The Cepia Club Blog

The Cepia Club Blog: The Cepia Club believes individual awareness and activism can lead to a peaceful and prosperous world. This blog contains the pertinent literature, both creative and non-fiction, produced by the Cepiaclub Director and its associates.

Tuesday, February 14, 2023

Space: Possibilities and Ambitions Unlimited: Part I—Missed Opportunity

 Space: Possibilities and Ambitions Unlimited: Part I—Missed Opportunity

By Tim Krenz

In recorded history, whether by archaeological or written accounts, humanity has always thought and dreamed beyond the practical limits of the circumstances of survival. We need our imagination, as well as sleeping dreams, to balance current demands with the subconscious desire to expand beyond the drudgery of working today in order to live slightly better tomorrow. Looking up to the sky, those dreamy heavens of stars and wonder, we might not know who, how or what invented us or the universe; nor do we know what or when fate awaits us in it. But we can assume that as long as humans have lived on earth, some men and women of imagination and in their dreams have speculated on the immensity above and the limitless possibilities of what we can know and do down here, and up there.

With these things apparent, humanity’s short history and long-term future inevitably rapture themselves in the bigger questions of the universe. Discounting the theological and eschatological arguments of beginnings and endings, the other questions persistently enlarge and require more research, experiment, testing, and result. Even if humanity and its future in the “really big place” we call the universe finds no truly definitive answers, the expansion of knowledge, capabilities, plans, and achievements for bettering human existence will go on into the future, as it applies to life on earth and humanity in outer space.

Looking back on the last one hundred years, the world had emerged from the First World War and the global failure to avoid avoidable mistakes in politics and culture. Even in the prosperity of the 1920s, the impact of losses that war incurred by humanity’s inconceivable cruelty to each other killed away a generation of hopes, intellect, potential geniuses. These people the world could have better used alive, to live in peace and prosperity. The number of doctors, scientists, even artists, and entrepreneurs lost with their potential to help the world (or hurt it more, in balanced honesty), still has not exactly redeemed itself. Yet, hopes and dreams of people like Jules Verne from the 19th Century, or the insights and horrors of H.G. Wells, remained inspirations to the select who believed humanity could go to the space above the earth. An American inventor, Robert Goddard, began and continued his critical early work on ballistic rocketry. And a conflicted and soon-controversial man of genius and talent, the German Wernher von Braun began to see his definitive visions for exploring above the atmosphere take practical shape and experiment in the 1930s. Whether professionals or lay people, people working in laboratories, or in social clubs—from Russia, Germany, England and the United States, thinkers and dreamers everywhere began to assemble and implement the vital ingredients and recipes necessary to someday get men (not women at the time) off the earth and into space orbit and beyond.

When, at the end of the 1930s, the mistakes made at the end of the last war paid a diabolical interest on the principle of errors, propelling humanity into another and more destructive conflict, the Second World War. It would become a war even more intensive and deadly, from the contributions that science, technology, engineering, and mathematics applied to make and use weapons of more power and lethal. An evil genius revival for ill took place in order to kill and destroy on scales far grander than ever seen before in history. Even so, the tools that people invented to peacefully put man in space—someday in the future—became instruments of terror and doom.

Using the support of the Nazi state, Dr. Wernher von Braun headed the technical portion of rocket and ballistic missile research for the German Army, to produce a missile, eventually the Aggregat (A)-4, later re-designated the V-2, (for “Vergeltungswaffe,” meaning roughly “revenge weapon” in German). Along with Luftwaffe’s V-1 rocket-motored cruise missile, Germany used thousands of these vengeance weapons in the final 11 months of the Second World War in Europe against Allied cities, ports, and other targets. With rather primitive guidance systems on this generation of rockets, and because of restricted conventional weapons payloads, (the V-2 carried roughly a ton of high explosives), the weapons had little practical tactical impact in the war. Even considering it as a strategic psychological weapon, it mostly served as an operational diversion. In terms of political policy, however, it created significant possibilities. Assuming material and other forthcoming technical improvements and advances, as research and development would undoubtedly achieve, warfare in the missile age put anywhere on the globe at risk of long-distance attack and at increasingly shorter times. What honestly started as a thought and a dream for peaceful attempts to put humanity toward a greater goal, suddenly became instruments of Armageddon, once the technology for another new weapon of science, nuclear bombs, made those feasible to combine them with rockets.

