Leaderboard


Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 12/23/2019 in all areas

  1. 2 points
    Methinks the pollsters are hoping to produce a self-fulfilling prophecy. Ellen
  2. 1 point
    In late 2018, I attended an event called the 21 Convention. One big reason is that the founder is a guy named Anthony Johnson. He is definitely an Objectivist and has said so on his show The Red Man Group. He started the 21 Convention when he was in his teens and is now around the age of 30. Yaron Brook has also spoken at the 21 Convention in the past. During that time, he has re-invented his event several times. He initially invited men from the seduction community like Ross Jeffries and Steve Mayeda. He has also over the years focused on self-improvement, inviting fitness and business gurus like Drew Baye and Elliot Hulse. The conference has become more focused on becoming an anti-feminist or even a male supremacist conference. In 2018, it was clearly a RED-PILL conference. Unfortunately, Anthony has also shown some of the same narcissism that Rand showed. He has had quite a few bad breakups with speakers--most recently Rollo Tomassi and Richard Cooper. His breakup with Tomassi has been about as silly as the one involving Rand and Branden in 1968. Personally, I've taken Rollo's side in all this. He has gotten a lot of attention lately because of his upcoming 22 Convention. The 22 Convention is advertised as a "mansplaining event," with the goal of "making women great again." He has been getting a lot of coverage lately--almost all of it negative. Here are some samples: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-7838273/Make-Women-Great-convention-hosted-MEN-teach-attendees-ideal-women.html https://nypost.com/2020/01/02/mansplaining-conference-hopes-to-make-women-great-again/ https://www.dallasobserver.com/arts/florida-men-who-have-never-touched-a-woman-free-of-charge-want-to-make-women-great-again-11845861 Anthony's Facebook profile is here: https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100024606491279 The 21 Convention is here: http://www.the21convention.com/ The 22 Convention is here: https://22convention.com/ Here is what 21 and 22 Convention speaker Stefan Molyneux has said about all this: https://youtu.be/PbuuSKLVWr8
  3. 1 point
  4. 1 point
    That is a good question. First, Anthony made some charges against Rollo that were very much the same tone as the charges Rand made against Branden. Here is a video Anthony made, and it is quite silly: Here is the response from Rollo Tomassi, which includes a few others: I have not totally disavowed Anthony Johnson. There are still some speakers I would like to see at 21 Con, but I doubt I will go back. I also won't be surprised if Anthony and Molyneux have a bad break up in the future as well. There is just way too much narcissism there.
  5. 1 point
    The Rand/Branden breakup was not "silly." That implies trivialities. But what was important then is no longer now. The ideas remain. --Brant
  6. 1 point
    Part 3--without comment so far. I haven't even seen it yet. But I know it's good. I've seen Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham comment on it this morning. That means it is going to get a bigger splash audience than normal. Michael
  7. 1 point
    Long live John Galt We have taken the White House and renamed it Galts Gulch
  8. 1 point
    Jon, No he isn't. Who has he convinced so far? Or who has he silenced? People who already agree with him? That's being inept at propaganda. I like the pretty pictures, though. Michael
  9. 1 point
  10. 1 point
    Emperor Trump anyone !!!!!!!!!!!! Hail, my president , my Emperor, my King !!!!!!!!!!!! I love you , Mr. President !!!!!!
  11. 1 point
    Oh, no! Putin denies the pretend consensus? The one which I've posted proof that it has been demonstrated as being false, and which Billy has refused to address? Heh. J
  12. 1 point
    Well, the House finally presented the Articles of Impeachment to the Senate. The House used zero crimes and misdemeanors, two Articles of Impeachment, seven Managers to present the case to the Senate, and 30 gold pens served on silver platters for Pelosi to sign the House's articles. At least I think there were 30 pens. No one in the news is saying what the number was, but they did give a picture. So I counted the pens and there are 30. As Pelosi signed, she gave the pens away to her cronies as swag souvenirs. And the result? President Trump is still President. Generalissimo Franco is still dead. More updates as we go along. Michael
  13. 1 point
    Bernie Part 2 Dumbasses. Michael
  14. 1 point
    I predict that tomorrow, President Trump will be just as much President as he is today, and that Generalissimo Franco will be just as dead. Let's see what happens. More updates as we go along. Michael
  15. 1 point
    "We" didn't put any "heat" into the oceans. --Brant ". . . here comes the sun . . . ."
