Wednesday, August 16, 2017

Trump is a Danger to Our Well Being

Trump is a Danger to Our Well-Being


image of frank frazettas death dealer provided by tom sheppard
Death Dealer (C) 1973 Frank Frazetta
A CNN headline came through my newsfeed today stating that Trump is a danger to our well-being.  This isn’t the first time I have seen similar editorials from CNN and other sources.

  • On May 15 of this year CNN trumpeted, “Trump Again Reveals His Dangerous Incompetence”.  
  • On June 28 CNN noted “Trump Putting Journalists in Danger.”
  • On June 7, the Washington Examiner (washingtonexaminer.com) headline was “Trump’s  Decision on Paris Agreement Poses Great Danger.”
  • July 5 and again on July 22 linked Trump to the concept of danger in two separate stories, one about his campaign against fake news and another worrying about his inaction.
  • Slate, on August 10 linked Trump’s rhetoric with North Korea to danger for everyone.
  • The Washington Post on July 22 referred to Trump as “a Unique Threat to American Democracy.”

And, the consistent linking of Trump to the concept of being a danger isn’t confined solely to US publications.  Das Spiegal (www.spiegel.de/international/) called Trump the most dangerous man in the world.  A piece reported by NPR on June 26 noted that a Pew Research poll of global respondents found a majority think trump is both arrogant and dangerous.

Trump’s critics have been consistently beating this drum that he is dangerous.

My response to all these alarums is this, “So, what's new?   The President of the US is always dangerous.”  The President of the United States (POTUS) has been the most dangerous man in the world since President Harry Truman ordered the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, Japan.  Add to that, the POTUS has been the biggest single danger to the well-being of Americans since President George Washington.

The powers inherent in the Executive Branch of our government, as delineated both in the US Constitution, laws passed by Congress, and in the rulings of The US Supreme Court position POTUS to have significant impact on our well-being.  POTUS lawfully can:

  • Sign treaties with the UN and other foreign powers which give away our Constitutional rights and “become the law of the land.”
  • Initiate wars, as long as he doesn’t call them a war, or let them go on too long, as Commander in Chief of our armed forces.
  • Throw people in jail or spy on them (DOJ, IRS, Homeland Security, Department of State).
  • Direct the DOJ to enforce, or not to enforce, specific laws.
  • Direct the IRS to collect, or not collect, particular taxes (for instance the “Individual Mandate” from ObamaCare).
  • Create or eliminate regulations that affect almost every area of your life –
    • Your lights, heat, air conditioning, stove, oven (DOE),
    • your job (OSHA, Commerce Department, Department of Labor),
    • your health (CDC, NIH, FDA, Health and Human Services),
    • the environment and what you can do with the land you own (EPA),
    • what you can say and where (FCC),
    • what you can drive (EPA, FTA),
    • where many people can live (HUD),
    • what you can use to buy things (Treasury),
    • what you should be learning in school (Department of Education),
    • what crops you can grow and how you can care for them (USDA)
    • and the list goes on, and on.
Beyond these clearly established avenues to change our lives, there is the avenue of executive orders which, deservedly, awaken fears of extra-Constitutional actions flowing from the White House into the lives of many.

Regardless of who is POTUS, that person is dangerous to our well-being, as well as the well-being of nearly everyone on this planet (a few exploding nukes could ruin all our lives for generations).

With a list that touches almost everything in your life, it is beyond my comprehension why anyone would approach a presidential election with the level of ignorance that is commonplace in the voting populace of this country. 

President Donald Trump is neither more, or less, dangerous than any president has been since Harry Truman, or even since George Washington.

What all the folks promoting fear of President Trump have in common is that they are all advocates of social agendas which are not aligned with the values promoted by our current POTUS.

When Barak Obama was POTUS, folks to the right of center were just as alarmed by the treaties, regulations and executive orders which he promoted.  If you don’t know this, then you have never been on the mailing list of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and you have filtered out of your news feed sources like Fox News, Breitbart and The Wall Street Journal.

The reason the headlines back then weren’t filled with the same volume of portentous alarms is because the mainstream media sources (MMS) are almost exclusively inclined toward the socialist political agenda of the left of center.  The unfortunate reality is the “watchdogs” of our republic are too busy eating the drugged meat of the socialist-leaning left to bark at the leftist encroachments on freedom and prosperity in the US.  They have been retrained, like a version of Pavlov’s dogs, to bark only when the bell of the right chimes in the public square.

