AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Ayn Rand
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ayn Rand

post #1 of 43
2/18/11 at 11:28pm
Thread Starter 
I open this as a forum in which to discuss your thoughts on Ayn Rand's views.

Do you support her ideas? or take issue with them?

I will weigh in later on with my thoughts.

Fellowship
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #2 of 43
2/18/11 at 11:52pm
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Terrible. Selfish. Dickish. Backwards. Awful. Disgusting. Unchristian. Inhumane. And half of this board's members' material for the spank bank.

This quote sums it up:

Quote:
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #3 of 43
2/19/11 at 12:00am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Terrible. Selfish. Dickish. Backwards. Awful. Disgusting. Unchristian. Inhumane. And half of this board's members' material for the spank bank.

I am glad to see that you and I agree in this matter. It really does encourage me.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #4 of 43
2/19/11 at 12:48am
Without doubt the worst 'acclaimed' write that ever lived - eclipsing Martin Amis' world record for appalling yet lauded scribbling.

Significantly, the vast majority of her 'fans' (they are not fans of literature - how can they be? They are merely happy that there selfishness has somehow been 'justified') are actually first infected in the 12 - 16 age group....this is understandable as she is juvenile herself and they do not have anything to compare it to but the worrying this is that a small percentage never grow out of it.

That is they never grow up - this is the tell-tale sign: they still 'want it all' and 'want it now' and they want someone to tell them it's ok. If they can justify their childish selfishness as 'philosophy' then it makes them feel less adolescent.

She is a brawling obscenity and not worth a thread in any way, shape or form.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #5 of 43
2/19/11 at 1:12am
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Can't wait for John Galt to chime in. Naming yourself after a character who would watch (and encourage other selfish people to watch) millions die because he isn't compensated enough for some invention speaks volumes.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #6 of 43
2/19/11 at 1:23am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Can't wait for John Galt to chime in. Naming yourself after a character who would watch (and encourage other selfish people to watch) millions die because he isn't compensated enough for some invention speaks volumes.

Trumpy's a big fan too iirc.

Wasn't Atlas Shrugged plagiarized btw?

Quote:
Justin Raimondo has observed similarities between The Driver and Atlas Shrugged, a 1957 novel by Ayn Rand, which has a railroad executive as its main character and another character named John Galt.

Both The Driver and Atlas Shrugged have to do with running railroads during an economic depression, and both suggest pro-capitalist ways in which the country might get out of the depression.

Wiki
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #7 of 43
2/19/11 at 7:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Terrible. Selfish. Dickish. Backwards. Awful. Disgusting. Unchristian. Inhumane.

Well, duh...she was an atheist. So of course her world view would be "un-Christian." I'll leave to others to debate whether the rest of her philosophy is the cause or result of her atheism.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #8 of 43
2/19/11 at 8:02am
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Trumpy's a big fan too iirc.

Wasn't Atlas Shrugged plagiarized btw?



Wiki

I have not read all or even most of "Atlas Shrugged" but I've heard/seen/read enough to get the basics of it. I have read "The Driver" and there are definite similarities. I would also suggest that "The Driver" was something of a novelization/fictionalization/dramatization of the story of James J. Hill.

P.S. I also just finished reading Garet Garrett's "The Wild Wheel" which is basically just and early biography of Henry Ford. Actually quite interesting and a bit surprising.

Anyway...

