James Bond: Objectivist Assassin

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

But Objectivist esthetics is not part of Objectivism except as an add-on.

Brant,

I stand in awe.

(Isn't an add-on a "part"? )

Michael

EDIT: Granted, Ayn Rand stood on one leg and did not mention aesthetics. But that was not exclusionary. She was merely giving a shortcut to the fundamentals.

[objectiveMan]

Tell that to a person like Ayn Rand who watched an entire civilization almost go down the tubes, not just once, but twice (WWI and WWII) and, to get started, saw the communist revolution take everything her family had.

I would agree that WWII was a case where it was probably in the self-interest of Americans to fight. But even that is unknown, as we cannot know what an alternative history might look like. The later wars are much less certain. Donald Trump, for example, has said that wars in Iraq and Afghanistan were mistakes.

A foreign policy that I advocate is non-interventionism. Here is a wikipedia definition:

Non-interventionism or non-intervention is a foreign policy that holds that political rulers should avoid alliances with other nations but still retain diplomacy and avoid all wars unless related to direct self-defense. An original more formal definition is that non-interventionism is a policy characterized by the absence of interference by a state or states in the external affairs of another state without its consent, or in its internal affairs with or without its consent.

I consider myself in good company, as Wikipedia lists names like Ron Paul, George Washington and Thomas Jefferson as other supporters.

Being a good guy sometimes comes with a price. Those who refuse to pay it are not necessarily bad guys. They're not good guys, either. They're just parasites living off the efforts and payments of the good guys.

I don't think the concept of a "good guy" has any clear definition. It represents some vague idea, rather than anything concrete and objective.

It seems to me like you are saying that those who sacrifice themselves for others are the "good guys", when Objectivism specifically holds self-sacrifice as particularly evil?

[9thdoctor]

A review of the new movie. Sounds like something MSK will relate to.

http://v.theonion.com/onionstudios/video/3424/640.mp4

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

It seems to me like you are saying that those who sacrifice themselves for others are the "good guys"...

Pekka,

Where did you ever get that idea?

Confucius say: Think with brain, not with knee.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

A review of the new movie. Sounds like something MSK will relate to.

http://v.theonion.com/onionstudios/video/3424/640.mp4

Dennis,

Ha!

So James Bond's more outlandish adventures were all the result of his unbridled alcoholism?

(God knows, enough of mine were. )

Just think about all those enablers, too.

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

But Objectivist esthetics is not part of Objectivism except as an add-on.

Brant,

I stand in awe.

(Isn't an add-on a "part"? )

Michael

EDIT: Granted, Ayn Rand stood on one leg and did not mention aesthetics. But that was not exclusionary. She was merely giving a shortcut to the fundamentals.

.

A barnacle is an add-on.

--Brant

I thought posting after your name was just for me on OL (sniff)

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

A barnacle is an add-on.

Brant,

So the fictional character John Galt is an Objectivist barnacle?

Or worse, a mini-barnacle since the big barnacle would be Romantic Realism?

Michael

[Brant Gaede]

John Galt can be considered a proto-Objectivist. That's a dead end for him and his speech essentially the end of the novel. There was then no where for that Objectivist to go just as the classical Objectivist, a la Rand and Branden (Peikoff?) had no where to go (so Branden took a dog leg).

--Brant

if you're going to be an Objectivist know what kind of Objectivist that's going to be so your wheels will get proper traction on the highway of life (and you're pointed in the right direction)

[Brant Gaede]

A barnacle is an add-on.

Brant,

So the fictional character John Galt is an Objectivist barnacle?

Or worse, a mini-barnacle since the big barnacle would be Romantic Realism?

Michael

Brant baiting.

--Bear