New/Old Objectivist

[mweiss]

Greetings Fellow Objectivists and Students of Objectivism,

I found this forum while Googling the name of Dr. Alan Blumenthal, recently. Out of curiousity, I looked around to see what sort of people are frequenting the place and sensed that the maturity level was somewhat higher than at another Objectivist forum of which I am also a member. I also noted that some notable persons frequent this discussion venue, which adds a bit more credibility to the value of discussions here. And last, the atmosphere seems non-combatant.

I’ve been reading some of the posts in the Meet & Greet area and so for the sake of comparison, on the surface, my current relationship to Objectivism is somewhat similar to that of Robert Jones and Paul Mawdsley. I wouldn’t go so far as to say I’ve “given up” on O’ism, but let’s just say that I too find that while it is a great philosophy for living on Earth, there is a little missing between Heaven and Earth in terms of remaining open to phenomena that are not explainable by current-day science. That said, I don’t wish to give the false impression of being a mystic—I am quite far from it. But I would not call myself an Atheist either. More like an Agnostic.

I think that I was much better at Objectivism in the late 1960s, when I was busy reading all of the books by Ayn Rand and Nathanial Branden, as well as listening to the many lectures of both on records and tapes. I came out of a Christian Science background in 1964 and both my parents and I discovered Objectivism through a mutual friend who introduced us to it and convinced us to come to some lectures in New York City. That was in the summer of ’64. Life changed dramatically after that.

I was never satisfied with the oblique and evasive “answers” that church administrators would give me in response to my deeper questions about theology. Ayn Rand’s clear, no-nonsense writing, however, answered all of my questions in a manner that always made sense to me. This awakened the “crusading spirit” in me, and I wore my Objectivist premises out in the open for all to see throughout the next 15 years. My openness with these ideas did not earn me many friends. However, the few friends I have are quality friends, though not Objectivist themselves.

My mother was a rigid Objectivist (though my parents referred to themselves as ‘students of Objectivism’ –they felt that the only true Objectivists were Ayn Rand and Dr. Leonard Peikoff and to a lesser extent, Nathaniel Branden (though they sided with Ayn Rand when that dispute between Branden and Rand broke in the early 1970s) and was intolerant of those guests my father would bring home as dinner guests who had any mixed premises or mystical thinking. My father was also Objectivist, but I would say he was the more liberal of the two, being tolerant of ‘normal’ people’s ideas. Neither one enjoyed robust health after the 1960s and there were many problems.

When Ayn Rand passed away in 1982, my mother completely “lost it.” She rapidly deteriorated after that day. I’ll never forget that day. It snowed just a bit early in the day, almost as if the weather were signaling Ayn’s passing. The news shattered our lives—especially Mom’s. For her, her last great hope had died. A light had gone out in the world and we were sunk into darkness. For Mom, it was over. And she died a few years later. Dad hung on for another decade and passed too.

After Mom’s passing, Dad became more and more religious. While he still believed Objectivist ideas, he began to dabble in the concept (almost the hope) of an afterlife. He read lots of books on the subject and believed that there were some cases with evidence presented in which people who had ‘near death’ experiences were able to remember events and places that their living self had no knowledge of. I began to consider the possibility of an organizing force in the universe, though I was pretty sure there wasn’t a man called Jesus that was promoted to some Holy Ghost status. I believe that there is “intelligence” that unites all of the universe and governs the laws therein, as if the entire universe were one big neural network, “God’s brain”.

Getting back to my views on Objectivism, I was much better at it in the 1960s than I am today. The last serious reading I did was in 1976. But in my younger years, I was logical, fairly intelligent and thought things through. But Objectivism didn’t seem to solve my problem with my inability to appeal to the opposite sex. I was very lonely for most of my adult life. I could not find any Objectivist women when I was an eligible batchelor and had been on a few ‘blind dates’ over the decades. By the mid 1980s, I had sagged into severe depression. Seeing my love interests passing me by and getting older and older, I began to believe that love just wasn’t in the cards. So I went through about 15 years of acceptance, after a very low period where I drank my sorrows away and killed a few billion brain cells, and forced out of the corporate world, I struck out on my own as a typesetter, later graphic designer, struggling in a losing battle to make a living.