As with politics at the end of the Second World War, humanity stood at a possible threshold and turning point, if not the most critical one so far in history. What happened?

In politics, the world in the last years of the 1940 and through most of the 1950s very well needed to come to terms with its sins, to find some accommodation to end wars and take care of its people, and to take care of the only planet it has on which to live. Instead of giving the people peace and amity, political and economic elites reaped their bitter fruits and relapsed into fear and greed. They produced a cold war, and repeated similar mistakes committed at the end of the First World War.

On the same coin, at the end of the second war, scientists had cracked the codes to orbital ballistics, and made space travel theoretically reachable, and had invented nuclear power, making cheap energy obtainable. Those two achievements could have combined to put humanity into a space age, earlier, better, fuller, and with better consequences for everyone and the earth. A Space Civilization might even have put humanity at more, if not complete, peaceful coexistence. No one will know, though. When history and humankind reach thresholds and turning points, decisions can get made wrongly, and events then have irreversible and irrevocable consequences. Instead of rockets and nuclear power for space and peace, leaders produced political division backed by rockets and nuclear power created into thermonuclear ballistic weapons, at unimaginable financial costs, the dividends of which could eventually end all life on earth.

But the story of “Space: Possibilities and Ambitions Unlimited” continues….see the next part coming soon.

Monday, January 02, 2023

On Membership--For the LPWI


For the LPWire

By Tim Krenz

December 13, 2022

On Membership

From the long-term perspective of a Libertarian Party activist in Wisconsin, both as a member and a consultant, the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin has always lacked one critical thing which stymies success so far: Its lack of membership in large numbers. For in the sum of the whole effort to implement the platform in the state, the size of membership means everything. From the membership the Party derives every resource to its existence: Ideas, finance, comradeship, and belief.

From membership, Libertarian campaigns find every ingredient for success: Candidates, staff, volunteers, and supporters (financial and in-kind). In matters of statistical probability, the higher the quantity of membership totals, the more campaigns the Party can support. And in a dinosaur or egg question, the more membership it has, the more the Party will have higher quality efforts—better prepared candidates, higher experienced staff, more enthusiastic volunteers, and far wealthier supporters.

All of this looks obvious, and simple. But there, in that simplicity, has always rested the difficulties. The Party has a market, full of potential customers already subservient to a monopoly, all waiting for a better option. It has the right product in one package, in “more freedom and liberty.” On the other hand, it has a dumb approach to marketing, proven by the fact that it can never sell or even give away something already free. (No value? Or wrong approach?). Finally, the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin has a poor approach to conducting its organizational business. It centralizes and stovepipes somethings—freedom and liberty—which should expand like a gaseous cloud, everywhere and expansively, as the laws of thermodynamics dictate. The Party does not need total anarchy inside itself, but it can refine some things to increase membership, that critical element to success.

The party already exist. People have built it, and torn it down, and rebuilt it again. But not many people have come to stay and make it their political home. Why? Here, it might come down to the laws of attraction. Too often politicians and activist understand problems but err in vocalizing too much and too loudly what they oppose. From experience, that has always—and WILL ALWAYS—turn too many people away. They might decide to stay clear because they see negativity as a fruitless way to improve things. For any solution, in politics especially, you cannot just keep opposing something(s).

Eventually, you have to stand for something, and vocalize and live it as a positive solution; a better idea in the free-minds markets should always generate profitable results. Also, logic expressed with erudition makes people often feel stupid. A parable expressed as common sense usually gets a more favorable hearing. And, finally, aggressive statements and acts get taken at face value. People either submit without commitment to avoid aggression or deter it with escalation. At all costs, promote peace and understanding and avoid conflict and danger. Simple stuff? How often do Libertarian activists fail in these elementary ideas?

Somewhere in this mix of good and bad points, the Party can find solutions for increasing the numbers of members who agree with its freedom and liberty agenda. And the challenges of increasing membership needs to become and stay priority #1 in 2023. Everything in the future of the Party depends on that. In the past 30 years, too much work got wasted dithering over dancing angels (or demons) on pinheads. The key, the focus, the solutions for the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin will come in a larger membership. In reality, membership growth comes only one person at a time. It takes work, patience, persistence, and toleration. Mostly, it takes experience and skill to recruit. Yet, only a smarter effort in all things will achieve anything for the Party we call home.

