Leaderboard

Popular Content

Showing content with the highest reputation since 03/11/2021 in Posts

  1. Some further comment after Ellen's post ... Quoting caroljane: “... it [a vaccination ID] illustrates my point. A public health measure is not viewed [by those who object to this?] as what it is, a measure to limit the initiation of force by citizens upon each other, but as – well, what? An infringement on your sacred right to get sick, and make others sick?” The ending is sarcastic and “initiation of force” is designed to push Objectivists’ buttons. The mask orders, “lockdowns” of healthy people, limiting businesses, closing businesses, forbidding public assembly, etc. have to
    4 points
  2. I have often thought of the fundamental asymmetry between Marxist collectivists and classical liberals / radical Capitalism. The former relies on and is rooted in proactive force and cannot countenance the latter in any way, but instead must overthrow it, eradicate it. There can be no harmony with the latter's existence. The latter is pacifist like nothing the hippies would ever have dreamed up, with non-initiation of force at its base. Rather than outlawing collectivism as such (while of course outlawing collectivist use of force) the latter is perfectly harmonious with any
    4 points
  3. There are a lot of things I want to say on this thread, but I just don't have the time. But here are a few quick notes. I agree about asymmetry between Marxism and Capitalism. But notice that what is called capitalism these days is not capitalism. It's crony corporatism. The pharmaceutical cartel, for example, is called capitalism, but it is a monopoly racket protected by government-enforced privilege against newcomers and often funded by the government. Ayn Rand said somewhere that any compromise between good and evil only benefits evil. Good has nothing to gain from evil.
    4 points
  4. It is a disadvantage to tolerate the left in public. We place too much value on freedom of speech. It's like some religious dogma we have. No, sometimes speech needs regulation. Let's recognize that when a leftist advocates for socializing property, he's initiating a process of force against private property holders. Left unchecked, we run the risk of losing everything to the left simply because we tolerate them and the loot-thirsty mob that gathers behind them. It's like listening to a psycho rant about how he's going to rape a woman, and we do nothing about it. Then his psycho friends a
    4 points
  5. Has anyone here read NB's novel Layers? It was published in July 2020. I had heard he had written and completed at least one novel and that it had been submitted to publishers about 15 years ago. But for some reason, it was never published. I bought the Kindle version of Layers a couple of months ago and am in the middle of reading it for the second time. I didn't know it had been published until I did a search on Nathaniel Branden books on Amazon. The book has not been mentioned on any of NB's Facebook pages. It's not even listed in the store on nathanielbranden.com I really like the bo
    2 points
  6. Peter quotes Rand Paul three posts above: I'd like to emphasize this sentence: "We can't let government tyrants and media fear mongers push us into accepting this terrible idea that we need their permission to go back to our lives." Ellen
    2 points
  7. I inadvertently got a lesson in my COVID-19 vocabulary education today. I want to say this word applies to many, but I think it serves better for the elite of the elites club. And I love Juanita basically telling the oligarchy, you'd better put some ice on that, you mothafuckin' cockwomble... Michael
    2 points
  8. NIOF has been regularly used disingenuously "to push (~libertarian's~) buttons", I agree. The right of ownership of one's own body. Well, of course, but inadequate. The Objectivist formulation comes from one's right to *freedom of action*- which must not be interfered with, by others' initiation of force. This is a positive and active right, not a passive one. No one in general is required to take especial care of you, and one has no expectation of such. That is a *claim* on others. Such as, one doesn't wander onto a busy highway, expecting that motorists all manage to avoid kno
    2 points
  9. It was an interesting time at Walmart today. We now, both have our double Covid shots just as a Brazilian double mutation is on its way to get us. How many variants is it now? But we are not doomed. Study the science and get your shots. Obviously the Corona virus was manufactured to kill off Republican, conservative, conspiracy theorists, and libertarian knuckle heads. Other than old people and people with “underlying conditions” who is more likely to die? Deniers.
