too pure.) They point out all the flaws in society and wonder why everyone hates them. Then they scream and shout at every perceived injustice and refuse to debate or engage in reasonable discussion because they know they are right. The only crime they can’t see is their own.

I don’t have much to say about these people. The scariest people are those who do evil thinking it is good. What more can be said?

The Elitists are Hillary Clinton and her allies. They are aristocrats among aristocrats, the demi-gods the aristocrats worship. Not only do they have money and power, but they have Hollywood and primetime media to ensure that their image is never desecrated. As has been exposed through Wikileaks, their elitism is their downfall. People know that they are the emperor without any clothes, and now we enjoy pointing it out daily.

The Globalists want a one-world government to rule them all. They have concocted a number of schemes to see it happen, and if it weren’t for the people on the right in America, America could’ve been that one-world government. I don’t need to say much about these people. George Soros is the face of this group for me.

The Communists are those who want to see communism or socialism brought into practice. The communists want to see America fall so that we can rebuild it on communism. The socialists want to put communism into practice right now. If it weren’t for the fact that they never learned how to get along, they might actually be more effective. There are a lot of socialists on the right, but that is not their primary motivation. They just happen to hear the socialists and like what they hear, so they try to put it into practice without questioning the source. I believe Obama is a member of this group.

The Minorities are all those who think they are defined by their sex, sexual orientation, or their skin color or heritage. They believe people like me wake up each morning with a new idea of how we can exploit them. Unfortunately, they are under a spell, which thankfully a very large minorities have broken. Their hatred of the White Man captivates them and makes them prisoner to their masters, who abuse them and use them for their own purposes. If the minorities could see what their leaders really thought of them, they would never vote democrat again. Think of Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson and their followers and you see who I mean.

I include among the minorities the poor. In a way, poverty has become a skin color in America. You can wear your poverty the same way a black person can boast they are black.

The Deplorables include all those who want to commit gross crimes but find it impossible in our ultra-puritan country. These include pedophiles and worse. I lump drug abusers in here as well because they are ultimately controlled by their passions like the other deplorables. The democrats enable these people and encourage them, but really, they, like many other groups, are simply prisoners in a game they don’t see yet. The truth is these people need help, and government can and probably should step in to provide that help, but the democrats have made it so that we believe that we all have a right to harm ourselves and others, which is a contradiction if there ever was one.

It should be clear why the democrats have lost power in America. Simply put, they built their side up on identity politics, and now there aren’t enough people who identify with them. They’ve alienated so many people that now their voters are willing to try an ideology or two. And once people start thinking about politics, why, they might just vote republican.

The Proper Way to Fund Socialism

November 13, 2016

Trump is a socialist. Let’s not kid ourselves: He thinks that government and business should be connected, and he’s going to try to spend a lot of money to stimulate the economy. I don’t know what he’s thinking as Keynesian Theory has been pretty much debunked and any economist worth their salt is a free-trade free-market capitalist. Nevertheless, Trump is apparently not paying attention to what they have to say.

Granted, Trump appears to want to cut taxes and regulations, or at least simplify them. That action alone may bring enough real economic growth to offset whatever his socialist spending plans are. And a growing economy would rather keep government far away from it, so if we do see America growing again, he will have a hard time finding good companies to “partner” with.

This post is about various ways countries can try to fund their socialist ambitions. I’m going to cover what happens when you try each one, and then make my amateur recommendation. I hope someone close to Trump is listening.

The first way to fund Socialism is, obviously, through taxes. You raise taxes, you spend it, and you do it again and again. The problem with this is, obviously, taxes hurts economic growth, and thanks to the Laffer Curve, we know that if you raise taxes too high, you get less revenue. So go ahead and try to raise taxes. I’ll tell you what will happen. First, you’ll see the black market boom. And second, you’ll see businesses close their doors and jobs disappear. The economy will be in shambles when you’ve hard your way long enough.

