Selene

Yes because a fundamantalist religious dictatorship possessing nuclear weapons is the same thing as a representative liberal democracy prossessing them. I am new here, but that is a very refreshing website.

Maybe, maybe not. If you had actually mastered time travel, or could truly peer into the future, he might have considered you a magician or a true precognitive -- and been frightened. If you were able to give a bit more detail ('waves of what?' -- 'is this like the telegraph?') of the transmission, he might have said, "hmm, are you sure your name is not Jules Verne, are you not cribbing from his writings about tele vision?" He might have said, "I want you to talk to my friend Maxwell. This sounds like some of his work in electromagnets, by golly!" Or, he might have asked, "And did you know, Mr Kelly, that in less than 200 hundred years, the earth will warm, the seas will rise, and humankind will escape to Mars? And that orbiting satellites will first send tele vision in 1962?" The problem with analogy, as with hindsight, is that it is either almost exactly wrong, or nearly exactly right. It very much depends on the use to which it is put. Excellent points. When I was teaching rhetoric I used my own model of arguments to teach my students "reasoning" and critical thinking. I hope the triangle of argument comes through in the perspective it was sent in. G I D P A P The PIG being induction and the GDP being deduction and the PAP being analogy. P=particular; G=generalization; I=induction; D=deduction; and A=analogy[which I maintain is a reasoning process that we do not fully understand, but exists.

Humans have three pound brains and a potential lifetime of a century or two. There is a limit to how smart we can get and how long we can live. Even with crutches and force multipliers like computers there is a limit. A computer, in a sense, cannot be much smarter than the program that runs it and the program has its limitations (time and memory). Memory and running speed are ultimately bounded by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. We still have quite a ways to go in that direction, but there are limits. The space we have at our disposal is ultimately bounded by the speed of light and relativistic mass with its associated energy. The human race need not worry about these Ultimate Limits for some thousands of years to come, assuming that technology progresses as it has, but a day will come when we can go no further in terms of raw capability. I rejoice that I will not live to see That Day. Someone said that Nature in order to be commanded, must be obeyed. One aspect of obedience is to recognize natural limits. Right now Mankind is in its childhood and we are playing in the Sand Box. Like children we can pretend there are no limits, but when we Grow Up we will have to recognize what they are and learn to live within their bounds. Ba'al Chatzaf "Someone said that Nature in order to be commanded, must be obeyed. One aspect of obedience is to recognize natural limits. Right now Mankind is in its childhood and we are playing in the Sand Box. Like children we can pretend there are no limits, but when we Grow Up we will have to recognize what they are and learn to live within their bounds." And you actually as an allegedly rational sentient entity believe that statement?

About 11, 000 German-Americans and Italian-Americans were interned as potential enemies Whereas the Japanese population of the West Coast was removed to inland interment facilities. Over 110,000 were so interned. See http://www.foitimes.com/internment/gasummary.htm Ba'al Chatzaf "The only German and German-Americans detained and incarcerated were members of the Bundt. Ditto for Italian-American fascists active politically." Which you know is true, because the Hoover FBI said so, correct? Furthermore, you know that all 110,000 Japanese were just honest, pro American, hard working people. In fact, you know that they were all perfect pure people who never even jaywalked in America. And just a silly little question, how many of the torpedo planes, bombers and zeros were flown by Germans and Italians in the "accidental" bombing of Pearl Harbor? If there was a Jewish community in Nanking that was slaughtered by your buds, would you feel the same way as you seem to be towards the other two groups?

The only German and German-Americans detained and incarcerated were members of the Bundt. Ditto for Italian-American fascists active politically. In the case of the Japanese, they were ALL rounded up on the mainland. Men, women, children American born and Japanese Born regardless of political activity, all put behind barbed wire to the last soul. Later on in the war, young Japanese men were accorded the "privilege" of shedding their blood in Europe. The 442nd if I recall. The most decorated unit in the Army. Ba'al Chatzaf Yes we all saw the movie. However, your statement about Italians and Germans is quite simply untrue.