( Back to your regularly scheduled programming... )

I honestly don't know enough about Ayn Rand's philosophy or world view ("objectivism" it is called?) to comment on any specifics. I will say that those who argue for liberty are not always doing that because of selfishness. I know some will disagree with that. From Wiki is says that "Objectivism holds that":
  1. reality exists independent of consciousness
  2. human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception
  3. one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic
  4. the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest
  5. the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights embodied in laissez faire capitalism
  6. the role of art in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas
  7. by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form—a work of art—that he can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally

I'd say 1-3 are not unreasonable statements or claims. I disagree with 4, and while 5 is probably a true deductive statement, I'd argue that 4 is not the only reasoning to support 5. I'd need to spend some more time unpacking and thinking about 6 and 7.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #9 of 43
2/19/11 at 8:45am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I honestly don't know enough about Ayn Rand's philosophy or world view ("objectivism" it is called?) to comment on any specifics. I will say that those who argue for liberty are not always doing that because of selfishness. I know some will disagree with that. From Wiki is says that "Objectivism holds that":
  1. reality exists independent of consciousness
  2. human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception
  3. one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic
  4. the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness or rational self-interest
  5. the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights embodied in laissez faire capitalism
  6. the role of art in human life is to transform man's widest metaphysical ideas
  7. by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical forma work of artthat he can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally

I'd say 1-3 are not unreasonable statements or claims. I disagree with 4, and while 5 is probably a true deductive statement, I'd argue that 4 is not the only reasoning to support 5. I'd need to spend some more time unpacking and thinking about 6 and 7.

Much as it pains me to discuss Rand at all, let alone rationally, you make some good points.

The points in the Wiki though I think are classic examples of why her 'philosophy' is inept and why it has produced nothing at all. It's kind of a short circuit.

the first point is unprovable - though I disagree with it, imo they are the same thing: reality and consciousness - to believe the unprovable is fine...all religions do....but to extrapolate a whole belief from this is futile. Fundies do this all the time - it is what gives religion a bad name and Rand does it too. Rand followers remind me a lot of fundies actually.

Number 4 is really just a return to the animal state and a betrayal of human progress...it is barbaric in fact.

Number 5 verges on the insane imo and could only arise in a US context.

The rest she should not talk of....I don;t think she ever earned the right to even think about art, let alone discuss it.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #10 of 43
2/19/11 at 8:53am
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

the first point is unprovable

Perhaps, but the opposite claim (reality does not exist independent of consciousness), I think, is less supportable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

to believe the unprovable is fine...all religions do....but to extrapolate a whole belief from this is futile.

Hmmm...I don't know. We all live life believing lots of things that, strictly speaking, are not provable.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Number 4 is really just a return to the animal state and a betrayal of human progress...it is barbaric in fact.

What's interesting is that this point is the one most consistent and derivative from her atheism.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

Number 5 verges on the insane imo and could only arise in a US context.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #11 of 43
2/19/11 at 10:05am
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
No, it is not the result of atheism. It's the result of selfishness. The two are vastly different.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #12 of 43
2/19/11 at 10:11am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

No, it is not the result of atheism. It's the result of selfishness.

Possibly. But the comment about her philosophy being "un-Christian" is, well, true and rather ironic given her atheism.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #13 of 43
2/19/11 at 10:28am
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Clearly the irony was lost on you. I said she was unchristian to draw a light on all the "christian" conservatives who worship the baby Ayn Rand.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #14 of 43
2/19/11 at 10:43am
Thread Starter 
I have absolutely no respect for Ayn Rand. I don't think she is worth the time of day. Is this because she is an atheist? No. I know atheists who are nothing like this late bag. Her version of society is heartless cold, dead, nothingness. It is utterly meaningless. She does not know what meaningful living is. First she does not believe she owes a minute of her life to anyone.. It is not about owing anything to anyone Ayn it is about choosing to give. She regards any who choose to give as fools or mentally ill or simply weak. Well Ayn I respectfully disagree. What kind of person is so full of it as to disregard every other human being on the planet? What an ugly excuse for a world view.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #15 of 43
2/19/11 at 10:47am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Clearly the irony was lost on you. I said she was unchristian to draw a light on all the "christian" conservatives who worship the baby Ayn Rand.

EXACTLY! No Christian can embrace her crap and still have any credibility as a Christian.

She can take her fair place in the garbage dump of rotten to the core ideas.

