Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • 11
    Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 1 month ago
    Sorry, Walter. We agree on much, but none of that is in your essay.

    1. It is true the the EPA was Richard Nixon's creation. He also froze wages and prices. His EPA was run by Ken Lay who later ran ENRON. It is a perfect example of Ayn Rand villiains. The proper way to instantiate "environmentalism" would have been through property rights. (BTW, Nixon also opened up relations with China, holding a summit with Mao Zedong. If a Democrat had done that... Well, anyway...)

    2. Contrary to your claim, marriage has little to do with reproduction, and everything to do with social status and marriage rites and marriage laws make people into property. In our society, marriage is a tax dodge, as you know, "everything is in her name and she is in his name."

    3. As an Objectivist, I am not a Trump supporter. He is a range-of-the-moment muscle mystic. For an allusion to literature, Donald Trump is to Hillary Clinton as Cuffy Meigs is to Ivy Starnes.

    Our culture has been improving these past 50 or so years, often along flawed lines because of incorrect or mixed-premise ideas. The common theme that explains and underlies the collapse of traditionalist racism and traditionalist sexism (along with ageism, which you missed, old man), is individualism.. Because of the works of Ayn Rand and their long and continuing popularity among millions of people, things are better now than they have ever been.

    We have problems. But they are as much to be laid at the doorsteps of the conservatives. The so-called "drug war" remains a horrible failure in its primary and secondary destructions of lives. We now have a conservative rush to build a wall along the border, a new Berlin Wall in every sense. And it is a physical symbol of the "trade wars" of the Trump Administration. Trade war is an Orwellian phrase a "doublethink" an oxymoron because trade and war are mutually exclusive. Free trade, free markets, and free minds are integrated concepts and any attempt to regulate trade is an attack on the intellect.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Lucky 1 month ago
      Good!
      1. Yes.
      2. Very good. re your previous point that marriage is primarily about property.
      3. As a semi-Objectivist, I note the world-wide Trump Derangement Syndrome, pure collectivist hysteria.

      The Wall
      Good fences make good neighbors
      Fencing on a property line delineates ownership. This fence is not to define ownership of the land inside, but to state clearly that the land inside is not the property of persons outside nor do they control its use.
      Fencing on a national boundary denotes area of responsibility. The message is to those outside, and to those inside who do not want their nation to survive.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  MikeMarotta 1 month ago
        We have no fences with Canada. They are great neighbors! Famous fences: North Korea/South Korea; East Germany/West Berlin; Maginot Line; Siegfried Line.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  CBJ 1 month ago
          The Berlin Wall was built to prevent exit. Trump's proposed border wall is to prevent unauthorized entrance. Big difference.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 month ago
            "The Berlin Wall was built to prevent exit. Trump's proposed border wall is to prevent unauthorized entrance. Big difference."
            I understand the point, but to people who want people free to move, they are similar.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  CBJ 1 month ago
              For people who want reasonable standards regarding people entering the country, they are different.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by ewv 1 month ago
                Yes, the wall is not to stop people from entering the country (let alone leaving), but to ensure that entry is done legally through ports of entries where those who are not allowed can be stopped.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  Radio_Randy 1 month ago
              They are "similar", only in name. Our wall is to block the movement of people. The Berlin wall blocked the movement of people, but it's guards saw to the extermination of people.

              It's almost like saying using a condom is "similar" to having an abortion.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by ewv 1 month ago
                The name "wall" is used for both, but there is more of a difference than guards exterminating people, which was a means for enforcing the purpose of the Berlin wall: Imprisoning people trying to get out is not the same as preventing people from illegally getting in by avoiding valid ports of entry.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  mshupe 1 month ago
          Regarding border walls, the question is whether government has the moral authority to restrict freedom of movement among peaceful individuals. It does have the moral authority enforce its laws within its border, and defend the border from armed invaders. Gang members are another matter, they sanction violence by their membership and organize once within the country. The same can also be said about jihadists.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by ewv 1 month ago
            Freedom of movement of peaceful individuals does not mean anarchy. Of course the government has a responsibility to monitor who and what is coming over the border into the country, including hordes in large numbers.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  blarman 1 month ago
            It's actually a question of association. A wall is a separator between associations - whether they be families or nations. Nations are associations based on geographical areas or property lines, but inherently they are voluntary associations with 1. rules for membership, 2. privileges granted to members, and 3. conditions for entry which must be met.

