14

I would like to have some better learned Objectivists explain the current political social situation to me

Posted by $ nickursis 3 months, 1 week ago to Philosophy
175 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I would like to see how Objectivism views/interprets the current politics. Are the Liberals right? The Trump people right? No one right? What would work better, and could actually be achievable?


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by sdesapio 3 months, 1 week ago
    That’s a really good idea nickursis. Are there any specific issues that you’re most interested in? I’m sure we have a few Objectivists here that would be willing to chime in. I’d personally love to hear from Thoritsu and ewv on some things. For instance, what did you think of Yaron Brook’s response when asked what Ayn Rand would have thought of Donald Trump? https://youtu.be/vpsfENU5KA0
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • 10
      Posted by JuliBMe 3 months, 1 week ago
      Wow. That video showed Yaron Brook to be an emotional sissy who CANNOT see the purposeful deception of how Trump "acts" (and that is what Yaron is reacting TO) to distract from what he is DOING.

      It's the RESULTS that matter in watching the movie being played before us. Trump, the master magician, is making the COMMUNIST media and Democrats chase rabbits while he is RESETTING AMERICA back to PRE-1913 ACTUAL observance of the Constitution.

      Has anyone noticed the rolling back of personal and credit card debt on the Debt Clock? https://usdebtclock.org/index.html

      Tell me Trump is NOT working MAGIC behind the scenes while the Commies whine and moan about statues.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by chad 3 months, 1 week ago
        Trump is not purposefully deceiving the American communists and secretly achieving results for liberty. He is purposefully deceiving those who think that is what he is doing. He is the one who instituted the lockdown by the governors by instituting the Medical State Emergency Health Plan on March 13th with an executive order. He is the one that suggested (be decree) that group meetings should not exceed 10. Then he publicly announces that he thinks churches should be allowed to open appealing to 'conservatives'. Repeal the authority of the MSEHPA and let churches make the decisions for themselves. All should make their own decisions about opening their businesses, congregating for any purpose and how they will protect themselves from disease.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • 10
          Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 months, 1 week ago
          He is in a no win situation. No lockdown, and everyone who dies (even from things other than Corona) are laid at his feet. Lockdown, and the people and economy suffers.

          Very tricky to unwind it now, particularly with nothing he does being acceptable to the media.

          He may be too strict. He may be too lenient. I'd hate to have to deal with it, but if I did, I would tell people who are unacceptable to go hide, and the rest of us can roll the dice.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • 14
            Posted by JuliBMe 3 months, 1 week ago
            He's also not a medical expert and had to rely on the Wormtongue's of our government political "medical" community. But, he is the one who decided to shut travel from China on January 31 against their wishes.

            Seems to me, his instincts are much more reliable than their "expertise".
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • 14
            Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 1 week ago
            When the governor of GA publicly stated that the state government would no longer stand in the way of businesses re-opening in GA he was criticized in every possible way.
            All he did was get out of the way and let the people take responsibility for their own health.
            He didn't force anyone to go to the gym, or to get their nails done, or to go have dinner with 50 people in a restaurant.
            He gave people back the freedom and responsibility that the constitution guarantees.
            For returning liberty to the people he was pilloried by the media.
            For that act alone, he deserves to be re-elected.
            Trump has been getting that treatment by the media for more than 4 years. It's disgusting.
            If Obama had been faced with a pandemic and done the same things that Trump did, Obama would have been praised to the heavens and declared a Nobel prize winner in Science.
            I didn't vote for Trump, but the media has done everything they can to push me into supporting Trump in spite of his obvious flaws.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
              So, Freedom, how doe that fit into the question of how Objectivism fit into Conservatism and Liberalism as a political philosophy. I am openly saying my total knowledge of Objectivism is pretty limited, mainly through Atlas Shrugged. My main takeaways from the book/Movies were:
              1. A persons intellectual creations are theirs, the fruit of their mind and knowledge. Yet anyone who works for a company almost always has to sign away their work to the company (at least at my company thats true).
              2. Government is almost always doomed to become authoritative and despotic simply because power is concentrated at a small level, and people are easily corruptible.
              3. Democracy is a dictatorship of the 50.1% over the other 49.9%.
              4. Government control of anything (i.e. Hank Reardons steel) is almost always doomed to mediocrity or failure.
              5. You cannot force me to produce if I choose not to.
              6. The individiual is th most important person in the world. EACH individual is important. Placing them into groups and classes and labels is demeaning and manipulative. You move from a concept of "I", to the concept of "We" and then to a "You owe me" groupthink. The individuals in Atlas Shrugged were the ones who succeeded and did not end up morally compromised.

              I don't have a lot of free time to dig around into Objectivism as a total philosophy, and a lot of that is because I have yet to find anyplace that talks about Ayn Rands concepts in plain language, sorry to say. It seems it always devolves into high level talk with a lot od "isms" included. So I thought to ask the question after a discussion with a person who is very well educated in it. I do see a lo of parallels between what I think Trump and the Patriots are trying to accomplish, and what was brought out in Atlas Shrugged. The real issue is it seems a lot of people do not understand the current state of our society, where the huge political machines took over, and have been in control for a hundred years. The individual and personal responsibility has been crushed under propaganda and skewed news.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 months, 1 week ago
              We need to be told what to do, about anything except what we do with our private parts, and that such events should be allowed to be public, not just private.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 months, 1 week ago
          We shall see soon...can we say: Durham Report?
          Actually he won't be reporting, he doesn't have to. He just says: Bring em in Daniel...But we will hear the details.
          Not holding my breath but await while breathing. LOL
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
          This (by Chad) betrays a lack of understanding of federalism. Trump does not have the power to institute a lockdown unless it is just for DC and federal enclaves. (Or just against interstate travel, meaning no crossing state borders.) And California, at least, did lock down at both the county and state levels before the president made his suggestion.

          The president was correct to shut down air travel from affected countries. But that's all he actually did.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 3 months, 1 week ago
        Being a fairly ancient adult, I don't think you need go to pre 1913. I still remember the late 30's, early 40's, and the Roosevelt years.. I was a child, yes, but I now look back and analyze the attitudes as an adult. No one could get away with what is going on today or for the last 20 years. We recited the Pledge, Washington was the father of our country, and waving a flag was encouraged, and applauded.The left has succeeded enormously in the few years since my childhood in turning America's forward progress into a descent into purgatory.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months, 1 week ago
          Economically, pre-1913 is exactly where we need to go back. The 16th Amendment is where this country LOST its charter of FREEDOM.

          The jackbooted THUGS of the IRS enabled most of the corruption we are seeing today.

          So, I have to disagree with you where our Time-Machine has to land. :-)

          Other than that, destroying Leftism as a viable and/or credible philosophy would be another excellent goal.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
            JuliBeMe, a YouTuber called Spaceshot76 had this on one of his shows, it is a site where they talk about how to use the laws they imposed on us to make us slaves to the big banksing cartel (aka "Fed"), so they have a stake in it, but it describes the date in question and why it is important:
            "So, fast forward to the early 1900’s and you’ll come across several key events that make it quite obvious there was a master plan at work to enslave the people. If you read a book named The Creature From Jeckyll Island, you’ll become intimately acquainted with the happenings in the year 1910, when 6 men, who were either elite bankers and/or politicians, met in secret in a place named Jeckyll Island. The purpose of this meeting was to formulate plans for economics reforms for the United States. This is where the banking cartel began in this country. The idea of a central bank had always been rejected, and so the men who met on Jeckyll Island, needed to come up with a way to trick the people into allowing a central bank to be instituted.



