Kimmler

Timeline for what? In the quoted areas, there are three different subjects: 1. Obama 2. Russian Revolution 3. Cooked Frog ~ Shane "His purpose is to maintain and continually centralize power in this country. Once he has nominal control over the means of production, or his subsequent socialist brethren are elected, or in power, businesses can be nationalized and "profits" seized" A timeline for the above.

With greatest of respect and I ask this question with some trepidation. But, if objectivism is supposed to be a philosophy of happiness why are nearly all it’s followers so bitter and angry?

Steven: His purpose is to maintain and continually centralize power in this country. Once he has nominal control over the means of production, or his subsequent socialist brethren are elected, or in power, businesses can be nationalized and "profits" seized. Are you even remotely familiar with the Russian revolution and how many of the producers kept on producing, with the belief that the Red government was a temporary aberration. Then, when it was too late, they died with that bewildered look on their face. It is the parable of the frog in the slowly heating water who gets cooked because he did not feel it coming. Adam Smashing, great, super. Do you have a time line for this?

Crime and poverty may be related sometimes, but it's not a direct and the link is more complex. Newfoundland for example, relatively poor to begin with, suffered a catastrophic loss of the fishing industry and a resulting economic crunch (before oil and gas fueled a rebound). Crime did not increase, attendance in post-secondary education increased. Crime in Newfoundland (traditionally Canada's poverty zone) has always been extremely low, even by Canadian standards. Crime is not necessarily connected to poverty at all. Bob Well of course you can prove anything with facts.

How about re-education camps and "special arrangements" for those who flunk? Michael Nope, we won't have those either. No police to arrest those that flunk, no courts to sentence them and no prisons to lock them up in. Like the turtle needs it's shell, it is capitalism that needs the state not socialism.

But you also gave us Bryan Adams...before everything I do he was brilliant. Canada is not socialist, it's a capitalist country. As is Sweden. As for the - How about financially and economically ruined? One cannot live beyond one's means forever. Am I going to get a time line?

How about financially and economically ruined? One cannot live beyond one's means forever. Ba'al Chatzaf Great. Time line please. BTW - I take it you believe that Obama is a socialist but don't believe that socialism ends up in the gulag, gas chamber or the blood soaked paddy field thingy. I checked out Sweden the other day but could not find the number of people who flee from there every year. Do you have the figure?

Over half the people in jail are in there for "substance abuse" and dealing in illegal drugs. Solution: legalize the use of drugs and decriminalize the drug trade. That would let out over one million of the prison population. As to the others, remember there are a lot of poor people who do not commit crimes. How do you account for that? Ba'al Chatzaf Come on Ba'al, stop using free market capitalism to solve issues that would allow Steven socialist state to provide union jobs for his workers! Adam Under socialism there would be neither unions, states or prisons.

It is hardly accidental that cities with high unemployment rates also have high crime rates. In terms of violent crime, as FBI statistics for calendar year 2009 show, Detroit, noted above to have the highest poverty rate, also has the most violent crime per 1,000 citizens. It is hardly accidental that cities with high unemployment rates also have high crime rates. In terms of violent crime, as FBI statistics for calendar year 2009 show, Detroit, noted above to have the highest poverty rate, also has the most violent crime per 1,000 citizens. As Sir Thomas More wrote in his Utopia: “You allow these people to be brought up in the worst possible way, and systematically corrupted from their earliest years. Finally, when they grow up and commit the crimes that they were obviously destined to commit, ever since they were children, you start punishing them. In other words, you create thieves, and then punish them for stealing,” Could he have better explained America’s 2.3-million prison population today? Poverty, like the sores of some malignant disease, is spreading across America, as its states and cities go broke and bankrupt. There is no sign on the horizon that poverty and the blight will not continue to spread. Now this I dispute, even in the great depression life did get better and the economy did pick up, capitalism will 'right' itself, Marx was correct on that. Boom will follow bust. It is not that Americans are lazy and shiftless; rather, they are reeling from betrayal—for they have been betrayed both by their employers, who have shown not an ounce of loyalty to their work forces, and they have been betrayed by their Federal government, which has lied the nation into costly criminal wars. High poverty rates stem largely from persistent, structural unemployment. As the Washington Post reported, “Blacks, Hispanics and men have suffered the most mainly because they have been disproportionately employed in sectors hardest hit in the recession — manufacturing and construction. For instance, the unemployment rate for blacks is expected to reach 27 percent in Michigan, which has been shedding auto industry jobs. Other states with jobless rates above 20 percent for blacks are Alabama, Illinois, Ohio and South Carolina”. Kai Filion, research analyst at the Economic Policy Institute said economic losses could result in a 50 percent poverty rate for black children, up from 34 percent in 2008. In many communities, major employers abandoned their workers with no compunction (and often without deserved pensions), automating employees out of their jobs. Other employers simply relocated their plants overseas entirely. One employment choice for ghettoized youth is the military. While Pentagon recruiters strongly deny they target low-income neighborhoods, a careful reading of the home towns of those reported killed in the Middle East may well cast doubt upon this contention. Sir Thomas More again speaks : “To start with, most kings are more interested in the science of war…than in useful peacetime techniques. They’re far more anxious, by hook or by crook, to acquire new kingdoms than to govern their existing ones properly.” This, of course, applies perfectly to America’s kings, for not only have our presidents assumed the powers and prerogatives of kings but they have, in fact, acted no better than medieval kings, waging wars with armies raised from the poorest strata of society and spending lavishly to conquer while ignoring their own citizenry’s cries for bread and opportunity. Put another way, the Pentagon is spending more money for war (52 cents of every tax dollar) than all 50 states combined spend for all purposes to improve the lot of 300 million Americans. In The Three Trillion Dollar War, Joseph Stiglitz and Linda Bilmes write, “A $3 trillion figure for the total cost strikes us as judicious, and probably errs on the low side. Needless to say, this number represents the cost only to the United States. It does not reflect the enormous cost to the rest of the world, or to Iraq.” (Stiglitz is former chief economist at the World Bank and a Nobel Prize laureate and Bilmes is a public policy authority at Harvard.) Given the wars’ colossal and criminal waste of human life and treasure, it is little wonder states and cities the nation over are starved for income, record numbers of homes are being foreclosed, and soup kitchens are reporting a rising influx of patrons, many of them bewildered former members of the shrinking “middle class”. Even in peace time all of these are present. Americans today do not grasp the reality of the terminal disease that is war. They do not recognize how it is driving them relentlessly into poverty while sacrificing their children like some primitive culture on the altar of the military-industrial complex to ensure a profitable harvest from their blood. This strikes me as a tad patronizing, but then I don't know the mood of America. I sure Americans are clever enough to reach such a conclusion Taken and adapted from an article by Sherwood Ross of the Anti-War News Service

Anyone got a time line for Obama & his 'socialist' brethren centralizing power and nationalising America's industries? I've e-mailed the White house but they won't tell me.

A small rural community in western Tennessee is outraged and the fire chief is nursing a black eye after firefighters stood by and watched a mobile home burn to the ground because the homeowner hadn’t paid a $75 municipal fee. South Fulton city firefighters – equipped with trucks, hoses and other firefighting equipment – didn’t intervene to save Gene Cranick’s doublewide trailer home when it caught fire last week. But they did arrive on the scene to protect the house of a neighbor, who had paid his fire subscription fee. “I just forgot to pay my $75,” said Cranick. “I did it last year, the year before. … It slipped my mind.” Later that day, Cranick’s son Timothy went to the fire station to complain, and punched the fire chief in the face. (AOL News, 6 October) Thanks to the WSPUS for providing this story. Seems crazy to me, they went out there so save one house and let the other burn down to the ground. All for $75.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-1335550/Merry-Christmas-Along-millions-middle-class-families-I-afford-one.html I think the saddest line in the article is near the end - "I’m just too squeamish about disappointing my children in the short term — even though in the long term I would probably be doing them an enormous favour" Often people need to understand that they cannot have the best things all the time. I feel her pain(!), honestly, she worked hard and was good at her job and now has seen her income drastically reduced. But a lot of people in the UK would be happy to get £500 per month and that’s life, you have yer ups and downs!

If I have been rude to anybody here, or they have personally encountered rudeness from any socialist then I am truly sorry. There is no excuse for bad manners and those who are rude to you, you should rise above it and you should counter this with good manners. I hope that all of you will accept my apology and accept that I was asking a legitimate question and not out to distress any of you.

From space you can see no borders. We, and previous generations, have built up a productive capacity that is more than sufficient to feed, clothe, shelter, educate and amuse everyone on the planet. The only barrier to its use for that purpose is that it exists as capital. The only basis for its continuing existence as capital is our continuing acceptance of capitalist and state property rights. From below, at the sharp end, in the worker’s-eye view, these look as obsolete and obscene as property rights in people. Without those rights, capital would just be machinery, that we all together already operate and improve upon every day, every minute, collectively and globally. The only way in which these rights can be permanently abolished is consciously, politically, collectively and globally, at one fell swoop. Not on the same day all over the world of course, but in the space of a few years, in one historical moment. And why not? Slavery and feudalism were in the end abolished, with a stroke of the pen followed if necessary by a stroke of the sword. Why should we not think, then, of the abolition of capitalism? We can’t reform it out of existence. Long experience, as well as theory and common sense, tell us this. Neither ‘socialist’ governments nor ‘communist’ regimes have ever brought society a day nearer socialism or communism. There are many reasons why not, but the basic reason is simple. Production for exchange can’t be gradually reformed into production directly for use. Nor, in a world where almost everything is produced as part of a global division of labour, can it be abolished locally in one community, or one country, or one continent. It’s all or nothing. Closely related to that reason is another. A society of conscious and voluntary co-operation can’t be established unconsciously or unwillingly. It can’t be imposed from above or from outside or from behind our backs. Many will agree, if pressed, that the world cooperative commonwealth can be thus established eventually, but not now. In the meantime, they want something else: a society called socialism which retains wages, price, and profit but keeps them in the hands of the state and the state, they hope, in the hands of the workers, which all too often means the hands of the workers’ party, which all too often means in the hands of the correct leaders of the workers’ party. They want that, or they want steps in that direction. The cooperative commonwealth itself is, they insist, for the distant future. Why not now? We don’t need to wait for capitalism to increase productive capacity to the point where the co-operative commonwealth is possible, because it’s already done so, and it’s already the greatest barrier to the use and expansion of the productive capacity that exists. Why then should we vote for reforming governments to manage it, or ‘progressive’ regimes to develop it further? Especially when these reforming governments and these ‘progressive’ regimes waste so much of production, and so many of us, in war and slump. We have to make up our minds, once and for all, that we want rid of this system, for good and all. Let those who want to keep it reform it and improve it and expand it. It’s their job while it lasts. The job of those who want to end it is to give such people not a vote, not a gun, not a penny, not a person, not an inch, not an ounce of support. No political contender who is not a wage slavery abolitionist, nobody who advocates in word and deed anything less than, and anything other than, the speedy end of this system, and the consequent emancipation of the working class, deserves another minute of our time. To everyone who claims to want such an end eventually, but advocates something other or something less in the meantime, we can say we’ve lived already a long time in that meantime, and we’re still no nearer. All it would take to do away with this system and establish the world co-operative commonwealth is for most people in the world to agree to do it. It’s no news that most people don’t. The number who understand and want the commonwealth is tiny. The only revolutionary action worth the name is working to increase that number. Nothing more is needed, and nothing less will do. - Ken MacLeod

But there is something for Obama to cheer about this Xmas... “The nation’s workers may be struggling, but American companies just had their best quarter ever. American businesses earned profits at an annual rate of $1.659 trillion in the third quarter, according to a Commerce Department report released Tuesday. That is the highest figure recorded since the government began keeping track over 60 years ago, at least in nominal or non-inflation-adjusted terms.” (New York Times, 23 November) How can this be happening? Don’t the businessmen know that Obama is in power? Why aren’t their profits dropping off during his Presidency?

No. Sweden is socialist and they have no gulags there. What a socialist system produces more often than not is mediocrity and boredom, not death. Ba'al Chatzaf There is no socialism in Sweden...as if there was there would be no money, buying or selling or a state and that is just for starters. Now all of these things exist here. But it you don't believe me then how can you explain this? http://www.happyplan...obal/index.html Going by this index there is more happiness in Sweden than there is in the US. Maybe the socialists there slip prozac in the water? I can't explain a map that is based on either subjective or irrelevant data. How does one measure satisfaction? Ba'al Chatzaf How can you measure boredom? You state that socialism creates mediocrity. Yet the same could equally be said of objectivism or indeed any -ism.

No. Sweden is socialist and they have no gulags there. What a socialist system produces more often than not is mediocrity and boredom, not death. Ba'al Chatzaf There is no socialism in Sweden...as if there was there would be no money, buying or selling or a state and that is just for starters. Now all of these things exist here. But it you don't believe me then how can you explain this? http://www.happyplanetindex.org/explore/global/index.html Going by this index there is more happiness in Sweden than there is in the US. Maybe the socialists there slip prozac in the water?

Why are objectivists so rude when dealing with people they disagree with? Why is it considered acceptable behaviour to abuse non-objectivists?

I'm confused...Obama is a socialist right? Socialism always ends in the gulag, gas chamber & the blood drenched paddy field. Yet...no one can give me a time line for this to happen in America? Why not? The people won't allow it? Why can't Obama, like the other socialists just make this (ending) happen? Why did the American people vote in a socialist president? Have they ever done this before? If so, why didn't that end in the gulag, gas chamber and blood drenched paddy field? All I need to know is: Obama is a socialist yes/no? Socialism always end in the gulag, gas chamber & the blood soaked paddy field yes/no?

Adam wrote: "I would prefer to withdraw our forces beyond the outside range of their artillery circle which would be, I believe, about fifty [50] or so miles south of Seoul. I am just completely committed to not risking one single soldier when we can kill the enemy from long range. And yes, I would use tactical battlefield weaponry with absolutely no compunctions." Wow...wouldn't that lead to massive civilian deaths? Would you have no compunctions over that? Would you get upset if, in this scenario, the Western media showed images of N. Korean civilian casualites? Would they be guilty of undermining the war effort if they did this? Actually, the N. Koreans are not your enemy...workers of the world unite.

Factory seized by workers? Right on comrades! They are just taking back what is rightfully theirs. Up the workers. They will probably run it better than the John Galts...

From my reading of Objectivism and from my knowledge of the life of Rand and her followers it does seem that there is something intrinsic in the philosophy, that encourages and obligates objectivists to pass moral judgment on everything and everyone. The attitude is never pass a chance to make a moral judgement and objectivists seem to take great pleasure in condemning others in no uncertain terms. But, is this a healthy attitude to have? Won't you end up alienating yourself from the rest of society? If you are constantly judging yourself too won't this lead to emotional damage? If you are constantly telling others and yourself how rotten they/you are, what good will ever come from that?

We all know that Obama is a socialist and we all know that socialism always ends in the gulag, the gas chamber and in a blood field full of rice. So, putting two and two together I just wondered if anyone here has a time line for when America is going to end up in the gulag, the gas chamber and in a blood field full of rice? I e-mailed the White House and they said that don’t worry, Obama is not a socialist and the Democrats are not a socialist party. Obama has no plans for America to end up in the gulag, the gas chamber and in a blood field full of rice. I then put it to him that Obama does have plans for America to end up in the gulag, the gas chamber and in a blood field full of rice as he is a narcissistic Socialist who hates the prime movers. He then e-mailed me back saying If I was so clever did I have a time line for that. Well…he had me there, but I bet you lot do have a time line for when America will end up like that. Helps out here and let me put one over on this little White house squirt. Give me a time line and then he print off his e-mails, get a plate, a knife and fork and eat his words. So anyone out there who can answer me these questions three: When will America end up? 1) In a gulag 2) In a gas chamber 3) In a field of rice and blood I’d love to be a fly on the wall when that jobsworth gets this time line…ha ha ha as lets face it when it happens (questions 1 – 3) he will be the first go, right?

http://www.worldsocialism.org/articles/why_we_dont_need.php It's just not British not to give the udder point of view.