Fellows
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
May the peace of the Lord be with you always

Share your smile, Have respect for others, and be loving to all peoples

Paul in Athens: Acts 17 : 16-34
Reply
post #16 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:03am
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Clearly the irony was lost on you. I said she was unchristian to draw a light on all the "christian" conservatives who worship the baby Ayn Rand.

Ahhh...I get it now. I guess this irony was lost on me because I don't know any Christians (conservative or otherwise) "who worship the baby Ayn Rand."

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #17 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:20am
Although Rand's philosophy was vehemently opposed to Social Security and other forms of welfare, she received Social Security and other health benefits using her husband's name. The circular "justification" she used for this inconsistency (read hypocrisy) was that it was "morally OK" to accept such payments, knowing that the government uses coercive power to collect taxes to fund such payments.

I wonder what Rand would think of today's mega-welfare queens of the military-industrial-prison-security complex? What would she think as they strutted along the platform of the corporate gravy-train station awaiting their next astronomically sized multibillion $$$handouts and no bid contracts, all funded by we the long suffering taxpayer?

What would Ms. Rand think of the $$$multi trillion bank "bail-out" (mega scam) of the last 2.5 years, together with the lack of investigation, and the outrageous coercion of Congress to vote for the TARP and other government welfare schemes to get the bankster cartel off the hook?

What would she think of the spectacle of the bastions of "Free Market" Capitalism being rescued by socialism in its standard form, i.e. government funded welfare.. except this time on the grandest scale ever?

Oh my.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #18 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:40am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

Although Rand's philosophy was vehemently opposed to Social Security and other forms of welfare, she received Social Security and other health benefits using her husband's name. The circular "justification" she used for this inconsistency (read hypocrisy) was that it was "morally OK" to accept such payments, knowing that the government uses coercive power to collect taxes to fund such payments.

This is certainly poor reasoning. Better reasoning would be (if this were true for her and it is for many people): I paid in X, I should get X back. Not X+, just X. Preferably X with interest for the time the government had it. But X would be sufficient.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #19 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:42am
Back to Randian Objectivism...

This worldview/philosophy is based, it seems, in self-centeredness and selfishness.

Why is this wrong? On what basis can someone say this is wrong?

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #20 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

What would she think of the spectacle of the bastions of "Free Market" Capitalism being rescued by socialism...

Sammi_jo, be careful. You are begging the question.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #21 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:57am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Back to Randian Objectivism...

This worldview/philosophy is based, it seems, in self-centeredness and selfishness.

Why is this wrong? On what basis can someone say this is wrong?

I read a book recently by a Randian disciple Robert Ringer's Looking Out For Number One.

I didn't want to read it but I have to sometimes read stuff I hate because I have an open mind and I need to talk about it...anyway, apart from the endless eulogizing of Rand it made a lot of sense and I see where he's coming from.

For a start, his 'selfishness is the highest good' seems a lot worse than is it - when you give him a chance to explain he seems to say that helping others IS in your own good. Which I'm fine with.

He also states that everyone has a transactional contract mentality - which I agree with. I just happen to believe the goal is to transcend this but he thinks you cannot. Presumably Rand thought it was a great thing.

I would say that though that this system - and perhaps even Rand's philosophy, I don't know - makes perfect sense in the context of US Capitalism. In fact, it may even be the perfect way of WINNING within the context of US Capitalism.

I disagree with it because I disagree with rampant forms of Capitalism and with the US version in particular...but to those who embrace it then I would say that From what I gather from what little I know of Rand, it is probably the way to go.

Much better though - imo - to expend effort to change the system. And really help others instead of just using them as a rung on the ladder.
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #22 of 43
2/19/11 at 12:07pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

For a start, his 'selfishness is the highest good' seems a lot worse than is it - when you give him a chance to explain he seems to say that helping others IS in your own good. Which I'm fine with.