            Three years later, in 1913, President Wilson signed the Federal Reserve Act into effect, which is the current central bank in the United States, even though it is actually not governed by any agency of the Federal Government. Eight years later, in 1921, the Maternity Act was passed which required all birth to be registered with the state. So, now all key pieces were in place for the upcoming bankruptcy default and restructure."


            http://understandcontractlawandyouwin...
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months, 1 week ago
              Well, that's going pretty deep into conspiracies I don't know much about. However, there are many people who believe that President Trump fully intends to end the Fed.

              I'm learning more but I don't understand the Fed system very well. And, I can't see what a return to a gold standard would look like for me personally. But, I DO understand basic market scarcity principles and know that as they print, WE PAY for it as a hidden tax. Printing = Devaluation of the $ in our pockets. Scarcity = HIGHER value.

              I'm for the IRS being eliminated completely, too. With Trump also bringing tariffs back as a revenue source for the Federal government and knowing that he's big on "under budget and ahead of schedule" projects, it's not too outlandish to believe he's also in the process of fixing the WASTE, FRAUD, and ABUSE of the taxpayer's resources. And, the amount of THAT that has been going on, if everyone realized, would make even the most disengaged person go get the torches and pitchforks in RAGE. I'm not exaggerating.

              So, he's obviously reducing the size of this monster and he's finding and reinstituting the Constitutional means for revenue collection. I think we're on the cusp of something many could not imagine.

              And, it tells you why the HATE for him is enormous and pretty bonkers. To put it MILDLY.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 1 week ago
                nickursis is right about the book, The Creature From Jekyll Island. If you want to understand the financial corruption that we now are enslaved under, who planned it, and how it permeates every part of the economy, read that book.
                If you want to see the results, look online and find a chart showing inflation in the US from the 1780's to the present. Prior to the federal Reserve Act in 1913 inflation did not exist in the US except when a war was being fought that meant the government spent more than it had to destroy things outside the US.
                The value of the US dollar was stable from the time the US constitution was signed until 1913. No inflation. Stable prices. Bankers had to provide their own money to be able make loans and get rich on interest. ZERO inflation. The elderly could save some of their earnings and count on being able to support themselves in their old age because prices would be stable. Since 1913 solely because of the Federal Reserve Act the price level today is 26 times higher than in 1913.
                On average if it cost $1 in 1913, today it costs $26 solely because of the banking cartel stealing from everyone else legally after bribing the US government to create the Federal Reserve Act.
                Read the book. For the first time you'll understand why you are angry and who is the cause.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
                JuliBMe, go look up X22 Report on YouTube, Dave, the guy who does them, does a Political and a Financial vid usually during the week daily. He has been detailing the destruction of the Fed for 3 years now, and one thing Q has posted for three years is "Gold will destroy the Fed". Does that say something? In addition, 2 months ago, the Fed was placed under control of the Treasury, a huge step in it's destruction, that no one reported on. Now, if Munchin wants to release money, he tells them what to do, not the reverse. Huge. After this election, we will have a financial reset. That is why Trump doesn't care how many trillions they blow, he knows it is all fiat anyways, and will be erased soon, at the cartels expense. Although I would make sure I have as littl as possible in a bank, after 2008, they passed the Dodd Frank bill, one thing it did was legalize the ability of a bank to do a "buy in", where they can take up to 50% of your money and give you worthless bank stock in return, sound familiar? Think Social Security Trust Fund. The have no originality, just the same old plays they do over and over. It has worked because of concerted efforts to label any discovery as a "conspiracy theory" Dodd FRank is no theory, it is law.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 3 months, 1 week ago
        Trump cannot possibly be what he seems to be, and yet, I have to believe my eyes and ears. This is not an ordinary man in hardly any sense. His larger than life story, his actions and attitudes as well as his unnatural energy and strength in the face of what would destroy the average man is jaw-dropping.He is almost a force of nature. I'm not sure whether to hate or admire him half the time, but always...yes, always no matter how deeply he is submerged, he always surfaces going in the right direction. Not always the way you or I would do it, or even conceive of doing it, but getting it done. Not all the time. But more times than not. It simply takes one's breath away.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by JuliBMe 3 months, 1 week ago
          Yes. He's a genius of some sort. Definitely, believe it or not, Communications. But, also, economic and STRATEGIC.

          As far as his physical stamina goes, it is amazing. But, I believe that he is on a RIGHTEOUS mission and that is where he is getting his energy. He appears to be aging in REVERSE or in a holding pattern. No president has done so before.

          I would think that has to be the result of doing GOOD vs. doing EVIL. Doing and thinking Evil always degrades you outwardly.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 months, 1 week ago
      I think Yaron is 1) correct, but 2) self-defeating. He could simply have said something like: "Ayn was uncompromising in her views. We have few choices. We have no good choices. In support of individual freedom, Trump is obviously better"

      If fact we have three choices: 1) Biden, 2) Trump, and 3) to pick anyone else as a symbolic protest. Biden quite clearly seeks more government power and control. Trump speaks like a clown, and certainly does not concern himself with the rules, Constitution included. A symbolic protest accomplishes almost nothing. It is not unlike throwing away bologna when starving because it is bad for you and animals.

      Ayn took an uncompromising position on Libertarianism, to the detriment of Objectivism, Libertarianism and the general population, allowing obviously flawed polarizing positions of Republicans and Democrats to dominate. Maybe her choice was really right for her. I believe it was simply spiteful.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • 19
        Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
        With all that’s being exposed, not only with the immoral politicization of this horrible medical crisis, but also the revelations of the corruption and abuse of power of the deep bureaucratic state, and the vying for power, this next election and the following two terms, will determine the future of this great country. For all the never-Trumpers, the “ivory tower” Objectivists (not the real-world Objectivists), rinos, moderate democrats, and the undecided middle, the following may be enlightening. Many wonder who Ayn Rand would vote for if she were alive, and maybe the conclusion of her letter from Vol. 1, No. 24, 8/28/72, will possibly shed some light. Pay particular attention to her last paragraph.

        To the great credit of the American people, the polls taken immediately after the Democratic Convention showed a significant drop in McGovern’s popularity and a significant rise in Nixon’s. At this writing, Nixon leads by the enormous figure of 26%.

        I am not an admirer of President Nixon, as my readers know. But I urge every able-minded voter, of any race, creed, color, age, sex, or political party, to vote for Nixon – as a matter of national emergency. This is no longer an issue of choosing the lesser of two commensurate evils. The choice is between a flawed candidate representing Western civilization – and the perfect candidate of its primordial enemies.

        If there were some campaign organization called “Anti-Nixonites for Nixon,” it would name my position.

        The worst thing said about Nixon is that he cannot be trusted, which is true: he cannot be trusted to save this country. But one thing is certain: McGovern can be trusted to destroy it.

