"That Carnegie, Melon, Forbes, Rockefeller, Frick, Morgan and many others could have produced so much in the brief period of the nearly unfettered industrial development of the US is totally amazing."
most of that was built on the foundation of intellectual property. by bang, I meant you're fairly new in here and got us all going in a great discussion-and there was that short period where I thought I was having a heart attack-but otherwise got us all going. I admire that. I also like your last sentence. it's kind of like a "you didn't build that-" some of the same people who would be incensed by that understanding of american prosperity completely buy into it from a God perspective. you owe your virtue to something else. not hard won. boggles my mind

Amity, a small word but I had to look it up. I do not think that anyone expects Utopia any time soon but if we base our actions on reason and reason alone we will become closer with each step. If we base our actions on our gut we will feel our way into hell.

I've decided to download it, as much as I love the heft of a book, because I have no patience to wait for it to ship! :-)

I am in agreement except for one thing. We will never perfect our government or society. Utopia is beyond the possible. We are imperfect and of diverse expectations. One mans utopia is another’s prison. “In order to form a MORE perfect union…” which is itself an abstraction is not perfection. It is the best we can hope for. This is part of the problem. When we had established a more perfect union, many did not recognize it for being the best imperfect humans could devise. The changes some instituted were in contradiction to the end. When people acquire this wisdom and learn to recognize the best one can hope for as the ideal, rather than their own utopian vision we have compromise and amity.
Regards,
O.A.

If we're going to discuss anything naked, ladies first!

Well said. Bravo.

This is where I see hope. Everyone take off their social issue clothes and let's work on the naked principles that we all agree on. I do not want to know anything about anyone's spiritual beliefs, philanthropic desires or their sexual preferences nor do I want to impose any of mine. I want every ounce of freedom that I can have to enjoy my own life while realizing that some organization of men is necessary to protect all others that are like minded from predators. We almost had it but instead of perfecting it, we let it slip away. I want it recaptured.

You have a point, but stick within the subject of AS. Yes, I'm a Christian and do agree with Ms. Rand on about 80% of her philosophy. But to veer off and go in-depth on religion's impact on the world would compromise the both the book and the Objectivism view.

We can discuss religion separately because it opens up a whole new argument. Case in point, your comment on "an understanding of who we are and what we are here on this Earth to accomplish." kind of sounds along the lines of Christianity. But lets go non-politically correct (translation: the TRUTH) and mention Islam. For the muslim, introspection is rare. They don't need to, all they need is to know what Mohammed did and didn't do. Did Mohammed kill anyone who didn't submit to him and his ideology? Yes. Guess what? That's all they need to know. End of story here. Trying to fit this in somewhere within the realm of AS is like trying to mix oil and water.

If you want to discuss religion, let's talk. If you to discuss AS, and Ms. Rand's views, let's discuss. But to combine them, isn't going to accomplish anything except get both of us frustrated.

He is a stopped watch... He is right only occasionally. Maverick… He is more like a Pinto. Boom! :)

"A nation of freedom and liberty can not be built upon compromise of principles." Sen McLame of AZ would disagree with you. The "Maverick" loves 'reaching across the isle,' ~ translates into 'compromising on conservative principles' to the Left.

There is no compromising with the unprincipled. A compromise consists of two parties giving to some degree and reaching a tolerable state for both.
There was a great compromise reached in 1787. Our constitution is a contract consisting of many compromises. A contract requires a meeting of the minds and binds the participants to certain limits and responsibilities. Since then the progressives unsatisfied with the results have reneged on the compromise and have attempted in many ways to nullify the parts they deem unsatisfactory. Any just changes must be made through the prescribed amendment process to carry any measure of consent. Only when the parties mutually agree to changes are they binding. Disregarding any part of a contract places them in breach. Executive orders, extra constitutional agencies (U.S. Dept. of Education etc.) and the power they exert are not governance by the consent of the governed, and they are thus per minas, mala fides. Any laws passed by congress that are not within the scope of enumerated powers are the same.

