Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/09/2020 in Posts

  1. 2 points
    There's something else I want to add. Countries are not shut down because of grassroots. They are shut down by the elites. From what I see, since so many countries in the world shut down in the same manner, it's reasonable to assume the elites are talking to each other. I could spin this in so many ways, it's not funny. How does this one sound? Two people from the European ruling class meet in August, 2019. European Elitist: My dear sir, those open borders are screwing us left and right. EU Dude: Trust us. We have discussed this ad nauseam. This migration will only go on a little longer. It is useful for the greater good. (winking) Of us, that is... European Elitist: Yes, but all of those poor people from Muslim countries are pissing off our citizens. Really pissing them off. It's bad. EU Dude: Well, sir. Control them. That's what you are paid to do. European Elite: I can't. We can't. They won't listen. EU Dude: Make them. European Elitist: Really? Do you think I haven't considered that, Mr. High-and-Mighty? They are not only not listening, they are now coming after me! And if I fall, they will come for you. Wait until you meet Mr. Commoner Beastie. He's as strong as an ox, only has three teeth in his head and loves to brawl. He puts his enemies in the hospital. The peasantry love him. (shuddering) He eats boiled beef because he likes it, for God's sake. Then he drinks the damn broth right there... right out of the pan. EU Dude: Ghastly!... So what do you want to do about it? European Elitist: I think my country should leave the EU. Yes. That's the answer. Leave. Just like Great Britain did. EU Dude: Now wait a minute. It's not that easy. You simply must stay. European Elitist: Then fix the goddam flood of immigrants. EU Dude: But the humanitarian... European Elitist: (yelling) I don't care! Either those uncultured pigs stop stampeding in or we leave the EU. Period. Enough! EU Dude: (long pause) Hmmmm... And if we fix it? European Elitist: (surprised) Well, then. There's no reason to leave. I get to stay in power in my country and Mr. Commoner Beastie gets to go back to his dirt hut after his political ambitions fail. EU Dude: And what about our... uh... er... ummm... special arrangements? European Elitist: When the people clamor to make the intolerable stop... when filthy hoards are moving in next door and raping their daughters in broad daylight... when the calmest among them are ready for violent revolt... My dear fellow... when bold solutions are suddenly implemented in times of such ire-laden flux... when said solutions work--or look like they are successful... I can see our arrangements getting sweeter. The relief will make the people, that is the lower ranks, momentarily numb and give us a window of opportunity where anything could happen. EU Dude: (thinking and preening) Really? European Elitist: No doubt about it. EU Dude: Well, of course something effective can be done. It must be done. Does the idea of stronger borders appeal to you? Would that appeal to your citizens? European Elitist: Absolutely. But now that people are used to loose borders and wandering about like nomads, how would we do that? EU Dude: Have you ever heard of something called COVID-19? They talk long into the night. Stronger borders it became. And no one of importance among the populations of the different EU countries complained about the change in border policies. That's just one off the top of my head. Michael
  2. 2 points
    http://radio.garden/visit/runavik/eZl4Tlda
  3. 2 points
    Ayn Rand's 1957 novel, ATLAS SHRUGGED, contained a counter-conspiracy involving a radio speech given by a man who vowed "to stop the motor of the world." On March 28, 2020, we have this speech dropped by the counter-conspiracy known as "Q", via the internet... "The entire world is watching. Patriots from around the world are praying for AMERICA. We are all bound by a feeling deep inside, a feeling that cannot be publicly expressed for fear of ridicule, a feeling that challenges the mainstream (narrative), against that which we are told to accept and dare not question, put simply, that people are being abused by those in power and time is running out. " Read the entire drop here: https://qmap.pub/ https://twitter.com/StormIsUponUs/status/1243987443533205504?s=20 Many have criticized Rand for Galt's speech being too long to hold people's attention, and too unfilmable for a movie. But whatever else one may think about "Q", you gotta admit, they figured a way around all that...