        Ayn Rand
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          Thank you, I believe that was what I saw too, McGovern was a deep state disaster, almost a test to see if a rabid socialist could survive, and revealed the people were not yet fully educated. Look at today, proposals such as "defund the police" get full power support, despite being self defeating. Yet in 68, they would have been viewed a insane. I think there is a lot of background material that is needed to fully understand how things have changed. One thing for sure is the education system has had a big part in it.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
            That is why the likes of us (Objectivists) need to provide the intellectual principles in context and perspective, for the others to understand. The fact that there is such a schism is very disappointing. The formal movement should be all over today's events, yet they're playing hooky. They're hiding in their "ivory tower" while the cult wait to see how they're suppose to react. Much more divisive than at NBI 60 years ago. TOS showed some promise before they decided to ignore the politics. Hopefully they will get back on track staying consistent with the principles while being objectively relevant with today's application. The first order of reality is to acknowledge there is not John Galt in the current political climate.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by bubah1mau 3 months, 1 week ago
              I personally do not see the "need" to inform anyone of anything unless it's someone I personally, especially value for praiseworthy achievements--someone likely to value the information. For those whom I don't value, I have only one need: distance.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                Yes, if you don’t value someone there’s no need to inform. But relationships, friends, social interactions, and passing associations provide an essential component to exchange information of all kinds, nourishing a well-balanced psyche. Education of others, on a multitude of levels, is not only rewarding but encourages knowledge acquisition. Cynicism stifles productive growth and ends up being a lonely place.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
            That is the key to the whole bad system, I believe. Public education needs to be replaced by private, whether it takes place in schools or in the home. But with enough money, we should be able to do this without any change in the law. I believe a good K-12 curriculum can be made available for free download. After that it's a matter of letting parents know it's out there. Computers are cheap.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 months, 1 week ago
          And there you have it, a flawed candidate and a perfect candidate of it's primordial enemies.

          Yes, hiltery then (2016) biden now would definitely be trusted to destroy us.
          Likely, biden would not be doing his own bidding, that much is obvious, the post modern cultural marxist would be marching on.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • 11
        Posted by sdesapio 3 months, 1 week ago
        Thanks for that Thoritsu. I feel the same way about Yaron's response and I'm still scratching my head a little as to why he chose the more emotional route (maybe ewv could chime in on that and get me straight). Especially given that, prior to abstaining from the vote in 1980, she laid out her process pretty clearly...

        "A voter's choice does not commit him to a total agreement with a candidate -- and certainly cannot commit a candidate to an agreement with every voter who supports him. Under a two-party system, a voter's choice is and has to be merely an approximation -- a choice of the candidate whom he regards as closer to his own views; often, particularly in recent times, a voter merely chooses the lesser of two evils." - "How to Judge a Political Candidate," Ayn Rand, The Objectivist Newsletter, Edited and Published by Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Branden, Volume 3, No. 3, March, 1964, pg. 10.

        I think we all need to remember that Trump is not alone. When voting for Trump, your voting not just for Trump, but rather the entire Trump administration. Essentially, the best shot of filling the administration with people that actually understand to some degree the core principles of individual liberty, personal responsibility, free markets, limited government, etc. is to vote for Trump. [I'd love to hear an opposing view on this.]
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
          In addition to the core principles you mention, is the most basic one. Rand always stated that the country will never change its course until it realizes and sheds its altruist morality. Many of Trump’s policies are framed around that, with America’s self-interest as the guiding factor, even if he cannot articulate the proper principle. MSM displays it as a Nazi nationalism, but it’s a fundamental ethical shift that should be identified and championed until shown differently.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
            Now is not the time to fight against altruist morality. For one thing you'd drive away the Christians who are the vast majority of the conservative base. Instead, I'd give more publicity to the likes of Thomas Sowell and Larry Elder, who've studied the causes of poverty and shown that LBJ's welfare programs made it much worse. That way abolition can be sold to the public as beneficial, which it is.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          Scott, then from an Objectivist view, Trump is that "best" choice, assuming Biden is the other. How does this change if say, Obama was his VP (there is nothing I am aware of to stop that), or if Michelle was substituted with Kamala Harris? (Thatis the "Biden is too sick to run now" scenario. I know it is speculation, but from what I have seen here we have people who do not like Trump, so will not vote for him, yet the Ayn Rand position is that you need to pick the one closes to your own moral views? That seems like a big conflict.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by sdesapio 3 months, 1 week ago
            RE: "How does this change if say, Obama was his VP"
            Obama, Michelle, and Kamala are all all collectivists. It would change nothing. It would still be a question of Collectivism vs. Individualism.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
              Thank you, that was my thought, but I needed to have it validated. Any collectivist believer is clearly then, non Objectivist, and non Conservative, as I see it. Of course it is a party thing as well, their platform has not been modified yet that I know of to clearly articulate their Socialist change, but Bidens announcement today went a long way towards it.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                Yes, in the ethical/political sense any collectivist is not an Objectivist. With a conservative it's probably a 50/50 shot. Possibly Biden should pick Romney as there's no other use for him, lol.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
                  That is true, he is of the Paul Ryan Republican Party, along with NoName McCain, non of them had any thoughts on the individual, just the collective, and their take from it. Tat is the root of the corruption and is identical with Atlas Shrugged storyline. One of the reasons I loved the book, it was a clear indictment of the current political system.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
        I like that statement, it is a lot of what I was seeing. I was not swayed with his argument, as it seemed he was making an emotional based decision vice a logical, factually supported one. I do need to watch the whole thing when I get time, as he may have changed his position in the longer interview.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
      Wow, that was a rough 1:30. I will have to see the whole conversation to see if it gets beyond "I think" Maybe I do not understand Objectivism at all, since I would say he should be speaking to terms like " Principles of Objectivism say this, and then exhibit facts that support it. I do think there are a lot of places where conservatism crosses Objectivism, as I see the current efforts to restore individual rights. As an example:How does the current "Black Lives Matter serve this, when it seems to lump everything into a group, by amassing the individuals? That seems a disingenuous mis statement, especially when black children are being killed in the major cities daily, yet not one word, or protest. I do see a lot of emotionalism being used as weapons by both sides, however, I do not see much effort to support the individual from the left, in that every effort they make seems to involve a specific sub group by label (race, gender, social state).
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ kddr22 3 months, 1 week ago
      I think she would have torched both sides for the contradictions both are showing. I think a more interesting answer would be what she thought of Biden"s socialistic views lol
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Doug_Huffman 3 months, 1 week ago
      Thanks for the video link.

      A complication in philosophical political cultural discussions is of the slippery continua of ‘definitions’. When I struggle with a definition, I try to learn a positive meaning, but also a negation - what is not within the definition. I resent, have long resented, what I see as L. Peikoff’s corruption of Ayn Rand’s philosophical legacy - in to his rice-bowl.

      What is an Objectivist and what is he not. What is a conservative and what is not a conservative position.

      Humpty Dumpty (Through The Looking Glass). "I don't know what you mean by 'glory,' " Alice said.
      Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. "Of course you don't—till I tell you. I meant 'there's a nice knock-down argument for you!'"
      "But 'glory' doesn't mean 'a nice knock-down argument'," Alice objected.
      "When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean—neither more nor less."
      "The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
      "The question is," said Humpty Dumpty, "which is to be master—that's all."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ DriveTrain 3 months, 1 week ago
    There are a million tangents possible in answering nickursis' question and like most of us time is a constant enemy, but to soapbox my appraisal:

    My initial view of Trump, from the moment in summer of 2015 when he bellyflopped right smack into the middle of what had been the most promising lineup of GOP candidates in a quarter-century, was of a pragmatist utterly devoid of philosophical moorings, who happened to lean in the direction of GWB-type conservatism, only with a more assertive and self-confident (not to mention abrasive and crude) public persona. In the runup to the 2016 election my attitude was close to that of Objectivist author Robert Bidinotto's, as expressed in his April 2016 blog post "A Vote For Neither":
    http://bidinotto.blogspot.com/2016/04...