Saturday, December 03, 2022

Dancing Smile--My Memory of Kathie (Sather) Cabreanna


By Pi Kielty

November 29, 2022

Dancing Smile”

—For Kathie, dear Friend,

When Kathie smiled our sunshine rose.

Her beaming brought us rays of gold.

As she glided to near our way,

We felt the warmth of graceful sway.

She embraced our friendship closer.

We felt welcomed when beside her.

She spoke the songs of joyful living.

No words of doubt could stop our singing.

Kathie moved in simple dancing.

Unshaken, hopeful, steps beginning.

Slender, of golden hair that glistened;

Those wholesome eyes that looked and listened.

She rose near dusk, in light her life,

And we left dark and in our strife.

There she must dance and we here stay.

Let Kathie’s smile shine hearts this day.

Friday, November 18, 2022

Success, Momentum, and Initiative... Keep It Going!


LPWIre article submission

By Tim Krenz

November 17, 2022

Success, Momentum, and Initiative... Keep It Going!

By Tim Krenz,

(The views expressed belong to the author, and do not necessarily represent the policy of the LPWI)

We have cause to celebrate in the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin! Although we had only three candidates this past mid-term election, all three achieved incredible success. First, an assembly candidate, Carl Hutton, took 23% of the vote, with 3300 ballots cast for him and libertarianism. Second, Jacob VandenPlas, in a hard-working effort, collected 10.5% of the vote—over 32,000 people who voted for him in one district, in the 8th US Congressional race. The percentage itself approaches Ed Thompson numbers in a race all but discounted by the two-party overlords. As Jacob would point out, his campaign made new connections with heretofore unreachable constituencies, namely labor unions and tribal nations. His efforts, and the Libertarian message, worked with them and with others! He did the work.

And for the third reason for the LPWI to celebrate? Neil Harmon’s 2.07% of the state-wide vote—54,000 voters—in his four way Secretary of State campaign will prove huge to the future. For the icing on that cake, Neil’s totals exceeded 1%, the minimum needed to gain the LPWI ballot access status for 2024. We can now put our Presidential and Vice Presidential candidates on the Wisconsin ballot without the need for thousands of signatures. From my 30 year experience in the Libertarian Party of Wisconsin, we have had both successes and failures with ballot access status. Gaining it, and keeping it, while seemingly minor, nonetheless takes effort—a LOT of effort! It hurts the Party when we do not have it, and at times we have not maintained it. Thank Neil, especially, for the effort in his race! Thank all three candidates for going out and doing the hard work to represent the Party!

With this election behind us, and elections ahead, we can enjoy and celebrate the measured success of 2022, and start our planning for work in 2023 to build on that momentum. The votes gained, the new connections made, and with more of the public seemingly wanting us to win but to earn their vote, we can move ahead. Sometimes, people and organizations have to make their own luck. Yet, hard work builds its own luck, at the start. Sometimes, though, seizing an initiative becomes mandatory. We must use 2022 as the starting point for more success in the 2024 elections. The hard work necessary comes in the traditional four keys needed for a winning political party. Those keys: recruiting membership, organizing affiliates, raising money, and running campaigns. Do a lot of all of these keys, and we can implement our platform by winning. Think ahead, act united, focus on the goals, and look the part, as we get ready for 2024.

Between now and then, opportunities abound in 2023. Local races, partisan and non-partisan, give LPWI members and supporters (i.e. future members) campaign and office holding experience. In 2024, in a general election, we have the biggest opportunities yet. The times demand what we as party offer to the people: protecting their freedom and liberty. First, in 2024, a US Senate race (Baldwin’s seat) gives a Libertarian candidate a decisive role to compete and win in a three way, Federal, and state-wide race. Second, we have a chance, not a forlorn hope, to send our electors to cast ballots for President and Vice President of the United States. We have nothing to lose by trying. And third, all the Federal, State and local offices need Libertarian candidates. If they will not come to us, we must go in search of them. Again, we have nothing to lose by trying.