Ironically, my most successful venture, was a federal crime: building and running a homebrew FM radio station without a license. Out of that success, came a change of career, of working in the legal end of the radio field, as an engineer. Industry professionals, impressed by my “ultimate thesis” of having built a working radio station from scratch—not from pieces of commercial equipment, having achieved a level of technical performance unsurpassed by any commercial equipment in existance at the time—I was introduced to the field of broadcast engineering and highly recommended by some influential radio people. You could say it was a lucky break. And for about seven years, I carved out a living.

Throughout the late 1970s, a series of unpleasant tanglings with the IRS taught me to have a strong hatred of government. I began to discover the Big Lie about America—that we are not a free country, as I was taught so many decades earlier in school—but that we are a Fascist Totalitarian state, and that ‘might makes right’, not morality in the philosophical sense. This, added to my sense of injustice that I felt about the military draft during the 1960s, just cummulatively added to my dislike of this hypocritical government. My understanding of Objectivism was directly responsible for my hatred of any kind of enslavement, whether it be conscription to the military, or economic enslavement.

Now, today, as I battle to keep my home from seizure by the town, as skyrocketing property taxes have exceeded my annual gross income, the anger has reached unparalled levels. But I got a little ahead of myself…

Let’s go back to the 1990s. After my father passed away, that was the last of my close living relatives. We were good friends—we’d meet for coffee daily at a run down diner and shoot the breeze about stuff. After his passing, I was really alone, with no one to turn to.

In 1999, I met a young lady in Taiwan, via the marvels of the Internet. We corresponded for a while and eventually her assignment ended and she returned to the Philippines. She could discuss almost anything, and was a real techie. We started having conversations by telephone and I started having $1200/month phone bills. When she suggested my visiting her in the Philippines, at first I didn’t know what to do. I had no money and limited income. This is where the “God” part comes into my story.

Through a series of unexplained events, not only did this relationship start and grow strong, but out of the blue, I had offers from a radio station to buy the homebrew equipment that I had built two decades earlier, for thousands of dollars. So I sold it and used the money to finance my travel. We hit it off, and got engaged. Somehow I just “knew” I had met the right one. Try explaining that in Objective terms. My second trip 3 months later was to help her get through the US Embassy interview and ensure a smooth acquisition of a K1 visa. That wasn’t to be the case. Due to the fact that my income was far below the poverty standards, the consular officer refused our application. That touched off a week of pain and struggle, the likes of which were like something out of a bad spy movie. To make a long story short, we prevailed by finding a total stranger who had heard of our plight through a mailing list on Fil-Am relations, and sponsored my wife’s visa. The gentleman was an air traffic controller in Texas, and he had been in my shoes ten years earlier with bringing his Filipino fiancee to the US.

Serious Objectivists will chastise me over the fact that I married a Catholic girl. But there are two things that went into consideration: I had a conversation with the guy that had introduced us to Objectivism in the spring of 1964. He confided to me that he had married a Catholic in 1976. I was somewhat shocked by this, but his encouragement reduced my sense of guilt and concern. The other factor was that my wife was Catholic in affiliation, but non-practicing. From our many conversations, I’d say she was brought up because her parents were Catholic and well, the Philippines was converted to Catholic by the Spanish and not by their own choice. My wife, the entire time I was in the Philippines, never went to any church ceremony. Nor did her family. So I would say she was not as close-minded to ideas. In fact, long before we got engaged, I spoke at length against religious ideas and she listened to me and continued to stick with me. Today, she and I both agree that religion is the root of much evil in the world, with radical Islam as our example. She was long aware of the evil of Islam in her own country, so it was not hard to leap to the conclusion with her that religion is a convention of man, invented to comfort and control men.

So here I am, married and we have a two year old daughter now, who has taken center stage in my life. If ever there was a miracle, it is my daughter. How we managed to have such a cute little girl, so perfect in every way, eludes me. I didn’t get the good end of the genetic stick, which largely played a role in my inability to date when I was a young man, so every time I look at my little girl, I am amazed at how fortunate we are to have such a darling who is smart, funny and adorably cute. People stop is in shopping malls to tell us what a beautiful little girl we have. I’ve been told more than once that we should enroll her as a model for children’s clothing. We briefly considered, but decided it was not a good idea.