This is really a close cousin to the whole Adam Smith observation about people acting in their own self interest still providing good for others (and society in general)...the whole "invisible hand" thing.


Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

I disagree with it because I disagree with rampant forms of Capitalism and with the US version in particular...

What is a "rampant form of Capitalism?"

You do know that the form of "capitalism" we have in the US is basically "corporate socialism," "political capitalism," "economic fascism," "crony capitalism" or some degree of "state capitalism." Right? I just want to be clear on this. By and large there is little true free-market capitalism in the US. There hasn't been for some time. Many people think there is and blame it when things go bad. But this is simply misunderstanding (or misuse) of terminology, ignorance (willful or otherwise) or deliberate propagandizing. The word "capitalism" has so much baggage and misunderstanding surrounding it, I try to be a bit more clear by saying a free market economy.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #23 of 43
2/19/11 at 2:08pm
Never read any of Rand's books. I have never met a "Christian conservative" who has ever claimed her ideas as inspirational or foundational to their work or beliefs. Most of what I know about Rand comes from this board. The only time the name has ever come up for me is when fiscal conservatives and/or libertarians are in the room, and their comments are usually politely received, but hardly ever endorsed.
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
The evil that we fight is but the shadow of the evil that we do.
Reply
post #24 of 43
2/19/11 at 11:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

This is certainly poor reasoning. Better reasoning would be (if this were true for her and it is for many people): I paid in X, I should get X back. Not X+, just X. Preferably X with interest for the time the government had it. But X would be sufficient.

If we had *direct democracy*, yes. But we don't, to any extent. At best, in theory, we have representative democracy in which our representatives decide how our money is spent.

You paid X in taxes. How was that money spent? Thats is outside of the taxpayers' bailiwick... Rand's argument is bogus.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #25 of 43
2/20/11 at 6:37am
Quote:
Originally Posted by sammi jo View Post

If we had *direct democracy*, yes. But we don't, to any extent. At best, in theory, we have representative democracy in which our representatives decide how our money is spent.

You paid X in taxes. How was that money spent? Thats is outside of the taxpayers' bailiwick... Rand's argument is bogus.

I was thinking (and referring) specifically to the issue of Social Security taxes and payments. You're right, with other taxes it's much less clear. Better than we end all (or most) taxes and get the government (federal, state, regional, county and city) out of the business of doing things beyond the proper role of protecting the basic rights of life, liberty and property of its citizens and leave the rest of the stuff to private, free and voluntary organizations.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #26 of 43
2/20/11 at 9:25am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I was thinking (and referring) specifically to the issue of Social Security taxes and payments. You're right, with other taxes it's much less clear. Better than we end all (or most) taxes and get the government (federal, state, regional, county and city) out of the business of doing things beyond the proper role of protecting the basic rights of life, liberty and property of its citizens and leave the rest of the stuff to private, free and voluntary organizations.

Because private, free and voluntary organizations are so honest, righteous and trustworthy.

You see, that's the clearest definition of where Rand and small government arguments fall apart.
Reply
Reply
post #27 of 43
2/20/11 at 9:43am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Because private, free and voluntary organizations are so honest, righteous and trustworthy.

You see, that's the clearest definition of where Rand and small government arguments fall apart.

Because coercive and violent organizations are so honest, righteous and trustworthy.

You see, that's the clearest definition of where the socialist and big government arguments fall apart.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #28 of 43
2/20/11 at 9:11pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Because coercive and violent organizations are so honest, righteous and trustworthy.

You see, that's the clearest definition of where the socialist and big government arguments fall apart.

So the solution lies somewhere in the middle, between totalitarian government (which we thankfully don't have) and laissez-faire capitalism (which thankfully we also don't have). Whoever is arguing in favor of either of those is insane.
Reply
Reply
post #29 of 43
2/20/11 at 9:15pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

So the solution lies somewhere in the middle, between totalitarian government (which we thankfully don't have) and laissez-faire capitalism (which thankfully we also don't have). Whoever is arguing in favor of either of those is insane.