If you reflexively, uncritically, accept the news presented by the “major” news outlets, you have become part of the problem with politics, conflict, and civil debate in the US.

President Trump is dangerous.  He has power at his fingertips which is almost incomprehensible.  He is especially dangerous to the socialist agenda, just as President Obama was dangerous to the agendas of Federalism and Constitutional Conservatist agendas.

If the agenda of POTUS aligns with your own politics, then you will likely welcome his exercise of power to limit the actions of your opponents and increase the efficacy of the actions of your own faction.

The good news for everyone is that the checks and balances built into our government by the framers of the US Constitution are still functioning pretty well, in spite of many attempts by partisans of the left, center and right to cripple or kill them.  Every time I see these checks and balances in action (even when they don’t land in my favor), I thank God for the far-reaching genius of those men.

It is my greatest hope that the recent fear that has ripped through those who find Trump dangerous, will inspire those who feel it to do all in their power, today and tomorrow, to support and strengthen the reliance of our republic on the US Constitution, and help to limit the powers of government to be restricted solely to those specific areas delineated by the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and lawfully adopted amendments to the US Constitution.

The beauty of the US Constitution and the system of government we have built on that, is that it protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority as well as protecting the majority from the tyranny of the minority.

I also hope this unending “crisis”, manufactured by those who oppose the current POTUS, will inspire the members of the “fourth estate” to retreat from advocating any and all political agendas which have the effect (or objective) of disabling the checks and balances built into our government.

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2017 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Learn more about Tom Sheppard at his Amazon Author Page:


http://amzn.to/2vERMnU
Get your own copy of Tom's blockbuster Godvernment today.

Tuesday, June 13, 2017

Zombies and Superheroes

Retrieved from "http://marvel.com/universe/Marvel_Zombies_(Earth-2149)"

The Walking Dead are Among Us

Perhaps you don't believe it is true?  Consider that no less an authority on life and death than the first person to ever resurrect, Jesus of Nazareth confirmed that the dead walk among us.

In The Gospel of Luke, Chapter 9 verses 57 through 62 there is the account of two would-be followers of Jesus.  Skipping over the story of the first one, to the second he said, "Follow me."  This would-be disciple replied that he was willing, but first he wanted to go and bury his father.  Jesus replied, "Let the dead bury their dead, but you go and preach the kingdom of God."

From more modern authorities comes this interpretation of the interchange.  On BillyGraham.org I found this:
"He was speaking of ...those who were alive physically but dead toward God in their souls."
https://billygraham.org/answer/what-did-jesus-mean-when-he-said-to-let-the-dead-bury-the-dead/

Super Heroes are Among Us

Former Atheist CS Lewis noted that
"...the dullest most uninteresting person you can talk to may one day be a creature which,if you saw it now, you would be strongly tempted to worship."
For some time I have puzzled over the popular mania about zombies.  Likewise, I puzzled over our obsession with super heroes, mutants, and stories of those with supernatural or magical powers.  I believe both fascinations stem from the same root.  Each of us knows that within us lie the seeds of life or death.  If our life is more like a walking death, than the robust super-charged life of a super hero, we feel the loss and yearn for more.  Or, some resign themselves to the life of the undead / unliving, believing that quasi-death is the inevitable fate of everyone and that true life is but a brief state that soon will pass to be replaced with unrelenting gloom.

Harry Potter is a very ordinary seeming boy suddenly learns that he is anything but ordinary.  His story resonated with children and adults around the world to the tune of more than 400 million copies.

All of us want to believe that there is magic, or a super hero within us, just waiting to emerge and transform our lives from humdrum to an extraordinary adventure.

Many of us go through our lives feeling like we are the walking dead.  While there are those among us whose lives are filled with life, vitality, abundance and joy.  These success stories seem to us like some sort of super hero story.

We buy all sorts of elixirs and snake oil remedies from people who present themselves as economic or spiritual super heroes.  Each bottle, book, course, boot camp, or certification is presented as an essential step to transform ourselves from zombies into super heroes.

Jesus of Nazareth was threatened with death by stoning when he told the people of his home town, "Ye are gods." (John 10:33).  The fact that he was quoting from the Old Testament (Psalms 82:6) didn't make the pill any easier for his hearers to swallow.

Are these sellers of success the keepers of the true path to change each of us from zombies into super heroes?  Unfortunately for those of us who have bought their wares, no.