Yeah, that the police are idiots. I would not call the "Anarchist Cookbook" as a seminal book of anarchy. Its sort of like the would-be kids into wicca getting the 'satanic bible' or the like. I've read things which has claimed the 'recipes' in the cookbook would get you killed, as they were intentionally done incorrectly. (I recall an episode of Law & Order:SVU used it as a prop) Seminal was a bad choice of words.

Robert, I have no problem denying Iran nuclear power (even by means of war) given the "second-coming" (14th Imam) bent of Ahmadinejad and the ruling clergy. That's a very dangerous kind of mentality to be in charge of massive means of blowing things up. But even if Ahmadinejad were toppled from power with our involvement (and that is the wrong guy to topple in Iran, anyway), I seriously doubt the repercussion in the Sunni world would be very great. It wasn't when the the Shah was installed, it wasn't when the Shah was toppled (Iraq even went to war with them) and I don't think it would be with Ahmadinejad. The Muslim world is just too big and divided for an oversimplified "shock and awe" approach. I have no problem with teaching fear to those who need it (and on a personal level, I have done a bit of this myself in the past), but it is a tragic mistake to miss out on teaching Muslims to love individual rights and other forms of love where this can be done. I would expect you, as a Christian, to have at least some sympathy for the approach of teaching love for human beings. The solution to this whole issue is a package of many measures and there is no one size fits all. There are simply too many Muslims, too many denominations and too many countries involved for that to be realistic. Michael Well, we can argue details, but the main thrust of my argument was rhetorical. Yes, i know some Ayatollah jerkoff really runs things in Iran, and his word is law. My main challenge was the *equivocation* between Christians, Jews and Moslems. I do not see it, and cannot see it. I can make out a laundry list of atrocities commited in the name of Islam that are not commited in the name of Christianity and Judaism. Nor was I saying that a one-fell-swoop attack on Iran would answer everything. I was giving a single *example,* namely to address the point above. "Shock and Awe" worked only inasmuch as it toppled Saddam from power, but afterwards we didn't exactly calculate what would happen in the power vacuum. However, I am glad that the United States has established two bases of operations (Iraq and Afghanistan) with Iran in the middle. What I am NOT happy about is precisely the point you raised about the Sunni Moslem world: Saudi Arabia is behind all this Jihad shite, and we didn't attack them because we are whores for oil. I have sympathy for your approach in trying to foster relations with reasonable Moslems. I have in fact left numeous postings on these boards praising Irshad Manji, and others, who seek to revive the Islamic tradition of Ijtihad. However, that's the carrot. And, without the stick at the backs of the radicals and their sympathizers (more people than you think), there'd be little impetus to change their way of thinking. Yeah, I'm with Daniel Pipes and Wafa Sultan on building bridges (I don't know who Yaron Brook is, though). It ought to go without saying that we oughn't to throw the baby out with the bathwater on this, which would only end up alienating decent Moslems, who certainly don't deserve to suffer from the excesses of their extremist brothers. However, so many decent Moslems are silenced from speaking their true thoughts on these matters. Yes, half of it is from fear. But, the other half is from shame of not following their own religion as rabidly as the terrorists. Until decent Moslems admit that perhaps Mohammed was a murderous Schweinehund, they will be permanently cowed by the more devout of their faith. I have no problem saying, "hey, St. Paul was probably wrong about this or that," and I am not stoned for it. A Moslem most likely would be if he even suggested that Mohammed was not always a swell fella. As a Christian, though, here's where I stand on the subject of the kind of agape love you are describing. If I turn the other cheek once, shame on you. If I turn the other cheek twice, shame on me. The West has turned the other cheek to the Moslem jihadists *thousands* of times. Time to slap back, I say! "However, I am glad that the United States has established two bases of operations (Iraq and Afghanistan) with Iran in the middle." Damn, sounds like a real good RISK game. Anyone out there ever played Avalon Hill games like Gettysburg or Tactics II[<<Robert you would like this one].

Selene, I like you. Michael Thank you. The feeling is mutual. Granted, as you pointed out to me regarding general semanticist[aghh I have not read him in years] this is a "rant" area. I did not realize that at first. However, your original point that started this journey to the "dark side" in a number of posts, mine included, is worth exploring. Folks tend to selectively distort and selectively retain information as they process the information. It is a question of personal discipline to be "objective". It is not an easy path and yes we get yelled at a lot. So be it.