Now, let’s follow 2022 with two years of work: To recruit, organize, raise, and run! Seize the moment, for the right time does not last.

Saturday, November 07, 2020

Leaves By Pi Kielty



By Pi Kielty (Posthumously)

Found: November 7, 2020

Copyright © 2020 CEPIA Club LLC

For my spirit brother, J.D. Schloss, and his girlfriend, Lisa:

Thank you for all the help, and for your tolerance and patience;

and for all of your honest, loving friendship.


By Pi Kielty


November 7, 2020

I sit on grass and look at trees, they in Autumned range, orange, red, yellow, and some greens. Above my valley, I humble still, scorched by solitude, but sunbeams thrill. The air grasps clear, the sky, sky-clean, a blue with whites awaiting the god unseen. I dwell.

My thoughts deflame, soon serene calms, I pray for his holy peaceful balm. I fail. Then, I shun that morose, that my heart would ail. A breeze whisps from behind, through me, my way, shimmers colors, a'sway the trees, but those leaves do stay. I do now see god waving, those leaves his hands, calling me, my spirit stands.

Those fingers of god rest my mind, my turmoil sated, my heart unbinds. These colors of life, I now hear the call, in the wind's wattle, of those leaves of fall. Deepened reds, some orange burns, some yellow soft, the greens still yearn.

When I wondered, “Nothing more?” the wind recedes, and I know my peace. In this valley, the curve, the depth, I see leaves—red-red, a green, yellow suns, and orange, above them blue and cloud frames adorn.

God's words in breathful breeze, his wisdom spoke in rustling leaves, his brightness clear love, in old trees, of knotty oak, sweet maple, tall elm, and birch. . . . I seize. My word to the world my hopeful plea,

“Come, sit my hill. Won't you watch the leaves with me?”

Friday, October 16, 2020

 Commercial written, filmed and produced by CEPIA Club LLC for Red Bird Music Store in Osceola, Wisconsin, 54020.

Monday, October 05, 2020

The Four Pillars of Future Progress—Part IV: The Neutral Economy


The Four Pillars of Future Progress—Part IV: The Neutral Economy

By Tim Krenz

October 4, 2020

For Hometown Gazette

Copyright © 2020 CEPIA Club LLC

In this fourth part of the series, “The Four Pillars of Future Progress,” we examine the idea of a neutral economy, and how a new thinking of economies, and the dismantling of some of the established doctrines, might such a thing useful and better for the world. Going forward to the future, with a goal of sustained goods and services, how humanity designs, manages, uses, and benefits from the neutral economy will to a large degree determine the type of cultures we will have on earth someday. The world faces a clear and trending choice now between cultures of either slavery or freedom. After an end state analysis of future progress, when faced with this choice, most people, one may believe, would rather have freedom, so people must start now to ensure it. Understanding the concept of a neutral economy only begins the process of undermining the forces that would seek to make the many only slaves to the few. New thinking hopefully will give motivation to readers to take some action on their own.

Economies make up the complex system of market trades between actors to procure or acquire goods and services needed and wanted by both producers and consumers. Humanity naturally developed economies to satisfy two things, and two things only: things, or needs, for survival; and things, or wants, for comfort. And the more complex these trades become, the more levels of depth get added in goods and services. People have needs at all times, and had them throughout history. People also want more comfort, a sign of civilization's prosperity. Economies exist everywhere in the world, and have existed at all times in human interactions. Economies need at least two actors in a transaction of trade. Add more actors, then add more layers of complexity.

To distinguish “economics” from “economies,” economics as social science simply studies, too often wrongly or inadequately, how economies and actors act and react to one another. It tries to create predictive or explanatory frameworks for understanding or managing an economy of diffuse markets. Most of the theories, but not all, and not at all the very strict laws of economics (like the “law of supply and demand,” for instance), can sometimes cause detrimental effects to actors in a market of trades as a matter of economic policy. In the area of policy, we find the institution of “political economy,” a descriptive term for the system of the overall social management of cost inputs and benefit outputs in an economy. And, in a rather malicious way, the acts and actors of political-economics determine most often in a biased and manipulative way the questions of “who gets what, when, why, where and how?”