The problem is power/control-creep. When you start using force to achieve your goals (which so many people seem to like the idea of)...first it ends up having negative distortionary consequences which end up resulting in the call for even more force to correct these effects and on it goes. Second, use of force is addictive. The trend is for more. It might be slow, but the direction and trajectory is clear. Finally...it's immoral.

I like freedom and voluntary engagements. It's clear that many, perhaps including yourself, prefer to the use of forced, coercive, non-voluntary engagements...typically for other people of course.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #30 of 43
2/21/11 at 5:13am
LOL how naive to believe that law is the only means by which people are forced to make decisions they don't want to make.

Unregulated business has every bit as much capability to use 'force' as government has.
Reply
Reply
post #31 of 43
2/21/11 at 6:48am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

LOL how naive to believe that law is the only means by which people are forced to make decisions they don't want to make.

Unregulated business has every bit as much capability to use 'force' as government has.

They may have the capability but they don't have the right. Just like a mugger might have the capability to use or threaten force with, say, a gun or knife and take your money...they don't have the right.

You are confusing capability with moral right.

The problem is that with government, you have given them the apparent "right" to use force. Morally speaking, no one has the right to initiate* the use of force against another. Whether that someone is an individual, whether they work for the government, whether it is a large group. Whether it is a large group that has been selected by some other group to do their bidding. Whatever.

Worse, this capability (and alleged "right") vested in the state then becomes co-opted by private interests to be used for their own purposes. Which is why the power of government to use force must be strictly limited.

It's amusing to see people who want to give government lots of power then be dismayed when that power is co-opted and abused, as if this were some kind of unpredictable outcome.

It's amusing to see people who have no faith in people to act morally and well when they are acting in the private realm but to assume they will act morally and rightly once they have been given the power of force embodied within the government.

Finally, its amusing to see people who propose and advocate for the use of force to achieve whatever goals they desire or claim to be noble (usually for other people than themselves), ignore both the immorality of this as well as the fact that they have no right to do it.

Look tonton, as an example, if you are entering into some kind of agreement, let's say for employment, with someone...I have no right whatsoever to step into the middle of that arrangement and dictate its terms. None.

*Everyone does have the right to use force in defense of a forceful action of course.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #32 of 43
2/21/11 at 8:12am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

They may have the capability but they don't have the right. Just like a mugger might have the capability to use or threaten force with, say, a gun or knife and take your money...they don't have the right.

You are confusing capability with moral right.

The problem is that with government, you have given them the apparent "right" to use force. Morally speaking, no one has the right to initiate* the use of force against another. Whether that someone is an individual, whether they work for the government, whether it is a large group. Whether it is a large group that has been selected by some other group to do their bidding. Whatever.

Worse, this capability (and alleged "right") vested in the state then becomes co-opted by private interests to be used for their own purposes. Which is why the power of government to use force must be strictly limited.

It's amusing to see people who want to give government lots of power then be dismayed when that power is co-opted and abused, as if this were some kind of unpredictable outcome.

It's amusing to see people who have no faith in people to act morally and well when they are acting in the private realm but to assume they will act morally and rightly once they have been given the power of force embodied within the government.

Finally, its amusing to see people who propose and advocate for the use of force to achieve whatever goals they desire or claim to be noble (usually for other people than themselves), ignore both the immorality of this as well as the fact that they have no right to do it.

Look tonton, as an example, if you are entering into some kind of agreement, let's say for employment, with someone...I have no right whatsoever to step into the middle of that arrangement and dictate its terms. None.

*Everyone does have the right to use force in defense of a forceful action of course.

Completely missed my point.

There's a company that owns the road between your house and your business. You're forced to use that company's product. They are FORCING you to use their product by controlling the market. That is a corporation using FORCE, and you are supporting that right, and there's not a damn thing you can do about it. So when they double the toll fee, what do you do?

