anthony

Members
  • Content Count

    6,842
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    18

anthony last won the day on May 29 2020

anthony had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

172 Excellent

1 Follower

About anthony

  • Rank
    tony garland

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    A. GARLAND
  • Description
    My all-time quote: "Man is a being of self-made soul."
  • Looking or Not Looking
    not looking

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Republic of South Africa

Recent Profile Visitors

19,608 profile views
  1. I didn't know much about Bernstein apart from a few articles, nor his affiliations, but it looks like he has distinctly broken ranks with the Orthodoxy. He wrote a very good essay arguing why collectivism is the greater evil, and sure enough Binswanger entered in a debate to (not effectively) counter that. Seriously? It is controversial for O'ists to support individualism (by the dreaded religious conservatives) over collectivism (by the Left)?
  2. Ah, there was a twisted method in the MSM's truth madness. Now it is no longer only Trump's "incitement" of his general followers, we can now place Trump in bed with 'his' extremists. Giuliani said something interesting at the time, something like, by definition, the true Trump supporters wouldn't have been violent at the Capitol. I believe this in general. As if a leader can and must be held responsible for everyone of his voters. Save me from my followers (AR) How 'bout impeaching Kamala Harris? She gleefully told an interviewer in November that BLM/Antifa rioters (um, peaceful pro
  3. I suspect everything that comes from CNN, and have avoided them like the plague, but sometimes they and the WaPo have to get some thing right. I've not seen this item get ANY exposure. Back in January, it is generally known to you guys, right? "Were not incited" - "part of a preplanned conspiracy". https://capitalismmagazine.us12.list-manage.com/track/click?u=e6daac5bbabca715ce33f553e&id=f55b06a9b9&e=1ce5f80967
  4. SL, This is immaculately thought and composed. Thanks. I can't see a problem with emergence, not unless it's considered as an instantaneous and one-off event. Then, yes, one could conclude many think there's some mystical stuff going on. A Divine Spark or something. Or, non-mystically - emergence from zero awareness to a conceptual mind. Surely, as we know, everything biological 'emerged' or developed from something prior to it, no less the brain and nervous system. That process is still ongoing, but like all things evolving, adapting and mutating, takes aeons of time - and there's no reason t
  5. Mark: Could Ed Powell's essay and his other essays be also posted to O.Online? His work is top class.
  6. Power first, the money follows, and guess what follows both ...? ha.
  7. TG, apt observation about mainstream Objectivist intellectuals. I.e. It is "science", right? It's big business - right? Praising them and the people as inherently admirable, irrespective of the morality of some scientists and big businessmen, their purpose, methods and their aims. Nor their involvement with Big Government? Wealth is good - therefore he who has amassed the most (e.g. Bill Gates) must be better than good. And so on, especially with Big Tech. As if on a quest - of which I'm certain - to find O'ist real life heroes (and there DO exist those, not always in obvious places, ofte
  8. Gives me confidence that these guys won't be around for long. The laughing stock they've made and will go on making of themselves. They have no sense of shame or self-awareness (and facts). Back in the 90's when Cyril Ramaphosa, the present SA President, was the leader of the Trade Union, someone I knew used to meet to arbitrate with him the labour issues in the steel industry. He related that one day Cyril, who is particularly dark, told him, "Do you know why you whiteys can't catch us out in a lie? Because you can't see us blush". Thought of that watching this pastor.
  9. "When men reduce their virtues to the approximate, then evil acquires the force of an absolute, when loyalty to an unyielding purpose is dropped by the virtuous, it’s picked up by scoundrels — and you get the indecent spectacle of a cringing, bargaining, traitorous good and a self-righteously uncompromising evil". “GALT’S SPEECH”
  10. TG: Obviously and we see Rand warned of, that evil acts among men, and periods of it in certain places certainly could exist. In which case, I assume she'd have had to accept that it could be potent, for a while. But what runs counter to evil is that, first, most people begin to see, visibly, that it's not practical. It does not achieve the promised results. And that to maintain its motion requires increasing personal costs to them and others. Then more intellectuals begin to doubt and question its morality, in secret at first. And the saving grace is good old human nature, men don't like bein
  11. "The truly and deliberately evil men are a very small minority; it is the appeaser who unleashes them on mankind; it is the appeaser’s intellectual abdication that invites them to take over. When a culture’s dominant trend is geared to irrationality, the thugs win over the appeasers. When intellectual leaders fail to foster the best in the mixed, unformed, vacillating character of people at large, the thugs are sure to bring out the worst. When the ablest men turn into cowards, the average men turn into brutes". “ALTRUISM AS APPEASEMENT”
  12. Right, the new technologies, the cowardly sell-out by independent journalism. I edited something like let's be fair to Rand's context of knowledge into my post.
  13. I think you have something important there TG. To play a little DA, too, in the broad abstraction what Rand said still holds true: "... by intellectual default..." I think this remains fundamental. BUT- PLUS, additionally, there has been a "diabolical conspiracy" even she couldn't have guessed at and foreseen, perhaps naively, back then. (But then the whole media/social media has come under leftist control, and the existence of the latter especially she could not have anticipated). The original New Left has been left behind by concerted, colluding efforts of the New, New Left, a
  14. I don't know what to name them. I'm running out of words. Shameless? Self-contradicters? (Evaders?) Do they think no one notices? I am flabbergasted that they do this - and all of them in glib unison - in Rand's name and by her philosophy. And why is there not an uproar from independent (a redundancy) Objectivists? I admit to making excuses for them, to myself, just a little, that perhaps they can't know the enormity of what they are doing and have been working towards, for the last four years. But how possibly can 'leading' Objectivists be innocent of knowledge? I will go
  15. New one out of ARI, not 2 months ago, not 2 years ago, but now, 22 December 2020. Better late than never...? How and why Rand thought the New Left was evil: https://newideal.aynrand.org/ayn-rands-critique-of-the-left/