So in this far-too-lengthy introduction, I will conclude by stating that I feel that there are benefits and disadvantages that can be had with Objectivism. We all know the benefits, clarity of thinking, ability to identify reality without the cover of mysticism, etc. But some of the disadvantages, as experienced in my life are that knowledge of the truth can be painful—to try and be rational in a world gone mad is frustrating. I cannot bear the immorality and injustice of property taxes, an issue which plays a very threatening role in my life right now. But on a deeper level, Objectivism taught me to be practical. I am unable to imagine anything fanciful. It’s hard for me to have hope for a better tomorrow when I am so grounded in reality and knowing full well the outcome. The old saying “ignorance is bliss” never range more true. When you know the truth, it makes you want to commit suicide and get it over with. And my mother knew that after Miss Rand died and she got her fulfilling prophecy just four years later. But years earlier, she knew we ‘weren’t going to make it’ financially or in terms of reaching her goals and dreams.

I too, have been fighting off feelings of impending doom for decades. I too have been struggling to make a wealthy sum, but I run into roadblocks at every turn. In my latest effort at turning the tide of my now-failing radio business, joined a financial services company, but due to my lack of friends and relatives, find myself doing cold-calling in an attempt to market my newly-gained financial services skills and to recruit others into the business. After hundreds of phone calls, and a couple of false positives, I am back to square one. Broke, out a lot of time and some money invested in education and licensing, but still not giving up. But it dawns on me that I am the only one, out of 203 people in our regional office, who is having such difficulty doing business. I feel as if I carry a curse. My lack of success at telemarketing reminded me of my lack of success at meeting the opposite sex when I was younger.

I sometimes wonder if my ability to invoke the Law of Attraction by envisioning what I want is limited by my being grounded so deeply in reality that I cannot open that part of my mind which can communicate on a different level than we do in the practical sense. I sometimes feel that maybe I don’t want success, but that I want suffering and pain, which seems a ridiculous notion, but is not one I have not encountered in talking with other miserable people. Which brings me to why I was searching out the name of Alan Blumenthal once again. I had a consulation with him in 1971, which, at the time, he pronounced me to be intelligent and in good mental health. But now I am curious as to his whereabouts and whether he still practices.

Now onto other thoughts… Sometime in the 1990s, I read Ellen Plaisel’s book THERAPIST (interesting title, if you hyphenate after the first three letters), and for the first time, the notion of scandel and imperfection enterd the Objectivist community. Just hearing Blumenthal’s name mentioned in the book gave me the shakes. But then a few years later, I bought a DVD entitled “A Sense of Life” and I think it was somewhere in there that I learned there was more to the breakup between Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Branden than just what I recalled from 1972. I may have done a search on the internet and stumbled into “The Passion of Ayn Rand” and when I read the accounts of this fiasco, it made me angry. It was like some sort of revenge against Miss Rand for expelling Branden from her collective. But I do not know the truth. And since Miss Rand is no longer among us to present her side of the story, perhaps we’ll never know. Seeing that Barbara Branden is present among this forum’s contributors, I suppose I’ll get to hear a lot of Branden’s side of the story.

Now I have had other highly-intelligent people tell me that Ayn Rand had some shortcomings and that even her philosophy was underdeveloped and lacking in many areas. In 1998, I had one such conversation with a young man who used to work for DARPA, who later developed his own philosophy called “Innovism” and he seemed to have limited respect for Rand, but also criticized her, claiming that her philosophy came up short in areas where his thinking expanded beyond. Well, one person can only do so much, and if Miss Rand laid out the foundation, I think she did well enough. But that was just another one of the chinks in the armour of Objectivism that had been brought to my attention.

So in conclusion, my philosophy of life today draws 90% of it’s ethics, 40% of its metaphysics and an unknown amount of its esthetics from Objectivism. I’m a bit lost in the judgement of music because I see a lot of self-proclaimed Objectivists that are listening to rock music and think it’s esthetically compatible with Objectivism. I had always held a belief, not necessarily tied to reality, that a fine symphony of exhaultation was more in line with the esthetics of Objectivism. And I’m pretty sure I’ve found that music, but not in America.

As for metaphysics, I’ve formed my own “open” opinion—I am always learning, so I draw no closed conclusions about the nature of existence beyond what we perceive with our senses.

As a side note, I find that my writing skills have deteriorated tremendously from where they were 30-40 years ago when my mind was actively studying Objectivism. I knew many of the arguments by heart or could develop them through inductive reasoning when needed. I also noticed that as I moved toward a more pragmatic philosophy, my chess game started to become worse. I used to play in tournaments around the time Bobby Fischer was popular (1970-73) and during that period, I won a lot of games and played often. I thought through my moves carefully. But by 1976, I had changed. Either I no longer cared, so I just pragmatically played my chess games, or I became mentally lazy. Whatever the case, I began to lose a lot of matches from then on. I stopped playing altogether in 1984.