I'm not talking physical force or legal force. There are other kinds of force. And they are equally as effective as that part of government you loathe so much.

What government gives us is the power to change things (gradually) with our vote if we don't like it. That company that owns the road? What are you going to do? Firebomb them?

You should have been born in the dark ages. Because that's where your ideas are.
Reply
Reply
post #33 of 43
2/21/11 at 8:15am
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

I'm not talking physical force or legal force.

I am. That's the kind of force that really matters.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

What government gives us is the power to change things (gradually) with our vote if we don't like it.

Uh huh.


Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

You should have been born in the dark ages. Because that's where your ideas are.

How pleasant it is to try and have an adult conversation with liberals. They always make it personal.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #34 of 43
2/21/11 at 8:28am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

How pleasant it is to try and have an adult conversation with liberals. They always make it personal.

What if the ideas are medieval though - I'm sure some somewhere are - does it mean no-one's allowed to point it out?

Seems a bit dictatorial...
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
What is Faith? When your good deed pleases you and your evil deed grieves you, you are a believer. What is Sin? When a thing disturbs the peace of your heart, give it up - Prophet Muhammad
Reply
post #35 of 43
2/21/11 at 9:30am
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

I am. That's the kind of force that really matters.

Why?

How is there any difference between any kinds of force that limit your choices? The end result is exactly the same. It's the end result that matters.
Reply
Reply
post #36 of 43
2/21/11 at 10:53am
  • BR
  • Justified Arrogance
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

What if the ideas are medieval though - I'm sure some somewhere are - does it mean no-one's allowed to point it out?

Seems a bit dictatorial...

Sounds like he's trying to force you into not saying certain things.

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply

 

“The nitrogen in our DNA, the calcium in our teeth, the iron in our blood, the carbon in our apple pies were made in the interiors of collapsing stars. We are made of starstuff.” 
-Sagan
Reply
post #37 of 43
2/21/11 at 1:38pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by segovius View Post

What if the ideas are medieval though - I'm sure some somewhere are - does it mean no-one's allowed to point it out?

Seems a bit dictatorial...

Well, fair enough...if ideas like voluntary engagements, liberty and preservation of basic rights of life, liberty and property are "medieval" then I'm guilty as charged.



The real point was that it is never simply that we can respectfully disagree with each other...that we have come to different conclusions based on the evidence, logic and observations...no it's like "you're an idiot", "you're selfish", "your a heartless bastard", "you should have been born in the dark ages because that's how you think."

\

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #38 of 43
2/21/11 at 1:39pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by BR View Post

Sounds like he's trying to force you into not saying certain things.

That's what it might sound like to someone who insists on a watered down definition of the word "force."

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #39 of 43
2/21/11 at 1:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by tonton View Post

Why?

How is there any difference between any kinds of force that limit your choices? The end result is exactly the same. It's the end result that matters.

Not really. Because there is vast difference between your hypothetical example that you think creates a situation of "force" and governments which actually do, you know, force people to do (or not do things.)

Anyway, we disagree. I respect your right to your opinion, and I would fight to protect your liberty even as you vote to take mine away.

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply

The state is nothing more than a criminal gang writ large.

Reply
post #40 of 43
2/21/11 at 2:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MJ1970 View Post

Not really. Because there is vast difference between your hypothetical example that you think creates a situation of "force" and governments which actually do, you know, force people to do (or not do things.)

Anyway, we disagree. I respect your right to your opinion, and I would fight to protect your liberty even as you vote to take mine away.

As long as you would fight to protect my liberty from living in a place where i don't know if my milk powder is tainted or not (because there's no regulation) or whether the restaurant I eat is breeding rats (because there's no regulation) or where the poor aren't breaking down my door wielding sawed off shotguns (because the economic system is a serfdom and their families are starving while I'm on Saville Row) then I guess that means I would fight for yours too.
Reply
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Ayn Rand