  16. 1 point
  17. 1 point
    Whoever or whatever "Q" is, he or she or they are probably enjoying the break, not having posted since December 29 2019. This break has had zero effect on propagation of the 'cleaned-up' version of the mighty conspiracy-of-all-conspiracies ... from Mike Rothschild: The article is here. As "Q" might say, The 'silent' war continues.
  18. 1 point
    "This just in: Generalissimo Francisco Franco is still dead."
  19. 1 point
    Superlatives! Oceans were hottest on record in 2019 "That's a lot of zeroes."
  20. 1 point
    I didn't expect the next Veritas drop to be about Bernie, but it is. Notice how the Bernie dude talks so casually about sending Americans to reeducation camps, about how Stalin's Gulags weren't so bad, etc. And notice how the other Bernie dude is salivating about Milwaukee burning if Bernie doesn't get in. The commies are really showing themselves for who they are here. Finally, there is something in the O-Land orbit in contemporary politics that normal Rand-fed O-Land people can relate to as the enemy--that is, a typical O-Land enemy acting like a villain. Despite all the nuance and controlling the narrative, the closer hardcore lefties get to real power, the more they show their fists. Michael
  21. 1 point
    Hypothesis falsified: The signs at Glacier National Park warning that its signature glaciers would be gone by 2020 are being changed... https://www.cnn.com/2020/01/08/us/glaciers-national-park-2020-trnd/index.html But it's still gonna happen, and we need to stop freedom cuz the scientists have made new predictions which are less specific and even more certain. Forget about those past predictions. Just go by how much confidence we're expressing right now. J
  22. 1 point
    Our friend Tat who is holidaying in NY made the trip to Toledo to be at the rally. Mad, of course - it's a pleasant summer in Johannesburg. Reported the "amazing logistics" before the event.
  23. 1 point
    The neo-conservatism that many Objectivists have in the past (maybe still?) defaulted to, was the slide away from objective value in favour of intrinsic value/disvalue ( --i.e. "evil" by revelation.) I remember my shock by pronouncements by Peikoff and other O'ists to "nuke" Tehran, bomb that mosque, thinking I'd arrived on a neo-con site . That was 10 years ago, when I was new to the forums and blessedly innocent of internal rifts. Rand had the clearest idea of objective value and the nature of objective evil, which I believe was superficially imitated and mashed into the appearance of neo-conservatism. (This was the tussle between intrinsicist vs. subjective values which Kelley and Peikoff accused each other of when they "split". That breakup and the loss of Kelley's intellectual influence in ARI leaving the field to Leonard alone, i reckon has had effects until today. Now I wonder if many Arians, post Peikoff, haven't defaulted the other wrong way, to subjective value and subsequent Leftism). A statement Peter presented, by one Patrick Stephens "... I believe terrorists would still target America for its citizens' support of Israel". As well as being counterfactual, concrete bound and anti-conceptual, imo here's an example of having subjective values. Ditch Israel and the troublesome Jews and "they will love us", kinda. But it's an identical intrinsicism by Iranian leaders and terrorists, from which followed their hatred for anything and anybody Western (and Jewish). That's fixed and impossible to deal with reasonably..