    2 points
  10. TG, Now you are beginning to see it in all its glory. Once you see it, you can't unsee it. And then the argument always boils down to: An instinct is an instinct unless it isn't. Or the corollary: An instinct isn't an instinct unless it is. And here's the kicker. A concept is supposed to boil down in the end to observation, right? Well in this case, that proposition is the foundation. That's the premise. That's the primary conceptual referent for each example. We can call it the Eeny-Meeny-Miny-Moe protocol. Everything else is mutable in the argu
    2 points
  11. I agree. I would go on to imagine the following. By the time birds are adults they are quite familiar with things they pick up or manipulate with their beaks, insects, nuts, pebbles, leaves, straw, sticks, grass etc... they’ve seen piles of them, perhaps seen others making piles... and perhaps having never had the urge to do so previously, one spring a bird sees a particularly interesting crook between a branch and a tree trunk... it’s dark and empty and enticing... irresistibly so. An urging to perch there... multiple times reinforces itself and then another urge is bor
    2 points
  12. SL, That's part of the problem when using examples, and only examples, as the arguments. But there's even a deeper problem. Can a hatchling or chick build a nest by instinct? No it can't. It can't even fly. Whenever people talk about instincts in O-Land and are of the view that human instincts do not exist, they always leave out growth. The logic goes like this. If you point to an instinct (like being left handed or right handed, which only appears after growth takes place), they claim that this is a learned behavior because experience helped fill the "blank slate
    2 points
  13. OK, I noticed that in the "All Activity" feed. It gives me an opening. I've been avoiding reading the thread, but the title has been bugging me. In the final conversation between Eddie and Dagny, Eddie told Dagny not to wait for him before going wherever she was going. He would have been invited. He said he didn’t want to go. Ellen
    2 points
  14. I would think the reason a lot of discussions around instinctual behaviors and the like are center around infancy is due to the fact that infancy is the time with the least amount of experience, the idea that certain behaviors could not be from 'learning' and self programming if the opportunity time is nonexistent. I will grant that 'instinct' isn't perhaps a well understood or applied concept. But that's just a gut feeling.
    2 points
  15. It's not who you believe it's what you believe and why. In the hunt for facts and conclusions I don't believe anybody primarily. There are some anybodies I'm inclined to believe--to a point. I'm a profound sceptic searching for truth(full conclusions) not for ad h. debunking. I never line up pretty soldiers all in a row and conclude all soldiers are pretty (nice or whatever). --Brant
    2 points
  16. Where are you being held and who kidnapped you?
    2 points
  17. Repeating part of that with emphasis: "...the only plan thwarted was one in which multiple challenges to states’ elector slates would force a stoppage in the proceedings." The purpose of the leftist infiltrators was to prevent the electoral-slate challenges from getting anywhere beyond hasty dismissal. Something I’ve wondered about ever since the incident is, What was wrong with Trump's intel? Did he have advance info that there would be the attempt to disrupt consideration of challenges? If he didn’t have that information, why didn’t he? Where was the failure to inform
    2 points
  18. To think there isn't a world war going on is completely naive. --Brant partially for Michael
    2 points
  19. It ain't gonna go away... And I say good. The Biden junta needs to be thrown out and a proper election process patched back together. I love it that President Trump is keeping the flame alive. And, I hope this SCOTUS gets tarred and feathered by history the same way Chamberlain did with "Peace in our time," but without the drama of a world war. Michael
    2 points
  20. Be careful is right. Peter himself is a white nationalist white supremacist Nazi by the woke left's standards.
    2 points
  21. Hello. Richard Lawrence here, again belatedly responding to a thread that I just recently learned was revived. To clear things up from my side, I did not sell the noblesoul.com domain or any of my content to "Anthony Mason" or anyone else. I did take the site down voluntarily and abandon the domain after I realized that I was not likely to give it the time and effort needed to get it current again or otherwise maintain it. It appears that someone else has obtained the domain, which is totally fine by me. However, they have also chosen to repost some of my content, in particular personal essays
    1 point
  22. This has turned into a new form of philosophical argument: argumentum ad nationalgeographicum. Michael
    1 point
  23. Bitcoin and Crypto and DeFi and Sometimes Ayn Rand It looks like Bitcoin and Crypto are not well understood in O-Land. We have discussed this in a few different threads, especially this one: Why Don't Objectivists Seem to Care about Cryptocurrency?, and I think it deserves its own thread. So here are a few comments from elsewhere on OL, then we are off to the races. And this to get a philosophical foundation: This was funny and it deserves to be repeated. Just to mention NFT: That is enough to get the ball
    1 point
  24. Incidentally, there are some people in Canada who are standing up against encroaching totalitarianism from the bad guys using COVID like Hitler used the Reichstag fire. For instance, here is a pastor in Calgary who grew up in Poland and has seen what the beginning of massive oppression of citizens looks like. This guy had a fit and when the goons showed up to shut down his church service over COVID restrictions. He threw them out by sheer force of personality and moral courage. There is no syllogism on earth that is going to make this pastor bear false witness to what he has liv
    1 point
  25. Carol, Be careful. Instead of transmitting joviality, I get the feeling from your writing of seething hatred. Should I start calling you Karen? Michael
    1 point
  26. 1 point
  27. No, I’m not cavalier about them. Who the hell are they to ruin my life for some tiny possible benefit to them? Who are these old people who sacrifice the young to themselves? (By the way, the iron hand of the state is doing a lot more than forcing people to wear useless masks.) “Fanboy” wasn’t in my vocabulary so I looked it up. Merriam-Webster online: a boy or man who is an extremely or overly enthusiastic fan of someone or something It’s a disparaging word. I don’t think I have any “fanboys.”
