DavidMcK

I should have said IF constructed it is hard to see why it was done etc..... I've been on both sides of false accusations Michael, and it is embarrassing to be so wrong when you attack without justification, and it hurts when you are the object of an attack without justification. My point is really that Ayn Rand was someone who contributed to the idea of profiling...as in FBI profiling: not assuming that every black person in a Cadillac is a drug dealer. The FBI analyzes written communications (such as kidnapping letters) and comes up with a profile of the kind of person who might have written it. Ayn Rand did that with regard to philosophy, and some of the linguistics sorts on here seem to be really sharp about having a 'phony' detector.

It is hard to hide things in a written communication from the linguistic sorts on here. Hard to see why someone would construct a letter like this unless they are fishing for investors or something similar.

Thanks Ted if this works, and thanks a lot if it doesn't (sarcasm).

http://blog.mises.org/14769/a-chilling-look-at-the-future/ I don't know how to embed this; a look at how hyperinflation might be reported and come to the U.S. sponsored by an apparently new organization, the National Inflation Association.

Nice selection Phil, I particularly liked Donway's piece which seemed so much in the spirit of the holiday. Happy Thanksgiving!

Not to mention a credible leader of the X-men.

I should think Objectivists would be warmer to the United States prior to the Civil War. There was much less government then and the country was on the Gold Standard. Ba'al Chatzaf Very strange answer considering there was also slavery...or was your tongue in your cheek?

He may be speaking from the revisionist point of view; those libertarians or anarchists that come from the Austrian School and have put forth the idea that the Civil War was really about tariffs; that the war was started because the North was basically making the South subsidize Northern manufacturing by raising tariffs through the roof. The South was especially hurt since the South was an exporter, and they minimize the slavery issue. They point out Abraham Lincoln put people in jail for criticizing his policies or the war (thousands) and suspended habeas corpus, subsidized the transcontinental railroad...you get the drift. Honest Abe was in their view one of the leaders of the expanded state.

I'll ignore your sarcasm too Michael and point out what I took from this book: that people can believe the earth is flat and still function until culture progresses to the point where you can no longer believe it without selecting your point of view for extinction. There is an evolution of ideas and truth (or a reality map) that trends ever closer to approximating reality without perhaps ever totally matching reality exactly (or it wouldn't be a map). That is what makes Rose Wilder Lanes idea so interesting and important...we were always free just like the earth was always round: we just had to discover it.

Ever heard of google? A truly evil book, BTW. I won't react to your sarcasm, and I don't regard books as evil, there are books that I have gotten a great deal out of and some which I haven't. Also, the other principle or idea that is worth thinking about from Lane's quote explains why people can be so wrong and still function in the world: notice that believing that the world is flat (or that the sun goes around the earth) doesn't necessarily make for any practical problems, it creates an upper limit to your understanding, and to the limits of your culture. A culture that believes the earth is flat is far less likely to explore the world in ships than one that assumes the earth is round. There are many ideas in 'The Discovery of Freedom' that make re-reading it a real pleasure. Here's another quote from 'The Discovery of Freedom' in which she was arguing with people objectivists would probably call 'tribalists' about American Individualism: They questioned me shrewdly. I staggered myself by mentioning taxes; I had to admit that an American pays the tribe for possession of a house. This seemed to concede that the American tribe does own the house. I was routed; their high opinion of my country was restored. Rose wilder Lane

All men are brothers, of one blood, of one human race. They are brothers in one imperative desire to live, in one desperate necessity to combine their energies in order to live. Any man who injures another, injures himself, for human welfare is necessary to his own existence. Many men do not know this fact. It is not the first fact that men have not known, nor the only one that they do not know now. There are still people who believe that the earth is flat. Because it is not flat, because it holds them to its surface by the attraction of its spherical mass, they can behave, within limits and for short distances, as if it were flat. Rose Wilder Lane I believe this quote is out of 'The Discovery of Freedom' but I'm not sure. I liked that book though, and I got out of it that human beings are and always have been 'free' (volitional) even though she didn't give the kind of sophisticated philosophical arguments that Nathaniel Branden did in 'The Psychology of Self-Esteem'. I also like the Karma idea in this quote, that whomever hurts someone else hurts everyone (including themselves eventually). Karma may not work with mechanical-like necessity but it works often enough to be suggestive. This is the selfish basis of community.

What happens to a dream deferred? Does it dry up like a raisin in the sun? Or fester like a sore-- And then run? Does it stink like rotten meat? Or crust and sugar over-- like a syrupy sweet? Maybe it just sags like a heavy load. Or does it explode? Langston Hughes

I glanced through the letter, and I don't think we really disagree that much, it is just that politics bores the heck out of me, I'm far more interested in a good book that precinct votes, and polls, etc.. I realize there is a rift in the Republican party, and that some of the upper hierarchy didn't do the practical things that every politician has to do to get elected..but I don't really care. I don't think the new bunch of Republicans are going to change anything, our problems go well beyond what Rand would call Republican pea shooters, but I hope to be wrong about this.