A nation of freedom and liberty can not be built upon compromise of principles. It would be better to start over than to sacrifice right for a false expectation of comity, because a form of slavery is inherent in any such compromise.

Yarron is describing our original form of governance. Yes it can work if we leave the disparate religious doctrines out of the mix, but take from all, the principles which are congruent. In this way a coalition was and can be again in the majority.

Altruism is slavery.

Respectfully,
O.A.

I think it will be handled much like Francisco's Money speech. I love that speech and missed having it performed in its entirety but I understood.

don't get my husband started on it either-he wrote a book about it! :)

I would LOVE to hear that speech, but don't think it will hold an audience's attention. At least not those we are are trying to awaken. They'll pull out their phones and start tweeting their friends about what they ate for dinner. Dumbasses.

I had to give you a point for that. :-)

AR said, "with compromise, only evil can win." It was a profound statement that stuck with me after reading in the Objectivist Newsletter. Absolutely true...look what compromise has led to. We need to stand up and disagree when someone makes a statement that we disagree with and defend our position with truth. Although I have noticed that facts don't even matter to the other side now.

I remembered! The communist post. I had to set the youngster straight and clear up the fog from the indoctrination...not their fault. He/She was way off on the political spectrum. Thanks.

Yes, I know it's long. But since when did that stop anybody? The Ovomit Death Care Bill is about 2,800 pages and no one bothered to read it, they passed it easily. I would think 90 pages would be nothing...

That is true for us but not for theists. The root of their willingness to sacrifice themselves lies in their non-rational faith. Once you are not being coerced with a promise of life after death, you can see that you must live your own life. Once you realize that your own life is all you have you either rationally decide how to live it for your own happiness or if you don't you kill yourself maybe not with a gun but with drugs, alcohol, sloth or some other irrational behavior .

Don't get my husband started on sarbanes oxley.

There have been FAR too many compromises, concessions and appeasement given, which only encourages the looters to ask for more. I'm so tired of being told I have to give my fair share, to spread around some fictional wealth that my govt feels others are entitled to. I feel I am entitled to keep what I earn, thank you very much. I see no one else earning it, paying the extortion rate taxes that are somehow never enough. All of these redundant federal agencies are the greatest boondoggle foisted on the producers to keep alive a blind and drooling apathetic vapid leftist socialist grasping pile of mooching excrement!

?? I had a long post? About what? Damn, getting older...don't remember.

I've got to go find your long post from yesterday, I put it off so I could give it the attention it deserved and then this almost gave me a heart attack

I don't know about the bang but I would be relieved not to have to see this scene in AS III. I love the fact that these movies are being made and that they do not overtly "compromise" the book. I am not a movie critic but I think they fall short of being great theater. What I like is to be able to see actors presenting whatever part of the story that they can see including in a movie without screwing it up. Tears come to my eyes when there is a scene that is true and meaningful. It is a major accomplishment that AS I and AS II have been made and hopefully we will be able to see AS III in the future.

My life has been influenced by AS since the early 60's and it has been like pushing a rope. My career and personal life has been shaped by the ideas therein and it has resulted in a lot of external bruises. My four kids have likewise been affected and sometimes their grief from their beliefs is painful to see but what is good is that when I look in the mirror I feel good about the integrity of my life and I know they do too.

I spent most of my career in Pittsburgh and I felt the presence of the men that created the industrial heart of America. That Carnegie, Melon, Forbes, Rockefeller, Frick, Morgan and many others could have produced so much in the brief period of the nearly unfettered industrial development of the US is totally amazing. We are living on and still eating that legacy today. Only in America could that have been possible and it lifted the entire world and erased man's history of nothing but poverty except for the rulers. That we are tossing it out the window is incomprehensible.

I see the Priest as a symbol of everything that enslaves men by using their virtue against them.

I just don't see how that can happen. read the 90 pages again with a stop watch :)

Nice allegory! I can only say, "whew"!