Discounting other theories, models, and the history of partisan political biases and manipulation of economics for the moment, we can briefly survey some objective, more pure features of an economy, or what we can term as “the neutral economy.” Before doing so, to answer a begging question: Yes, an economy has some very neutral and natural forms and characteristics. By doing this survey, we should arrive at how a neutral economy can create a system of markets of trades that preserves and increases human freedom for the most people possible.

An economy has many characteristics of the physical sciences, if readers can accept the meaning and illustrations. It resembles many principles of physics, and even thermodynamics and fluid dynamics, in some aspects. Most professional economists will despise such analogies. One wonders why, if not for the very simplicity of understanding it gives, it also makes mockeries of most of their models and predictive theories.

As in physics, an economy in neutral form works in the same fashions of gravity, inflation, diffusion, orbits, equilibrium, and attraction. But to illustrate only a select few, supply follows demand for an economic product, from providers who have it to consumers who need or want it, with the same irresistible gravity that make things fall to the earth. The first primus law of economy, that of supply and demand, all things remaining equal and neutral, works for food, clothing, shelter, and energy, as well as for transportation, or any product, legal or contraband. If the body of consumers desire it, then providers will offer it. The larger the group of consumers, the more superior gravity, the more it draws it, from inferior bodies. Market mechanisms in trades (sort of like attraction in physics) will match demand with supply. Another, similar, physical example comes from the means of trade, the instruments of the transaction. Money, or capital, or labor, or indeed any rents on the supply side, or from the demand side in terms of any investment and savings, will find the paths of least resistance, and consequently the highest returns, and settle into their orbits. Capital goes where it needs to go, in short.

Economics also works in efficient modes, when neutral, like the theory of energy (see; Pillars, # 3, “On Energy”). The transactions in neutral form must equal, in inputs and outputs, for the transaction to balance and have the same equity between supply and demand for the actors. Otherwise, if not, one side of the equation suffers depletion of the resources available. For the fairness of the transaction in material/physical terms, the result of a “deal” must balance. Just like energy in the universe, which few people ever seem to admit, we only have a finite amount of resources on the earth, and even the opportunity costs to exploit them (investment) depletes another resource somewhere else. With this in mind, and also like energy, true wealth on earth comes from the earth and that wealth can never truly get created or destroyed, in resource terms. The resource wealth can only change form or change hands in the process. “Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust” (from The Book of Common Prayer). Again, this takes place in the purer form of economy, one neutral and natural, and without the dogma and religion of money to distort it—but money, either as a true currency or fiat currency, has its own story elsewhere.

When he wrote his magisterial study on economics in the 18th Century, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations (1776), Adam Smith discussed how an economy works, if freely allowed to trade in markets, and did not so much endorse a bias for a system of capitalism as we know it today. Only one particular type of economy, capitalism has its own peculiar spots on its leopard skin, one of immense bias and manipulation. Actually a professor in Scotland who lectured on “natural philosophy,” (an ancien regime name for physics, etc.), Adam Smith described and contrasted market ideas as they then existed and how they could work more efficiently. In the pure, natural forms of economy, Smith's philosophy reads more for a strict neutrality between production and consumption, than for the type of rigid controls the political-economic classes have exerted on the functions of economies since his book appeared. Wrongly known as the father of capitalism, Adam Smith should have more renown as the founder of a neutralist economic philosophy.

Now to contrast a neutral economy with one of bias and manipulations, we need to keep in mind the physical-material analogies of science. Like water flowing downhill, or like any physical principle that sciences can understand and divert or change, political-economic engineers can manipulate the flow of resources, inputs, outputs, and destinations—similar to dams, canals, breaks, reservoirs, aqueducts, etc. The union of political and business classes have always and probably always will try to create distortions in the economic terrain to divert or differ the outcome of any economy. Doing so, they create the unnatural and “un-neutral” economy that decides and determines the questions: who gets what, when, why, where and how? In other words, engineering the physical principles of economy create results different from the neutral and natural flow.

