Recommended Posts

Yes indeed.

The Charismatic Sherry. Thank you for those two vids.

That kind of ammo will be used effectively. I already signed up to run a tea party for July 4th, 2009 which gives me seventy seven days to make it as excellent as it can be.

It is perfect because we have the local mayoral election on May 12th, 2009. I am going to have folks giving out tickets to the Tea Party at the polls.

I used this in my school board race way back when. It is like a regular baseball or theatre ticket in size and shape. It can be made on your computer and hand cut out which makes a nice project for kids and volunteers while they brainstorm how to make the July 4th even better.

It is personal - you say hello and give them a ticket to come and discuss liberty with their neighbors.

And it fits in the government mail slots in apartment houses so that a volunteer can do an Ayn Rand high rise building with the tickets in getting into each of "hands" of every "cliff dweller" in approximately 10 minutes.

Feel free to use it.

Adam

Edited by Selene
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sherry,

I just saw the other two videos of John Lewis. This is the first time I heard him speak and he surprised me as to how good he came off. I remember some terrible things he wrote after 9/11 about the morality of using mass killing (including women and children) as a first resort, then asking questions later. He didn't use those words, but that was in essence what he said. He used the Civil War and the Atom bombs over Japan as prime examples (without apparently realizing that the massive lethal force tactics were last resort, not first).

I have been turned off to him for a long time over that.

His speech was a lot better than his interview. I was almost starting to revise my opinion of him when he blurted out at the end of the interview that the Ayn Rand Society is the only organization in the country that is treating the issues dealt with in the Tea Parties from the perspective of morality.

He emphasized that. The only...

Say what? The only one?!!!

Maybe Mr. Lewis doesn't watch TV or read the news...

If you want to see why Objectivism does not spread faster than it does, that cultist attitude is one of the primary reasons. The truth is that Rand's works, principally her fiction, are the true torch-bearers of Objectivism. These other people have very little impact on the culture, yet they fashion themselves as both foot-soldiers and generals.

I think Rand's ideas are spreading despite them, not because of them.

Their present surge in publicity is due to high-profile conservative media stars interviewing them, not because of their own shows and achievements. And in the interviews I have seen, they are merely talking heads—i.e., props—the conservative stars use to promote their own ideas. These folks do not come off as the torch-bearers of Objectivism, but more as cannon fodder for the right.

So I was pleasantly surprised just now. Mr. Lewis's speech was a cut way above that. It's a shame—a crying shame—this other stuff goes along with it and spoils it through discredit.

I do hope Mr. Lewis eventually gets out of the cult mindset. He is a gifted and inspiring speaker when he leaves it aside.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Michael:

I was more than impressed with him up until that last remark which really pissed me off because I feel that a critical mass is taking place and that type of "small puddle thinking" and backbiting has held us back from getting "full" and organized and then pick targets of opportunity.

Any thoughts on how to break the log jam between the numerous objectivist tribes?

Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites
(snip)

His speech was a lot better than his interview. I was almost starting to revise my opinion of him when he blurted out at the end of the interview that the Ayn Rand Society is the only organization in the country that is treating the issues dealt with in the Tea Parties from the perspective of morality.

He emphasized that. The only...

Say what? The only one?!!!

Maybe Mr. Lewis doesn't watch TV or read the news...

If you want to see why Objectivism does not spread faster than it does, that cultist attitude is one of the primary reasons. The truth is that Rand's works, principally her fiction, are the true torch-bearers of Objectivism. These other people have very little impact on the culture, yet they fashion themselves as both foot-soldiers and generals.

I think Rand's ideas are spreading despite them, not because of them.

Their present surge in publicity is due to high-profile conservative media stars interviewing them, not because of their own shows and achievements. And in the interviews I have seen, they are merely talking heads—i.e., props—the conservative stars use to promote their own ideas. These folks do not come off as the torch-bearers of Objectivism, but more as cannon fodder for the right.

So I was pleasantly surprised just now. Mr. Lewis's speech was a cut way above that. It's a shame—a crying shame—this other stuff goes along with it and spoils it through discredit.

I do hope Mr. Lewis eventually gets out of the cult mindset. He is a gifted and inspiring speaker when he leaves it aside.

Michael

This cultic mindset is disgraceful. Lewis is, actually, a pretty good lecturer. It's said that he assents to the conspiracy of silence about both the history of Objectivism (in particular, the role of the Brandens and others among the excommunicated) and the current state of Objectivist thought (ignoring the non-ARI segments).