  4. 2 points
    Peter, People don't do conspiracies out in the open (except in America where certain conspirators have a complicit press and this still leaves me with jaw dropping ). One characteristic of a conspiracy is that it is meant to be hidden until the right moment. That's by definition. So how can one demand observed fact about something hidden? One has to dig and expose. The idea that a suspicion is loopy just because you can't see who is doing the bad stuff is a very dangerous one. You can't see a cancer cell inside you with your eyes alone. Not even doctors can. And if you ignore it, it will kill you. I don't know if you ever read some posts I made about a professor in Florida--I forget his name right now. He's a leftie. He tracked down where the term "conspiracy theory" came from. And he holds conferences at the university level where "peer reviewed" material is presented about the different conspiracies that have turned out to be true. The term "conspiracy theory" came from the CIA to quell the unrest that happened, both in America and abroad, after Kennedy got shot and the Warren commission issued it's lame report. People were having a fit in public--the press, radio, TV, speeches, and so on. There are copies of a memo by the CIA at the time. It is available to anyone who wants to see it. The CIA circulated it to the press offices and the Embassies explaining how to discredit public doubters of the Warren Report or the public version of the Kennedy assassination by smearing them as loopy conspiracy nuts. Before that time, "conspiracy theory" was a phrase used to describe serious musings on events. I can't think of an example from that time off the top of my head, but the later economic term "trickle down theory" has the kind of emotional load "conspiracy theory" used to have. Nobody today thinks a person espousing the "trickle down theory" is a flaming kook. Instead, they think the person is serious even when they disagree. Before the CIA did that little masterpiece of persuasion engineering to shut down discussion of speculations, people going overboard on a conspiracy were generally linked to the theory they espoused. For example, "red baiters" or "McCarthyites." Not even the John Birch Society people back then were called "conspiracy theorists." Lance deHaven-Smith Here... I just looked and found where I wrote about my man. The professor's name is Lance deHaven-Smith, Professor Emeritus at Florida State University. Here's a great start of a reading list if you ever get interested in historical conspiracies that were not believed at the time, but ended up being true: Also, here is a little more on Lance deHaven-Smith. First a post by William (with the snark against those who think differently than him, mostly meaning Trump supporters, removed). He posted a very good video of Lance deHaven-Smith in a 2013 talk. Then a response by me that gives some more nutshell information on Lance deHaven-Smith: I know I can dig up a lot more if I get going. But that's enough to make my point--that taking seriously a potential conspiracy is not the same thing as being batshit crazy. (Besides, this is getting so long, I'm not sure you will read it all. ) Asymmetrical Warfare Now that the military has openly embraced what it calls asymmetrical warfare, you can find paper after paper published by the military on conspiracy theories in the original meaning of the term. QAnon is a phenomenon that has all the marks of such asymmetrical warfare. It is intentionally designed to attract the fringe and nonfringe alike, that is, the way this project has unfolded, it is a way to inject narratives into the mainstream that are different than the ones offered but the fake news media, narratives that discredit the elitist mainstream culture. It's been a resounding success in that regard. Just think of how this has led to Epstein's fall--before, nobody believed he was trafficking in pedophilia among the superpowerful, but now everyone says he was. And he got dead and croaked and suicided as part of the show. Not even a fifty million dollar special counsel investigation into the idea that Russians elected Donald Trump through covert means worked. Nor an impeachment. Don't forget, the mainstream press deployed everything they had to support the narratives behind that investigation and impeachment, both during the leading up phase and after both fizzled. The fake news mainstream culture did this for over three years, day in and day out. Part of the reason these efforts didn't take is that the narratives pushed by the mainstream culture were not accepted by the general population. One of the reasons this happened was QAnon's skillful injection of counternarratives and doubt into the general population at places the mainstream fake news culture did not control. Back when you and I were young, this would not have been possible since there were only three nationwide TV stations, radio was mostly pop tunes and religion, and the printed press carried the day. The Internet ended that monopoly on controlling the narrative by the few. One day, after all this blows over, it will be very interesting to look at and study all the different techniques deployed on both sides. I have already identified a few, but it's still too early to write anything definitive about it. (That goes for me and others.) I'm still--we're still--observing--still gathering conceptual referents so to speak--since important history is unfolding right in front of us and hasn't wound up. Michael
  5. 2 points
    Something else: go to Google Earth, and look up the Administrative and Court Facility at Guantanamo Bay. I tried it..."the results are will shock you..."
  6. 2 points
    Indeed. I may be skeptical about aspects of the story, but not the story itself.
  7. 2 points
    Pizaagate is proven true by the Epstein story alone with it’s tentacles into Harvard, MIT, Bill Gates, Bill Clinton, Ehud Barak, Princes and princesses worldwide. Nothing, no list of additional disclosures of any length will bring a person away from their precious yeah buts if the Epstein story does not.
  8. 2 points
    I think I stumbled across one of the main reasons for the intense Trump hatred among the elitists, all the way from the beginning. Relevance. From Breitbart: Nolte: We Now Know Truckers and Stock Boys Are Vital, Hollywood Is Not Nolte then gives these two example of our Hollywood royalty. And Madonna below, purposely made up ugly (at least it looks like that), and butchering fried fish, of all the goddam things to sing about. I'm gonna push the fair use thing and give the rest of the article. So what does this have to do with Trump Derangement Syndrome? I'm reminded of an observation Nathaniel Branden used to say about everybody knowing the truth about themselves when they wake up alone at two o'clock in the morning. They don't use a mask at that time, not even to fool themselves. The truth is, underneath, everybody knows what John Nolte just wrote. They know it deep in their gut. Even Hollywood royalty. Dreams are for the future, but without the present, dreams are nothing. There can be no future without the present. But look at how pathetic our dream-keepers are without their dream-enhancing trappings. Their present is worse than many of our next-door neighbors singing in the shower. They are not striving to make their dreams real. They are wallowing in mediocrity. Now think of this. Who sold the biggest dream of them all out in Hollywood and among the elites? Donald Trump did. He said go for it. And go for it, people did. They went for keeping that dream alive in their hearts. They read his books and made bestsellers out of them. The consumed the image of a big money show-off he injected into the mainstream. They put his TV show at No. 1 for years. And did Donald Trump become a dream-keeper just like everyone else? Nope. He took his own advice and went for it out in reality. He made his dream come true. And he did not need them to do it. Something none of them have the capacity to pull off. Oh, they have the reputation of being able to make dreams come true. But it's unearned. When push comes to shove, they know they are peddling a dream future without having earned a real present where that makes any kind of sense. They don't strive in their personal lives to become competent and better at real things. One can build a dream by striving for it by living on the pathway to it. Instead, they strive to be pampered and shielded from real things. I'm not talking about words or stories. I'm talking about reality. Reality-wise, these people are spiritual impostors. They crave to be worshiped for a metaphysical standing they have not earned and do not deserve. They can present a good story, but their reality sucks. Well, President Trump emerged from enormous personal striving and became President of the United States against all odds--while keeping the dream all along. He didn't sell out his dream, but instead, transmuted into reality on a foundation of merit. And by extension, he made these impostors look at themselves in the daylight, not just at two o'clock in the morning when they are by themselves. He made them realize--in full awareness--how insignificant they really are. They never forgave him for it. This applies to all elitists who hate Trump, too. Especially conservative never-Trumpers who made their careers out of selling a conservative dream but not earning a conservative present of productivity and competence in dealing with reality. They could never do what President Trump did and it galls them to no end anyone could. They know what that makes them look like--to everyone and to themselves. And now, for some goddam psychological reason I can't grok right now, these Hollyweird idiots are hell-bent on showing their public just how ugly, untalented, and insignificant they really are when they have to live the life their fans do. I can grok this much, though. They have a subconscious drive to put their hands on reality when all they've ever known is a dream. But they're not going for the gold out there in reality. They're going for the shit. That's what they want their fans to see them right now: themselves as shit. And they want this right at the time when their fans are under attack by reality. They will never forgive President Trump for making them do this, even though he didn't. Their hatred of him is projected hatred of themselves. Why do they hate themselves? Because they can't measure up and Trump can? No. Not at root. It's because they don't want to measure up and they know how wrong that is as a human being--at least they know it at two o'clock in the morning. Michael
  9. 2 points
    Jon, What accounts for the appearance of the COVID-19 virus just now in your narrative? Are you claiming that Xi had the virus bioengineered or some other way managed to get it unleashed on the world and that Donald Trump is such an inhumane bastard that he doesn't care about the deaths and misery and financial dislocation so long as he has a cover for declaring martial law and arresting his enemies list? Ellen
  10. 2 points
    Polly's terrific. She at least asks the right questions as Michael says; and if a tenth of what she interconnects is valid, it's enough. It's your minds they want. AR Never let a good crisis go to waste. R. Emanuel If you can keep your head when all about you...RK When all the cattle are stampeding in one direction, look for the men on horses. AJG There's something very strange going on, things which didn't transpire with the last serious virus.
  11. 2 points
    The ~main~ thing to be fearful of is others' paranoia, and ongoing curtailment on our freedoms. Do not accept the leftist narrative driving panic for power.
  12. 2 points
    Rand had good things to say about the American "common man." Nonetheless, her expressed views about the large majority of humankind were dismissive. Google the word "ballast" in Rand's work. Here's an example from the title essay of For the New Intellectual. This isn't early Rand. It was written after Atlas Shrugged. Ellen
  13. 1 point
    They are not even hiding that they are doing this. Lookee here. It's right out in the open. President Trump needs to wake up and look who is beside him. I know he would not build a hotel using that logic. Michael
  14. 1 point
    I just saw the following live on a broadcast. A guy in the press was trying to bust President Trump's balls over firing Michael Atkinson. In responding, after blasting the hell out of Atkinson, President Trump started talking about Ciaramella without mentioning his name, but pointing to different people and saying, "You know who he is, you know who he is, you know who he is, I know who he is..." and so on. Then he came out with this: Michael
  15. 1 point
    I’m thankfully still working because my profession is deemed to be an essential service. Lots of new procedures in place. Hand sanitizing stations everywhere. Etc.
  16. 1 point
    Another screenshot from Facebook. That's Robin Williams, so it doesn't have anything to do with the coronavirus. Unless one thinks of Robin Williams being a man ahead of his times. Michael
  17. 1 point
    Take care Peter. I for one will miss your posts. (Back to whatever I was doing now.)
  18. 1 point
    Merlin, I would have to look it up, but I think I first heard about this on Tucker Carlson. He said at the time that the US division runs completely at a loss. This deficit is compensated by overseas, including ad hikes from CNN's airport monopoly. That didn't make any sense to me at the time, how can airport viewing prop up ad prices? But I have seen other people in the news talk about this. I smell a smokescreen. Comments in the news about CNN running at a deficit come up in the sporadic news stories that AT&T is thinking of spinning it off due to losses. This was discussed more during the recent AT&T and Time Warner merger, but it still comes up. On the Wikipedia page for CNN, you even get this comment: That is sourced to The Guardian. I'm surprised the hack political Wikipedia trolls let that one alone because there is certainly a lot more about CNN's losses that could be mentioned and sourced but isn't (meaning the trolls have been busy). For more details, I would have to do some digging if I ever get around to it. But the minutia of CNN's financials is not high on my priority list right now. I'm more interested in things like why and how a whole string of disgraced and/or retired intelligence officers keep getting pundit positions over at CNN and what kind of payoffs this entails. It seems like the ties between CNN and the CIA in particular are quite deep. So for now, just treat all this as my opinion. You'll probably sleep better at night. And add this. CNN is a cancer in our society. Michael
  19. 1 point
    Brant, Peter is hurting from a death in his family that looked like the coronavirus, but was not tested. And his pain is deep. I feel it in between the lines in everything he writes right now. I have learned a lot about running an online forum, but I have not yet learned what to do when other people refuse to take things like that into account and bicker with him as if he were the enemy. He's not and never will be. A man in his kind of pain acts differently than he does normally. But it's hard to detect this online and even harder to get others to see it. What to do and what to do? Hell and damnation. How does one keep the fire burning in people's souls, call for exceptions due to context at the same time, and not piss off everybody? It's not either-or. Both the fire and the exceptions are what make for a healthy environment that will not die, but keeping that balance is a bitch. From what I've seen, an imbalance in this is what killed Atlantis--that is, Wales tried to impose the exceptions from the top and mold people into his vision. The passionate fire people simply left. I bet many thought, "Fuck you," as they left, too. As I've said several times, when I was in the underworld in São Paulo, they used to have a saying. When one bandit fights with another, you always know who wins: the police win. This is the same on a forum of ideas. When members bicker to the point of driving each other off, the bad guys targeted by the forum win. On a parallel note, I agree with you that technology will play a key role in the spread of Objectivism and libertarianism. But I don't think they will be as sub rosa as you do. I see these systems of ideas more as tempering agents that will keep the world from turning into a dictatorship by technocrats or a bunch of warring countries that erupt into world wars like last century. I honestly don't think President Trump could have happened without Objectivism and libertarianism. The penetration of leftism in education and the media was so deep in America, and the thirst for power so acute among the elitists, without a strong ideological wall in the hearts and minds of the people forgotten by the power-mongers, the average people who try to be good and strive on their own for improvement, the US would have gone the way of Russia, China and several other countries around the world. But it didn't. They fell and the US didn't. Why? There was too much moral individualism in the US, whereas in Russia, China, etc., there wasn't. The bad guys couldn't pull it off in the US especially because the families and friends of the young people they indoctrinated, and the ruling class people they corrupted even more than normal, held ideas that would not go away--ideas like do whatever you want so long as you do not infringe on the rights of others, like every person's life belongs to himself or herself and not to a state or a mob, like wealth can be created and not just confiscated, like how important independent thinking is to one's happiness and self-esteem as opposed to groupthink, like any individual can rise as far as his or her ability and effort can take them, and so on. These ideas come from Objectivism and libertarianism, including the historical and intellectual roots of these systems. These ideas are kept alive in the culture by stories (especially film, video, novels, songs and so on), but also by public places like OL where ideas can be discussed, examined, bickered about, and used as a draw for gathering people to interact idea-wise with each other. No indoctrination on earth can fight the individual mind when so many opportunities to cultivate it exist in our culture. And no system of ideology, religion, philosophy, politics, etc., can stifle the individual mind when other systems that prize the individual mind--like Objectivism and libertarianism--keep the flame of liberty burning in the souls of individual hearts and minds. That flame of individual independence is our job--at least as I see it. Keeping it alive is what we do. That's what we are supposed to do. We are custodians of the flame in our part of the world, whether virtual or physical. That means we don't need to be an epic tale where we impose a philosophy on the whole world and transform it into a utopia according to the vision of Rand or Jesus or the Founding Fathers or anyone else. We don't need to be a world-changing movement in order to keep the world right. Hell, even President Trump's rise was not a movement to forge the planet into a utopia. His rise was a reaction to a deadly attack on a massive number of peaceful individuals by the ruling class. His rise was made by individuals who said, "Enough!" And he said, "You're right!" Don't think he doesn't know it. If no one believes that, imagine what would happen if President Trump turned into a typical ruling class asshole. Imagine what would happen to him personally. Not good... So I say we don't need to be molders of a new world. Not on a discussion forum. Leave that for the stories and storytellers. Epic stories are like the horizon, anyway. You use them as guides, but you never reach the horizon. You can only reach specific destinations and you can only experience that as an individual. That's just the way the world exists. It's