  24. 1 point
    When push comes to shove Objectivists sleep with the neo-conservatives. True of Rand in her day. We both default to the nation-state, which is true of everyone not an anarchist. However, the basic ptactical question is freedom yes or freedom no? Then we have to know where we are to change it to more freedom or less freedom? This is not the birth of a nation. --Brant not a war-monger
  25. 1 point
    The Korean War was the quintessential "Police Action." I'd forgotten that then common nomenclature. Officially it was a United Nation's war. The Soviets skipped the Security Council meeting that authorized that and never skipped another. --Brant
  26. 1 point
    The Berkley protests and the police use of force to stop them?
  27. 1 point
    William, Rand said, "Judge and be prepared to be judged." I use this often as a guide for my life. I once produced a protest singer and songwriter in Brazil, Geraldo Vandré. In one of his songs, he said, "Que a Deus cabe castigar, E se não castiga ele, Não quero eu o seu lugar" Translation: It's up to God to punish. And if He doesn't punish, I don't want to take His place. I use that at times in life, too. Geraldo's message in the song was shoot to kill, not punish. But I have found these particular words useful for other contexts. They form a phrase that comes unbidden in my mind whenever it wants to, at the most unexpected moments, not when I want to remember it. I seek wisdom. In part, that to me means knowing which idea to use and when, including all the combinations and variations. Thank you for the explanation. Happy New Year to you. Michael
  28. 1 point
    On New Year's Eve William posted a blog entry titled (quoting from memory) "No Need to Check Facts when You [sic] Gut Tells You....." The entry and all comments (about 9) seem to have disappeared. I'll repeat the second paragraph of a post I made about 2:00 am this morning: "Larry and I went to dinner at a place we love - an historic inn, currently called 'Abigail's,' which dates back to not long after the Revolutionary War. We toasted: 'To Donald Trump's re-election.'" Ellen
  29. 1 point
    I remember Ike was a President who warned us about the Military - Industrial Complex. From Wikipedia. Military–industrial complex. The military–industrial complex is an informal alliance between a nation's military and the defense industry that supplies it, seen together as a vested interest which influences public policy. A driving factor behind this relationship between the government and defense-minded corporations is that both sides benefit—one side from obtaining war weapons, and the other from being paid to supply them. The term is most often used in reference to the system behind the military of the United States, where it is most prevalent due to close links between defense contractors, the Pentagon and politicians and gained popularity after a warning on its detrimental effects in the farewell address of President Dwight D. Eisenhower on January 17, 1961. end quote Robert Tracinski is interesting below. The last paragraph may describe President Trump. Peter Some excerpts from “The Unlearned Lessons of Vietnam” by Robert Tracinski in the May, 2004 issue of The Intellectual Activist. They are not in order: A country that is “occupied” by a free nation is an aggressive dictatorship, such as Germany, Japan, and Italy after WWII. The assumption is that such a society has not demonstrated its commitment to free and peaceful government – that it must be taken into receivership, as it were, having its full sovereignty and independence restored only as it demonstrates that it is capable of sustaining a proper form of government. (A. . . ) misconception was stated succinctly in a New York /Times profile about a reunion of Vietnam veterans, one of whom criticized the current strategy in Iraq in these terms: “I thought the lesson learned in Vietnam was that you commit American troops only when you have a clearly defined goal, then you unleash them to achieve that goal without telling them how to do it. I fear that the politicians are getting involved again . . . .” This sounds like a sensible outlook, and many pro-war “hawks” (and well-meaning Objectivists) have stated the point in similar terms. But the debacle in Fallujah was, if anything, a result of too “little” political control over an irrational strategy generated by military commanders in the field. In reality, the problem is neither too much nor too little political involvement in military tactics. The problem is the wrong “kind” of political involvement – a political involvement that demands contradictory goals and thus leads to a confused, disintegrated, contradictory military strategy. To integrate American’s policy from top to bottom, from the White House down to the commanders in the field, requires not an absence of political involvement in military tactics, but the right kind of political leadership: a leadership that will establish policy goals consistently shaped by America’s interests and the requirements of victory, uncorrupted by any element of consensus-worship and appeasement.
