You certainly have a point. One of Ayn Rand's most brilliant titles was "It's Earlier Than You Think," but that was 60 years ago (1964, after Goldwater's defeat). Still...the best context for what is happening in America now is reactionary. And that is a good thing, but it seldom wins a permanent victory--but it can delay things.

Creeping Socialism? Slowly at first, then all at once?

If the first act of a dictatorship apparent to all (a cancelled election, Trump in handcuffs and leg chains, The Federal Government employees refusing to obey the Constitution in any way), then it will seem to have arrived fait accompli - a done deal. It has taken them a long time but we are just a hair's breadth away from a President as Dictator.

I'm about a quarter of the way through C Bradley Thompson's America's Revolutionary Mind (excellent so far). It will be interesting to compare yours, his, and Hicks thoughts on the subject.

Thanks! It's long, but it covers a lot of ground, really a survey-n-brief of Western philosophy, focused on the Enlightenment, but also on what came before it and, with the long review of the Stephen Hicks book, what came after up to this day.

Nice link. Thanks. The US isn't a dictatorship yet, but seems to be working on it. Articles like this will help slow down or stop the progression provided enough people read them and understand them.

The fool who is just a puppet.

Of course, we are familiar with what Ayn Rand called "the four characteristics which brand a country unmistakably as a dictatorship: one-party rule—executions without trial or with a mock trial, for political offenses—the nationalization or expropriation of private property—and censorship." Or more briefly: "A dictatorship is a country that does not recognize individual rights, whose government holds total, unlimited power over men."

By none of those criteria have we arrived at dictatorship. At the same time, we can cite government policies and actions that either violate or are portents of future violations of all four principles. Around the time of the 2020 election, Savvy Street ran an article that cited the four characteristics, and then evaluated where America stood in terms of each one. It is here: https://www.thesavvystreet.com/using-... I think the past four years have been especially notable for acceleration in the direction of dictatorship in one-party rule, political trials, and censorship. As Ayn Rand knew, of course, fascism is the form of socialism that does not nationalize industries outright, but leaves them nominally private under regulations, taxes, directives, and co-opting of managements that have the effect of making them public. Still, a great deal of freedom remains in America, including in the critical area of freedom of speech and press. What can't you say about Biden or any other public figure? What idea or principle can't you tear apart in print? Of course, the mainstream media takes the part of a fascist government in controlling what ideas and opinions reach the general public.

Yes, it does seem more like a distributed totalitarian rule than centralized. Of course, it could be centralized but we just don't know who is occupying the apex - certainly not that fool on the hill in DC.

America, today, is no longer the land of the free. Neither is it a dictatorship like those of Hitler, Putin, and Xi. Joe and Kamala have the frightening importance of lapdogs.

Instead, America is more of a distributed dictatorship.run by a Central Committee composed of the heads of the CIA, FBI, CDC, Obama, FED, joint Chiefs, and some crony capitalists.

It has taken them maybe 120 to 140 years but they have succeeded

Ordered your book today from Amazon

Speaking of hating merit, what political party do we all associate with inflationary forced sacrifices to be made for climate change BS, the of grooming little kids for sex changes, drag queen little kid story hours, fixed elections, Easter dirtied into a transsexual visibility day, no bail releases for repeat offenders, a two-tiered justice system, Arcancide, pedophilia acceptance~~hell's bells, I could go on and on~~plus last but not least three years of outlandish lies about having a secure border and last all the house squatting, rapes, murders and fentanyl traffic condoned as acceptable collateral damage toward inventing new voters to achieve one party rule?
I would have included the gargantuan effort to run up our national debt but RINOs really help out with that. Isn't that right, Speaker Johnson?
https://www.usdebtclock.org/

Nah! Reading would by merit based and the DEMS hate merit.

True. In America it's called the Infernal Revenue Service. "Only the little people pay taxes" Leona Helmsley

taxation is armed robbery

You mean they can read?

Thanks for the comment, Joe. Right on target, too. This essay is one of a series published over more than a year in which I dealt with individuals and ideas of the Age of Enlightenment. I have brought them together now in a book, "How Philosophers Change Civilizations: The Age of Enlightenment." It ends up with a series of essays on the situation, today, including one on Ayn Rand as the chief proponent today of Enlightenment values against the dominance of postmodernism, the "anti-Enlightenment." The Enlightenment gave us much of our civilization, but not an adequate and enduring philosophy of morality.

“…Government’s role is to encourage production and savings by ensuring individuals’ justice: that their property will be safe from theft and the depredations of invasion and war. Wealth depended upon accumulation and investment of capital (another incentive for domestic enforcement of “justice”) and, once government has funds necessary for the police, courts, and military defense, virtue—and perhaps allowing for building of roads and other infrastructure to facilitate domestic commerce and basic education to promote understanding of justice—no further taxes should be collected. Nor should government accumulate debt that becomes a future drain on capital...”

Well written and argued Walter. Yet not a nation on Earth in 2024 acts in accordance with the principles expressed in this paragraph. The prevailing sentiment of Mankind has never been, overwhelmingly, benevolence towards one’s fellow men. Rather, the prevailing sentiment of Mankind has been, for centuries on end, Taking – of lives, of property, of freedom.

Would Moses have written “Thou shalt not steal” if the Israeli tribesmen were living in peace and harmony with each other? Would Plato have written in his Republic “…So this is tyranny which by stealth and by force takes that which belongs to others…” if there was no Taking in his society.

That Earth today seems to be in a constant state of taking by individual criminals, small groups of criminals (mobs and cartels), and large groups of criminals (people who work in governments, elected or hired) would seem to belie the notion that affection or kindness toward one’s fellow man is in any way a dominant sentiment.

Joe Gabriele

moral sense?

you'll have to translate that for democrats