            Much of the current ado about the southern border is a result of the fact that - unlike 200 years ago - the people trying to come here are not seeking to become members of the association known as the United States of America. They do not want to adopt the rules of the association (the laws and culture of the United States) nor do they meet the defined criteria for joining the membership (rules for citizenship). They just want to take advantage of the privileges of association granted to citizens of the United States. They are by very definition looters.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  mshupe 1 month ago
              Great comparison, and I think the counterargument is one of collectivism vs. individualism. For example, the association in this case is government, and government does not have the moral authority to grant privileges aka rights. But I agree, migrants who do not respect individual rights, and in fact come from medieval cultures, are a complex problem.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by  $  blarman 1 month ago
                "I think the counterargument is one of collectivism vs. individualism."

                Where collectivism is really code for one-world, socialist government of the elites and for the elites at the expense of everyone else. Agreed.

                "the association in this case is government, and government does not have the moral authority..."

                The government is there to administer the affairs of the association known as the United States of America and to protect that association. The association is not the government, but the People. And any association has the right and duty to police its own membership AND to determine who they will allow to join and become members.

                "migrants who do not respect individual rights, and in fact come from medieval cultures, are a complex problem."

                To me, it is very simple: you either apply to become a member in the approved manner AND live by the rules or you aren't a member. I don't think there is anything complex about it whatsoever.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by ewv 1 month ago
                  Citizens of a country are not "members" who "join" and "association". Laws are supposed to protect the rights of the individual, not "administer the affairs of the association" and impose arbitrary "rules", whose members act as a clique that "polices" its own members are arbitrarily decides who can be in the country.

                  This is supposed to be forum for those interested in Ayn Rand's ideas of reason and individualism, which are the opposite of a collectivist clique imposing arbitrary rules in an "association" like a college fraternity and worse.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by ewv 1 month ago
              Nations are not private "associations" that happen to have arbitrary "rules" for "members" with "privileges". The purpose of government is to protect the rights of the individual citizens, not to grant "privileges" and enforce "culture". There is no requirement for anyone to adopt the "culture". Those who come here because they want to "take advantage" of a freer country in which rights are respected are not "by definition looters".
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 1 month ago
      I think you are wrong. The alternative to Trump was crooked Hillary, and more collectivism.

      Our culture has been declining BIG TIME in the last 50 years. Now, pretty much any confiscation and restriction is on the table for consideration. That was not the case when I went to college in the mid 60's.

      I am tired of all the "racism" crap put out by the leftists. I havent wanted to hire blacks as a general proposition, not due to the skin color, but because they typically were just not as good a worker as others. Now, they are primarily "entitled" and as a result even worse employees.
      There are exceptions, and I would hire them of course. But its quite hard to find those exceptions.

      I would agree that the laws promulgated by religion are indeed bad. Those include the war on drugs, the war on DUI (when there are no victims), the extreme fights about gay marriage.

      The wall on the border is needed because of the stupid immigration laws we have that restrict "catch and deport", the sanctuary cities issues, and the instant citizenship for a baby that happens to be born in the USA from foreign parents. Fix those issues, and the need for the wall is heavily reduced. Maybe you want to pay for these pretty useless migrants, but I DONT
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 1 month ago
    This article hits a powerful point about how things are getting better. Activists calling for reform don’t get attention by saying, “we’ve almost completely nailed this problem, but help us improve things further.” Saying things are getting worse, even if that’s wrong, gets attention.