    As a resident of California, a state 99.9999% certain to flop to the Democrat Presidential candidate in any case, my desire to vote my conscience - for Cruz, who was demonstrably the best of the 2016 lot - was an easy one with no downside (except for the fact that my vote was null in any case.)

    I obviously cannot speak for Mr. Bidinotto and I do not know if his view of Trump has changed in any way since that blog post, but given the undeniably good moves Trump has done in office - alongside the certifiably moronic - my opinion of him as a President has improved somewhat, with the emphasis being on the "somewhat."

    That he's better than any of the totalitarian-collectivist Democrat mentalities is a no-brainer, but at a visceral level I rebel against being placed in a position of having to cast my vote for someone I would never otherwise choose, just to keep barbarian marauders at bay. Which in context of the 2020 election means I remain undecided as to whether to cast a vote on conscience again or to just give it to Trump.

    The void where a philosophical framework needs to be is Trump's key flaw and continues to be.

    So at a baseline level I consider Trump an acceptable placeholder and bulwark of sorts against... a pack of barbarian marauders, which is regrettably what the National Socialist Democrat Party has become.

    From that baseline upward I can only hope that Trump will work to roll back the evils of the Obama, GWB, Clinton and GHWB years, work which may outweigh his asinine trade war, his asinine border wall, and the asinine noises he's been making in the direction of censorship and "antitrust" action against his foes in online media.

    His most catastrophic default continues to be a.) his failure to gut and overhaul American education from top to bottom, and b.) his default as a competent competitor in the ideological tug-of-war we're in.

    a.) As we've all seen over the last six weeks, a dangerous percentage of American people have been steeping for far too long in the collectivist, anti-American toxins that American "educators" have been dishing out for decades, the general worldview of Howard Zinn: America was not founded on July 4, 1776 but rather with the brutalization of the Avatar/Eden-like Western Hemisphere paradise by the EvilGreedyEuropeans who arrived on the Nina, Pinta and Santa Maria in the late 15th century.

    Every evil manifesting itself in American politics and culture right now can be traced back, not surprisingly, to the ideas that have been inculcated in American schools, particularly the increased radicalization of ideas we've seen since the close of the 1980s. If this is not reversed, it won't matter who's elected or what laws get passed.

    The collectivist corruption in politicians, in entertainment, in the CEOs of American businesses from Disney to the NFL to Facebook to YouTube to Twit to Nike to Netflix, to the hordes of otherwise decent people who happily marched beneath the banners of an openly black-supremacist and Marxist-totalitarian group in the wake of the George Floyd murder, are the consequence of this uncorrected educational corruption.

    The people working in these offices and these businesses and marching on the streets are people who... have been steeping in anti-Americanism for most of their lives. And most people believe what they're taught.

    b.) Politics is a pendulum-swing or tug-of-war. The side that pulls the hardest and for the most radical goals will almost never get what it's pulling for - but in pulling for those radical goals it thereby pulls the entire context of debate that much farther in the direction of its worldview. It's the old Soviet "two steps forward, one step back" dance, and it still works.

    A Republican President should be championing things like: a new Amendment to abolish residential property taxation nationwide (not a single American "owns" a home,) a 100% regulatory review with a goal of repeal, the expulsion and dismantling of the UN, the transformation of Mexico into a prosperous, constitutional republic by whatever means possible, etc.

    America needs a "radical for Americanism," and Trump is at best... a placeholder.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
      I find myself in agreement with much you have to say in this post, but not all. I know Trump is not a philosopher or Constitutional scholar (his forte is in building and business, not academics), but he seems to recognize the best of America and knows what's important in fixing many of its problems and moves to make those fixes real. His "trade war" fix and "wall" fix are not asinine, IMHO, and if properly applied will do more good than harm. For example, if the trade fix repatriates lots of jobs, especially for the less skilled among us, and the wall fix slows the tide of unskilled labor then, along with other benefits, the pressure on the great welfare state can be considerably lessened and more prosperity will result. A side benefit may be cries for more Marxist solutions to America's problems may lessen as well. One could argue to get rid of the welfare state, but good luck with that in these times.

      I agree with your assessments of education in as much as can be addressed at the federal level. I agree with your stance on property taxes, but those are mainly at the local level (state, county, municipality). The income tax system can certainly be addressed at the federal level (abolish it!).

      IMHO, Trump is more than a place holder for "Americanism", but he could be even more radical. The left hates him for his love of America.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ DriveTrain 3 months, 1 week ago
        I'm not a legal scholar so yes, the question of 10th Amendment violation with an Amendment that would perform a blanket abolition of an entire class of taxation nationwide may not be Constitutional. OTOH, I wonder if identifying the perpetual denial of ownership of a duly-purchased residence as a human rights violation would be sufficient to clear that hurdle (the right to the dwelling for which one has paid being as fundamental to human life as the right to eat the food one has purchased.)

        But again, the mere proposal, championed aggressively and publicly, and debated seriously in the halls of Congress, would ipso facto vault the issue to prominence and pull the entire context of property taxation in the direction of individual rights and the importance of private property - something desperately needed at a time when the UN's "Agenda 21" implementation is being ramped up aggressively.

        The abolition of the Income Tax would be a vast benefit, obviously, but the need to maintain funding for essential government rights-defense functions (as identified in the Declaration of Independence,) would require its replacement. The transition between which would be a delicate - if not prohibitively difficult - balancing act.

        Ideally a national sales tax would be a contender, if for nothing else on the issue of financial privacy alone.

        [Nobody should have access to the details of anyone else's income or finances. If you were to discover that a neighbor or even a relative had found a way to examine your personal finances you'd be outraged; why then do we acquiesce to a pack of faceless IRS bureaucrats doing precisely the same, annually? A sales tax would eliminate that privacy violation.]

        But before as radical a change as Income Tax repeal and replacement could be even feasible, there would have to be a drastic, sea-change-type reduction in Federal spending in all areas except the three essentials: the Armed Forces, the Police and the Courts.

        Meanwhile, Malta, Lichtenstein, Croatia, Thailand, Monaco, Fiji, the Cook Islands, New Zealand, Israel, Dubai, Bahrain are countries where there is no residential property taxation at all, or at most a one-time tax on purchase or sale of a residence, but no perpetual, annual tax on property. The United States of America, once the leader of the free world, has a less-just tax policy than Croatia? Than Malta? Than Dubai?

        It's for that reason - and the impending specter of retirement - that I think a property tax abolition is a great and long-overdue idea. Also the fact that with virtually every American home "owner" likely being an enthusiastic supporter, it would sail to ratification in record time. But yes, the Constitutional legality of it would have to be hashed out before it could be advanced.