Excellent and you are not alone. I just returned from our local library chess club I had joined about 4 weeks ago. Averages 14 young people and 8 adults. Well, I walked into tonight's club with my shiny issue of The New Individualist, Atlas Shrugged at Fifty. I had been talking generally about Rand and the 50th anniversary for three weeks. The magazine was a great hit and 3 parents and 5 young adults were swung over and open to listen for about 45 minutes after the club. The librarian said I better slow down because they just had to order four more copies of other Rand books that I recommended, including Breaking Free - once again thanks Nathaniel. One 14 year old had been pushing his mother to read Anthem for two weeks. She thanked me and walked out with it tonight. We discussed the movie V which was in another thread here. Libertarianism. It was an excellent night and I am still undeated - <<<<tooting his own chess horn. This is one important method to spread a philosophy. I have been doing it for 49 years and it works. As she wrote in The Fountainhead, every time Dominique saw a building she loved, a gas station, it was Roark's. We are like an underground stream which will fill vaccuums and burst from the ground in unexpected places. Geez, I sound like an "evangelical" Objectivist, but that would be an oxymoron.

There was a long history of anti-Japenese anti-Chinese sentiment in the U.S. long before Pearl Harbor. You will notice the U.S. did not do mass roundups of German born and first generation German-Americans and put them in holding camps. However hundred's of thousands of Japanese born and first generation Japanese-Americans were put behind barbed wire in 1942. The was during Earl Warren's governorship in California. FDR signed a presidential order mandating the roundup. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_Exclu...nited_States%29 for a resume of anti-Chinese sentiment. In California there was anti-Japanese sentiment well before the Pacific War. It seems the Japense farmers were "too successful" and ticked a lot of California farmers off. The Japanese farmers had a knack for turning marginal land into money makers. Live and learn. Ba'al Chatzaf "There was a long history of anti-Japenese anti-Chinese sentiment in the U.S. long before Pearl Harbor. You will notice the U.S. did not do mass roundups of German born and first generation German-Americans and put them in holding camps. However hundred's of thousands of Japanese born and first generation Japanese-Americans were put behind barbed wire in 1942. The was during Earl Warren's governorship in California. FDR signed a presidential order mandating the roundup." Actually, there were "roundups" [sounds like a good rodeo] of German American and Italian American citizens[Gino Marchetti - Hall of Fame DE's family were sent to internment camps and their property confiscated] . The Supreme Court ruled in post WWII and we[Americans] paid for that through our taxs. Every single immigrant group that came to this country went through "levels" of bigotry. Dutch/German hated the Irish; Irish the Italians/etc. - its called reality. The whining just makes it annoying.

Hence, one of my favorite Rand quotes that has gotten instant attention for almost 50 years. It is a great door opener to advance a discussion of her ideas. "Show me what a man finds sexually attractive[<maybe off on that word - might be desirable] and I will tell you his philosophy of life." Say that and be patient and you can actually see the person go through actual thought and one of the most beautiful sight for a teacher or persuader to see - awareness of a truth. She had a remarkable ability to extrapolate from little or nothing, which I do not admire. This doesn't mean she solved the "problem" of induction. It means she made an overstatement to illustrate her dubious point. --Brant How so? Secondly, she was a human being who had flaws and a "philosopher" whose philosophy is not perfect in all the branches of the discipline. So let's psychologically spank her and glean the immensely revolutionary concepts that we all have learned. Jack Nicholson > "I suggest you just say thank you and move along!"

Oh, come now. On the other active thread you defined modern Judaism. I accepted it, because you know more about it than I do. Where's the tyranny? W. Hmmm. Don't you hate the pointed horns on that dilemna?

It's amazing, isn't it? Yep. I was surprised that they were actually the color yellow, I put on my best looking metro-sexual hat and tried to imagine what shade or hue of yellow that they actually were? I just thought he meant "yellow" as a character description as in they ran away from the fire bombings which killed more civilians than both of those there nuclear thing a ma jigs that they dropped on those funny sounding cities. They were kinda wierd looking to, ya know what I mean, like kinda suspicious looking with them funny eyes.