    I cannot see how this fact causes people to support President Trump. Trump argues that things are horrible, even things like violent crime and illegal border crossings that have improved hugely by clear objective measurements. Rather, the fact makes me respective to President Obama’s “hope and change” message. My first disappointment with him was after his election he carried on with what President Bush had been doing: arguing the gov’t must prop up the financial companies to save the economy. I wanted more hope and change. I wanted “All the economy is is people helping one another in mutually agreed trades. Find someone who needs something and can give you something you need.” I get the mainstream idea that there was too much leverage, and only the gov’t could unwind it in a way without leaving means of production sitting empty, BUT more than ever I think the very concept of a central bank setting monetary policy is flawed. I am not knowledgeable about what should replace it, and I categorically reject using gold or other things of real value. There has to be a way the money supply can expand to fund good ideas. Maybe cryptocurrencies are the answer.

    Back to the topic, if I have the choice between a) someone who makes a big deal about a problem that’s gotten better, e.g. racism, homophobia, police brutality, domestic violence, gov't not taking citizens' property, war crimes, animal welfare, the right to keep powerful weapons for defense, local environment (except for global warming), education, really everything on earth has gotten better and b) and someone who even jokes about bringing those problems back, I’m solidly in camp A. Let’s make things even a little better.

    My ideal representative is someone in camp A who thinks it can happen without government force. No mainstream candidates like that run. We only have the choice of Obama borrowing $400M per year and Trump borrowing $1000M per year, between someone claiming to support people rights and someone laughing off police brutality, war crimes, asset forfeiture, basically human achievement in the last century, there is no choice for rational people who value liberty and don’t follow internet conspiracy theories.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 1 month ago
    We the People had and have a right to react!, Our Constitution forbid the federal government from doing more than stated it could.
    Note, few if Any on the right reacted in violence and no conversation could be had because progressives, socialist, etc are deaf.
    So our only means of censure was humiliating truthful observations and of course the reaction by progressives was to respond with pure nonsense and emotion.

    I don't see why Objectionist wouldn't agree with that assessment.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Dobrien 1 month ago
    Most Trump supporters that I know of follow Q
    From what I have witnessed in the Awakening is that there is a worldwide group of humans who are sick of being enslaved by a government that no longer represents them period. A government run by thugs and looters that has systematically destroyed much of our brilliant future. It is a small minority that acts against someone based on ethnicity. Q anons and Trump are not racist!
    The Democratic Party certainly is.
    For The patriots , the motto is #WWG1WGA. Where we go one we go all !
    The road to freedom is the road to Self-Control
    We like clean pure water and air.
    We do not care about men or women’s legal sex acts
    and don’t support anti gay sodomy type of laws. We do know that there are 2 genders
    With some exceptions.

    I understand that the group think ..........that is on the leftists playbook and how it could easily infect people anew. I agree that this is a danger to avoid. ThanQ for you essay.