        And to take it back to my original point: Regardless of legal feasibility, this is the kind of thing we should be hearing from Trump and from all of the Congressional Republicans, continuously, aggressively and relentlessly. The collectivist Left seem to understand this "pendulum swing," because they are continuously spewing a barrage of ever more atrocious assaults on individualism, capitalism and liberty regardless of plausibility - and it serves the purpose of maintaining focus on their warped agenda. From their opposition - the elected Republicans - we typically hear pins hitting the floor, in seeming quadraphonic clarity. Some other off-the-top "radical for liberty" demands, great and small, that could be and should be demanded:

        - The selloff of all government-held lands not sitting directly beneath legitimate government buildings, facilities and military bases, à la Senator Cruz' 2016 campaign pledge (which would be another stake through Agenda 21's heart);
        - The repeal of all absurdities such as regulations of toilets, bans on incandescent light bulbs, and "water use" regulations on appliances such as clothes washing machines;
        - The repeal of all land-use regulations which violate the property rights of landowners;
        - The opening of first class mail delivery to any and all competitors to the USPS (again, if bureaucratic Japan, socialist Britain and even theocratic-hell Iran can successfully privatize their government postal delivery, so can we);
        - The 100% deregulation of homeschooling, of for-profit private schools, of parochial schools, and the implementation of a phase-out of government-run "public" education in total;
        - The review and evaluation of all laws on the premise of coercion as the sole criterion for rights-violation - which would eliminate vast swaths of government regulation;
        - ... to name a few.

        Nobody is articulating - or even brainstorming - these kinds of moves back to Constitutional restraints and individual liberty, while the opposition continues to vomit an endless stream of assaults on them. This must change, but it won't unless Trump gets himself a whole new, better lineup of advisers.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
          Thank you for taking the time to articulate all that. I find we are in agreement with all the topics you cited including conversion of income to sales tax.

          My wife and I have lived in the same house for 40 years and have paid off the mortgage long ago, but can still be thrown into the street if we miss "Royal Rent" payments. My ancestor, who fought in the Rev War, was paid with land that had no such lien attached - and no income tax, either. He's probably rolling in his grave knowing government bullies will show up at my door to slap me around if I don't cough up the loot.

          "Nobody is articulating - or even brainstorming - these kinds of moves back to Constitutional restraints and individual liberty..." Point well taken! I suspect the big rise in the price of beef is at least partly due to the BLM (Bureau of Land Management) stepping on ranchers in the West, but I don't see any addressing the issue after the last shootout.

          Trump has been deregulating some things through executive orders and the left has been screaming - I see it on Facebook all the time about how the planet is doomed for one thing or another. Maybe he'll get around to a few more things on your list, but for now he certainly has other blips on his radar.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 months, 1 week ago
    Objectivist seem to have a problem viewing objective observations of the causes to the current social, political perversions without labeling it all a conspiracy theory. It's creeping Marxism, pure and simple.
    They offer no novel solutions as to how we rid the world of this problem.

    It is a seeking of power over others by those that cannot create a self sufficient space for themselves and therefore require the values created by others in order to survive.

    Yes, That IS Parasitism and their lack of conscience makes them Humanoid, not Human.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by sdesapio 3 months, 1 week ago
      I'm not sure I follow you Carl. Are you saying that you think Objectivists are parasites?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 3 months, 1 week ago
        Laughing...no, those that usurp power, usurp the creation of value are the parasites...Rand called them looters, didn't she.
        The problem goes deeper, it's a lack of conscience, the mind and mutuality which makes the "looters" parasitical.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 1 week ago
          Trump uses the term "Elites" in a fashion those in power like to believe of themselves but in fact those are the "Looters" & "Parasites" and he is mocking them perfectly.
          Out here in the real world, let's face it, Trump likely would not have anything to do with any of us here however he considers himself closer to us than any other politician in my lifetime.
          Just my opinion but I firmly believe that Trump has been screwed and burned by many of these so called "Elites" and has a serious vendetta against many of them. In another 4 years he will go back to his life of luxury with a big grin knowing that he screwed the "Elites" right back and in the process made it better for us little folks.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
            Yes, and that is why I have not seen Trump as theater, like he is presented as, and a lot of people think he is. He uses their own weapons against them, so well, most people fail to notice it. Remember, in his 2016 campaign, he labeled China as an adversary, but he did not go to the word "enemy". I have seen him label the "Elites" as member of both parties, indicating there is a distinct manipulation in the background. I believe there are reasons people like Paul Ryan did nothing 2016-18, and he did not run again....amongst others.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by GaryL 3 months, 1 week ago
              Trump is absolutely "Equal Opportunity" on whom he hammers. Exploding heads come in all forms and party affiliations. I find him very entertaining with his right between the eyes shots.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
    The Welfare State/Statism has become completely entrenched in our system. The Right has constantly yielded to the Left in the name of altruism.
    Biden will reap the rewards of this trend, especially given the hatred (often justified) against Trump. It will not likely matter just how progressive Biden talks.
    The short-term hope is that Rep.s hold the Senate; we are in danger if not.
    The long-term hope is a true capitalist properly defending American principles and gaining traction with the rational side of our populace.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
      Very true. Why is hatred of Trump "justified"?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
        Some of his policies + his non-Presidential behavior yields hate. He is a welfare-statist but not as much as Biden. His trade policies are damaging but so are Biden's. His immigration policies are mostly wrong. His handling of COVID and BLM have been mostly bad.
        Yes, there are good policies as well.....
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
          Your initial sentence is purely subjective with no contextual reference or specifics, and yielding hate is a strong opinion. He may have a lean towards big-government (in the NY tradition), but I don’t think a “welfare-statist.” As his trade policies may appear to be contrary to our free/open market beliefs, he had to play the cards that were dealt with the inequities that were present. One of the only times I heard him utter a principle was when he left the G20 last year saying he’s for open and free trade without governmental restrictions and regulations. And when another country’s tariff is zero, so will ours. The policy appears retaliatory rather than offensive. Same with his immigration policies that have been skewed for years with the entitlements. Hardly a starting point to implement what we believe immigration should be.
          Your conclusion of the handling of COVID and BLM as mostly bad may be based on flawed assumptions. He is neither John Galt nor omniscient and must rely on data supplied to attempt to a rational response. If the data is corrupted (either mistaken or agenda-driven), it is intellectually dishonest to assume he should have known. Just look at Dr. Stadler, I mean Dr. Fauci, who had no scientific integrity. You entirely discount the immense negative forces from all the anti-Trumpers that purposefully want to destroy him.
          But as I said, your opening sentence may tell much of your predetermined biases, rather than any objective observation and discussion.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
            Not subjective at all - the hate is real and the cause is obvious.
            He is no capitalist.
            The inequities with China are not resolved with tariffs - bad economic policy.
            I'm certainly not putting the bulk of the COVID fault on Trump; but COVID strategy and communications has been bad.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
              It is not obvious to me other than the narrative from MSM. Please refer to a specific so I can make a judgement on an individual event rather than broad brush. Not sure why you need to conclude he's no capitalist. That applied definition has many ancillary parts and I'm not sure who your political standard would be. I am fully aware of what capitalism is, but we have to apply our principles to the existing world with all its warts.
              Re China, trade or war are the only alternatives as Rand has said. Our misunderstanding of China has caused us much harm for over a generation. Identifying their metaphysical nature is the first step in moving the ball. Hong Kong, military in S China seas, India incursions, Thailand, and the COVID coverup are just some example of their totalitarian fundamentals.They have exposed their cards and now it's up to us to have them accountable and trade has been lowered in priority to formulate a proper response, at least I hope. Chang and Pillsbury may give you a better perspective.
              With regard to the COVID strategy two fundamental things were done. Rather than seize more power and control, he deregulated many of the needed medical chains and decentralized basic decision making back to the governors. Both a good thing.
              Let's just make real assessments of the current state.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
                The origin of this blog is about Objectivist views of the current social system. Those who support Trump blindly (to some extent at least) are not applying Obj. principles.

                Trump is hated by the Left and all associated Marxist groups. And it is "broad brush": his personality, mishandling of COVID/domestic terrorism, lack of progress with issues such as inequality and climate change.