I am more disappointed when I see this behavior by Lewis or Tara Smith (ignoring NB, ever - that I can find - citing him in her work) than when I see similar behaviors by some of the lesser minds in the ARI fold.

Bill P

Link to post
Share on other sites

Folks:

I am so glad that I was not around the inside of the movement because with my capacity to attack and give no quarter, I am sure I would have changed nothing and made me miserable.

In this case, ignorance may not have been bliss, but I did not get my knees broken by the small minded thoughtless police.

If I did I would have been excommunicated from the Roman Objectivist Church like my father was from that other Roman Church!

Sorry you guys had to endure it.

Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites
Any thoughts on how to break the log jam between the numerous objectivist tribes?

Adam,

Heh.

Any thoughts on how to keep dogs from barking?

:)

btw - On the morality thing, I especially had in mind Glenn Beck, whose coverage of all this has been nothing but morality (although he is by far not the only one). See here: Nine Principles to Believe In.

Things like that have not happened in the mainstream for a long, long time. One may agree or disagree with the moral issues, but it is morality on the table and not just the money, as Mr. Lewis claims.

In fact, one of the striking facets of the whole Tea Party movement has been the variety of quarters where morality has been springing up in public. Everybody is talking about morality these days. And they are talking about the descent of the USA into socialism. Taxation is merely one issue illustrating these things.

When a person does not see something as obvious and widespread as this, myopic is too good a word to describe it. I believe a person does not see it because he does not want to, not because his eyes are defective.

"Blank-out," as the lady said.

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

"blank out" was another fine concept that the lady advanced in my mind also.

I have to step back and appreciate how I chose to accept her analysis of morality and how my life has been made quite full.

Yes, I got a full preview having listened to Beck for almost two and a half years and watched him move from Republican Conservative to Libertarian to a half in the fold Randian.

He has been working on those principles for close to a year.

By the way, his research staff is one of the best I have ever dealt with.

The everybody's doing it morality observation is why I feel this critical mass achieving "boom" size within the next two years and possibly within six to eight months.

I think we just need to focus and network as hard as we can because if the thug whore from Chicago Ron Emanuel can use a serious crisis to advance marxism, we can to use his blunders to advance objectivism.

Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes.

"blank out" was another fine concept that the lady advanced in my mind also.

I have to step back and appreciate how I chose to accept her analysis of morality and how my life has been made quite full.

Yes, I got a full preview having listened to Beck for almost two and a half years and watched him move from Republican Conservative to Libertarian to a half in the fold Randian.

He has been working on those principles for close to a year.

By the way, his research staff is one of the best I have ever dealt with.

The everybody's doing it morality observation is why I feel this critical mass achieving "boom" size within the next two years and possibly within six to eight months.

I think we just need to focus and network as hard as we can because if the thug whore from Chicago Ron Emanuel can use a serious crisis to advance marxism, we can to use his blunders to advance objectivism.

Adam

Adam -

If you don't mind, please tell us a little more about your experiences with Glenn Beck's research staff.

Bill P

Link to post
Share on other sites

It seems that the three or four questions that I posed over the time I was getting to become fully engaged with his show, they were courteous and complete.

Moreover, when a particular issue arose wherein I and two or three others knew what happened and they had no way to know, they were completely comfortable with stating that they could not disprove or prove that particular "incident".

In addition, I have not ever caught his staff manipulating a quote or an obscure letter from one of the founders.

However, that is the extent of my interactions.

Adam

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherry,

I just saw the other two videos of John Lewis. This is the first time I heard him speak and he surprised me as to how good he came off. I remember some terrible things he wrote after 9/11 about the morality of using mass killing (including women and children) as a first resort, then asking questions later. He didn't use those words, but that was in essence what he said. He used the Civil War and the Atom bombs over Japan as prime examples (without apparently realizing that the massive lethal force tactics were last resort, not first).

I have been turned off to him for a long time over that.

His speech was a lot better than his interview. I was almost starting to revise my opinion of him when he blurted out at the end of the interview that the Ayn Rand Society is the only organization in the country that is treating the issues dealt with in the Tea Parties from the perspective of morality.

He emphasized that. The only...

Say what? The only one?!!!

Maybe Mr. Lewis doesn't watch TV or read the news...