  30. 1 point
    Rand's view of the United States was naive. "Never engaged in military conquest" is a complete hoot. She painted with broad brush strokes running over nuances as if they didn't exist, but in this case she dumped the can of paint onto the canvass. Her views on the military-industrial complex, whatever they may have been, would not be valuable save as ideological dressing. --Brant
  31. 1 point
  32. 1 point
    "Q" is on a tear about supposed shenanigans in the March primary elections in California ... "Q" is not a top-level analyst.
  33. 1 point
    In a word, Peter: symbolism. The aesthetic imagery that an entity's or person's inner goodness and beauty is manifested by outer goodness and beauty. That's shown especially by the Left who are infatuated with the "beau geste" in these multi media pervaded times, over facts and real outcomes. Where symbolic-aesthetics entered the identifying-evaluations of Objectivists, who know that outward appearances don't make the man, is puzzling. (Cue intrinsicism and rationalism). I keep hearing of the president's "bad character" - again, that's his (superficial and public) persona ajudged by lefties who don't know "character", I've found; objective qualities under fire he has shown plenty of.
  34. 1 point
    This is usually the time of the year that I give gifts of Robert Tracinski's site and re-subscribe myself Not this year. He just doesn't get Trump and Trump's objective qualities.
  35. 1 point
    Happy Christmas!. Merry New Year!! --Santa Brant
  36. 1 point
    “Whats’s” And didn’t she say no using her name for orgs? What would that imply about using her face in a cartoon? Fucking fuckwits.
  37. 1 point
    I'm calling it batshit evil. --Brant
  38. 1 point
    That mad Julia Davis, again: Russia Gloats Over Departure: ‘Trump Is Ours Again’ Her notion is that Russia is happy, Iran is happy, Hizbollah is happy, Turkey is confused, and the Kurds ... well, fuck the Kurds, they are all commies. Happy now?
  39. 1 point
    Searching for another video about Moc Hoa, Vietnam where I lived with my Special Forces team for a year, I came across this which isn't much about Moc Hoa and a lot about PACVs (Patrol Air Cushion Vehicles) which were parked right outside my camp in the fall of 1966. The video does not have the tremendous noise of engines and guns firing. At 2:30, in, there are AirCat airboats below seen from a helicopter. I may have been in one of them. In fact, there may be some footage of our improper incursion into Cambodia Nov. 20, 1966 when we wiped out 56 enemy before it was discovered we weren't in Vietnam and withdrew before mounting an additional assault on a fortified village. The King of Cambodia complained a week later and the number two in Vietnam, General Abrams, came by the next day for a debriefing. The unit we wiped out had kicked our ass 6 days before. The SFC next to me had gotten a bullet almost between the eyes. A Sp 4 radioman, John Mayo, on an assault boat was machinegunned across his chest when the outboard stalled out. I gave CPR to a South Vietnamese soldier in a helicopter flying back to the hospital in Moc Hoa. Shot in the head, possibly but unlikely by my own "friendly fire" (my bullets likely arced into the water the range was so long so the VC probably got him), he died and I had his blood all over my face. I accompanied both American bodies to the morgue at the AF base in Saigon for ID purposes. Theirs were the only bodies on a long row of marble embalming slabs. It was a quiet day. The ten thousandth American had yet to be killed. I saw the future. It was the same future I had imagined in March 1965 in jump school at Ft. Benning when a training NCO told us conventional units were going into Vietnam. I wondered if it was going to be like Korea with 40,000 dead. As I left on a bus for SF at Bragg we went by the old WWII wooden barracks of the First Cavalry Air Mobile. I saw soldiers lounging outside. I wondered how many were going to die. The Mel Gibson movie We Were Soldiers told their story--the battle of la Drang Valley, Nov. 1965. The only surviving Vietnam PACV--there were only a few used ever--is in a museum in Seattle. They could go on land or water for they rode on air generated off the motor's action contained by a continuous skirt around the vehicle. Going over the rice paddies with that engine noise they made a hellish appearance but the airboats did most of the damage. The captain running the airboats--I didn't see this--ran his over a rice paddy dike and machinegunned 18 communist soldiers to death with one continuous burst of .30 cal. Captain George Marecek was a pure killer. I think he lived to kill. He was convicted of murdering his Cambodian wife in North Carolina. He