When average Americans hear, "He did something no one had ever done, and it disturbed many people." they think "cool" before they even know what it is. Foreigners are more likely to think "who does he think he is to go disturbing people". Both groups eventually will judge this hypothetical action on its merits.
I love that Americans hear "disruptive" and think that's a good thing. It's almost a buzzword that's lost its meaning b/c everyone wants "disruptive innovation"; people say it without even thinking.
If you look to history, one of the things that forces change to governments is when its brightest citizens leave. I, of course, am in the 9%. My life is considerably happier outside of the states. The de facto freedom where I live is considerably higher., the cost of living much lower. I have more time to devote to the kinds of issues we talk about in here. If I were still in the States, I would not have that luxury.
I too have thought of it, but there's no place to go. Most of the countries we think of as 'western democracies' are socialist. Some more than others. I see that as no improvement. I have considered living somewhere else, and may yet, but I doubt I'll renounce my citizenship.
I will never renounce my U.S. citizenship or my Texican citizenship (and thereby my U.S. citizenship). For my own safety's sake. There still are small, limited protections I can hide behind to protect me from this out-of-control authoritarian insanity.
But, more importantly, why should I be the one to leave? I'm the one who wants America back the way it *was* and the way the Founding Fathers meant it to *be*. Why should I surrender it to socialist idiots who are carbon copies of socialist idiots who can be found anywhere else? Let THEM surrender their U.S. citizenship and go to the socialist countries that agree with their philosophy, while I, and people like me, stay here and restore the philosophy of individual liberty upon which the nation was founded.
Already, you can hear the leftist talking heads trying to accuse those of us wishing to restore the republic as trying to change America; as if they hadn't already changed it horribly in the past century. All in the name of the "public good".
I have considered the possibility and have reached the point where I find it difficult to take much more of this oppression. If we elect another Statist, progressive to the presidency and congress continues to fail in protecting our liberty and the spirit of our founding, one must ask themselves, just what is left that is worth my patriotism... my contributions?
I have a lot of emotions attached to this AJ. To renounce my citzenship for me would be the same as giving up. There are few options anyway. I think one of the reasons schools don't teach about the founding fathers is they don't want them to understand how much they risked and sacrificed. As a Vet you have done more than most and it makes me want to work harder to keep this country free.
"The John Galt Line... because I am tired of hearing that name. It means quitting... giving up. And I'm not giving up; I am not going to quit. I'm going to win." - Dagny Taggart,Atlas Shrugged part 1
After the last few elections, I feel like I don't know my neighbors. A stranger in my own land. Much of what I saw as America, much of what I hoped to bequeath to my children simple doesn't exist anymore.
Sure there is plenty of fight left in me but what's the point of fighting for a people who'd just as soon see you put into bondage?
I wish I could defend the actions of the masses but I can't. I can only control what I do and I'm not going quietlly into that good night. The pendulum of justice will swing back our way soon.
By and large the R's aren't the answer - they are just another way to bondage (globalism). At this point with the way all arms of the government are functioning, it seems that THERE IS NO PENDULUM.
hey. I thought my ears were ringing. we will have to take justice into our hands. It starts with books like ours. We should have written them 15 years ago.
It's very un-Randian to fight for other people. As Galt said to Dagny in AS, he wasn't going back for her sake, but for himself.
Surrendering citizenship, leaving the U.S.... that's Galt's way. I far prefer Dagny's. Dagny was the one who fought to *preserve* her heritage, to maintain her link to an honorable, rational past which she loved and wanted to restore. No matter what society Galt replaced the current one with, it would never be the U.S. again. That's the pricetag of Going Galt.
hir, you do not know the price tag for going galt. Many do not want to go backwards-they want to go forward. Create a country that has freedoms consistent with natural rights. The US wasn't perfect, it was just the best the world had seen. You are missing a key point in the story. Without ridding the world of the idea of altruism, all Dagny was doing was helping her enemies perpetuate the very system destroying her. When people vote with their feet, it is the single most powerful statement that they mean business. not hothead, not rhetoric. The decision does not come without cost.