So taxes are out. You can only bleed so much money from the economy, and if you’re smart, you’ll find that magic number and set taxes there or perhaps lower to encourage growth. But that doesn’t solve the problem of funding socialist spending policies.

The next idea is to borrow the money. Hey, we borrow, we grow, then we have more money and paying back the loan is no problem, right? Wrong. Japan’s been doing this for a very long time and what has happened is they have had basically no growth except in their national debt. Unfortunately, when government borrows money, it basically sucks money out of the economy, the same as if they had taxed it. See, people would normally save their money or invest it in businesses, but because government is offering a better deal, they put their savings and profit into government bonds. (And if they didn’t offer a better deal, they couldn’t raise any funds by borrowing it.)

So, borrowing is out. It’s almost like government has a certain amount of money to play with and no more.

Well, there is one more way to get money without taxing and without borrowing. It’s called the printing press. Congress has the power to print money. They can print as much as they want, and they only need to pass a bill to do so. Government could literally print all the money it wants and no one can stop them.

Why don’t they? The answer is simple: The Federal Reserve. This privately-owned and operated “bank of banks” has been given permission by congress to print as much or as little money as they want, and then to graciously loan it out to other banks. Those other banks can then offer loans many, many times larger than their savings. This dishonest scheme is called “fractional reserve banking” and says that banks can loan money that they don’t have. It wouldn’t work if it weren’t for the Federal Reserve and its blank check that congress gave it.

You can fund your socialist projects with free money. The way you do it is you shut down the Federal Reserve and you end the practice of fractional reserve banking. You stop giving the banks the power to print money, and you let congress print the money.

There is a problem, though: If you print too much, you get inflation. Print too little, deflation.

Again, it’s almost as if you can’t really have more than a certain amount of money.

My recommendation is simple.

  1. Lower taxes to 0.
  2. Lower regulations to the bare minimum.
  3. End the Federal Reserve and fractional reserve banking.
  4. Print as much money as needed to ensure a very small growth in the money supply vs. demand. This would be roughly comparable to the economic growth in the economy.
  5. Spend that money as fast as possible.

This pattern should lead to infinite growth and maximum government expenditures. No debt, no borrowing, no taxes, but all the money you can possibly spend, no more or less.

Could you make more money by taxing businesses? No, in fact, I believe you would make a lot less.

What about borrowing? I have already established that borrowing is similar to taxes, so this is no good either.

Printing money is the safest bet, the easiest to enforce, and the sure gamble.

Now, here’s to some science and math. Well, not a lot, just a little. Let’s take apart what is happening in the economy to see why we need to print money at all.

The first rule of the economy is people will do what they think is best. The second rule is that as long as we let them do what they think is best, we can do no better. People in DC don’t know more about your job than you do, in other words.

Every time two people trade with each other, provided they aren’t lying to each other, wealth is created. See, each person goes into the trade with less than they come out with. That’s because if it weren’t so, they wouldn’t trade. Think about this for a moment: You go to the store, buy some food because you’d rather have the food than your money. The store, on the other hand, would rather have your money than the food. And so both of you profit from it.

These profits add up. A lot. And they add up really fast. As people give away the things they don’t want in exchange for the things they don’t want, they will increase the value of things already in existence. The best way to understand this is to think about how valuable food is when it is in the field, versus how valuable it is in the marketplace. Out in the field, you can probably sell your food for a little bit of money, but in the marketplace, you know you are going to get the best price you could ever get. As that food is moved from place to place through trade, it literally increases in value. And everything else increases in value as well. Granted some things are consumed, and they disappear, but what’s really going on is people are trading Mother Nature one thing to get another. For instance, a farmer “gives” Mother Nature his seeds, water, fertilizer, and some good ground to grow in, and in exchange, Mother Nature gives him a hopefully bounteous harvest. Or, a trucker burns up fuel shipping something from one city to another because those things are far more valuable at the destination than at their origin.