    Regards, Dobrien

    From Q
    What does money buy?
    How do you prevent tampering?
    Why are most forms of media left-wing?
    Why is H-wood left-wing?
    Why is the narrative so important?
    Why do liberals defer to racism w/o proof?
    No proof.
    Who is HRC’s mentor?
    What party was he affiliated with?
    Proof.
    What party formed the KKK?
    What party formed the Confederacy?
    What party abolished slavery?
    Why are D’s attempting to erase history?
    Is the black pop truly free today or enslaved by the D party?
    Refer back to black pop crumbs.
    Why is this relevant?
    Why is there an attack the day after bad news is published (D)?
    Do you believe in coincidences?
    Paint the picture.
    Crumbs will make bread.
    Operations underway.
    Operators active.
    Pray.
    Snow White.
    Godfather III.
    Q
    POWER TO THE PEOPLE
    1646
    Q
    !CbboFOtcZs
    30 Jun 2018 - 11:36:13 AM
    You have a choice.
    The choice has always been yours.
    POWER TO THE PEOPLE.
    THEY WANT YOU DIVIDED.
    THEY WANT RACE WARS.
    THEY WANT CLASS WARS.
    THEY WANT RELIGIOUS WARS.
    THEY WANT POLITICAL WARS.
    THEY USE THE MEDIA.
    THEY USE HOLLYWOOD.
    THEY USE POLITICAL LEADERS.
    THEY ARE LOUD.
    GROUP THINK.
    PUBLIC SHAME AGAINST THOSE WHO CHALLENGE.
    SLAVERY.
    THEY KNOW WHAT IS COMING.
    IT IS NOW MORE CLEAR THAN EVER.
    NEVER IN OUR HISTORY HAVE THEY BEEN THIS EXPOSED.
    NEVER IN OUR HISTORY HAVE THEY COME OUT FROM THE SHADOWS TO FIGHT.
    THE TRUTH IS CLEARLY VISIBLE.
    DEFEND MS-13?
    DEFEND THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR BORDERS?
    PROMOTE THE FEAR NUCLEAR WAR IF POTUS REMAINS IN OFFICE?
    NUCLEAR ALERTS MALFUNCTION?
    COMPARE TO HITLER/NAZIS?
    PROMOTE VIOLENCE?
    PROMOTE HATE?
    PROMOTE WAR?
    PROMOTE ECONOMIC DECLINE?
    PROMOTE NK TO END TALKS W/ POTUS?
    PROMOTE IMPEACHMENT FOR NO REASON?
    PROMOTE RACISM?
    PROMOTE FACISM?
    PROMOTE RIOTS?
    FORM ANTIFA - VIOLENT GROUP DESIGNED TO INSTILL FEAR IN FREE SPEECH.
    HATRED FOR AMERICA.
    SHEEP FOLLOW BLINDLY.
    THEY ARE SCARED.
    THEY ARE LOSING CONTROL.
    WE KNEW THIS DAY WOULD COME.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G2qIX...
    WE PLANNED.
    WE TOOK CONTROL OVER KEY ELEMENTS.
    WE STAND AT THE READY.
    WE FIGHT.
    DARK TO LIGHT.
    GOD BLESS AMERICA.
    GOD BLESS PATRIOTS AROUND THE WORLD.
    THINK FOR YOURSELF.
    TRUST YOURSELF.
    COURAGE.
    TOGETHER.
    "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."
    "Be on your guard; stand firm in the faith; be courageous; be strong."
    Q
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  mshupe 1 month ago
      But President Woodrow Wilson admonished us to disregard the Preface to better understand the Declaration! And he was pretty smart, if you don't believe me, just ask him.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DrZarkov99 1 month ago
    A vote for Trump was a recognized risk, but necessary. He was a disruptive outsider with the strength and toughness needed to make necessary changes. It was less progressive ideas than the obviously corrupt means they were using to reach their goals that caused the reaction against the direction our country was heading. Globalists used the disruption caused by demands which attacked established social rules of conduct to gain an increasingly uncomfortable control of our society.

    Intense focus on racial, religious, and economic differences, using them to drive people apart has become a primary tool of the left. "E pluribus unum," out of many, one is a motto that recognizes our strength as a nation is from many individuals working with common goals, not as a collective. The left was systematically destroying the trust and pride we felt as members of the greatest society in history, so when Trump said "Make America Great Again," it was a call to restore the pride and unifying support of a society of free individuals.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  blarman 1 month ago
    If the premise was that Trump is a reactionary President to combat the assertiveness of the Progressive Movement, I can agree with that sentiment. The rest I honestly had a hard time following because I couldn't figure out what was supposedly holding the entire article together. Maybe the author can chime in here what he was going for.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  mshupe 1 month ago
      I don't think the articles contain fair analogies. The predecessor to Trump voters was the Tea Party. Both organic "reactions" to increasing federal power over our lives. Both are peaceful and rooted in desire to return to consent of the governed. There's a huge difference between the American Revolution and the French Revolution founding philosophy, they just sounded similar.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo