Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation on 09/21/2019 in Posts

  1. 1 point
    This is exactly what mapping out a new story feels like. For the writer, it comes with an emotion of weariness, too. Michael
  2. 1 point
    Rand's most naïve view (or advocacy to the reader) is that there are no idealational conflicts among those who are "rational." This is derived from human perfectibility. How to counter the perfect Soviet Man (or Nazi Man)? The perfect Randian Man. She was trapped in the binary. Before you advocate for what should be you need to know what is. Rand knew collectivism and its ideology. So she countered with individualism and it's ideology. Great! But she didn't know the non-ideological masses. Therefore Objectivism is reactive to what people ideologically shouldn't be as opposed to reactive to what people in toto really are. Yes, she had some in-betweens. Of Objectivism's four pillars--reality and reason, morality and politics, it's the morality where it therefore mostly falls short and left libertarians short. They didn't buy the center. They had the politics without enough of the morality politics needs. The morality in individual rights is in or from rights only cutting libertarians off from humanity even more than official Objectivism does. Now that we are engaged in cultural warfare--there is no more Age of Reason for now--people of ideas are out of work while the conservatives and hoi American polloi fight it out with the left. We can join the conservatives or sit on our rumps, for this is the Age of Trump. --Brant not sayin' what to do
  3. 1 point
    Nah. All sick fuckers. We are fast approaching the day the whole world sees it that way. Good people need to think hard about when they will reverse themselves and speak out against what has been committed and is still being committed against a duly-elected President.