As the value of things increase, you need to increase the supply of money that mark the value of those things. If you don’t, then the limited amount of money will become more and more valuable itself. This is deflation. Under deflation, prices fall but people try to hoard cash and save it or invest it. The end result is the poor have no money and the rich have all of it. That’s obviously not desirable, so we need to make sure that at least the money doesn’t increase in value. And the only way to do that is to make more and more of it.

This is the reason, by the way, why no modern economy uses the gold standard. The supply of gold simply cannot keep up with the rate at which modern economies grow, and those economies who stuck to the gold standard saw deflation rob them of potential growth time and again.

Now, if you print too much money, then the value of money falls and the price of goods go up. People tend to buy more but save and invest less, which is bad for its own reasons. Too much inflation can lead to chaos and disorder.

Ideally, you’d peg the value of the money so that it does not change over time. If people knew and trusted that the money would not change in value, it would be a lot easier to do math and we wouldn’t have to talk about inflation-adjusted dollars.

Now, to what do we owe the fact that the money supply needs to increase? Who should be given those new dollars? We owe that growth to the people who made it possible through their shrewd trading practices and industry. We should probably just divide up the money and hand it out to those who have made the most profit over the past year. Since that would be really hard to track down, I think the next best thing is to give it to the government and let them choose how to spend it. It should be important to note that as a conservative, I really don’t care what they spend it on, as long as they spend it.

But I think the worst idea of all is to give all the money to the banks and let them choose who gets what. This is nothing short of a conspiracy designed to give power to a few at the expense of the many.

So there you have it, a simple explanation of why we need to print new money at all and why I think the government should do it.

Does Soros have enough money to bring about a collapse of the US?

November 13, 2016

It’s a well-known fact that most if not all of the protestors rioting are bought and paid for by Soros-funded groups. Their ads were everywhere on Craigslist and it isn’t hard to prove the connection.

What sad is that it turns out they might be paying women less than the men.

Anyway, for those of you who are all concerned that Soros might be able to buy his way into collapsing the US, let’s review a few things, shall we?

  1. What does it matter if a few liberal cities go up in smoke? The protestors are basically burning up their own backyard. If the liberal cities become uninhabitable, that’s bad news for liberals.
  2. When the riots come to conservative neighborhoods, the cops won’t be protecting anyone but the rioters. I guarantee there will be little or no property damage, and the protests will calm down a lot really quick, especially when the protestors know that $15/hr isn’t enough to stand against someone who could be carrying a loaded gun.
  3. America is far stronger than the government. Suppose the entire federal government and all the state governments all go up in smoke all at the same time. Since most Americans don’t rely on the federal government to feed them, and since we have strong communities, including churches, we’ll be able to govern ourselves.

The fact of the matter is America simply can’t be destroyed that way. It may have worked in Russia or other countries where everyone was dirt poor and they didn’t have strong communities where people trusted each other, but not here.

What will destroy America are things like the following:

  1. Destroying the family through immorality in the media and everywhere.
  2. Teaching people to hate each other rather than work together.
  3. Teaching people that without the government, they are going to die.
  4. Teaching people that money is the most important thing and without it you will die.
  5. Disrespecting the basic laws of nature and morality, such as property rights and industry.

All of the above really hinges on #1: Destroying the family through immorality.

In fact, if you read the Bible, although it isn’t mentioned explicitly, it’s clear that the prophet Balaam, who was hired to prophesy against Moses and the children of Israel by the Canaanites, and couldn’t do it, told the Canaanites how they could destroy Israel. They sent their women into the camp of Israel to commit fornication and adultery. Moses, in response, had to execute all of those who broke that basic law in order to hold off a destroying angel.

Soros and people like him who obviously hate America and want it to go away or be changed forever know what they are doing. These riots and protests are nothing but news headlines. The real crime against our society is the seemingly limitless fountain of filth that has become popular media. So if you are worried about the riots, why don’t you speak out against immorality in the media? We already know all the news stations were practically bought and paid for by the Hillary campaign. It isn’t hard to show the rest of the media is in on it too, given their reaction to the election of Trump.