a reality thing. But we can strive and there is great virtue in the striving. That's organic and it's growth. What's more, the transmutation of epic stories into reality where individual freedom is a core value can only be done by individuals to the extent they are able to. I am not John Galt. I am Michael Stuart Kelly. Ditto for you. You are Brant Gaede, not Galt. Even Ayn Rand was not Galt. She was Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum, maker supreme of epic stories and horizon painter. Maker of Galt, for that matter. But she was still an individual, not a collective, and not a god. We don't create epic stories on OL, although I hope we can at some point. Our job at present is different by its nature. As individuals and as a discussion forum, all we need to do out here in reality is be a warm tavern on a stormy night for any traveler who wants to get out of the rain. We can do that because that fits our size. Just knowing taverns like this exist keeps many travelers going on their individual journeys or stopping to stay awhile--and that, more than anything else on earth, thwarts the authoritarians. OL can grow bigger or smaller, but keeping a flame alive in a warm fireplace for individuals when it's cold outside is one of the things we can do in practice. It's what we should do. It's our importance. We--and people like us--matter more than anyone in the mainstream ever talks about. We are the keepers of the flame, not just in story, but in reality. But there is one other thing we have to do. We have to keep from burning down the goddam tavern. Michael
  20. 1 point
    TG, I didn't understand this. Too cryptic and I didn't feel in a "Where is Wally?" mood. But I did go to your link and it linked to one hell of an article by Praying Medic (from the comments, his name is Dave). How President Trump Uses Concealment In the Silent War Just a few quotes: The whole article is worth reading. Michael
  21. 1 point
  22. 1 point
    On the "Donald Trump" thread, Brant posted the comment (link below) about WSS's recent diarrhea of images on his Member Album. "William S has decided to use OL as a toilet. --Brant" Quite. However, I want to mention one of the images William posted, the one of "Dr. Oz" saying on Fox News that the recent coronavirus is actually common. NO, IT ISN'T. "Dr. Oz" appears not to be aware that there are multiple kinds of coronaviruses. Some of them have been common for years in humans and generally produce mild symptoms. COVID-19 is a new virus in humans, "novel." Ellen https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/15329-donald-trump/page/570/?tab=comments#comment-292537
  23. 1 point
    Mnuchin was with Goldman for how many years? Bill Barr was kinda SES and deep state, too. I can’t tell from here who was and is sincere deep state but is complying and cooperating with white hats now to stay alive, versus who was always a white hat and was simply faking and infiltrating.
  24. 1 point
    Your objection is noted, Peter.
  25. 1 point
    Here's one of the funniest exchanges I've seen so far about the coronavirus. Michael
  26. 1 point
    "Doesn’t sound like “fighting the coronavirus” does it? Because that’s not what it is." I had to re-read "Doesn't sound like 'fighting the coronavirus' does it"...missing comma? "Doesn't sound like 'fighting the coronavirus', does it?" That makes your implication clearer. I went down that "rabbit hole" last night. Interesting, intriguing, even, but I'm not quite sold on that. That said, no, it doesn't sound like it...
  27. 1 point
    What happens to the letters O at about 0:22 — 0:23 ? Are you enjoying the show?
  28. 1 point
    This song is about “halo’s” but it isn’t sad. I liked the song in a Chanel commercial and the person doing the elegant dancing, so I looked it up. It’s Margot Robbie dancing and Beyonce singing. Margot is beautiful and so is Beyonce. Peter From WWW. Chanel Gabrielle Essence Commercial – Margot Robbie, Halo – Song by Beyoncé Once Upon a Time in Hollywood star Margot Robbie is the face of this new TV advert for Chanel Gabrielle Essence perfume. The ad campaign sees the Australian actress Margot Robbie performing some elegant and flowing movements while dressed in a white and gold gown.