wanted to marry his cousin and run for the presidency of the Czech Republic. Took three trials to nail him even though only one of 36 jurors came down on his side. That was the first trial. The second was a conviction overturned on a technicality. He poured me a triple whiskey and told me, "You fought like a man" after I expressed some regret about what I had done that day. --Brant I drank it, but not because I needed it--I could have done what the captain had done, not that I could have chosen not to; you pull that trigger and shoot down the enemy or they will kill you--then or tomorrow--and you go look for more to kill and you aren't there to take prisoners, so I learned--as the captain said afterwards, "No, no prisoners." Why? Prisoners eventually got released and rejoined the fight. Fortunately, I never had to fight with him again and get that choice and then have to get between that captain and my prisoner, who would have been killed by the our American controlled and commanded Mike Force Chinese Nungs eventually anyway. Before that operation I was told--no, I can't repeat the common scuttlebutt about that captain for I never witnessed it myself and the story may be crap anyway, but it would make you puke. Enough said about that. My uncle Dave who died a year ago was almost killed in his B-17 in the South Pacific in 1943. He couldn't move because of his wounds so he passed ammo up to the nose gunner firing at the Zeros. The gunner died. Thus he spent a year in the hospital and rehab in Battle Creek, MI and didn't see combat again until Korea in B-29s and missed the bombings of Japanese cities and he never smelled the burning human flesh below. But he would have done that if ordered to and abled. (He had so many medals he couldn't wear them all and walk straight.) I would have too, even the atomic bombings. Different type of war--a war fought to win. My attitude would have been if not me then another American would take my place. In basic training in 1964 I realized no way would I be in the army supporting combatants--that I would be one; that's what soldering meant to me at the age of 20. This would be true today. I would rather be a Marine and take fire than in the army taking it easy in a support position. That said, in 1964 I was sluiced into the military by the military draft as were millions of others. Today I'd never enlist. Even though the Vietnam War was low key then--sort of on the back burner--I wouldn't have enlisted then except for the life-distorting draft. I didn't know the army would turn me into an American warrior and I had a propensity for it. I thought it would be three and done. Now it might as well be part of my DNA. When I say that today I wouldn't enlist and fight if I were young again it's an act of will for I want to be with my fellow soldiers, not to kill per se but to kill to keep them from being killed. In 1990 it was still remotely possible that if my ducks could be lined up in a row--they couldn't--I could go fight in the first Gulf War for I wanted to. Some my age did. The stupidity of most war finally got into my brain in the right way because of Iraq in 2003 and I shifted to being more of a libertarian and less of an Objectivist. I finally got the message most war is caused by the ruling elite for their own reasons and is completely unnecessary, including most American wars since the US became a nation. I can't tell you how many war stories I've written for OL I didn't post for they sounded to my like vainglory--and this one does too, frankly--but I will not delete this. People have to know about these things or I'm a coward for modesty. I don't like anything I've written here. I want to tear it off and stomp on it. I am a killer. I will be one until the day I die. Even my uncle couldn't say that with the same absoluteness. But I was a piker compared to McNamara and Lyndon Johnson. They killed about five million. I don't, btw, regret killing any communist soldier. Usually you don't see what your bullets do or even where the mortar rounds land. I once dropped 20HE 81mm on an out of sight target, I think with some success. I still hope so. I don't regret that combat; I regret that war. I also regret any allied soldiers killed or wounded. Gaede is from German stock who farmed in Russia in the 19th C and came to Kansas to escape military service for religious reasons. Those who stayed behind in Ukraine were murdered by starvation by Stalin. You think I couldn't kill him and his ilk? Why not. I'd do the same with even greater pleasure of Hitler and his. All of them if it could save one Jew. Fortunately I have no nightmares or war-induced PTSD. I know PTSD for another reason so I know a little what the soldier Patton slapped went through.