Isn't it? Isn't it what?

Hence, one of my favorite Rand quotes that has gotten instant attention for almost 50 years. It is a great door opener to advance a discussion of her ideas. "Show me what a man finds sexually attractive[<maybe off on that word - might be desirable] and I will tell you his philosophy of life." Say that and be patient and you can actually see the person go through actual thought and one of the most beautiful sight for a teacher or persuader to see - awareness of a truth.

Not in Japan. They are very racist there. They even keep records on themselves tracing their ancestry back many generations to show how purely Japanese they are. How many nations do you know of where it is common to keep a pedigree? And their treatment of Koreans and children of Koreans is an abomination. Look up eta on google sometimes. Or bonrin. The Korean "bloods" are "niggers" of Japan. The Pacific War was a clash between two very racist nations. We hated the little yellow rats and they hated us gijiin barbarians and claimed that we smelled foul. Sound familiar? Even 60 years after the war, they still keep pedigrees. The descendants of Japanese who are Americans, however, are not nearly so racist. One of the good side effects of living in a (pardon the expression) diverse society. A similar thing happened with American Jews. Except for the Orhodox, marriage of Jews to non-Jews is not uncommon. I have a non-Jewish son-in-law and and a non-Jewish daughter in law. I also have a Jewish daughter in law. Such a thing is not at all uncommon. It is called assimilation. America is the assimilation capital of the world. Ba'al Chatzaf "The Pacific War was a clash between two very racist nations. We hated the little yellow rats and they hated us gijiin barbarians and claimed that we smelled foul. Sound familiar?" Wow, I never knew that. I thought it was because they initiated force by a sneak attack on some Sunday and accidently killed close to 3,000 of our citizens. It is amazing how much history you can learn on this forum.

The U.S. is surrounded by external enemies who would love to wreck us. Is this a good time to wreck the economy internally? Ba'al Chatzaf A difficult choice to make, unlike in the fictional world of Atlas, wherein there is zero external threat. However, we are in a serious balancing period in a rapidly centralizing government. As I stated, there are some highly probable events when in tandem could rapidly lead to a seriously repressive left wing centralized government populated by provisional employees with agendas. You are from N.J. correct. Look at your state, one of the top three or four most corrupt states in the history of this country. One of the top two or three highest taxed states in the union. Inner city urban centers that have significant sections that are like some Baghdad neighborhoods without the I.E.D.'s. An educational system that is dysfunctional. Add a chemical plant or container center as part of a terrorist attack, combined with the seizure of two or three schools a la Beslan[sp ???] and a bridge or tunnel and you have marshal law with mass hysteria. What do you think the centralized state of NJ would do? By the way the Giants won 31-10, covered the points. NY Teams are my "religion". Lol

A strike can work and should absolutely be considered. Aristotle stated that if you have the will and the power, the deed is done. We do not have the will yet, but it would just take a few probable events, in tandem to convince many that it is certainly time.

The political structure in my view is totally irrelevant. Racism involves any type of prejudgement, good or bad, of an individual, based on the assumption of inherent attributes, abilities or lack thereof in the genetic stock. The attribution of any ability or character attribute whatsoever based on genetics is racism. Therefore, a value should not be attributed to race, and of course a set of values is just the same - racist. Now some 'facts' might be true, but it matters not. The prejudice example of racism: West Africans dominate sprinting - FACT. John is West African, and must be a good sprinter - RACIST. OR The 'race attribution' example of racism: Jews enjoy a higher income than Group B - FACT Success is a Jewish value - RACIST Bob Well put. I have been re-examining that because I used to call what you just stated as bigotry or prejudice, but it is racism and the state does not have to be involved. I was pretty sure this was the way my re-examination would end and your cogent argument convinced me. Kudos Bob.