If you want to see why Objectivism does not spread faster than it does, that cultist attitude is one of the primary reasons. The truth is that Rand's works, principally her fiction, are the true torch-bearers of Objectivism. These other people have very little impact on the culture, yet they fashion themselves as both foot-soldiers and generals.

I think Rand's ideas are spreading despite them, not because of them.

Their present surge in publicity is due to high-profile conservative media stars interviewing them, not because of their own shows and achievements. And in the interviews I have seen, they are merely talking heads—i.e., props—the conservative stars use to promote their own ideas. These folks do not come off as the torch-bearers of Objectivism, but more as cannon fodder for the right.

So I was pleasantly surprised just now. Mr. Lewis's speech was a cut way above that. It's a shame—a crying shame—this other stuff goes along with it and spoils it through discredit.

I do hope Mr. Lewis eventually gets out of the cult mindset. He is a gifted and inspiring speaker when he leaves it aside.

Michael

Michael, I respectfully disagree that Dr. Lewis has a "cult mindset". I do not know him well -but I attended a lecture he gave our local group last night (it was on Ayn Rand and American Culture - he covered many things that he has written for a chapter in the new book coming out with others later this year - sorry I do not remember the name right now and don't have my notes handy), and it was very good. A few of us had an opportunity to chat with him for an hour or so after the lecture. And, tonight, we had a get together, where I and several others had a chance to talk with him more. I think I sat with him with a few others for at least two hours.

At one point, one of my friends asked him about the TAS/ARI rift. He stated that did not agree with TAS, and that is why he worked with ARI. However, he also pointed out that he has never been asked to sign any kind of "loyalty oath" (I asked that question in a roundabout way because I have heard rumors of it before). He also stated that he didn't think TAS had much to offer - at least not anything useful to him. He was NEVER disrespectful at all when he talk about this.

He just doesn't agree with TAS. I don't think that stating you believe that ARI is the organization to go to - remember the way he stated it was as an opinion - is evidence that he has a cult mindset regarding ARI. He is very independent in terms of his work, and I was surprised that while he does have interaction with TOS (Craig Biddle's mag) and ARI of course, he isn't more directly involved with them.

Anyway, I just wanted to add my experience with him on this here. I found Dr. Lewis very approachable, willing to answer any question you asked of him, and if he disagreed with you (I had mentioned I thought sometimes the whole rift was "silly" and he didn't agree) he was very respectful - he laid out his information as to why, etc. What I took away from my conversation from him is learn the philosophy and make up your own mind.

(I haven't made up my mind totally regarding the whole TAS/ARI thing - personally, I get what I can from both groups and try to judge what I read based on my understanding of Objectivism. That study still has a way to go, and that is why I am reading as much as I can. I don't know if my opinion will change over the next few years, but I personally don't see the need to limit my association(off line or online) based on TAS or ARI loyalty. )

Also - regarding whether he watches TV or the news - he seemed VERY up to date on what is going on in the world today. He also has a brilliant mind as a historian.

Link to post
Share on other sites
(I haven't made up my mind totally regarding the whole TAS/ARI thing - personally, I get what I can from both groups and try to judge what I read based on my understanding of Objectivism. That study still has a way to go, and that is why I am reading as much as I can. I don't know if my opinion will change over the next few years, but I personally don't see the need to limit my association(off line or online) based on TAS or ARI loyalty. )

Sherry,

I agree with you. I discovered Objectivism in 1968 just when Rand and Branden split. I had been reading Branden's articles in The Objectivist Newsletter and had finished reading Atlas Shrugged for the first of many times and read The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.

The notion of having to choose between them never entered my mind. I naturally kept reading and rereading both and still do.

Just thought I would mention it because it is similar to the TAS ARI thing. I go to their websites too, both of them. I hope that they each succeed in spreading the word and passing the torch in there own ways. Even if either utters a mistaken idea whoever hears it will just have to use their own judgment to figure it out.

www.campaignforliberty.com 19Apr 10AM 146885, noon 146925

gulch

Edited by galtgulch
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sherry,

Since you have contact with Mr. Lewis and he is amenable to questions, maybe you could ask him why he does not consider Glenn Beck's coverage (and the coverage of any group outside of ARI) of the current Tea Party issues to be from a moral perspective.