  29. 1 point
    Darn, your brain is sharp. My brain was working on this as I played Tetris. Another really sad song from Canada. “In the Early Mornin’ Rain.” Gordon Lightfoot is now 81. I wonder if William knows him. Peter In the early mornin' rain With a dollar in my hand And an aching in my heart And my -pockets full of sand I'm a long ways from home And I missed my loved one so In the early mornin' rain With no place to go Out on runway number nine Big 707 set to go Well I'm out here on the grass Where the pavement never grows Where the liquor tasted good And the women all were fast There she goes my friend She's rolling out at last Hear the mighty engines roar See the silver wing on high She's away and westward bound For above the clouds she flies Where the mornin' rain don't fall And the sun always shines She'll be flying over my home In about three hours time This ol' airport's got me down It's no earthly good to me 'Cause I'm stuck here on the ground Cold and drunk as I might be Can't jump a jet plane Like you can a freight train So I best be on my way In the early mornin' rain So I best be on my way In the early mornin' rain So I best be on my way In the early mornin' rain Songwriters: GORDON LIGHTFOOT
  30. 1 point
    I knew about it, but it isn't a method favored by the particular plotters who are my focus. Look at the results with this COVID-19. It's getting globalists too and mucking up their money sources and communication routes and freedom to travel. Ellen
  31. 1 point
    Nope. I'm still not the poo-poo head. You're the poo-poo head.
  32. 1 point
    You keep getting it wrong. I'm not the poo-poo head. You're the poo-poo head.
  33. 1 point
    Let's mock some more. Who needs ideas? This is fun.
  34. 1 point
    I wasn't focused on whether he misunderstood her. I don't really care if he did. You have to take these two giants separately re their ideas, orientations and differing ages and backgrounds. Rand had a lot more time than Mises' to transcend her European background. They were both elitists. The masses in Atlas Shrugged were really Russians. For Mises', Germans. They were not championed nor protected by the masses as such so I guess they returned the favor. --Brant
  35. 1 point
    I’m not playing gotcha, you are just wrong about that person misrepresenting Rand’s message.
  36. 1 point
    If Mises did not misunderstand Rand then the author who said Clinton’s winning GDP-vote comments were Rand-like did not misunderstand Rand, either.
  37. 1 point
    Thank you for taking the time to write this, Michael. It could serve as a decent rebuttal to arguments made by Stefan Molyneux regarding I.Q. and his claims about "reversions to the mean" in certain demographics.
  38. 1 point
    So history records no objection on her part? Then it seems he and that author got her right, according to her. Branden’s Passion relates several stories Rand told Barbara about Mises, even the time he screamed at her during a couples dinner at the Hazlitt home. But there is nothing about him misunderstanding the message of her work, which I think would really grab her attention, as it has Michael’s and Brant’s.
  39. 1 point
    A pass like an excuse? Excused from what? Do you mean that the messages which that author and Mises identify in Rand’s work are not there? And further, that it only sounds like he says they are there — due to his inept English?
  40. 1 point
    Jon, That Mises quote is disgusting. Seriously. It implies that superiority in some specialized productive area is the same as being a superior life form, including innate moral superiority. The elites and the livestock of humanity. I rant about this attitude constantly. Rand showed signs of being on board with this in that sense, too, in her earlier Nietzschean days. But later she developed a nice healthy respect for average working people. See her essay on Woodstock, for instance ("Apollo and Dionysus"). Hell, even in The Fountainhead, there was Mike the construction worker who was Roark's friend. Still, would Mises have confused Hillary Clinton with Ayn Rand? Michael EDIT: Come to think of it, my repulsion about the Mises quote is that he treated this as a class issue (the masses), not an individual issue (people within the masses). The implication in his quote is that if you are in "the masses" you are automatically an inferior human being. Not an inferior industrialist or scientist or whatever. An inferior human being. That's about as collectivist on an epistemological level as it gets. Thank God Mises was inconsistent on this point.