I understand, I distinguish, you dististinguish. The problem is that the distinction is not automatically implied by the writer of such assertions nor inferred by the reader. Hence the problem. Also, problems arise when people think they're not being racist when in fact they are. One problem is when you speak of any 'tribal' attribute, racial connections will usually be made, intended, or both. As a result, statements will be perceived as racist without careful and deliberate clarification. Look at the following statements... 1.) Rand has the ethics of a Jew. 2.) Blacks are better at sports. 3.) Asians are better at math. 4.) Jews are cheap and money-hungry. 5.) Blacks are more criminally minded. 6.) Catholics have a low opinion of women. Regardless of whether the statement has any factual basis, or is complementary or insulting, they ALL involve a prejudgement based on race OR tribal affiliation or that character differences are based on this affiliation. It just doesn't matter how close the tribalism is linked to genetics or not. An African black person would laugh at the notion of a black 'race'. Different tribes within Africa have huge genetic variation so no black race exists in any real way. So because there really is no race basis to "Black" can we say that he has "Black" ethics now? Can we freely discuss black culture? Can we say that that was a very "Black" thing to do? Only if it's complementary? I call bullshit on it all. It's all racist. What, is achievement a Jewish value? Family cohesion? Hard work? I value those things, but I'm not Jewish. Does that make me a little more Jewish? Did I steal a Jewish value? I bet if I WAS Jewish, I'd understand right? Bah...You all damn well know this is racism. Bob AMEN! And the congregation rose to its feet in applause. "Rand's ethics are very Jewish. Take my word for it. I have been living according to Jewish ethics for over 71 years so I know what I am talking about. Most likely, Rand's parents were not particularly observant to the details of the Jewish religion. But that is mostly a ritual and ceremonial issue. The ethics are ingrained into the person in his total living." I'm sorry, are you actually stating that you are the fountainhead of interpretation of "Jewish ethics" because you are old? Therefore, I am the fountainhead of interpretation of "objectivist ethics" because I have practiced them for 49 years? And then you ask us to "trust you"? Isn't that a lot like a philosophical three card monte game wherein the dealer tells the marks to trust him that the "game" is "honest"?

Explain please... If it quacks... He called Rand's ethics "Jewish". He also implied quite clearly that Jewish ethics are precise and well-defined (with his 'molecular' comment). If Jewishness has anything to do with race, then the statement implies her ethics are partially race based. That fits just about perfectly with any definition of racism I can think of. You might not call it racist, but it is... American Heritage Dictionary 1)The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others. 2)Discrimination or prejudice based on race. Bob Precisely, Bob. Definition(s) of term(s) saves a great percentage of useless arguments and energy spent defending them. Defining terms for a debate is a first principle. My "gut"[equals sense in my gestalt] about the denotive definition of racism that you profer for this excellent argument that you are advancing is that racism needs a state political structure to qualify, but I have been re-examining my premises on this one. I am no longer sure about that. However, the dirty little secret that is not being addressed is that some exponents of individualism, freedom, self-reliance and just being a citizen who wants to be treated both "laissez-faire" and "lainous faire"[spelling ????] which roughly translates to "leave me the _ _ _ _ alone!" I fly the coiled rattle snake Don't Tread on Me" flag regularly. It is an elemental liberatarian position and certainly an anarcho-capitalist position. It basicly frustrates me when I see sharp minds getting all tangled up in mixed premises instead of concluding, hmmm I guess that is irrational and eliminate it from rational consideration.

Agreed. Good observation Reidy.

I guess I continue to learn that I can still be totally shocked by mixed premises leading inexorably to anti-individual results. Apparently, the basic assumption being advanced in this argument is what gang? Send in your choices now and we will announce the winners later.

You bet. Her ethics were Jewish down to the molecular level. Her parents might not have been observant, but they transmitted the ethics faithfully. It usually take three generations to die out entirely. Zedes (grandfathers) and Bubbies (grandmothers) have a way of making it persist. You will notice the O'ist movement was started and sustained in its early stages by cultural Jews. That is NOT a coincidence. Ba'al Chatzaf "You will notice the O'ist movement was started and sustained in its early stages by cultural Jews. That is NOT a coincidence." Now that is a despicable comment. So now the blush is off the rose.