Nowadays, I live a selfish life, going after material goals that I held most of my life, and within limited horizons. I have no ability to dream big, to believe that I can attain a million dollar mansion, even though I did manage to attain a $50,000 stereo system over a span of 30 years. I live within what are probably artificial mental limitations, and one of my goals is to find out what’s preventing me from reaching my potential, so that I can work on removing those limits. It is hoped that I may gain some useful insite by joining this forum.

[Victor Pross]

Hi Mark. Nice to meet you. I’m not apart of the official welcome wagon. I’m just a member here…but welcome!

Victor

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Mark,

That was one hell of a story. I think it is going to be a pleasure to know you. We can do ideas later. For now, please accept a very warm welcome to OL.

Michael

[mweiss]

Mark,

That was one hell of a story. I think it is going to be a pleasure to know you. We can do ideas later. For now, please accept a very warm welcome to OL.

Michael

Thank you (both you and Victor) for your warm welcome.

Yes, I have a lot of ideas I would love to discuss. Sorry for the long introduction, but I wanted to present a pretty clear picture of my present philosophical state.

The civility of the forum is one of the things that drew me to register. Plus it seems that there are people here who have been alive for a while and know a bit about the world before Viet Nam. Another forum I've been to seemed to be mostly college kids and the views didn't hit me as classical Objectivist in nature.

Hopefully I will learn more over here.

[CNA]

Mark wrote:

The civility of the forum is one of the things that drew me to register. Plus it seems that there are people here who have been alive for a while and know a bit about the world before Viet Nam. Another forum I've been to seemed to be mostly college kids and the views didn't hit me as classical Objectivist in nature.

Hopefully I will learn more over here.

Hi Mark. Welcome to OL. I absolutely agree. I'm grateful that I came upon this site as well. I've seen much going on in other forums and honestly it is a major turn off. The civility of this site is the main reason why I only post to this forum. At any rate, I think you'll like it here. I know I do.

Angie

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Hopefully I will learn more over here.

Mark,

You mentioned this a couple of times. I, too, hope you learn here, but I also hope you teach. You sound like you have some hard-earned wisdom that can be shared, even as you seek.

One of the things Kat and I stressed when we set out on this adventure is that we have no need or wish to be Objectivist preachers or gurus, or to cultivate that mentality. Our orientation is Objectivist, but I personally try to encourage every person I interact with to think for himself, even when this conflicts with Objectivism. I don't mind disagreement when it comes from honest thinking.

You will find a diverse group of people here. Give me a man (or woman) of good will who remains true to his own mind any day over any and all other people. This is a characteristic I seek and value in people.

Michael

[Judith]

Hi, Mark --

Welcome. I think you came to the right place.

Judith

[Chris Grieb]

Mark; I read your post on circumcism first and then found this one. I too was raised in Christian Science. I had left the church before I really became aware of Ayn Rand. It is interesting that one of the people who put me on to Atlas Shrugged was in my Sunday school class. In my reading of your post I noted that people were crictical of who you married. Lose these people. Back to Christian Science I would be curious about some of your experiences in the church but I don't know if Objectivism Living is the forum for it. Look forward to hearing from you.

[Rich Engle]

That was for sure a helluva read...zowie!

Welcome!

[Ellen Stuttle]

Mark,

Welcome to OL. I expect you'll find people here with whom you'll have much of mutual interest to discuss.

A quick word of assistance: If you're googling Allan Blumenthal, you'd probably have better luck if you spell his name correctly. ;-) It's "Allan," double-l, not "Alan."

The last I heard any word of Allan, which was fairly recently, he's still alive. I think he's still living in New York City. I doubt that he's still practicing psychotherapy. He'd be about 79 by now and I expect he's retired.

Ellen

___

[Victor Pross]

I live within what are probably artificial mental limitations, and one of my goals is to find out what’s preventing me from reaching my potential, so that I can work on removing those limits. It is hoped that I may gain some useful insite by joining this forum.

Mark, what are the topics or issues that interest you, that you would like to talk about?

Victor

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Back to Christian Science I would be curious about some of your experiences in the church but I don't know if Objectivism Living is the forum for it.

Chris,

Yes it is. I know I am curious and I am sure others are.