Some seem so obvious to anyone that knows Objectivism I wasn't really in the mood to point them out. I didn't say that the exact quotes provided were the exact antipode to Objectivism, but the more you read Marx the more sure you are that Objectivism was the answer to Socialist theory. As for the quotes above: The history of all previous societies has been the history of class struggles. Karl Marx I can't find the exact quote since I don't have all my books with me but in 'For the New Intellectual' the history of all previous (Western) societies is portrayed as a philosophical struggle...the rational vs. the irrational. I'm not saying that I don't think that some of Objectivism is one-sided...simply an observation about the Objectivism (see 'Ayn Rand: The Russian Radical' by Chris Sciabarra for details. The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism. Karl Marx In Objectivism, the iniatiation of force is a sin, and socialism is based on force, thus the meaning of peace is capitalism (and voluntary exchange). The production of too many useful things results in too many useless people. Karl Marx In Objectivism, the production of too many useless things results in too many useless people. The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all private property. Karl Marx Objectivism's political theory can be summed up in one sentence, the state doesn't own any property. Without doubt, machinery has greatly increased the number of well-to-do idlers. Karl Marx Without doubt, machinery has greatly increased the number of well-to-do workers.

I think we should not only whether we want a male or female to pat us down, but which one. I would opt for Eva Mendes.

Certainly all the Marx quotes show where Objectivism comes from....if you just reverse each quote (except one or two) you have Ayn Rand's philosophy...particularly with respect to denying an inherent conflict of interest between individuals or 'classes' (whatever a 'class' is).

Ninth Doctor, I meant any kind of interesting quote, as yours were. The Marx wasn't as interesting to me since I had heard or read most of them, not to mention the content of those quotes. Here's another, more humorous, but still serious: In the Korean War, after U.N. forces under American command were attacked by Chinese forces in the Battle of Chosin Reservoir, U.S. commander Chesty Puller made the remark, "We've been looking for the enemy for some time now. We've finally found him. We're surrounded. That simplifies things."[34] He also reportedly said, "All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time", and "Great. Now we can shoot at those bastards from every direction." In the same battle, Major General Oliver P. Smith was widely quoted as saying, "Retreat? Hell, we're attacking in a different direction!", but that is apparently an abbreviation of his actual explanation. (from laconic phrases in wikipedia)

I keep a diary of quotes, and today when I was adding one from Michael I thought I could share some of them in the hopes others would provide some of their own or comment on these. The first one is: James Whitmore "I have no regrets, real regrets about any darn thing...I think second-guessing one's self and your life is the most futile thing in the world."

Actually it is much harder than what the above posts suggest...the businessman who is self-made and hasn't gotten much money from government programs, but still believes in the mixed economy. The other type is the Soros type...a socialist oriented (or central authority oriented) type who can still compete in the private economy. Not every business person who believes the same things that James Taggart believes in acts like the character, and not everyone who acts like Reardon believes in the same things. Thus 'Atlas Shrugged' to straighten everyone out.

I thought Adam's discussion of Chambers was rather mild, a lot worse could be said about someone who claimed to hear a voice telling humanity to a death chamber go (even though it was saying just the opposite).

I agree Michael, and thanks for making it clear that ethnic cleansing is evil whomever the 'cleanser' is or the cleansee. You also said a lot of things to the idiot that some of us are too polite to say.

This may all be true, but it isn't relevant to one question: What does this have to do with the U.S.? We have nothing to gain from the Middle East, it isn't our battle. No mention of how Israeli's torture, push Palestinians out of their homes, violate human rights etc. To be against one side doesn't mean you are for the other; it is entirely possible that both sides are wrong, and the U.S. wins by staying out militarily, and just doing some window dressing diplomacy knowing that a diplomatic solution isn't likely.

David: You are incorrect. She lost because the Republican Senate Committee refused to finance a "ground game." This is my area of expertise. The "air war" was fought to a draw. By that we mean TV/media advertising. Other than the Christian coalition, she had a poor under financed election day operation. This cost her the election. That us a fact. Adam Well put, Adam. This was my impression also, but you (as someone with much better knowledge) can speak with authority. Sad, very sad, that Harry survived because of this. Bill P I wasn't able to find stats on the elderly vote in the Reid/Angle senatorial election, but I'm not the only one who pointed out that the outcome isn't all just logistics, it is the positions you take and the fact of the matter is that the American electorate isn't ready for something as radical as Ayn Rand and the libertarian philosophy. Here's some interesting posts on the election, some of which partially confirm Adam, and some which point to what I was saying: http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2010/nov/07/game-harry-reid-won/ http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Election-2010/From-the-Wires/2010/1103/Sharron-Angle-fails-to-topple-Nevada-Sen.-Harry-Reid http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101104/ap_on_el_ge/us_how_reid_won

Angle lost because she was honest enough to take on 2 3rd rails. Social Security and Medicare whilst other Republicans like to dance around the issue. Also her political base was split up with some other people running more or less on the same political ground.

What an awesome ignorance of international and free trade is displayed here. You need to read at least Henry Hazlitt's 'Economics in One Lesson' particularly Chapter XI 'Who's "Protected" by Tariffs?' and the following chapter XII 'The Drive for Exports" as a bare minimum of educating yourself enough to argue against free markets between nations.