Zombies and super heroes are all around us.  A few live lives of abundance while the majority shamble through theirs lives decaying a bit with every step they take.  What is the difference between the super heroes and the zombies.  What is it that can transform your world from death into life?

Joy.

Joy is not about everything always being happy and fun.  Joy is about being grateful for both the pleasant and the unpleasant in your life.  Joy is about embracing life as it is, where it is, instead of always pining for whatever is not there right now.

You can live in a state of constant joy.  You can mourn for the death of a loved one while being grateful for the happiness that person brought into your life while they were here.  You can regret the loss of riches while remembering how good you felt when you used your riches to make lasting memories with others in you life.  You can dislike the taste of the poor food you eat while being grateful that you have tasted so much better.  On the flip side, you can take pleasure from the happiness you are experiencing this moment while being grateful that the pains which came before have heightened your appreciation for this moment of triumph.

Joy transforms our life from walking death into abundance.

How Do I Become Full of Joy (joyful)?

The simple answer is not the easy answer.  The simple answer is that you decide that you will be joyful.

This decision is simple, but not easy.  Once decided, thereafter it takes a lifetime of thoughts and actions to maintain.  Every time something unpleasant comes into your life, you must be sincerely grateful for it and appreciate how the unpleasantness makes the pleasant experiences in your life that much richer.  Every time something pleasant comes into your life, do not take it for granted. Rather, remind yourself of how your unpleasant experiences are making this moment of delight, richer and more wonderful.

When I was a young man, for nearly two years I lived in a third-world country.  While there, living among the people, I saw real poverty.  While there, I saw despotism and corruption both in the government and among the people.  I saw a government that the people had reason to fear and knew that Constitutional Rights was, there, a meaningless phrase.  Right along with things like the rights described in the Miranda Act to protect people from abuses by the police.

When I returned to the United States of America, I came back with a full appreciation for the astounding wealth enjoyed by even our poorest in this country.  I came back will a deep appreciation for the wisdom of the framers of our Constitution as well as gratitude for those who have stood in defense of our country, our freedoms and our ideals.  Because of my experience there, I look askance at those who claim that our political process disenfranchises them, and I realize that what they are really saying is that our system doesn't allow them to do whatever they feel like doing with impunity.

Living a joyful life doesn't happen by drinking some elixir, rubbing in some ointment, attaining some degree or certification, attending some course, or reading some book.  A joyful life is the result of an attitude of gratitude which absorbs and is grateful for both the happy and unhappy things in life.

For me, this gratitude is founded upon my knowledge of the divinity and love of Jesus Christ and God the Father.

Having the certainty that the Creator of the universe is also the literal father of my soul allows me to be grateful for the fabulous beauty of the world I see around me every day. Knowing that He created it, in all it beauty and variety, to gladden my heart, makes me pause to truly observe and absorb the beauty that surrounds us.

Knowing that one day, I will die, but that is not the end.  At his word, my spirit will rejoin my body and He will glorify and perfect me by his power and grace and grant me such opportunities that the mind of man cannot imagine or comprehend.  All the sorrows of this life will, at that day, seem but a small moment.  I am grateful He lets me experience the bitter so that I can savor the sweet.

Isaiah 55:1,2
"... every one that thirsteth, come ye to the waters, and he that hath no money; come ye, buy, and eat; yea, come, buy wine and milk without money and without price.2Wherefore do ye spend money for that which is not bread? and your labour for that which satisfieth not? hearken diligently unto me, and eat ye that which is good, and let your soul delight itself in fatness.3Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live; and I will make an everlasting covenant with you,..."
The walking dead around us are dead to the joy of life.  The super heroes among us are those who live joyful, abundant lives, filled with vibrancy and gratitude for both the pleasant and the unpleasant.

Note:  An article in the Wall Street Journal today says that "adolescents with a strong personal spirituality are found to be 60% less likely to be severely depressed as teenagers,"

Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2017 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.

Thursday, April 6, 2017

In Defense of Inequality

Currently, there is an escalating discussion about equality in the US.  The Equal Rights Amendment is getting resurrected and there is a lot of talk about equality between the sexes.

I for one, am not in favor of equality.  To be clear, I am totally in favor of women getting equal pay for an equal job.  So, my umbrage with the equality movement is not about pay checks.  Rather, my problem with equality is with two things: One, is the fact that people, and genders are not equal.  Two, equal rights before the law are already ensconced in our statutes and regulations, both federal and state.