                Objectivists generally dislike him for his personality, general mishandling of COVID and BLM (albeit for different reasons than the Left), trade and immigration policies, etc.

                I agree with most of what you say re China; but trade tariffs are not the rational or proper economic solution - they hurt us more than China.

                COVID could have been essentially eliminated by now with good decisions. What he has done right was done too late. CDC and "experts" screwed up, but who is their boss?

                Enough said.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
                  It has been my understanding the origin of the Gulch was to promote the AS movie trilogy and Objectivist discussions were a prime topic, but need not be the only topic. See the "Ask the Gulch" suggestion above.

                  Trump is hated by the left because he is capitalist enough to poke their Marxist eye - and it hurts them. Every time he pokes them they label him "unpresidential" or other such hateful response.

                  Free market capitalists hate tariffs, but that only works when trading with other free market capitalists. As soon as the "other" initiates an action that crushes or manipulates the free market, then by default it is no longer a free market and must be dealt with accordingly. Between China's manipulations and our own foolish foreign and domestic policies, which Trump inherited, the wealth transference (including wealth creating jobs and businesses) from the USA to China (not to mention other worldly places) has been enormous. Trump is the first president in my lifetime to actually address these issues. Tariffs may be distasteful to free market promoters and believers, but we are not dealing with a free market.

                  C-19 is like a hurricane. How do you "handle" a hurricane? You don't, it handles you. The best you can do is find a way to hunker down and minimize damage until it blows over and then clean up the aftermath. Government can offer suggestions and assistance as it can, but your ultimate survival is up to you. Picture Trump as the Fed and you are the states. The states did what they did and if their outcome wasn't optimal they blamed Trump.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
                    I was referring to this particular blog.
                    It's not because he is "capitalist enough", but because he is not Marxist enough. Difference.

                    Free market cap.s hate tariffs always! Trade does not have to be equal to justify trade. E.g. China having tariffs hurts the Chinese and does not justify the U.S. reciprocating.
                    Jobs moving to China (and many other places never discussed) was a result of many bad policies; but that did not hurt our economy (separate from China's misdeeds - e.g. theft of our intelligence.

                    I won't repeat Trump's contribution to the COVID problems - they are well documented.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
                      "China having tariffs hurts the Chinese and does not justify the U.S. reciprocating." Really? It prevents trade balance even from rigorous competition from ever occurring and wealth flows from the US to China, but not the other way. I've been to China and I know the average Chinese and certainly the CCP doesn't give a Schiff if America makes a nickel as long as America's wealth flows to China. Tariffs may also be the most effective and immediate method to deal with currency manipulation and theft of intellectual property. Doing nothing is death by slow bleed. There might be disagreement, but at this time specifically placed tariffs are like tourniquets that can be removed when the problems are solved properly. There are other problems exasperating the issue like over taxation and regulation, but Trump seems to be addressing those as well.

                      "Jobs moving to China ... but that did not hurt our economy." I respectfully disagree. For example, there are large swaths of any population, including Americas, that have limited skill sets that can be trained into simpler jobs that large scale manufacturing plants and their support industries and businesses can fulfill. When those jobs are shipped overseas the only recourse for those people is the welfare state and that hurts America (you could argue getting rid of the welfare state, but good luck with that in these times). I believe Trump knows this, which is why he has worked to find ways to repatriate American companies and slow the tide of illegal immigration. I suspect he knows he will not get rid of the welfare state, but he can press policies that lessen the demand on it.

                      "I won't repeat Trump's contribution to the COVID problems - they are well documented." To satisfy my curiosity of this statement please do repeat or at least provide a link to the well documented list. I'd like to see it.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
                        All I can say is that you need an economics lesson.
                        Note that if you like Trump's trade policies, then you will like Biden's as well.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
                          I have to take tdechaine's side here. Milton Friedman did a good job of showing, by way of comparative advantage, why reducing or eliminating tariffs improves prosperity even if only one side does it.

                          Of course in the case of trade with hostile countries such as China, free trade may also help them arm for war against us or our friends, which can be a good reason not to liberalize. IP theft may be another good reason. Slave labor too.

                          I like Trump's trade policies better than Obama's. They are not the best possible. But toward China I think he's doing the right things.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
                          "All I can say is that you need an economics lesson." That's not an argument, it's a condescending deflection. Try again with something a bit more intelligent, ok?

                          "Note that if you like Trump's trade policies, then you will like Biden's as well." Flippant remarks like this do not state your case, either.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
                          Pleas explain, I tend to agree with Mccannon01, there were a lot of behind the scenes manipulation going into Chinas production, and when you have stolen most of your IP to produce, you have an edge to start with, add in an artifically supported currency, then it gets worse. Then add in state ownership of the bulk of the companies, working as shells it gets worse. I think Trump has just called it out in the open. I watched a video a few years ago of a company that made controllers for wind turbines, who was forced out of business when China made the exact same controllers, using their copied hardware and Software. How can challenging that be bad?
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                  Yes, you’re right. The origin of this blog is about Objectivist views. But again your opening sentence displays your predetermined bias. You have subjectively determined that any Trump supporter cannot be an Objectivist, by the intrinsic application of what you understand the philosophy to be, and that’s hardly objective and quite a mouthful. And many thinking Objectivists do support him.
                  Your examples are not specifics, but broad platitudes and opinions that are open to a variety of interpretations, again hardly objective.
                  To say “Objectivists generally dislike him for his personality,….” can be a “frozen abstraction.” I wonder what you would say if you met Rand or Peikoff, neither of which demonstrated a warm and fuzzy appeal. That shortcoming did not undermine the brilliance of their thoughts.
                  And as you said, “enough said.”
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
                    I did not say that. Sure Obj,ists could support Trump, but for what? Supporting the bad policies that I have noted is is not being objective.
                    No Obj.ist should like him. And shame on you comparing his personality with LP and AR. Trump is purely pragmatic, off the cuff, irrational in what he says most of the time.
                    For the record, I have met and spoken to both LP and AR. They may have come across as tight and inflexible to some, but that's because they are representing an inflexible but rational philosophy. AR was very appealing.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ jbrenner 3 months, 1 week ago
                      Objectivism is an inflexible but rational philosophy. Perhaps its inflexibility is the biggest reason for its lack of widescale adoption and its failure to ever be adopted by someone who gets elected as a governing philosophy. All of us would like to have an Objectivist as a minimalist president, but governing does require the ability to adapt to both unintended and intentional disturbances. With regard to COVID, he has governed less than most, although certainly not perfectly, especially to an Objectivist. If he had governed less than he has, he would have certainly been impeached again, but this time he would have been found guilty of dereliction of duty. Be careful what you wish for.