There are many good and many bad experiences in church life and this is well worth looking at.

Michael

[Barbara Branden]

Ellen: "The last I heard any word of Allan, which was fairly recently, he's still alive. I think he's still living in New York City. I doubt that he's still practicing psychotherapy. He'd be about 79 by now and I expect he's retired."

Allan is vey much alive -- and very much not retired. He still sees patients, but many fewer than he used to. He spends most of his time now at the piano, and he and Joan travel to the many musical amateur contests for people in the medical profession. His playing is light years better than it ever was, it's truly concert caliber -- and I'm delighted to say that he's a very happy man. And yes, they still live in New York.

Barbara

[Barbara Branden]

Mike, I, too, want to welcome you to Objectivist Living. You'll have a good time here.

By the way, I don't agree with your characterization of America as "a Fascist Totalitarian state." If that's what we are, then what were Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy? We're not even a full welfare state. This is not to deny that there are many things wrong, but totalitarianism is not one of them.

You said that "serious" Objectivists would chastise you for marrying a Catholic girl. Those whom I call "fundamentalist Objectivsts" probably would do so, but many of the people here are very serious about Objectivism and are happy for you that you found a woman you love.

Just one more comment on your post. You wrote that "some of the disadvantabges [of Objectivism] . .. are that knowledge of the truth can be painful -- to try and be rational in a world gone mad is frustrating." I understand why you say that, but you might ask yourself if you would be better off without knowledge, or less frustrated if you were irrational.

Barbara

[Chris Grieb]

Both Michaels; I will be happy to start the discussion of life in Christian Science a little way down the road. Barbara; I hope you can convince the Blumenthals to agree to be interviewed by Duncan Scott. They have many stories to tell.

[mweiss]

Allan is vey much alive -- and very much not retired. He still sees patients, but many fewer than he used to. He spends most of his time now at the piano, and he and Joan travel to the many musical amateur contests for people in the medical profession. His playing is light years better than it ever was, it's truly concert caliber -- and I'm delighted to say that he's a very happy man. And yes, they still live in New York.

Barbara

Barbara,

I am glad to hear that Allan is still very active in his field. My one consultation with him in 1971 was very refreshing. He validated my existance, that I was a whole person, at a time when I was feeling downtrodden due to terrible treatment by others.

It is also good to hear that he is still playing piano. I went to see him perform at Carnegie Hall near the end of the 1960s; he was very excellent then. (That concert, during the intermission, was the one and only time I met Ayn Rand--she literally bumped into me, tripped over my foot, as I recall--and I got my first really positive impression of her as a person. She was pleasant and apologetic and had a really genuine smile. I regret that I did not get over my tounge-tied-ness soon enough to strike up a conversation--it all happened so suddenly.

My parents had had a conversation with her on another occasion at one of her lectures. They said "we love you" and Miss Rand was at first a bit put off, but then they explained that they loved her work, her intelligence and her achievement, and Miss Rand responded with "Then in that context, I accept your compliment." That was more than 35 years ago.

[mweiss]

Mike, I, too, want to welcome you to Objectivist Living. You'll have a good time here.

By the way, I don't agree with your characterization of America as "a Fascist Totalitarian state." If that's what we are, then what were Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy? We're not even a full welfare state. This is not to deny that there are many things wrong, but totalitarianism is not one of them.

You said that "serious" Objectivists would chastise you for marrying a Catholic girl. Those whom I call "fundamentalist Objectivsts" probably would do so, but many of the people here are very serious about Objectivism and are happy for you that you found a woman you love.

Just one more comment on your post. You wrote that "some of the disadvantabges [of Objectivism] . .. are that knowledge of the truth can be painful -- to try and be rational in a world gone mad is frustrating." I understand why you say that, but you might ask yourself if you would be better off without knowledge, or less frustrated if you were irrational.

Barbara

Hello Barbara,

Let me first state that it is a somewhat strange and inexplicable feeling to be conversing with the THE Barbara Branden, a name I have known for over forty years and attributed with the Objectivist school of thought. Ironically, my parents, both strict "orthodox" Objectivists (though they called themselves "students") would not get this opportunity to communicate directly with one of the original members of Rand's "collective" and I, of much lesser intellectual ability, am now bestowed with this opportunity. What a feeling--I cannot explain or describe it.