I don't plan to belabor the second point, although for those who advocate some additional statute promoting equality I say, "enough."  We don't need any more laws or statutes.  We need diligent enforcement of the laws we have.

My primary objection to the equality movement is because it is fundamentally in conflict with natural law and reality. 

Mathematically, equality is about interchangeability.  If A = B, then it doesn't matter if you need A or B, either will serve equally well.  However, human beings are not mathematical ciphers, and we are anything but equal and interchangeable.

If humans were all equal, we would all have the same height, weight, hair color, skin color, intelligence, and abilities.  Anyone who has ever considered the accomplishments of Olympic and professional athletes and compared their own abilities against that standard knows, those Olympians and professional athletes are not our equals in terms of their speed, their strength and their agility.  If they were all equal, we wouldn't have any Olmpics, because all the athletes would run equally fast, lift equal amounts, and perform equally well.

Having so simply demolished the ridiculous assertion that we are all equal, and showing that it is simple common sense, that makes me ask, "what then is the equality movement all about?"

I conclude that the equality movement is either about equal outcomes or about an effort to, in spite of natural law, make men and women interchangeable.

Anyone who has ever witnessed the birth of a child knows without any doubt that men and women are not interchangeable.

I hope the equality movement is not about trying to make men and women interchangeable.  The pernicious legalisms and unexpected and debasing outcomes that would result from an effort to make men and women legally interchangeable before the law would warp our society in ways that are almost unimaginable.

So, that leaves us with the drive for equality of outcomes.  The driving force behind the movement for equality of outcomes is envy.  Equality of outcomes is the idea that no matter whether we do lousy work or excellent work, we should be paid the same.  Whether we are smart or stupid we get the same grades in school.

Equality of outcomes is the envy of the lazy for the fruits of labor of those who are industrious.

I believe that discrimination against anyone because of their gender is wrong. It is also already illegal.  We don't need a constitutional amendment to protect the legal rights of women against discrimination.  And, not only don't we need it, the probability that such an amendment would be used to push for the legal interchangeability of men and women is certain.

Today, there is a lot of commotion about who uses which bathroom.  If the ERA becomes law, everyone will be using the same bathrooms and showers.  

You may think I am wrong on this.  However, if men and women are determined to be legally interchangeable, then they don't need separate bathing facilities in our schools or anywhere else.  In fact, the maintenance of separate facilities would be unconstitutional.

Tom Sheppard is the author of Godvernment: Government as God.

Monday, January 16, 2017

Left vs Right Politics and Libertarians


I am sure you won't be shocked to know that recently I have been exchanging some ideas online about politics with a variety of people.  During one of these exchanges, while we were discussing what is politically left and right, I found and posted the chart above showing politics as a spectrum from left to right with the axis reflecting the degree of power given to government versus individuals.

A friend countered with a diagram created by the founder of Libertarianism showing politics on two axes.  I have spent some time considering both and this post reveals the results of both my research and my thoughts on these two diagrams.


The Nolan Chart is named after David Nolan, founder of the Libertarian Party.  When looking at the Nolan Chart, you should first realize that it is a propaganda piece, devised by Nolan to attract people to Libertarianism.  It is not necessarily an accurate, unbiased view of the political spectra.  If it were unbiased, just above the image of the Statue of Liberty, at the apex of Personal Freedom and Economic Freedom would be the word “Anarchists” or their symbol.

For clarity about why I say this should be positioned there, here it the Wikipedia dissertation on Anarchism.
Anarchism is a political philosophy that advocates self-governed societies based on voluntary institutions. These are often described as stateless societies, although several authors have defined them more specifically as institutions based on non-hierarchical free associations.  Anarchism holds the state to be undesirable, unnecessary, and harmful. While anti-statism is central, anarchism entails opposing authority or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of all human relations, including, but not limited to, the state system.


As you can see from this definition, Anarchism advocates a stateless society where each individual is sovereign and self-governing.  

So, the true apex of this diagram should rest on Anarchism, not Libertarianism.

Self-governance is a key tenet of Libertarianism.  The notion being that any "crime" which only harms the individual is not something the state should govern or limit.  Hence, the Libertarian push to end the "War on Drugs" and legalize drugs as well as a host of other "victimless" crimes. Under Libertarianism, the legitimate role of government exists, but is limited to protecting society from predations, be those from other states or from individual or groups within the state.  Libertarianism expects everyone to be on their best behavior.  As do the Anarchists.