    1 point
  28. I haven't been giving many notifications on Sidney Powell recently because the media campaign was so overblown against her, I thought it better to let it burn itself out. It was like whistling during a hurricane. And burning itself out is exactly what is starting to happen. Here is an indication of that from an unusual place--Scott Adams. One would think he was on Sidney's side about election fraud, but he hasn't been. He hasn't even been on board with voting machine fraud. But Lo and Behold, he is starting to drift. The moment he started waking up was on this last fake news assault
    1 point
  29. Speaking of the NIOF principle , it does imply reciprocity, no? Who is going to stop licking his honey pots and kick Pooh's ass ? I suppose the question is when are enough people in this country( and the rest of the west) going to demand a Pooh ass kicking and get someone to do it?
    1 point
  30. Tony, That's easy. Go look. There are two issues here. 1. The either-or people. Either humans have instincts or they have volition. Neither consider that humans have both. The bad guys fall into this category and try to sell it to get power. You, also, fall into this category, but I won't speculate about what you gain. Rand, at times, fell into this category. When she did, she was fighting the bad guys. 2. The law of identity. Humans have both instincts and volition. Humans evolved. Humans are still evolving. There is plenty of evidence for this and even Rand ackno
    1 point
  31. Not silly at all...isn't Rand the one who, instead of saying "good luck", insisted on saying "good premises"? (Or, is this a case of "it's not ok to use sloppy metaphors, except when it is?)
    1 point
  32. Tony, I can't resist. This set up is just too good. You mean "projecting human nature and actions onto animals" into a definition like this? Michael
    1 point
  33. Bookmarking this...interesting. I've had similiar thoughts about "meme warfare" and accuracy. Some people criticize those on the right for make outrageous claims and employ hyperbole/clickbait in lieu of context and accuracy. Reminds me of Revolutionary War era tactics about Lexington and Concord, etc, to make the British look bad, and seeing modern-era commentators criticizing such... "All's fair in love and war", and such...(but beware the "end justifying the means", and such...)
    1 point
  34. Yes, COVID-19 Was a Biological Attack by the Chinese Communist Party – Lawrence Sellin, Ph.D. Ellen
    1 point
  35. Perhaps we should put Rand's argument to the Bedevere test... V: There are ways of telling whether she is a witch. P1: Are there? Well then tell us! (tell us) V: Tell me... what do you do with witches? P3: Burn'em! Burn them up! (burn burn burn) V: What do you burn apart from witches? P1: More witches! (P2 nudge P1) (pause) P3: Wood! V: So, why do witches burn? (long pause) P2: Cuz they're made of... wood? V: Gooood. (crowd congratulates P2) V: So, how do we tell if she is made of wood? P1: Build a bridge out of her! V: Ahh, but can you not also make bridges out of stone? P1: Oh yeah.
    1 point
  36. TG, There came a moment in Rand's writing where she was trying to defend reason so much, she saw red whenever instinct came up. You can see this in Galt's speech and later essays where she blasted things like "instinct for self-preservation." I think she was in normative--not cognitive--mode at those times, though. The reason I think this is that there is no reason on earth to make instinct and reason in a brain--one that evolved in stages--an either-or proposition. The brain having one capacity does not negate it having the other. Both exist in the same brain. So why either-or? Loo
    1 point
  37. Yeah there’s a whole school of thought and study devoted to divining the human instincts, psychology. The suckling reflex is a different category, more biological/mammalian/deep/evolutionary kinda thing. The buttons that the screen magicians push hit on some deep hardwiring , but the reflexes they stimulate are more conceptual. For some reason (ha ha) some people need to blank out on stuff like amygdala’s and the interplay between regions in the brain. Almost like that gushy meat stuff messes up the pristine , sterile separation and elevation of the pure rational and feels better to
    1 point
  38. "Meanwhile, back at the hotel..." DOJ quietly acknowledges there was no sedition at the US Capitol "Media hyperbole was the root cause of fabricating crimes that didn't exist" https://www.lawofficer.com/doj-quietly-acknowledges-there-was-no-sedition-at-the-us-capitol/ (Now, let's talk about Antifa and the their constant, continued assaults on federal buildings...)