Whether in the state-capitalist system of the modern world which actually amounts to welfare for the rich by a statutory-endorsed fraud of a trust, or the communist system of a dictatorship of the proletariat, with the Nomenklatura elite as top beneficiaries (another welfare for the rich scheme), and every system in between them, government and business collusion in economic engineering directs resources to wherever the political-economic class wants them to go. Only a neutral economy, in a system free of political-economic bias, as in the natural universe of physics, prevents this corrupt fraud against natural law and for nature's god when men and women can eat a plentiful bread of their labors. Without a neutral economy, one where the physical principles of nature move freely, the needs and wants of people will always suffer to the corruption of power and those who unjustly use it to benefit themselves.

While an economy has multiple groups in common interests, control of an economy by one vested interest ultimately affects, negatively, all other interested actors. And when political-economic rulers run an economy with bias, it puts all at the prey of corruption. In the end, it all amounts to some type of open or closed bonded servitude of one group to another, usually majority interests segments to a minority interest sect. When and if times of scarcity or crisis happen, as they have repeatedly happened in history, the few in control of an economy get first choice. They eat better, in short. With those tools and ways of engineering an economy by design, the powerful remain in control. This would happen not as an absolute certainty, but as a normal and repeated temptation of power. And the temptations of power keep the few fed and free and the multitude starving and in an unnatural and, in reality, in an even unwitting slavery.

Economics distribute the needs and wants of a society, but markets of different kinds form them, with the parts creating the sum of the whole. Markets, by demonstration in the same history, do an efficient job of matching buyers with sellers, and balancing risks and investments, for the distribution of goods and services. And, as stated, every market has its own vested interests and its own dominant actors. How does this reconcile a biased economy, a need for a neutral economy, with the want of a culture of freedom? In a more abstract theory, the more markets that exist, and the more diversification of buyers and sellers and risks and investments, the freer the needs and wants of actors become matters of choice and consent.

In physical principles, we can take the laws of thermodynamics, the second law of which recognizes the eventual equilibrium of two separate systems when allowed to interact. To explain further, when the economy of the supply and demand system and the investment and risk system interact, as a matter of individual actors given fuller freedom to choose and consent—with a free, neutral system serving as a catalyst—the equilibrium in the market will remain efficient and free. The sums or resources should remain naturally equal between inputs and outputs as a result. What about the alternative with the biased outcome system as a catalyst? The equilibrium (still there, after all) would remain the same corrupt and fraudulent economic systems as now exist all over the world.

To progress into the future, we face a multi-faceted dilemma. Some resources for basic survival may, and some already do, get scarcer. Some, however, become and will become more usable and plentiful, once processes of research, investment, production and purchase take place. To achieve progress, in a false sense, as a way of upholding a further civilization of humanity on earth, a closed economy under the biases and manipulations of the few would only bring an ever-more oppressive, restrictive, and impoverished world for all but those few who rule the systems. That world would not have choice or consent as a positive system of equilibrium between needs and wants and investment and risk, but only a negative fate of systems of more violence and destruction in the competition for dwindling resources and returns. This negative result would occur both between present nation-states and within the current constructs of national borders, if any such things as nation-states and borders even persist.

Creating, and simply letting a neutral, natural economy between people operate, but one with some safeguards for vulnerable groups and individuals in dangerous areas of policy, might solve more problems than they pose. Free systems inside the economies in history have never really existed before, but the natural philosophy, the so-called physical principles, do work in nature, and they very well could work in man-made systems of trade and exchange for needs and wants. If at all costs, the mechanism of demand and supply—the demand for freedom and the supply of resources—can rectify the age old problem of humanity. That problem needing resolution: whether “priests and princes” will control resources and the fate of humanity, or whether people themselves and physical nature should determine their own destiny. That eternal struggle for power can only end in one of two ways: either people find true freedom from the fears of need and want or whether a political-economic class of the few force those very same people into the base fears of no freedoms for speech or conscience, i.e. the freedom for choice and consent.

A neutral economy can save the future. It must form one of the pillars of future progress. It can prevent wars and genocide, which powerful people in a corrupt system have always brought upon the world. The neutral economy at least leaves everyone free to pursue needs and wants, in peace, and in terms of resources, in a pattern that brings positive equilibrium. Otherwise, only the few will live through the struggle to survive their own miscarriages of justice and corruption. How do we create a neutral economy? In the end, we only have to choose it, consent to it, practice it, and live it in the future. The struggle of humankind now continues.