                      Every day you see Trump threatening to intervene with regard to riots, but he doesn't intervene. He checks his own power and yet keeps the real tyrants in check with his threats. He is walking a fine line.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                        Your last paragraph is the issue that I'm most worried about. They are egging him on to respond with an authoritative hand. And possibly his threats will keep the "real tyrants" at bay, to buy enough time for the rational locals to restore a semblance of law and order. We both know there are bureaucratic forces that would like to see a heavy-handed answer, and he is walking a fine precarious line. He did not listen to Bolton and hopefully he will discount any drastic actions within our borders.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ jbrenner 3 months, 1 week ago
                          I am concerned about the fine line Trump walks, too. He listens to Fauci, but then uses his own mind to govern. Listening to opposing voices is part of customer discovery, but ultimately you have to make your own decisions. I voted for myself rather than Trump during the last election because I knew I could govern myself better, but all in all, I don't think that I would have done a whole lot better than Trump did. Yes, he made some mistakes, but he usually gets rid of those (Sessions, Bolton). The Sessions situation is a great example of how difficult is to navigate through the D.C. swamp. Even forces that are seemingly with you are not.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
                          I don't know if you subscribe to there being a "movement" behind the issues we have seen. Many Objectivists do not seem to want to look at events as being engineered, despite a causal relationship. But, Trump needs to wake people up to the reality of what the democrats have done and many will not listen until the brutal reality is in their faces. The CHAZ in Seattle, the defunding of Seattle Police, the riots and looting, where they left it up to the cities. The people who put these liberals into power need to see the cost it exacts. I do believe we will see some large actions in the near future. Notice how HHS has taken COVID 19 reporting away from the CDC? Fox news had an investigation in Florida and the states rate was 76%, yet the total positive detections was at 9% per the hospitals. The bureaucracy has been built over time to be beholding to the old guard dems and repubs, they owe or want to owe Trump nothing, since he is basically taking away a lot of their power and money control.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by Doug_Huffman 3 months, 1 week ago
                            The President is the Executive authority of the Administration and not a tyrant. He has the same Frst Amendment Right to Freedom of Speach as all of US, and his minions have the responsibility to follow directions or not. As Constitutional Officers do they not take an Oath to Protect and Defend, just as we veterans did, and does their Oath lose effect on some date or event?

                            Trump is a mouthpiece. He is not even the tyrant leader of his party.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                      tdechaine, I applaud that you support Objectivism, but unfortunately, I sense we are at an impasse and further discussion will be unproductive. Either of our pedigrees is unimportant and who we may have met is not germane. I will offer two suggestions. First, read (if you haven’t already) “Truth and Toleration in Objectivism,” although it may not be on ARI’s recommended list. Your above statements are also logically flawed, so my second suggestion would be to “check your premises.”
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          I would suggest his welfare statist is just using whatever is at hand (i.e we are so far in debt, it won't matter) the system is going to collapse no matter what. I do not know of what trade policies are damaging, in that he has used a protectionist model to balance the one that existed but was unacknowledged. Immigration policies? Covid and BLM have no good solutions that are not manipulable by the lamestream to be wrong and used for "we could have" propaganda. But, call it as you will...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
    I can't explain the whole thing in one gulp, but I do have something to say. Today's SJWs are not masterminds but "useful idiots" who have been trained by Communists to repeat, teach, and enforce a completely bogus (and ever changing) set of so-called ethical rules called Intersectionality. It seems to me that Peikoff should have cited that, and not just mysticism, as the #1 red flag predictor of doom in The Ominous Parallels.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
      That is indeed true, the "useful idiots" were a Stalinist tool, and described the arrogance and disdain the Elites hold for everyone. As useful tools they are then thrown away when damaged or broken, which is sad, as they are unaware of their fate...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by MikePusatera 3 months, 1 week ago
    I would be interested in how an Objectivist would address systematic racism. I know all Objectivist would find any type of racism abhorrent. I have seen an old Ayn Rand interview where she absolutely refused to acknowledge any type of discrimination against women because she just refused to be stopped by it. That is one reason she is such a hero to us. But what of the Eddie Willers of the world. Is the government responsible for protecting African Americans. Or should they as a culture be able to fend for themselves. Obviously the protests would never be condoned. Also even if government should be involved most of the current policies have been disasters and in many cases have hurt minorities. Unfortunately I believe that the Fortune 500 is controlled by a lot more Orren Boyles than Dagney Taggarts. I wonder if Ayn Rand would agree with that conclusion today.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • 10
      Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
      Racism is simply no longer systemic in the U.S.
      "Race" should not even be the issue; this is about individual racists who need to be called out; and that applies to Whites and minorities.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
        Exactly. The individuals are the ones at fault, and yet, the entire system is designed to make it a "group thing"...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
          Again, it is individuals being collectivists, not the "system". If non-political individuals fought back against terror and the welfare-state, then perhaps they could influence the politicians.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
            So, BLM calling for "defunding the police" is not a group thing? They advocate giving the money to "local groups". Remember, Al Sharpton is one of those "local groups"...Doesn't seem collectivism is limited to just individuals, and the groups are used to raise the volume and give it legitimacy.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by tdechaine 3 months, 1 week ago
              What are groups comprised of?
              I was distinguishing all this from Govt. "system".
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
                I don't know if that is valid, in that the same groups we see on the street, are in the govt. They create the policies, and the rules. When a law is passed, the implementation is left to a "group" of bureaucrats, who have no concern for the individual. I would say the EPA and it's attacks on individuals where water is used on their property, at both a state and Federal level, as an example. The "group" that formed in the FBI to frame Trump for "Russian Collusion" is another, these "groups seem to set up and then implement any policy or procedure they are told to. I don't think the FBI stooges thought it up on their own...there is evidence to support that assertion.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
      The government has no place except when an individual right has been abrogated. Only on “government” property should civil rights be legally upheld. With private property one certainly has the right to discriminate (racist is too subjective), whether he should or not is a different discussion. Any form of systemic or institutional racism (a frozen abstraction) perished with the election of a black president.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by freedomforall 3 months, 1 week ago
        I would argue that institutional racism was raised to presidential power with Obama's election.
        Reverse discrimination (racism against whites in particular) has been government (institutional racist) policy for decades.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          I believe you are correct, look at Seattles new "White Retraining" they are doing for proof. The city council went nuts when told they could not just fire whites and was said to tell the Police Chief, "we will find a way around it, and fire the white ones only, so we can have a young and "diverse" force"....go look it up...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by mccannon01 3 months, 1 week ago
          This is what I've termed the "New Jim Crow". Same as the one that was put to rest in the '60s except the color of the favored people is different. Inculcating the non-favored race (whites) to accept the policy and posture as subservient is what the brainwashing courses are all about (non-whites are to become more assertive as the new master). The phrase "check your privilege" when aimed at a white person isn't so much about any real privilege, but is to elicit the correct response of fealty to the New Jim Crow. The elimination of Jim Crow-like constructs in America was one of the main thrusts of the civil rights movement of the '50s and '60s. It succeeded in as much as millions of white people agreed that Jim Crow was evil and unAmerican, but it obviously failed when the civil rights movement converted to the civil rights industry in the '70s and the New Jim Crow was turned loose.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Stormi 3 months, 1 week ago
    Rand came from a communist background. She had a head start and early appreciation of capitalism and freedom of self, when she found it in the US. I think she would be unhappy with both political parties as it now stands. However, where the left has gone violates almost every idea of Objectivim. Wear masks to protect someone else? Pay into false ideas of Green Scam Deal, to make someone else rich and powerful, against our own individualism? The whole idea of compromise in the form of Congressional funding, where Trump give up ideals to gain passage of collectivist programs. not acceptable. Rioters given a pass to destroy other's property, to have now personal accountability under Dem Atty's General fuded by former Nazi Soros? Everyone being legislated to support Black Lives Matter, which is against the freedoms and individualsim of all other races, no way. The toal disrespect for private property ownership by the rioters, their funders and the left. But Trump did no better when he used eminent domain to obtain property in Las Vegas years ago. We have failings on both sides, but the left takes us closer to that whic Rand fled and despised, farther from property rights and individualism, closer to clooectivism, calling for us to live for others who despise us, as it were.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months, 1 week ago
    Objectivism is about individual initiative, while collectivism is about the purported "helplessness" of the individual, and how he needs a powerful state to provide for him. It is a kind of reversion to the Utopian concept of Hobbes' "Leviathan," which was a justification for absolute monarchy, maintaining that the individual could never be powerful enough to withstand the forces against him without the aid of a powerful leader with the resources to dominate all who would abuse the helpless serf.