Why do I think America has fallen to Fascism? I believe that political change happens in pockets. I'll use an example that was geared toward economics, but the meaning of which can be translated to politics:

There was a saying that goes like this: "When everybody else is out of a job, it's a recession. But when YOU'RE out of a job, it's a depression."

How this relates to politics is what I wish to convey. Wealth is a great insulator from the ravages of Fascist/Draconian laws. Those who have wealth are usually the last to face the barrel of a gun sponsored by government. Conversely, those who have the least resourse--those who are struggling to survive and manage a bare subsistence living are most at risk of facing the government's guns.

Gross human rights violations in America are happening, but in pockets. Many will disagree--until the entire nation erupts in violations. But for those who were the exceptions and were violated (the Branch Davidians, Randy Weaver, to a lesser extent, my own family, and countless others) it IS a Fascist dictatorship that we are living in.

How different was it for the 83 men, women and children who died in Waco, Texas, than the killings at Auswitz? Both groups of people were killed by a similar idealism.

If my understanding of the definition of Fascism is correct, isn’t it the doctrine wherein all private property is owned by the government? If that is the correct definition (at least subset of the definition) then would it not logically lead to the concept that all property in the US is effectively owned by the government? My test for this is related to taxation. If we don’t pay the taxes on our property, it is forcibly taken from us. Therefore, we were not enjoying ownership, but custodianship of the land—land which we are renting from the government. Since the government collects taxes (rent) and since it can dictate what we can and cannot do with that land, it is exercising Fascist powers. It is a dictatorship (on its way to becoming a religious theocracy) because the government will use force up to and including killing its own subjects (I would have said citizens, but I no longer feel like a citizen) to impose its will on the people.

How can it not be Fascism that we have here in the US? Even if it is in small pockets, those that resist it are finding out just how serious the government is in using its dictatorial powers.

On marrying a Catholic girl: I married for love. Okay, I’ll admit that I fall into the general category of most Fil-Am couples—the aging, potbellied balding guy who’s never been married and realizing his life is at its nadir, so he reaches out past the boundaries of national borders in search of love.

But I was fortunate to have met a lady that doesn’t care about my age or my looks. She wanted someone mature and stable, and certainly that is what I present. She wanted a man who was non-violent and gentle with her. I am that. So I guess she got what she wanted and I got pretty much what I wanted.

Some Objectivists (former Objectivists) don’t take issue with that. In fact, the day before I left the US for the Philippines, I spoke with a longtime family friend, Cole, who was the one who intruduced us all to Objectivism in 1964. To my utter shock, he confided that his wife was Catholic. Now Cole is not really what I call and Objectivist today. In fact, in the late 1970s when I worked for his corporation, he was dabbling in Subjectivity and Hagelism. I even have a tape somewhere of him having a conversation with my father about Subjective ideas, recorded some time in the mid 1960s. So I conclude that his is not strictly Objectivist and so he would not be against my relationship.

It is the orthodox Objectivists that would have serious issues. They tell me that we cannot have anything beyond a superficial relationship because our core premises are opposite. That is true to an extent. But I am also somewhat a believer in ‘choosing the lesser of two evils’, and given that I was on a crash course with death and destruction shortly before I met my wife, I believe that my choice was self-preservational.

I realize that I cannot change my wife’s values. I don’t pressure her to do so. But in general, she’s a moral, mostly right of center, individual who acts as a stabilizing force in my life. And she’s goal-oriented with a track record of achieving all of her goals set to date. Finally, our relationship has been faithful and intense. That is my confirmation that my choice to marry her was correct.

On the disadvantages of Objectivism: I agree that it is better to possess knowledge than to be ignorant. However, I see a lot of people who are happy and creative because they believe miracles can happen. I do not believe in miracles, spiritual holy powers or any of that sort of thing. I’m so grounded in reality that I cannot even submit to hypnosis therapy (tried that in 1984). I can’t see or speak to the dead (my father claimed that his monther came to him in a glowing orb of light the night she died, and my mother had a classic ‘near death’ experience with the whole bit about passing through a tunnel and reaching a light and being “I am” not Lillian Weiss) or do anything else paranormal.

I recently saw a DVD program called The Secret, which is about the Law of Attraction. Basic premise is that we get what we wish for and that if we align ourselves with the universe, we can merely ask and our wishes will be granted. Some call it positive thinking. Believing that you CAN earn a million dollars, and then suddenly the phone rings with an opportunity to work on a level and for a client that you thought was way out of your league. Converseley, those who attract negative things by negative thinking, tend to get more of the same. Those who are ill often speak of illness and are focused upon illness. My mother was one for the books in this category.

As for me, I don’t really believe in the Law of Attraction without reservation. I have seen what amounts to being focused on an attainable goal work in my life, at least with regard to attaining certain material possessions, but on a grander scale of gaining economic freedom, it eludes me. And I sometimes suspect that my being mired in reality prevents me from believing that all things are possible in the universe.

I’ve probably said just enough to create confusion and mayhem, but as the conversation progresses, perhaps I’ll have opportunities to clarify specific statements.

On of the reasons I was looking for Allan Blumenthal was that perhaps I believe he is the only one who can quickly identify what's gone wrong with my thinking and to guide me back to a world where I can experience happiness.

[mweiss]

I live within what are probably artificial mental limitations, and one of my goals is to find out what’s preventing me from reaching my potential, so that I can work on removing those limits. It is hoped that I may gain some useful insite by joining this forum.

Mark, what are the topics or issues that interest you, that you would like to talk about?

Victor

Hi Victor,

Politics and Ethics seem to be, by priority, some of the more urgent topics that I am interested in discussing. Why? Because I am plagued and hampered by our Fascist government at every turn. They want to take my property away now that their taxes exceed my gross income.

I believe we are living in a nation of hypocrasy—a nation that stakes its raison d’etre on freedom—yet violates that freedom again and again in very real concrete actions.

I have, over the decades, developed some really strong dislikes for government in these areas:

The military draft: conscription = slavery

Taxation of private property: forced labor and the denial of respect for the sovereignty of a man’s home.

Eminent Domain: the wholesale violation of property rights

The FCC’s Doctrine of Prior Restraint on broadcasting: I believe that the airwaves belong to those with the technical ability to harness them. That they have been sold to economic pimps in a mafia-style control situation disgusts me.

Finally, what I’m really in search of is recovering my own self-esteem and efficacy. I’m here to sort of ‘recalibrate’ myself. Realign my goals and ethics with the ideas of Objectivism. So I will be presenting many situations I face and asking questions about dealing with them. Most predominantly, why do I continue to fail at business and in my quest for economic success?

This is a very exciting group of intellectuals here. My gosh, I was beginning to think all Objectivist forums were just college students sparring with eachother, trying to see who can argue Epistomoligy the best. Here, I see people who seem genuinely interested in seeking Truth through discussion, with no particular prejudice. I think that some good can come out of participation in this forum, so here I am.

[Kat]

Hi Mark, nice to meet you. Welcome to Objectivist Living. You have a very interesting story and I am interested in hearing what it was like growing up Objectivist back in the day. I'm glad you finally found your match and I wish you and your wife a long and happy life together. I found my match on the internet, too.

I hope that your troubles with the tax man doesn't sour you on this fine country. Good luck contesting your property taxes. I don't know how it works where you live, but in Chicago you can put together a pretty good case without a lawyer based on cost per square foot of nearby comparable properties. I've been able to reduce my property taxes that way. It does take quite a bit of research though. Also make sure that you are also getting homeowners or senior tax credits, if you qualify. I know taxes are high, but there is really no way around it. The tax man doesn't really look at income, only property value. Just don't fall too far behind. Good luck.

Kat

[mweiss]

Thanks Kat, good words there.

My problem is not so much with how accurate my property valuation is, but that through the trickery of inflation and speculators, the towns can use those excuses to jack up your taxes several thoudand percent over a few decades. I have done numerous things to try to affect a reduction. Oh, I could tell you a story about this house and the clashes with the town, but this is a family forum...

A home should not even be taxed at all. Shelter is an essential, just as food and water. Moreso, it's a psychological necessity, since it validates our worth as human beings. We, being individuals by nature and requiring freedom to survive and flourish, must have our sovereignty respected and protected. Take away a man's home, and you've thrown his life into chaos and threatened his mental health.

As for my connection to this mess, I'm not a person who lusts after piles of cash. My genius is not in making money. I'm more an inventor/starving artist type. Not good enough at anything to make a living, yet love to dabble in various things. My fleeting attention span causes me to lose interest in one type of task quickly, so I move on to another hobby and have had many. Incidentally, this is why I was never able to hold onto a job toward the later years of my employment. I was miserable on the job. I felt like I was in jail. The work was of no interest to me and all I could do was think about 5:00 coming too slowly. I hated the surroundings and the people that I had to work with as well. A series of events in the early 1980s would forever separate me from the employed world, and I would become a starving freelancer, jack of all trades, master of none, from then to the present.

