Objective Hate by Troi Torain

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Objective Hate: The Prequel

by Troi Torain

Have any of you heard of DJ Star? Or a guy named Star the Hater who showed up on another forum a while back? This is Troi Torain, a famous radio DJ who backs Ayn Rand and Objectivism. He is releasing Objective Hate: The Prequel, his first book, an autobiography with the trappings of an incipient manifesto, in February 2007.

Star sent me an advance copy and I will have a very intense review coming. For the time being, let this post serve notice that I endorse his book (with due and non-hateful observations that will be forthcoming). It ain't what it seems to be and I predict that it will make a big splash--and a very positive impact on at least one segment of our culture. There ain't no stopping it, either. You see, Star... well... he's a good capitalist and knows what he's doing in the market. His track record of success speaks more than I ever could.

He said that I could announce that he will be back on the radio in February. More details later.

You can see his You Tube promo video here: Objective Hate: The Prequel

I will have a surprise coming right after my review. (And I have a non-related surprise that will be announced on Thursday that should warm everybody's heart.)

Good things are coming for good people, folks.

Objective... er... Hate is one of them.

Michael

[blackhorse]

MSK, I think this guy is a dirtbag; http://72.14.205.104/search?q=cache:41ElK1...lient=firefox-a

[Danneskjold]

Ya, I read that and most of the comments. Guy seems like a complete idiot, even if he does have the right to say it, doesn't make it smart.

[BAMF]

I remember reading about Star's beef with Envy a while back. He said some pretty messed up stuff...that's really taking a beef too far.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Star does get out there a bit.

His audience is a bit different than ours (and by a few million, too).

More coming.

Michael

[Danneskjold]

He gets out there, good for him. Wanna try and find one thing in that transcript that blackhorse posted that doesn't show complete and utter depravity/lack of centralized purpose?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jeff,

Context.

Most all DJ jive is banter, not serious. It would be interesting to read a transcript of DJ Envy from that time, too, to get the full feel of the flame war.

People listen to that stuff because they want to. Millions of them. They can always tune in to another station. This is called capitalism.

As to the show, there is a kind of competition to see who can get more outrageous with DJ's, but it doesn't go beyond that in that particular context. It makes driving to work more entertaining and gives people a chuckle in traffic jams. (As another example, do you really think heavy metal bands are into devil worship and human sacrifices or is it just play acting?)

If there were no audience for this stuff, it probably wouldn't happen.

Incidentally, the charges against Star were dropped.

Michael

[Danneskjold]

In every Rand book I've read, the main protagonists were all for making money, but they were doing it on their terms. They made money their way, using their morals, and they rose above it without resorting to cheap flaming attacks. Francisco, Danneskjold, Galt, and Roark. Show me one of them that would have done what Star is doing. Even Wynand, Rearden, or Dagny Taggert, look at them after their revelation, would they have resorted to that?

Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of one's values.

--Ayn Rand

He's definitely on the right path there (sarcasm). The way I see it, if you're going to write an objectivist book you should have the philosophy right and at least make some sort of attempt to live by it. I'll treat this guy like the dirtbag he seems to be until he starts walking the walk.

Clarification, I have no problem with the taking of actions for monetary gain, he has the right to take them. I do, however, have problem with the actions being represented under the guise of Objectivism. He's missing some pretty key elements of the philosophy.

Please, point out to Mr. Torain the Primacy of Existence. Him wishing and wanting to be an Objectivist won't make it so.

Edited December 23, 2006 by Jeff Kremer

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jeff,

All I can say is learn more. You judge much on little. (I will have a very interesting and well researched review coming.)

And yes, Gail Wynand most definitely catered to his own market by presenting non-Objectivist tabloid values. And Dominique worked for him as a staff writer. And Howard Roark loved them both. He even called Wynand his "unrepeatable experience."

Michael

[Danneskjold]

Wynand also ended up regretting it. He was, according to Rand, the man that could have been. Dominique did not write for Wynand to turn a profit, she wrote for her own entertainment. Roark didn't love either of them for their capital gain, but for their ability to gain amongst other reasons.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Roark didn't love either of them for their capital gain, but for their ability to gain amongst other reasons.

Jeff,

Correct.

Michael

[Danneskjold]

The way I see it, here we have a Wynand, who's going to stay a Wynand. The thing is he's trying to pretend that he is/wants to be a Roark. Seems like a fraud.

Also, since Roark loved Wynand and Dominique for their ability to produce and not their capital gain, there is a difference, then what do you think he'd think of Torain? He didn't have any particular affections for Keating, Toohey, or Wynand (before he actually met him), in fact he disliked them. They still made profit and capital gains, but he didn't like how they did it or what they were trying to do with it.

Torain is in Keatings boat, he turns a profit, but he doesn't do it in accordance with his/good values. He does it playing to other people's weaknesses instead of their strength. If he has the ability to produce then he should find another job that doesn't involve talking about pissing on a competitor's daughter.

Edited December 24, 2006 by Jeff Kremer

[BAMF]

Does everything have to be based on Rand's characters and what Rand would have thought?

Aren't you an Eminem fan, Jeff? Does he not do the same thing?

[Danneskjold]

I'm an Eminem fan, but would object to him calling himself an Objectivist. Objectivism is a means to achieve happiness, amongst other things. Does Eminem seem/represent himself as happy?

We're basing things off Rand's characters because we are operating in parts of the philosophy that, amongst Objectivists, are relatively stable. Because Rand's characters are representative of different types of people, with the heroes being what we should strive for, it makes them easy to classify. Find a better metric by which to measure an Objectivist (according to the foundation/core of Objectivism) and I will gladly use that.

Edited December 24, 2006 by Jeff Kremer

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Jeff,

Where on earth did Star call himself an Objectivist?

Michael

[Danneskjold]

I assumed it from the title of the book, and you said that he backs Ayn Rand and Objectivism. Bad assumption?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Bad assumption.

Star speaks for Star, although he was influenced by Ayn Rand and openly proclaims it. He makes no claims to speak for Objectivism as a movement. He is a total individualist (as you shall read later).

Would you object to Eminem saying he liked Ayn Rand's works (although he hasn't said so)? Or Jim Carrey or Jerry Lewis (who have)? How about those for non-Objectivist heroes?

Do you think Ayn Rand's works should only be admired by a select few--or at least people should keep it hidden from the public if they are not full Atlas-thumping Objectivists?

As the saying goes, check your premises.

Michael

[Danneskjold]

Ya, I just got his relation to Objectivism wrong. As for the rest of those questions, no I wouldn't blame the rest of them. Just got the premise wrong. Guy still doesn't seem like my type but whatever.