The Social Classes at War

The Social Classes at War

There are four financial classes in our society: 1) the productive rich, 2) the productive middle, 3) the thieving rich and 4) the loafing poor (outside of political oppression, productive people do not stay poor). Every rational man agrees that no one should be paid for doing nothing, and yet the two latter classes have legal sanction to get away with it. These two are of the exact same rat mindset, and once moral men are out of the way, they are free to split powers, profits, and privileges between themselves and leave the populace to starve.

While struggling to make ends meet, the American middle class has always been considered the richest vat to prey upon by corrupt men. Every day, new laws are passed to place a larger burden on our shoulders while they placate us with budget controls. Spirit Murderers often disguise themselves as vanguards, preaching anti-life or dependency premises, which only necessitate the parasitism and destruction of other men. They have no tolerance to think, to judge or to weigh rational principles, wishing instead to point, shoot, and seize. Fear-driven organizations are designed around the centralization of confiscated energy’s dispersal—a mix of cognition and interaction—to complete the individual living structure. They portray the masses as feeble and helpless and use our compassion to seek control over everyone. They preach that no man can survive alone, and prove it by destroying all those who try. Their laws are designed to penalize independent traits to the extent that we exemplify them. While they withhold acknowledgement of our moral value in order to harness us, they have been busy setting up channels for our prosperity.

This pattern quickly assumes the shape of Socialism, and the classes eliminated are the productive rich and the productive middle. The thieving rich reign and everyone else is condemned to poverty and squalor. At a time when our economy is falling apart, CEO’s are still taking incomes 262 times higher than their average employee, yet the enterprise—which is their duty to secure—is left financially unsound. They attempt to justify such outrageous compensation as necessary to tempt beings of practically “sainted” abilities, but this is folly; it is clear that pirates are in control again and must be removed.

Only once in history were there men at the top who set up a system that did not provide them with a cut of our lives in return, but served the longer range profit of a free, stable, productive industrial society. The birth of America marked the birth of two new social classes of honor, and they must be preserved. This is the class war between the Self-made and the Fear-driven in economic terms. With a new moral philosophy to guide us, perhaps this time the thieving rich and the loafing poor can join the endangered species list, as they deserve.

Labor Unions: Good or Evil?

Labor Unions: Good or Evil?

There are good unions and there are bad unions. I have seen both first hand, and the difference will make or break a company. In watching Japanese union workers, I was impressed by the focus of their performance. There is a cultural aspect involved that demands pride in their work. To do a bad job would bring shame; a mortal blow. In America, we have a culture of freedom, but many abuse it by claiming it means “the right to have no discipline.” This is how we get beaten.

Here is what it is like to be hired into a union of socialist design: Instead of joining a plan for the greater good, suddenly you are lost among the undifferentiated—among the mean and small—and are then penalized for displaying anything more. You find out that the company is your enemy—that everything you thought made a good employee is now bad—that the lowest around you is now your equal, and your burden. They acknowledge seniority, not performance, disallowing effort to outpace lethargy. Their mass bares its teeth when exposed to any hint of personal accountability. Despite the thinly veiled, murderous smiles welcoming you, you can barely hide from yourself the fact that you have joined a hate group. It is the deeper brotherhood of all human beings that has been betrayed here. Unions may have begun as protection for unfairly treated workers, but with a Marxist ideology, they become a collection of us against them Spirit Murderers: malicious guardians of the Submission/ Domination Axis, and that’s all.

Marxist unions damn automation, yet propose no means to remain competitive. You rarely hear any ideas for improving efficiency; you never hear them addressing the company’s competitiveness or considering any sane reason why human beings are in business. Instead we hear their nineteenth-century reproaches against working conditions. For example, during our country’s intellectually-degraded pro-communist period, American railways were bullied into focusing on the livelihood of their workers, not on moving freight. The purpose had been lost—that of utilizing every bit of a business’s potential in the profitable pursuit of life as an abstract ideal—not the sheer naked survival of workers, and it virtually destroyed the industry.

Now, it is certainly the duty of company leaders to assure there will be work for those they hire. People depend on their income’s continuance, and count on those above to keep it growing or at least stable. But when managers strip the company of its wealth instead, leaving it unprepared for a downturn, causing mass layoffs and hardship, the employees have a right to band together and fight. This is where a proper union weighs in to protect workers. In today’s climate, we have huge hundred-year old businesses that are no longer run by their founders, but by principals having no vested interest in them. Such executives serve on each other’s boards, voting for mutual overcompensation, amounting to little more than embezzlement, and when things go south, they jump ship with golden parachutes. We must make it harder for corrupt individuals and their networks to destroy companies from the top, with jail terms and recovery of the stolen capital, which caused the business to falter. Still, no business exists solely for its workers. Workers exist in their context for the product alone. Losing a job is not the equivalent of losing one’s life, and there is no such thing as the right to a job. When a business is mismanaged or the country goes into recession, restoration of economic calm is found after a shakeout, which rids the waste of oversupply, and redistributes workers among the fields were they are actually needed.

The truth is a Marxist union brings—not craftsmen or manufacturing expertise to an industry—but violence, as it is a power organized specifically for the disruption of the enterprise. Such a union’s morale is dogmatically intended to maintain an all-time low. They are convinced that at work they deserve to sleep, to be drunk, to skip three days a week, and be totally unaccountable for their task, then to proclaim their inestimable worth and strike over compensation. That such people can live with so shameful a disregard for virtue is an abomination—almost as bad as its tolerance. A new employee with good intentions, trying to use sound administrative and moral judgment will find his efforts trounced by the very evil the system is designed to protect. He will be forced into cover-ups, strikes, walk-outs and a host of other immature or hostile activities, shamefully conspiring against goodwill, where adults embarrass themselves in a psychological predicament children should never have to see.