  40. 1 point
    Wow, The movie was vanilla to that reality. But if you click on your link you get the fuller and better story. Patton losing his command, btw, turned out to be a strategic blessing, for while he didn't get fighting again until Eisenhower gave him 3rd Army, he was used a decoy to help mislead the Nazis about where the invasion of Europe would take place, The Nazis ate it up because they couldn't believe the best allied tactical general officer in Europe if not the whole war--either side, any army--would be taken out for such a slight reason. And there is the irony that Patton himself snapped because of his own battle fatigue. --Brant
  41. 1 point
    I didn't record it. Someone called "Sp4 Malone" did. I don't think this video was meant for public distribution but for internal educational use by the army. It was originally 16mm film. The army sent soldiers with cameras out to various field situations to film. I recall one who accompanied us on a short patrol and I made suggestions on how to conserve his film when we blew up--tried to blow up--a bunker with C-4 explosive. Not a good visual. Not Hollywood by a long shot. Sean Flynn, son of Errol Flynn, came through out team in the summer of 1967. He was a free-lance photo-journalist. I didn't know it at the time, but he was all over South Vietnam putting his life on the line. The Kilmer Rouge grabbed him and a companion in Cambodia three years later, apparently held them for a year then executed them. I put this up with the story simply to dress out a small slice of what war is really about. Too often people who have never seen combat treat war too abstractly. The President Bush who never saw war ordered the Iraq invasion of 2003. I, who had, was against it at the time. I knew it would be wrong and bad but even I could not imagine how bad and that bad keeps rolling along today. His father had seen war and was more circumspect. It has just become public knowledge that he had barely evaded capture, execution and cannibalism by the Japanese who had captured eight of his companions. He knew all the time since what had happened to them. There was-were-war crimes trial in Guam in 1946 in which this information came out resulting in executions including a Japanese General who ate some liver of a murdered American airman as a delicacy. Such are some of the insanities of war. If I could do it all over again knowing what I know now I would have become the photographer I enlisted for or agreed to a four year enlistment, gone to language school for a year in beautiful California and spent my time in the army with NSA and maybe have become a CIA spook as a civilian career choice. I still remember how ardently the recruiter wanted me to do that after he saw my test scores. That's if there were a military draft. --Brant
  42. 1 point
    Reading in MYWAR: On page 260 (starting out in a context speaking of Objectivist groups around North America - Occasionally, I would hear that someone had been "excommunicated" from one of these groups because of some betrayal of OBjectivist standards. It seemed to me that some of these students were more severe than Ayn or I in their condemnation of infractions. "They're more royalist than the king," Ayn would comment wryly. "I guess all intellectual movements have to cope with one aspect or another of the 'true believer syndrome,'" I remarked once. Some years earlier, Ayn had discovered Eric Hoffer's True Believer and had recommended it to Barbara and me. "Because of our emphasis on rationality and independence," Ayn had confidently forecast, "this won't be a problem for us." I now knew that she was overly optimistic as far as our followers were concerned; I did not yet recognize that she was mistaken even about the inner circle. Interesting, in particular that Rand was at least somewhat familiar with Hoffer's True Believer. Bill P (Alfonso)
  43. 1 point
    Tough question. Ideally I'd want schools run on a mixture of Montessori and Summerhill methods, foster a culture where the individual (NOT the "School Community" (or the tribe or the pack or the group or the master race or the brotherhood of the proletariat or the nation state)) is seen as the fundamental unit, there's no "school spirit" and no religion, and there are absolutely no rules EXCEPT "do not start force/fraud/coercion/bullying." Run classes like a University. No coerced attendance, lecturers have expertise but not authority (observing Sharon Presley's distinction between the two). No uniforms. In other words, treat children like human beings rather than pack animals. As a consequence, they'll be less likely to act like pack animals themselves (i.e. bully others and create conformist cliques). Authoritarianism