  41. 1 point
    To get this thread back on target, which is to present weird versions and misrepresentations of Rand in the mainstream, I found this beauty from March 2018 in The Washington Examiner by one Ethan Epstein: How Hillary Clinton Is Like Ayn Rand It's a short article, so here it is in the most part. It's so muddled, it's hard to take an excerpt and make it stand alone. I've seen Rand misrepresented a lot and in a lot of ways. But this... But this... I stand in awe. Michael
  42. 1 point
    See? It’s the Rand Paul Society. Every single day they push his book. To my knowledge they have never. I will break it up So that it hits. They have never. Never. They have never mentioned Ayn Rand’s Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal. Nor George Reisman’s https://cdn.mises.org/Capitalism A Treatise on Economics_3.pdf I wish I was criticizing people for the way they promote Ayn Rand’s ideas, even if poorly. I wish I could agree that that is even what they try to do.
  43. 1 point
    I will. She makes it very easy with her bird-sized brain.
  44. 1 point
    Come to think of it, we could bring back crucifixion for apostates, blasphemers and the like. Definitely excommunication. Let's burn some books while we're at it. Such being sense and intelligence and all... But nah... I prefer to save my gun powder for bad guys like Soros, not my own indigestion. Michael
  45. 1 point
    Very Proud Cultist here, in the newly conceived cult against cult of personality.
  46. 1 point
    Ellen, LOL... You definitely are not the target audience for this TAS project. But think about presenting Rand to social justice snowflakes. Like it or not, these people vote and will soon be the ones in power. The hardass no nonsense battle ax figure is not going to get a hearing with snowflakes. It's not that they will disagree. They will not even get near that. Would you prefer to see the world ruled by them after they had some positive contact with Rand to prompt their curiosity, or with them believing the caricature sold by the progressives? That caricature is their starting point, not ours. So I, for one, don't mind an image of Rand that will draw them near enough to get curious about her rather than comfortable with the default stereotype in their minds. And just to be a pain in the ass, here is something for your viewing pleasure. I even followed a like by William just now to be reminded of this. Michael
  47. 1 point
    Disrespectful and bizarre - as if she could imitate the real Rand (and is she going to attempt to imitate some of the famous Rand explosions?). People would come from distant places and line up for many hours to get into a real Rand Ford Hall Forum appearance. The performance was worth the travel and the wait. I wouldn't go to see Jennifer Grossman try to imitate Rand if she were doing it next door. Ellen
  48. 1 point
    Linz was the official movement buffoon for a long time, but he has nothing on her.
  49. 1 point
    Check this out, though. She plans to get up on stage pretending to be Ayn Rand and engage in a Q&A session. Never mind how disrespectful that is going to be. Never mind that she would murder on the spot anyone arrogant enough to do this. I hope the estate sues. And never mind that this is Jennifer Grossman doing the pretending and she is a beginner, beginner, beginner at Rand, philosophy, economics, Objectivism — this fact becomes beyond obvious when you simply read her Instagram comments. Total fucking train wreck in the works ...
  50. 1 point
    I started looking around on Twitter for some news articles on Rand. Guess what I found? When I type "Ayn Rand" into Twitter's search engine, I get about 95%+ leftist crap and snark. See for yourself: "Ayn Rand" I'm tempted to post some of those things here, but I don't want to call attention to trolls. There is one troll I want to mention, though. She's a bonehead who Tweets like rabbits humping, She chose the handle of AynRandPaylRyan, so she gets the "Ayn Rand" keyword luv from Twitter. She spends a lot of her posts bashing Rand. Also, curiously, some radical feminists seem to want to punch Ayn Rand in the face. They get passionate about it. Weird... There is lots and lots and lots of snark. Then add some more snark. This tells me Ayn Rand is scaring the crap out of them. I see more than this, though. I see an audience. Do you want to know why organized Objectivism is not spreading too well? Where are the tweets from ARI or TAS? They shrugged, I guess. They walked off the field and just left Rand's very name to those who hate and fear her. A Rand meme project is waiting--right there--for a talented meme maker. (One who is truly funny, not just a preacher.) From what I see, the market exists. I might think about this one myself. Michael