    1 point
  39. It does surprise me, though, and so does the fact that one of these heroes helped Epstein avoid prosecution in 2006, extending his successful career in sex trafficking for another two years ...they were apparently friends. Even in lawyers, I think that as you said somewhere, "character matters." But I suppose this is just tiresome ancient history to you, so yawn away, cousin.
    1 point
  40. Now that is funny, coming from you. Ellen
    1 point
  41. Michael, With something as crucial as Rand's statement which is the center of Objectivist ethics, I think there's no room for ambiguity. Her words set me off wrongly years ago as I also interpreted it to mean "my life" - the standard of value- etc. I've been arguing this strongly as it dismays me to notice others going a similar route to mine. With an ethics as powerful as this, it can bite back if one's understanding of egoism strays into subjectivity. After all, I thought then, hers was an ethics of (rational) egoism, not so? So I - my life - must be the "standard". My interpretati
    1 point
  42. One video , I only saw once, shows a shot of the crowd on the 'steps' of the Capitol singing the national anthem, is that something insurrectionists do ? sing the anthem of the government before 'taking it over'?
    1 point
  43. (Carol's post copied from a different thread. I think she goofed. ) Carol, The Lincoln Project, made up of elitist anti-Trump Republicans, was shot through and through with pedophiles, embezzlers, etc. All this recently came out in the mainstream news. And I have been trashing them for a long, long time. Not for being anti-Trump, which, I admit, I did not like. But for being ruling class elitist assholes who were morally bankrupt. I think those people are vile. Apropos, speaking of vile, here is a story for your eternal silence. Milwaukee County Judge Brett Blomme
    1 point
  44. Even though this interview is done by a leftie, the view presented here is closer to an Objectivist and libertarian dream--that of separating the economy from the government--than anything I have seen to date. Jimmy Dore is the interviewer, and one of the people I am studying right now, Max Keiser, is the Bitcoin expert he interviews. I don't like them calling crony corporatism "capitalism," but at this distance, I can cut them some slack. I don't think they realize how close to Ayn Rand they are. Rand was known as a proponent of the gold standard, but almost nobo
    1 point
  45. Carol, Can't you read? I say over and over that I hold "elite conservatives" are part of the problem. Yet you ask this. Use your eyes, not just the stories in your head. You might see a little reality and it might surprise you. Michael
    1 point
  46. Carol, Here is what I know. When I discuss Cohn, I openly mention his shortcomings. I have yet to see you dwell on the shortcomings of people like Marc Elias. From the way I see life, which is different than the way you do (based on your last couple of posts alone), I place more importance on what someone does as opposed to what someone says. You talk a good game about insinuating that you are objective, fair, etc., but your actions do not show it. Your actions show that you believe sleaze only happens outside your tribe, even when someone inside your tribe is provably an enormo
    1 point
  47. It means, witch hunts against lawyers having particular legal theories based (at least in part) on philosophical or political ideas or beliefs, deprive individuals whose case may depend upon those legal theories, from having any possibility of a fair proceeding before an adjudicator, because strong advocacy for his position has been abrogated. Were law societies in a "free democracy" to require a yearly solemn affirmation in the rightness and propriety of Affirmative Action, how could a lawyer morally represent a citizen who wanted to overturn Affirmative Action law? If law societies in
    1 point
  48. Peter, Farmland. Michael
    1 point
  49. The deep state is fascism (or corporatism) without an ostensible leader. It's a chicken running amok with its head cut off. It's inertia. --Brant
    1 point
  50. Not at all clear how "recent and emerging technological and economic realities" would manage to drive evolution. Evolution is a theory of descent - biological descent - with modification. Lots of details needed re particulars of the modifying - and just how genome lines might be isolated so as to compete. Details are notoriously left out in statements such as Nathaniel's. Also, re values that have become "dominant in corporate culture" - not what he was predicting. Ellen
    1 point