CREATES and PERPETUATES bullying; the military is full of 'hazing' but there's almost none in universities (some fraternities are an exception but they're basically structures that exist for those that gravitate towards pack-animalism). Montessori schools are basically bully-free, authoritarian schools are full of bullies. More freedom, less bullying. Some people might say some kids "need" structure and control, but I say that people naturally thrive under freedom. I certainly did and I'm not Superman. Call me a social darwinist if you will, but those that "need" structure and control strike me as malformed examples of human beings. My daughter went to a Montessori pre-school and is now in a Montessori elementary school. She will be entering sixth grade, the final year of her Montessori elementary school. I cannot say enough good things about her school. It is truly a wonderful, nurturing place. All of the Montessori values are strongly emphasized. In addition to a first rate academic education, the entire educational experience is beautifully balanced. The focus is on the development of the total child, not just academically but socially and ethically. Needless to say, kids are strongly encouraged to be nice and to respect each other's rights. This is an integral aspect of the school's culture. Bullying is absolutely not tolerated. And there are no school uniforms. The idea is most definitely not to prepare the kids for a regimented, soul-destroying life in the military or anywhere else. Maria Montessori was definitely a woman way ahead of her time. She was a true heroine. Martin
  44. 1 point
    Tough question. Ideally I'd want schools run on a mixture of Montessori and Summerhill methods, foster a culture where the individual (NOT the "School Community" (or the tribe or the pack or the group or the master race or the brotherhood of the proletariat or the nation state)) is seen as the fundamental unit, there's no "school spirit" and no religion, and there are absolutely no rules EXCEPT "do not start force/fraud/coercion/bullying." Run classes like a University. No coerced attendance, lecturers have expertise but not authority (observing Sharon Presley's distinction between the two). No uniforms. In other words, treat children like human beings rather than pack animals. As a consequence, they'll be less likely to act like pack animals themselves (i.e. bully others and create conformist cliques). Authoritarianism CREATES and PERPETUATES bullying; the military is full of 'hazing' but there's almost none in universities (some fraternities are an exception but they're basically structures that exist for those that gravitate towards pack-animalism). Montessori schools are basically bully-free, authoritarian schools are full of bullies. More freedom, less bullying. Some people might say some kids "need" structure and control, but I say that people naturally thrive under freedom. I certainly did and I'm not Superman. Call me a social darwinist if you will, but those that "need" structure and control strike me as malformed examples of human beings.
  45. 1 point
    Andrew, Woah thar pardner. That's not what I said. Teaching self-discipline is not authoritarianism--not in my sense. Don't forget, you are talking to Mr. Big Honking Authority Issues in life. The following is a true story. I once walked into a meeting of Brazilian and Paraguyan generals at the Itaipu Hydroelectric Dam (which is called Itaipu Binacional in Portuguese). I was putting on a show on the premises on the Paraguyan side and my show got canceled at the last minute. Well, it is true that I was producing a Brazilian protest singer, Geraldo Vandré, so the thing was very controversial. This was right in the middle of Brazil's military dictatorship--the one where they jailed and tortured political prisoners. I was livid and just stormed on in. The generals were seated at a meeting table. They looked up surprised and asked who I was. I said: "Sou gringo do Brasil binacional, quem são vocês que cancelem meu show?" (I'm gringo bi-national of Brazil, and who the hell are you to cancel my show?) I could have disappeared at that very moment and nobody would have uttered a peep, not then, not down the road. But I was lucky. I think they liked my spunk or something. (Latin American military leaders like macho displays, but I don't recommend doing what I did if you think things like breathing are of some value to you. It's like petting a rattlesnake for amusement, then whopping it on the side of the head to watch it jump.) The general in charge was surprisingly polite to me, although a couple of the others looked miffed--dark clouds forming over their heads. He was almost fatherly, though. He