I suppose it is the issue of the need for the state that becomes a primary differentiating point between Libertarianism and Anarchism.  From the Nolan Chart it is inferred that the state continues to exist.  

I had to study the Nolan Chart for quite a while before it finally hit me what was really bothering me about the chart.  At the bottom of the chart you see two, diverging statements about freedom.

Going from the bottom toward the Left it reads "more personal freedom".  Going from the bottom toward the Right it reads, "more economic freedom."

I recalled having read that economic freedom has been found to precede personal freedom, so it seemed to me that this divergence of personal versus economic freedom was totally wrong.  Not trusting 100% to my memory, I did some research.  I found this very interesting treatise on economic freedom called "Freedom and Prosperity" by Jake Dubuque and "The Benefits of Economic Freedom A Survey" by Niclas Berggren.

Berggren provides some useful definitions.  He defines economic freedom as "a composite that attempts to characterize the degree to which an economy is a market economy—that is, the degree to which it entails the possibility of entering into voluntary contracts within the framework of a stable and predictable rule of law that upholds contracts and protects private property, with a limited degree of interventionism in the form of government ownership, regulations, and taxes. This is a negative concept of freedom: freedom to do something without being hindered, as opposed to freedom in the sense of having access to actual opportunities to do something ."

Key pieces of this are the "predictable rule of law that upholds contracts and protects private property" and "a limited degree of ... government ... regulations and taxes." [my emphasis]

He also defines political freedom as "participation in the political process on equal conditions, actual competition for political power, and free and fair elections" and adds the dimension of civil freedom, which he defines as "protection against unreasonable visitations, access to fair trials, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion, and freedom of speech." 

His definition of civil freedom seems to align somewhat with concept of personal freedom on the Nolan Chart.  However none of this addresses the incongruity of having personal freedom diverging from economic freedom.

Milton Friedman in his book Capitalism and Freedom explained that “the fundamental threat to freedom is power to coerce, be it in the hands of a monarch, a dictator, an oligarchy, or a momentary majority.  The preservation of freedom requires the elimination of such concentration of power to the fullest possible extent and the dispersal and distribution of whatever power cannot be eliminated."

Logically, this is as true for personal freedom as it is for economic freedom.

Dubuque, notes that, "Freedom House’s Freedom in the World index is used to measure political freedom, while The Index of Economic Freedom, produced by the Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal measure the second variety of freedom.  These indices are compared to the GDP per capita of each country.  The results indicate that there is a significant correlation between each variety of freedom and wealth."[my emphasis]

The two indices of freedom, seem to buttress each other in every instance.

In addition to these contemporary studies which are conducted each year, many have looked at history and noted the direct correlation between economic freedom as a significant prerequisite to personal freedom.  In a Readers Digest article in July 1941 Max Eastman noted that “[Marx] is the one who informed us, looking backwards, that the evolution of private capitalism with its free market had been a precondition for the evolution of all our democratic freedoms.  It never occurred to him, looking forward, that if this was so, these other freedoms might disappear with the abolition of the free market."

Any student of western history can note how the rise of the merchant class preceded and led to the ultimate destruction of the system of serfdom which was the hallmark of the Dark Ages of Europe. The wealth of the merchants eventually put them on equal footing with the nobility and the increasing dependency of the nobility on the wealthy merchants forced them to concede the protection of law and receipt of freedoms which eventually trickled down to the commoners and liberated the serfs.

From history and from research it becomes clear that personal freedom and economic freedom do not diverge as shown in the Nolan Chart.  Rather they travel in the same direction. 

We now have uncovered two fundamental lies in the Nolan Chart.  The first is that the chart omits its true apex as Anarchy and the second is that the Left is not a protector of personal freedom.

Dubuque shows how this view that the Left is a champion of personal freedom arises from a contradictory reading of the UniversalDeclaration of Human Rights, which was adopted 1948 by the General Assembly of the newly formed United Nations.  He notes that the rights noted can be summed up into three categories:
  1. Everyone is entitled to the rights set forth in the declaration and that discrimination before the law is unacceptable.
  2. Everyone has personal rights, including the rights “to life, liberty and security of person,” in addition to the rights to privacy, education, religious freedom, freedom of expression, and the right to own property.
  3. Everyone is entitled to participate in government, either directly or through elections.