    Today's Leviathan proponents have replaced the monarch with an oligarchy of elites who know better than the rest of us what is best for us. The believers have adopted a cultish, pseudo-religious passion for this belief, obedient to the pronouncements of the high priests of collectivism. With the declarations of the all-knowing oligarchs at the top not to be refuted or disobeyed, it is easy for those oligarchs to engage in doublespeak, changing what is holy as is convenient to promote their agenda. What is blessed today may be abomination tomorrow, and the believers follow without question.

    It is this religious aspect of collectivism, as practiced by the extreme wing of the Democrat party, that makes it impossible for an Objectivist to have a rational conversation with its followers. Logic and actual facts are forbidden for them to discuss. Their belief stems from virtue signaling, being on the righteous side of an argument regardless of what is real. There's a set of interviews on Facebook that best illustrates this belief system: in the piece, liberal whites are first interviewed, on the question of defunding the police, and they all declare the righteousness of getting the police out of poor minority neighborhoods; the second set of interviews are with residents of Harlem, the "victims" who say that getting the police out of their neighborhood is insanity, and that they want a stronger police presence to protect them from the gangs.

    The insanity of the collectivist position is exemplified by AOC, who declares the increased crime rate in minority neighborhoods after the police presence has been reduced is due to the pandemic, and is just poor people shoplifting a loaf of bread. She would have us believe that it is nothing more than a modern black Jean Valjean, struggling to provide for his family. Pay no attention to the dramatically increasing numbers of gunshot victims, because that doesn't fit the narrative.

    Hopefully, this comedy of terrors is making an impression on those remaining people to whom reality hasn't slipped away. If this November's elections put the mentally challenged Biden (who is now adopting the most extreme of the irrational positions) in the White House, we will have two choices: either bow our heads and accept our fate, or rise up in resistance, and possibly take up arms to defend our freedom.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
      "rise up in resistance, and possibly take up arms to defend our freedom. " The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure.
      Jefferson
      https://www.monticello.org/site/resea...

      Even if he owned slaves (a very un-Objectivist idea, anathema) he was a Patriot to the country. He had many faults, but all humans do. Still does not detract from the statement.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by DrZarkov99 3 months, 1 week ago
        Jefferson himself penned the "missing paragraph" from the Declaration of Independence that proposed an end to slavery. Unfortunately, because they needed consensus from all 13 colonies, when Georgia and South Carolina objected to the idea of ending slavery, Jefferson's proposal was dropped from the final version of the Declaration.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          Thank you, I would like to find that, it destroys the BLM worldview....
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Doug_Huffman 3 months, 1 week ago
            he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers; is the warfare of the Christian king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, by murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them: thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another.
            Known as the "anti-slavery clause", this section drafted by Thomas Jefferson was removed from the Declaration at the behest of representatives of South Carolina.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by rbunce 3 months, 1 week ago
    Vote buying and crony capitalism...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
      Lets not forget ballot harvesting, look at Broward County, 2016/2018 for the poster girl.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
        nickursis, are you from Broward County?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ 3 months, 1 week ago
          Nope, but saw several reports as they investigated, several videos that were used to support the accusations.
          This was not because of racisim, sexism or any other ism, but of her debacle in recounts, and the videos of the "ballots" being unloaded in the dead of night:
          https://www.foxnews.com/politics/bren...

          Am I in error?
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
            No, you are correct. I live in Broward County and the Dems have been crooked for years.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 months, 1 week ago
              Born and raised in Brevard County.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                Howdy neighbor. Can you imagine if Gillum was elected. It was a close race.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by $ Thoritsu 3 months, 1 week ago
                  Not there anymore, but my mother and brother are. Up in New England now.
                  I can not imagine. FL is at a tipping point, just like TX.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by Tavolino 3 months, 1 week ago
                    I think it will be okay here. DeSantis is doing a good job, no state taxes and sun still shines. Gillum would have brought darkness and new taxes.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ Dobrien 3 months, 1 week ago
                      No doubt about it Gillum would have brought forth darkness. https://www.tampabay.com/florida-poli...

                      Humanity is good, but, when we let our guard down we allow darkness to infiltrate and destroy.
                      Like past battles fought, we now face our greatest battle at present, a battle to save our Republic, our way of life, and what we decide (each of us) now will decide our future.
                      Will we be a free nation under God?
                      Or will we cede our freedom, rights and liberty to the enemy?
                      We all have a choice to make. .
                      Evil [darkness] has never been so exposed to light.
                      They can no longer hide in the shadows.
                      Our system of government has been infiltrated by corrupt and sinister elements.
                      Democracy was almost lost forever.
                      Think HRC install: [2+] Supreme Court Justices, 200+ judges, rogue elements expanded inside DOJ, FBI, CIA, NSA, WH, STATE, …….removal 2nd amendment, border etc. ……… America for sale: China, Russia, Iran, Syria…….ISIS & AL Q expansion…….expansion surv of domestic citizens…….modify/change voter rules and regulations allow illegals+ballot harvesting w/ SC backed liberal-social opinion………sell off of military to highest bidder to fight internal long-standing wars……..
                      Their thirst for a one world order [destruction of national sovereignty] serves to obtain control over America [and her allies [think EU]] by diluting your vote to oblivion and installing a new one world ruling party.
                      The start of this concept began with organizations such as: world health org, world trade org, united nations, ICC, NATO, etc., [all meant to weaken the United States] also the formation of EU through threat [con] of close proximity attack [attack on one is an attack on all – sales pitch to gen public – fear control].
                      Re: EU _did each member nation cede sovereignty to Brussels?
                      Re: EU _each member must implement EU rules and regulations in all areas [think immigration, currency, overall control].
                      Their thirst to remove your ability to defend yourself serves to prevent an uprising to challenge their control.
                      There is a fundamental reason why our enemies dare not attack [invade] our borders [armed citizenry].
                      If America falls so does the world.
                      If America falls darkness will soon follow.
                      Only when we stand together, only when we are united, can we defeat this highly entrenched dark enemy.
                      Their power and control relies heavily on an uneducated population.
                      A population that trusts without individual thought.
                      A population that obeys without challenge.
                      A population that remains outside of free thought, and instead, remains isolated living in fear inside of the closed-loop echo chamber of the controlled mainstream media.
                      This is not about politics.
                      This is about preserving our way of life and protecting the generations that follow.
                      We are living in Biblical times.
                      Children of light vs children of darkness.
                      United against the Invisible Enemy of all humanity.
                      Q
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 3 months, 1 week ago
    People, in general, are not mentally capable of peacefully solving the current challenges. Instead, they create more challenges.

    This Objectivist’s take...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jdg 3 months, 1 week ago
      It's not a matter of mental ability. The current situation cannot be settled peacefully because the enemy are determined to use force, and ARE using it, against anyone who even disagrees with them out loud. Once that is going on the only rational reaction is to send the Marines, or if they fail us, take up arms.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo