Ron Paul: The Last Nail

[sjw]

Did Objectivists stand idly by as The Bill of Rights was shredded? Yes. ARI Objectivists even volunteered to help do the shredding.

Shayne

[Selene]

Shayne:

I agree with about ninety seven percent (97%) of that speech.

Adam

[BaalChatzaf]

I can't deny what Paul says. So what do we do about it?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sjw]

I can't deny what Paul says. So what do we do about it?

Ba'al Chatzaf

In my opinion, there needs to be a grassroots education process about natural rights, and barring that I don't see much hope in altering the trajectory that Ron Paul is identifying. This tyranny is mainly coming from the bottom-up; it's what the masses want, whether explicitly, or by default.

Shayne

[Greybird]

Did Objectivists stand idly by as The Bill of Rights was shredded? Yes. ARI Objectivists even volunteered to help do the shredding.

And the Atlas Society Objectivists chose — as did, and do, many people in this forum — to misrepresent, insult, and smear the above messenger.

The blame goes all around, Shayne.

Oh, and for the record, I agree with 110 percent of what Paul says. The extra ten percent involves his not being quite forceful or pointed enough about it. (Partly due to the five-minute House-speech time limit. Nonetheless, he covers a lot of ground.)

His son, though, is doing beautifully in that rhetorical respect, utterly skewering Harry Reid's lily-livered hypocrisy about the Fourth Amendment on the floor of the Senate today. Not that the cowards around him listened.

Edited May 27, 2011 by Greybird

[sjw]

Did Objectivists stand idly by as The Bill of Rights was shredded? Yes. ARI Objectivists even volunteered to help do the shredding.

And the Atlas Society Objectivists chose — as did, and do, many people in this forum — to misrepresent, insult, and smear the above messenger.

The blame goes all around, Shayne.

Indeed, yes.

Shayne

[studiodekadent]

I should add that not all Objectivists fell into the Foreign Policy Hawkishness pattern. Certainly, plenty (I'd suspect most) did, both ARI and TAS did (again, I think they applied the Objectivist theory of history in a rationalistic, methodologically collectivist fashion, and I think they saw things in overly symbolic terms and fell into the trap of treating people and nations and certain buildings as avatars of philosophical premises).

But I know ARI Watch is run by an Objectivist that isn't a Foreign Policy Hawk. And I am an Objectivist and didn't support the hawkishness of many other Objectivists (I support going after Bin Laden and Al Qaeda, but I don't support the war in Iraq, the extendent nation-building effort in Afghanistan, and I certainly don't support the national security state or the so-called PATRIOT Act (honestly, they must have spent ages trying to come up with such an ironic acronym)).

[BaalChatzaf]

In my opinion, there needs to be a grassroots education process about natural rights, and barring that I don't see much hope in altering the trajectory that Ron Paul is identifying. This tyranny is mainly coming from the bottom-up; it's what the masses want, whether explicitly, or by default.

Shayne

You are talking about a generation long turnabout. Approximately thirty years. Do we have that long?

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sjw]

You are talking about a generation long turnabout. Approximately thirty years. Do we have that long?

Ba'al Chatzaf

Brant is the prognosticator, not me. My opinions relate to the causal relations. However, I think it doesn't have to take 30 years, that depends on factors that are not easily discerned.

Shayne

[BaalChatzaf]

Brant is the prognosticator, not me. My opinions relate to the causal relations. However, I think it doesn't have to take 30 years, that depends on factors that are not easily discerned.

Shayne

Undoing over two hundred years of bad habits is not easily done.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sjw]

Brant is the prognosticator, not me. My opinions relate to the causal relations. However, I think it doesn't have to take 30 years, that depends on factors that are not easily discerned.

Shayne

Undoing over two hundred years of bad habits is not easily done.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Most people don't live to be over 80 or so.

Shayne

[BaalChatzaf]

Most people don't live to be over 80 or so.

Shayne

The sin of the fathers and the mother are thoroughly taught to the sons and the daughters. That is why the bad habits persist for centuries. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[sjw]

Most people don't live to be over 80 or so.

Shayne

The sin of the fathers and the mother are thoroughly taught to the sons and the daughters. That is why the bad habits persist for centuries. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Old dog, new tricks?

Shayne

[caroljane]

Most people don't live to be over 80 or so.

Shayne

The sin of the fathers and the mother are thoroughly taught to the sons and the daughters. That is why the bad habits persist for centuries. As the twig is bent, so grows the tree.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Old dog, new tricks?

Shayne

Shayne and Baal, you are both right, but in this one Shayne is righter, I think. Ideas can be revolutionized within a generation of about 30 years, the Enlightenment and your own Revolution demonstrated that. Moreover, those who carry out that revolution are usually younger than 30, however long they live afterwards, remaining revolutionary and mopping up the blood with their highly absorbent, glory-stained rags.