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.

That CircuitGuy is a Clinton fan...Objectivist?

Good one! Shutting China down was completely obvious...unless you loved the idea of an epidemic

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".

Hoenig voiced his support of Clinton over Trump several times on TV. I have personally heard Brook echo the same, as well as many others I know.

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.

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.

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.

Objectivists voted for Clinton?? I find that unbelievable.

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.

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.

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.]

Many of the formal Objectivists went down the ant-Trump rabbit hole very early. At that time they could not have objectively viewed him (similar to a doctor diagnosing a patient from afar), and certainly lost hierarchal context in the realm of politics. Rand always said her philosophy is for living life in the real world, and some of the “ivory tower” Objectivists have fallen off this planet and not dealt with or identified the metaphysically given, especially when they voiced their support of Clinton. Kind of ironic.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

👍

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.

I'm not sure I follow you Carl. Are you saying that you think Objectivists are parasites?

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.

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."

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

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).