Add Comment


All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by 1 year, 2 months ago
    Thanks for the comments! Published in "Savvy Street," this article has stimulated unusually long and pointed discussion. One who commented, John Gillis, said my support for Trump was not better than supporting Benito Mussolini to beat the socialist/communists.

    I thought that comment, now common currency in some Objectivist quarters, was worth a substantial reply, as follows:

    "I don't blame John Gillis--because the idea now is common currency among Objectivists--but it is slightly wacko to compare Donald Trump in any way with Benito Mussolini. The idea is supposed to be that Mussolini was viewed as the opposition to socialism, but, in fact, was a socialist who merely rejected communist internationalism. Mussolini was a lifelong, intellectual, activist socialist revolutionary, always committed to violence. He first joined the Italian Socialist Party but was expelled for advocating Italy's entry into WWI (opposed by the socialist international as using workers at cannon fodder and turning workers of one country against workers of another when the worldwide proletariat should unite). Mussolini studied every leading socialist philosopher, but most of all Marx and Engels. He translated some German philosophers into Italian. When expelled from the Italian Socialist Party, he eventually formed the fascist party, with an explicit commitment to aggressive, all-out Italian nationalism. He became the youngest Italian Premier. Then, he promptly eliminated all political opposition using the secret police, he changed the laws and the constitution to create a one-party state, and he sent Italian armed forces rampaging around the Middle East and Africa and the Balkans seizing territories. Mussolini was a lifelong intellectual socialist; he never had any job but politics; from the earliest age, he engaged in violent revolution and was arrested again and again. It was he who inspired Hitler, Franco, and Salazar.

    "Sorry, but the fact that President Donald Trump opposes socialism, but not completely and in principle, does not warrant comparing him with Benito Mussolini. This is claptrap in an Objectivist wrap. EVERY president of our time has explicitly rejected socialism and adopted much of the socialist (interventionist-welfare state) agenda. What is notable about Mr. Trump is that he is a lifelong NON-politician, a highly successful New York City businessman, with NO intellectual roots in ANY socialism. He has NO known Marxist or socialist or other leftist ideological models. He is a product of the American capitalist system, a symbol of the American dream of productivity, wealth, luxury, and even high romance and beautiful women. He decided to run for President as a frank reactionary, although he would not call himself that.

    "Reaction against unlimited illegal immigration as a Democratic political strategy.
    "Reaction against the ideal of "colorblind" becoming racial quotas/affirmative action.
    "Reaction against environmentalism as clean air and rivers becoming global anti-Industrial Revolution.
    "A reaction against the Blacks as historic U.S. "victims" justified in revolution in the streets.
    "Reaction against the "canceling" of American history's ideals, achievement, leading the world toward freedom and capitalism.
    "Reaction against the politics of gutter-language, defaming, shaming, scandal, and idiotic scare attacks.

    "The July 4 speech Mr. Trump chose to give at Mt. Rushmore was ghosted by someone who truly understands the idea of "far left fascism," "hatred of American ideals," and the total defaming of America--a world of difference from criticizing and improving and prodding ahead the country that you love in principle. And Mr. Trump wanted to say all these things at a time of street violence, revolutionary opposition to police, claims of fighting a "police state." You think he can't choose his speech writer?

    "Returning to Mussolini, Mr. Trump has shown NO tendency toward what defined Mussolini: immediate, activist, aggressive politics of international Italian territorial expansion. He has done NOTHING in that direction. NOTHING to use the government to eliminate his political opponents. Instead, his entire four years have been about trying to achieve something for America in the face of endless political, legal, media, and street attacks. ENDLESS. And what has he done? Defended himself. Tweeted back at the tidal waves of smears: "Trump is Hitler," "Trump is Mussolini," Trump is a murderer," Trump commits crimes against humanity (Paris Accords), Trump is an idiot, fuck Trump, fuck Trump, fuck Trump.... And so...he Tweets

    "Mussolini did not deal with political attacks (he did not permit any) by Tweeting.

    "And Trump carries on. And I now have been driven by anger and indignation and an outraged sense of fair play to publish two books. BOTH have the theme "Donald Trump and his enemies."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by j_IR1776wg 1 year, 2 months ago
    “Yes, in the timeframe of centuries, eons, mankind will endure and prevail. But what of the future for us and our children? How do you see it?”

    Bleakly and through failing eyes. Your description of a dystopian future is, sadly, spot on. In sports terms, the forces of evil are on the offensive and have 22 men on the field against 2 on our side. The momentum is theirs.

    I am also father and grandfather and bemoan their future. The answer to the title of your piece is yes America will collapse if not this year then certainly in our lifetime. When it does it will do so with the suddenness of the lights going out in Atlas Shrugged.

    What then, Walter, should we do? What can we do?

    We can organize:

    Individual Rights parties in all 50 States based on those Enlightenment ideas and ideals, the DOI, and the Bill of Rights, and Rand’s Reason in economics, aka, laissez-Faire Capitalism and severe limits on the power of people in government.

    We can try to speak with one large voice instead of a thousand separate and scattered ones. I thought GaltsGulchOnline might be a possible venue. It was not.

    Mass demonstrations with placards reading Individual Rights Rule or Down With Socialism.

    And yes, we should be prepared to meet violence with violence. No one ever won a war by turning the other cheek.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 year, 2 months ago
      Ayn Rand wrote that America, as she knew it, never could succumb to dictatorship. But, she said, there could be a civil war. She notably did not predict the outcome of civil war; she lived through the Russian civil war, when the Whites fiinally went down to the Red. What is a civil war like when the federal government controls nuclear weapons and other weapons of enormous power? Would they be used? I suggest that if civil war does break out, then be sure that your party is in power. The idea today of widespread civil disobedience, with guns, is wholly unpredictable. But, yet, in the very, very last analysis, in extremis, I would pick up a gun.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 1 year, 2 months ago
    I fear, we will go under before I die. Damn, so much for retirement...will keep writing till I die...
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 1 year, 2 months ago
      Carl, I have appreciated your consistent attention and contributions to my posts. Of course, I raised the question: Will we go under--and how that calculus changes when you have children. As for writing, I will do that as long as I have a functioning brain. It is my lifeblood and my way of being part of the world. I wonder if we should focus more on "channeling," as they say, today, that truly great minds that to new generations are simply unknown. I would prefer that a reader attends to "The Fountainhead," because of my efforts than to a dozen of my "essays." Perhaps the time has come to act as a transmission belt between an intellectual past suppressed today and a new generation perishing for want of the genius of Rand, Hazlitt, von Mises, Hugo, and so, so many other that Ayn Rand brought into our own lives. She understood the subversive power of simply introducing new generations to great minds that today's sundry intellects would like forgotten. Paul Krugman can be an intellectual giant to a generation who never hears about von Mises, Hazlitt, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Isabel Patterson, Alan Greenspan...and dozens more.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 1 year, 2 months ago
        I think, for today's generation, will need a lead up to Rand...I fear they will be triggered and never consider her work. Although I have met so many open minded Millennial's, most would not even get Atlas Shrugged, let alone The Fountainhead.

        Don't mind me, just my thought of the day.

        As for my work, The consciousness or lack of, is my focus in regards to what might actually be, the true division among mankind. Conscience: Those that have and those that have not.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  


  • Comment hidden. Undo