I can find no justification for that position unless Mr. Lewis understands morality to mean solely Objectivist morality as defined by ARI. You said: "... he seemed VERY up to date on what is going on in the world today." That only makes it worse since there is not even the option of claiming ignorance of the fact that such moral issues are being discussed everywhere all the time. Mr. Lewis being intelligent enough to get an appraisal of a "brilliant mind as a historian" from you makes it even worse since these are historical events we are talking about.

You also might ask him if his disagreement with TAS extends to TAS's views on freedom, individualism and the moral issues concerning capitalism that they constantly write about (including the ones concerning the Tea Party). I would be especially interested in knowing which part of these issues he disagrees with since they are identical to the ones promoted by ARI.

Having read some of Mr. Lewis's previous writing, I stand by my opinion of him until I get good reason to believe otherwise. Your comments about your own relationship with him are useful in this respect and I have no doubt he is a very charming person to people with whom he socializes. I always like to base my opinions on a variety of information sources.

But, essentially, we respectfully disagree for now. I have no doubt that should Mr. Lewis look at my stuff one day, he will come to his own conclusions based on his own values and not on the people who know me (or at least take that information into account in its due proportion).

btw - My opinions on Mr. Lewis and these issues in general are based on what I have read and seen and studied in the Objectivist world in the last 3-4 years. Before that, I was not involved in the Objectivist subcommunity and barely realized that there was all this animosity. I knew of the break from Barbara's book, but that is all I got down in Brazil. Once I started standing up for her in public against what I perceived to be incorrect information and the ill will of a few (and still perceive to be so), I got trashed in a manner that surprised me. Frankly, this pissed me off.

I wrote an interesting series of articles trying to come to grips with the bigger picture concerning all this hatred called "The Ayn Rand Love-Hate Myth." Here is the series if you are interested. I haven't read these myself for a couple of years, but I have no doubt I still agree with me. :)

The general tenor is that extreme Rand love and extreme Rand hatred belong to a very, very, very small, but loud and vocal, group. The fringe element. The rest of Rand's readers, the ones who enjoy her books, take the ideas they want from her to apply to their own lives and are mostly silent. So basically neither side of the extreme divide influence much of anything in the world. The real influence of Rand on the world is Rand's works.

(As a continuation of that thinking, if people wish to change the world for the better, they will do so through their own achievements if they are of a proper caliber. This is exactly what the silent contingency is doing. Nobody can do very much on the skirt-hems of Rand other than bitch a lot to their particular choir. :) )

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 2 - Moral Ambivalence

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 3 - Brotherhood of Hate

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 4 - Rand's True Value

Michael

Link to post
Share on other sites
(I haven't made up my mind totally regarding the whole TAS/ARI thing - personally, I get what I can from both groups and try to judge what I read based on my understanding of Objectivism. That study still has a way to go, and that is why I am reading as much as I can. I don't know if my opinion will change over the next few years, but I personally don't see the need to limit my association(off line or online) based on TAS or ARI loyalty. )

Sherry,

I agree with you. I discovered Objectivism in 1968 just when Rand and Branden split. I had been reading Branden's articles in The Objectivist Newsletter and had finished reading Atlas Shrugged for the first of many times and read The Virtue of Selfishness and Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.

The notion of having to choose between them never entered my mind. I naturally kept reading and rereading both and still do.

Just thought I would mention it because it is similar to the TAS ARI thing. I go to their websites too, both of them. I hope that they each succeed in spreading the word and passing the torch in there own ways. Even if either utters a mistaken idea whoever hears it will just have to use their own judgment to figure it out.

www.campaignforliberty.com 19Apr 10AM 146885, noon 146925

gulch

You have pretty much summed up how I look at this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Sherry,

Since you have contact with Mr. Lewis and he is amenable to questions, maybe you could ask him why he does not consider Glenn Beck's coverage (and the coverage of any group outside of ARI) of the current Tea Party issues to be from a moral perspective.

I can find no justification for that position unless Mr. Lewis understands morality to mean solely Objectivist morality as defined by ARI. You said: "... he seemed VERY up to date on what is going on in the world today." That only makes it worse since there is not even the option of claiming ignorance of the fact that such moral issues are being discussed everywhere all the time. Mr. Lewis being intelligent enough to get an appraisal of a "brilliant mind as a historian" from you makes it even worse since these are historical events we are talking about.