didn't solve my problem, but actually gave me some information that I later used to get the restriction released. That was back when I had more courage than sense. Would I do it again under similar circumstances? Probably. But I'm getting too old for that crap. The point is, you are not talking to an "authoritarian" in the sense you described. Not even in the ballpark. Now you know one of the main reasons I am not attracted to the fundy version of Objectivism. Too many authoritarian games with the head folks getting off on power trips. But self-discipline? That's another topic. Self-discipline is a skill just like any other skill. It can be learned--and, I agree, many folks screw up teaching it. Some kids have a knack for it and others don't, so I have no qualms with teaching it to kids who don't have it. (I'm not a fan of the Prussian model of education we currently use. I'm more into teaching life skills, including entrepreneurship as kids get older, but that's another issue.) Frankly, I wish someone had taught me the self-discipline skill when I was in school instead of laying an authoritarianism trip on me. I later had to figure it all out on my own right when I most needed to rely on it. Even today I fight with this. If I had been taught self-discipline when I was young, it would have spared me years of grief. Michael
  46. 1 point
    All the more amazing, when five of the folks that Mr. Perigo is trying to summon have been banned from SOLOP: Barbara, Jonathan, Neil, WSS, and yourself. Chris Sciabarra may not have been given the boot, but he's never coming back. So Mr. Perigo wants Brant and me to mix it up with him? ;) Robert Campbell He must be lonely. He kicked out the most lucid, properly focused, incisive mind there--Billy Beck--in order to keep in Amy Peikoff's good graces, but she's disappeared along with a lot of others. I think they have, but don't know for sure, for I've stopped reading most of the SOLOP threads. SOLOP and OL share one important commonality, however: too many posters seem purblind to what's going on in the world and how bad it's going to be. Our own government is acting for the destruction of this country and our enemies will soon be able to do an incredible amount of damage with a small amount of effort. In 10-20 years the US we know today may hardly even exist. --Brant
  47. 1 point
    Bill: "Oh - I've fallen into the patterns Hoffer talks about more than once. Including AFTER reading Hoffer, so I can definitely sympathize with your note about selective blindness. I suspect you can sympathize." You couldn't be more right. It's remarkahle what the human mind can do to protect itself from unpleasant realizations. Barbara
  48. 1 point
    This is not true. Either sentence. Care to elaborate? Since I've read about the theory, I've kept my eyes open and seen situations where it seemed to fit. Judith Hazing is group sanctioned bullying. There use to be a lot of it in Fraternities and the military academies, archetypically West Point. General MacArthur stopped the worst of it over 80 years ago. The idea is you are an outsider until bullied (hazed) then you are an insider and get to bully the to-be-initiated. In the U.S. military discipline and group training does this job. When hazing gets out of hand and into the news the brass step in to stop it. I have no doubt in many foreign armies extreme hazing goes on but it has nothing to do with combat readiness and having one's back protected. For instance, in the Soviet army hazing went so far as to include homosexual rape of newly drafted recruits. In my three years in the army I never experienced hazing. True, I was not in a regular combat unit, but I underwent basic training and advanced individual light weapons training and jump school at Ft. Benning. In Special Forces I was with senior non-commissioned officers, all highly trained specialists. Hazing simply means that the hazed is going to be looking for revenge. You don't want someone like that watching your back. Young, unmarried males with guns are the most dangerous creatures on the planet, aside from their political leaders. --Brant
  49. 0 points
    They think they can keep this satanic piece of shit alive with just $500,000 a year? 🤣 https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7881493/Canada-offers-pick-Harry-Meghans-500-000-security-bill.html
  50. 0 points
    Hi Glen, It is because of the criminal bloodliners who have ruled over us for so long. Their aim is total slavery over us. Real change and real freedom can come after Trump finishes them off, them and their privately owned Federal Reserve and every other structure they have enslaved us with. We won the battle of ideas a long time ago.