In an age of immense corporate graft, unions have been one of the few organizations to come forward and protect the people. If they want to survive long-term, they must break any tie to Karl Marx and his hostile propaganda. Unions need to acquire a sound operating philosophy and develop a “backbone of the nation” kind of culture we can all be proud of. They must become master craftsman once more, and restore the pride and confidence we feel when seeing MADE IN THE USA on a product. Otherwise, the only recompense Self-made businessmen have against poor conduct is the one line union membership is designed to prevent: “You’re fired!”

American Armed Forces: Our Protectors or Theirs?

American Armed Forces: Our Protectors or Theirs?

The purpose of an army is to protect its borders in order to safeguard its countrymen. The military’s function is to protect its country from all domestic, foreign, and natural opposition such as civil outbreaks, invasions, storms, or epidemics by whatever means is appropriate in order to return a secure, peaceful state of existence for its citizens. We as civilians delegate our use of physical force to the armed services to represent us in foreign and domestic issues. The question to ask is who decides when the use of force is proper?

The military is going to want to do what they were trained for, but they must submit to the coolest heads who steer the nation politically. Military men will have their own political ideas—everyone believes they can do the job better than those elected—but the tail cannot wag the dog. A body lives by the direction instructed by its head; not from an arm or a leg. Our political leadership is just as essential as our armies. Armies are the body, policy is the brain. In leaving office, President Eisenhower said, “We must never let the military-industrial complex endanger our liberties or democratic processes.” He said it for a good reason, as it killed his successor. Unfortunately, history has shown how evil those in power can be, but it isn’t always so. Rationality can return, as morality is what drives policy. Despite occasional abuses, we have by far the most moral internal and external civilian and military force on the planet, and they deserve our support. How many other countries use tear gas and rubber bullets when possible?

Still, as military personnel, always side with the people. If you see the citizens running for their lives, from you, you are no longer their protector. You are on the wrong side and it is your leaders who must go. Think of the long-term good for America—peace and freedom for all, oppression by none—and use your weapons wisely.

Voluntary Service

There is a difference in public reaction to a civilian death versus a military death. We emotionally factor in that possibility for military personnel, given the risk involved in their occupation versus what one would expect to encounter in private life. Military personnel and police officers should be well compensated for that potential—materially and spiritually. First and foremost, they should always have a choice of whether or not to serve in such a manner, including for whom and for how long. Volunteer armies are always the strongest, and there are just as many responsibilities to be addressed at home if some choose not to fight. If the man next to me is not committed, I don’t want my life in his hands. If he can’t handle it, he shouldn’t be here (and probably won’t be for long). Let him support the war effort as a citizen, being useful in his own way; there is no shame in that. Let him object until he understands the issue at stake. No man should die for a principle he has not acquired. No man has the right to push another out onto a battlefield; it is a direct Constitutional violation of our right to life.

Sacrifice is leaned on mostly in troubled times, but it can become an abusive political instrument. No one wants to sacrifice—ever; and they are right not to want to. Great care must be exercised before political leaders decide to risk one single human life. If we were threatened with invasion, I would fight without question, even knowing my chances of survival were not good. Resistance to aggression parallels the resistance to death that nature requires of us every day; such a tribute to life is not a sacrifice. But to be forced to go and die for some dubious cause is a national disgrace, and suspicious intentions always surround those who advocate a draft.

War is a minus-sum game to the mass citizenry—a pure expense in money and blood. Every building built, every creation brought into existence adds to our wealth, as does the steady economic state necessary to maintain it. War just destroys it all, generating nothing but cost. No one benefits from war. No one wants to spend more than necessary, unless some intend to profit by it. “Military businessmen” need a steady state of war; a direct contradiction to the steady state of peace needed by the citizenry. Throughout history, this fatal pursuit of profitability through violence has spread imperialism across the globe by one superpower after another. A company’s military divisions should be a self-sustaining industrial obligation, not a key profit center. Our proper foreign efforts are to assure protection and justice to our citizenry abroad, never to assist them in gaining property for themselves by military means. We must protect only what has been acquired by voluntary trade.

The leaders who stem conflict at the cost of the fewest human lives are the greatest of heroes. The best solve issues on moral grounds without ever firing a shot. As we must defend ourselves, this is not always possible, so we do counter aggression vigorously. The greatest men in government gear foreign policy to ensure a safe world for all of us to venture into, and they work to spread the basic means of that freedom to all governments, who should want the same for their people. Not that their citizens must abandon their cultures or a modest life to pursue the American way of toasters and cars and homes, but simply that they are protected from coercion by their government and fellow citizens; not subjected to it. When their government could care less about their people, we make them pay to trade with us, or refuse them altogether. That is the moral reason for tariffs—to deny slave labor any advantage over our ethically run enterprises. There was a time when these tariffs paid for the entire cost of our government. We should seek this budget solution again.

Look at any totalitarian or socialist government and you will see few loyal soldiers, but many eventual defectors. Until the second Bush administration, no one defected from America. In our culture, every man’s life is valuable. Every man has the right to live without subordinating his desires to anyone, and that is a land worth protecting—worth fighting for—worth dying for if necessary. If it came down to it, most Americans are willing to die for what America is—not for what it promises to be. The men of communist countries are considered expendable and are always left to die for “the noble ideal,” ideals which their fundamental premises make impossible. Americans don’t have to create illusions about their country’s potential greatness to be proud of; our culture makes it great. It is the nearest to Atlantis the world has ever been.