You also might ask him if his disagreement with TAS extends to TAS's views on freedom, individualism and the moral issues concerning capitalism that they constantly write about (including the ones concerning the Tea Party). I would be especially interested in knowing which part of these issues he disagrees with since they are identical to the ones promoted by ARI.

Having read some of Mr. Lewis's previous writing, I stand by my opinion of him until I get good reason to believe otherwise. Your comments about your own relationship with him are useful in this respect and I have no doubt he is a very charming person to people with whom he socializes. I always like to base my opinions on a variety of information sources.

But, essentially, we respectfully disagree for now. I have no doubt that should Mr. Lewis look at my stuff one day, he will come to his own conclusions based on his own values and not on the people who know me (or at least take that information into account in its due proportion).

btw - My opinions on Mr. Lewis and these issues in general are based on what I have read and seen and studied in the Objectivist world in the last 3-4 years. Before that, I was not involved in the Objectivist subcommunity and barely realized that there was all this animosity. I knew of the break from Barbara's book, but that is all I got down in Brazil. Once I started standing up for her in public against what I perceived to be incorrect information and the ill will of a few (and still perceive to be so), I got trashed in a manner that surprised me. Frankly, this pissed me off.

I wrote an interesting series of articles trying to come to grips with the bigger picture concerning all this hatred called "The Ayn Rand Love-Hate Myth." Here is the series if you are interested. I haven't read these myself for a couple of years, but I have no doubt I still agree with me. :)

The general tenor is that extreme Rand love and extreme Rand hatred belong to a very, very, very small, but loud and vocal, group. The fringe element. The rest of Rand's readers, the ones who enjoy her books, take the ideas they want from her to apply to their own lives and are mostly silent. So basically neither side of the extreme divide influence much of anything in the world. The real influence of Rand on the world is Rand's works.

(As a continuation of that thinking, if people wish to change the world for the better, they will do so through their own achievements if they are of a proper caliber. This is exactly what the silent contingency is doing. Nobody can do very much on the skirt-hems of Rand other than bitch a lot to their particular choir. :) )

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 2 - Moral Ambivalence

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 3 - Brotherhood of Hate

The Ayn Rand Love/Hate Myth - Part 4 - Rand's True Value

Michael

Michael,

I don't know him very well, and I have other questions I would like him to answer for me first. However, I will ask once I get to a point where I feel comfortable doing so. I say that not because I am afraid of offending him, but more out of respect for his time, and the fact I have other questions that are more important to me personally I would like his input on.

I can agree to disagree with you as well. =) (That is what I like about this board, we are free to agree to disagree without all hell breaking loose! Very refreshing.)

Link to post
Share on other sites
At one point, one of my friends asked him about the TAS/ARI rift. He stated that did not agree with TAS, and that is why he worked with ARI. However, he also pointed out that he has never been asked to sign any kind of "loyalty oath" (I asked that question in a roundabout way because I have heard rumors of it before). He also stated that he didn't think TAS had much to offer - at least not anything useful to him. He was NEVER disrespectful at all when he talk about this.

Sherry,

Yikes, when did this happen? You are aware that having such a discussion is against NTOS policy? Had I known that TAS/ARI issues were fair game, I would have made more effort to have been at the social. Personally, I would have liked to have heard the depth to which Dr. Lewis understands the philosophical issues that he says he has with TAS. For instance: what specifically does he disagree with and why?

NTOS speaker event policy is as follows: *NTOS requests everyone to avoid Rand/Branden, Peikoff/Kelley, and ARI/TAS issues at our speaker and related events, which topics may be more appropriately and freely discussed at other NTOS events.

Edited by Donovan A.
Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok California go!

Here in San Diego we are setting up a TEA party on May 16th to get out the word to vote no on Prop 1A and other propositions that will raise our taxes even further. I am writing TEA party organizers hoping they will organize a TEA party on May 16th - nationwide TEA parties in solidarity to support California in their efforts to stop Prop 1A from passing (which would extend our taxes for more years). If other states come out in solidarity with CA and at the same time exposing possible similar legislation and taxes being proposed in their cities, counties, states, etc. in large numbers, then WE the people can override the millions our Governor and Unions are spending to get this passed in California and in effect send a message to their own government officials. We are also using the day to say thank you to our armed forces. Hoping you will do an event on the same day. California needs you as does any state that is passing these huge tax increases. Thanking you in advance and thank you for helping organize events.

Melinda Wiman

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now