Modern Progressivism/Socialism embraced by the political left asserts that none of these freedoms noted above can be truly enjoyed if the individual lacks the basic necessities of life.  They take Maslow's Hierarchy Needs and hold society responsible through the power of government coercion to see that the foundational needs are met so that the self-actualization needs at the top of the hierarchy can be met for everyone.

While this is helpful to understand why the Left manages to appeal to many people it doesn't directly rebut the lie shown at the bottom of the Nolan Chart.

Dubuque speaks to that directly: 
If the socialist ideal of economic security for all is realized through a centrally administered economy, then freedom from necessity does not create freedom in any real sense of the term.  While socialists can argue that physical depravation severely constrains individual freedom, the material security that their philosophy provides does not liberate the individual.  Instead they are made dependent on the state.  Even though the state’s motives might be altruistic, it still must have the power to enforce the regulations or central plan of the economy.  With such a concentration of power in government and the state of dependency it creates, the individual cannot be described as politically or economically free.  It doesn’t matter whether the government is a dictatorship or democratically elected by the majority; the state is totalitarian. As Milton Friedman writes, “fundamentally, there are only two ways of co-ordinating the economic activities of millions.  One is central direction involving the use of coercion – the technique of the army and of the modern totalitarian state.  The other is voluntary co-operation of individuals – the technique of the marketplace.”This simple characterization pointedly distinguishes between the two philosophies of economic organization available to governments.
[my emphasis]

This makes it clear to me that the coercive level of the state is the correct axis to apply to the political spectrum, rather than the double axes portrayed in the Nolan Chart.  The coercive power of the state must decrease to allow both personal and economic freedom and is an inverse of those two factors.

Note that the very first chart shows that our Constitutional Republic is actually to the right of Democracy.  This is because democracy, as was recognized by the Founding Fathers, quickly devolves into the tyranny of the majority and destroys the rule of law.

Our Constitutional Republic is the only form of government which is stable enough and strong enough to protect the rights of the individuals with the rule of law by limiting the coercive power of government.  W. Cleon Skousen had it right when he called the establishment of the United States Constitution a 5000 Year Leap in political freedom and government.

Finally, my research led me to the chart below.


This chart explains why so many people today are laboring under the mistaken assertion that Fascism is an artifact of the political right instead of the left.  Their teacher in school said it was that way and they never bothered to examine the premise for themselves and learn the truth.

Some might wonder that I would so indict our educational institutions.  Consider for a moment the significant influence that began to appear in our colleges and universities in the 60's and 70's.  The students who protested against the establishment of those days were heavily influenced by Marxism.  For decades now, they have been running our colleges and universities and educating the teachers who educate our children in public schools.  Considering that, is it really a surprise that we find our educational curriculum today is not only ignorant of many historical facts, but teaches not only falsehoods and has established a system which punishes independent thought and rewards the adoption of what the teachers promote as societal norms.

Conclusions:

  1. The Nolan Chart is deceptive
    1. it omits its true apex of Anarchy
    2. it falsely portrays a divergence of personal and economic freedom
    3. the introduction of two political axes is useless and is an artifact solely to convey the incorrect notion that Libertarianism is a "centrist" approach to political positions.
  2. The "True Political Spectrum" is a more accurate and useful depiction of the political spectrum
    1. the coercive power of government is the central issue of both political and economic freedom
    2. the protections afforded to our economic and person freedoms are far to the right of the predatory policies of democracy, corporatism, fascism, socialism, progressivism, communism and all other forms of totalitarian political positions.

There are other conclusions you may draw, but I am highlighting these as central to my discussion with my friends.


Tom Sheppard is a business consultant and coach to small business owners and individuals. He is a recognized author with dozens of titles in business and fiction to his credit. One of his endeavors is to help those who want to see their own book in print. He does this through his trademarked Book Whispering Process (TM). 

The author is not an official spokesperson for any organization or person mentioned herein. 

(c) Copyright 2017 A+ Results LLC. All Rights Reserved. 

Your comments are welcome... Please observe some ground rules. No profanity, vulgarity, or personal attacks. Profanity, vulgarity and personal attacks not only betray a lack of vocabulary and imagination, they also are the hallmarks of bigotry, and bigotry is the hallmark of someone who is fundamentally insecure in their views. Facts are always welcome.