I read a book on writing science fiction once. One thing I remember is it said if you think you're predicting the future with your writing, you're wrong. Since your future is a dystopia, I really hope you're wrong.
I think you and a bunch of other people pointing out these risks will cause people to avoid them. Good stories trick you into not thinking about the politics but getting inside an imaginary character's head; from that point people see things in a new way.
Consider Orson Scott Card's and Arthur C Clarke's futures dominated by conflict with the Soviet Union. OTOH they got a lot right.
Just twenty years ago there were gatekeepers to being published. Now anyone can start a blog or TV channel almost for free. There are little world-wide communities (Tribes, to use Seth Godin's term) of people with narrow interests tinkering and working to make their little corner of the world better.
Freedom is fragile, but I don't see it going away. I think it's on the rise.
Would you renounce your American citizenship? If that is your choice, I shan't gainsay it. You may find the grass is not greener. Although I have some Canadian friends whom I would like to visit (during the summer, of course) but in no wise would I want to become a citizen. Circumstances may yet force me to flee to that country (though the opposite direction would be closer, the government there leaves much to be desired. I'll have to check with kh on that.), I would still hold to my American citizenship.
I love that Americans hear "disruptive" and think that's a good thing. It's almost a buzzword that's lost its meaning b/c everyone wants "disruptive innovation"; people say it without even thinking.
I love the American spirit.
I, of course, am in the 9%. My life is considerably happier outside of the states. The de facto freedom where I live is considerably higher., the cost of living much lower. I have more time to devote to the kinds of issues we talk about in here. If I were still in the States, I would not have that luxury.
But, more importantly, why should I be the one to leave? I'm the one who wants America back the way it *was* and the way the Founding Fathers meant it to *be*. Why should I surrender it to socialist idiots who are carbon copies of socialist idiots who can be found anywhere else? Let THEM surrender their U.S. citizenship and go to the socialist countries that agree with their philosophy, while I, and people like me, stay here and restore the philosophy of individual liberty upon which the nation was founded.
Already, you can hear the leftist talking heads trying to accuse those of us wishing to restore the republic as trying to change America; as if they hadn't already changed it horribly in the past century. All in the name of the "public good".
Sure there is plenty of fight left in me but what's the point of fighting for a people who'd just as soon see you put into bondage?
More like a medieval catapult...one way, and very destructive.
Surrendering citizenship, leaving the U.S.... that's Galt's way. I far prefer Dagny's. Dagny was the one who fought to *preserve* her heritage, to maintain her link to an honorable, rational past which she loved and wanted to restore.
No matter what society Galt replaced the current one with, it would never be the U.S. again. That's the pricetag of Going Galt.
Many do not want to go backwards-they want to go forward. Create a country that has freedoms consistent with natural rights. The US wasn't perfect, it was just the best the world had seen. You are missing a key point in the story. Without ridding the world of the idea of altruism, all Dagny was doing was helping her enemies perpetuate the very system destroying her.
When people vote with their feet, it is the single most powerful statement that they mean business. not hothead, not rhetoric. The decision does not come without cost.
Its my book coming true, before my eyes. Its unsettling as hell.
I think you and a bunch of other people pointing out these risks will cause people to avoid them. Good stories trick you into not thinking about the politics but getting inside an imaginary character's head; from that point people see things in a new way.
Consider Orson Scott Card's and Arthur C Clarke's futures dominated by conflict with the Soviet Union. OTOH they got a lot right.
Just twenty years ago there were gatekeepers to being published. Now anyone can start a blog or TV channel almost for free. There are little world-wide communities (Tribes, to use Seth Godin's term) of people with narrow interests tinkering and working to make their little corner of the world better.
Freedom is fragile, but I don't see it going away. I think it's on the rise.