I have to solve my psychological and maybe physical problems which are at the root of why I can't seem to succeed in business and become both a productive and happy and wealthy individual. There is something going on, some guilt perhaps--don't believe it can be entirely related to laziness--although I can't rule out physical exhaustion as a hampering factor, but the way things are now, I have a family that I'm responsible for, most importantly, a little girl who's innocense deserves the best effort I can muster on my part to ensure her quality upbringing. Thankfully, I have a wife who expects little of me and is incredibly patient.

The tax problem is a symptom of more serious economic problems and a way of life. Poverty is a philosophy, according to my belief. I have to dismantle my thought process and change the premises that hold me in that mental prison. I hope to get to the point where writing a $26,000 tax payment is like dropping a dime in the toilet--inconsequential. I want to be rich enough where I won't miss the money.

What I need is a coach who can dissect my premises, one by one, and probe out the contradictions, of which there are probably many. Living with mixed premises is painful enough, but when you know a little Objectivism, you realize that having mixed premises is really a bad thing and you want to fix it, especially after your concrete performance has confirmed that you are going nowhere but down if you continue along the current path.

[Ellen Stuttle]

Allan is vey much alive -- and very much not retired. He still sees patients, but many fewer than he used to. He spends most of his time now at the piano, and he and Joan travel to the many musical amateur contests for people in the medical profession. His playing is light years better than it ever was, it's truly concert caliber -- and I'm delighted to say that he's a very happy man. And yes, they still live in New York.

That's lovely to hear. I had a special fondness for Allan. He could aggravate me, and I once had a parting-of-the-ways altercation with him (which was smoothed over after he split with AR), but even when I felt angry with him, I always had a particular tenderness for Allan. I'm ever so glad he's doing well. And I bet his piano playing is a joy to the ears. He always was good (it was his interpretive sensitivity which I fell for first, at a recital he gave in 1970, before I even talked with him in person). If he's gotten still better...

Ellen

___

[Ed Hudgins]

Mark and Mary Ann-- Just a quick "Welcome to Objectivist Living!" This is a tolerant site so you won't be damned to hell for treasonist thoughts, though you'll get some good arguments.

Also check out the website of The Atlas Society and Objectivist Center for lots of articles, info and the like:

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/

Best,

Ed Hudgins

Exec. Director of TAS/TOC

[Ellen Stuttle]

Mark,

I'm going to make an outside-of-O'ist-parameters suggestion. I think you'll probably find discussion of use to you here on this list. And I think you'd get something of help to you talking to Allan, if he's available. But considering your political slant and personal predilections, I suggest that you also make contact with folks of the free-market anarchist, etc., persuasion.

Here's the URL for a group where you can find numerous folks of that stripe:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Individual-Sovereignty

That list has 275 members, and it's quite active in posting volume. It's had 598 messages in the last 7 days according to the list's homepage. I haven't read any of the posts on that list in a long while, upwards of a year and a half I suppose. I joined it when a particular person I knew in listland committed suicide, a Montana libertarian by the name of Larry Fulmer. Individual-Sovereignty was the central clearing place for what was going on re Larry Fulmer, so I read the posts there for awhile. I tend to be of the anarchist persuasion myself, unlike most of the people here. But I also tend to be uninvolved in political issues, too much else occupying my thoughts and too little time. However, from what I saw of Individual-Sovereignty during the few weeks when I was following it, I think you might find some persons there who would be of immediate practical assistance in your circumstances.

The posting rules are the following:

* Membership does not require approval

This means that anyone can join.

* Messages from new members require approval

This means that the first post from a new member will be held for approval. The first-post hold is a technique used on a lot of groups to prevent spammers from joining the list. Once a first post is verified as coming from a sincere participant, the hold is lifted.

* All members can post messages

* Email attachments are not permitted

* Members cannot hide email address

There are numerous other anarchist-type fora; and there's the LeftLibertarian list, which I think is still active despite its founder's having died. I don't have the URL for that, but folks on I-S I expect would.

Ellen

___

[mweiss]

Mark and Mary Ann-- Just a quick "Welcome to Objectivist Living!" This is a tolerant site so you won't be damned to hell for treasonist thoughts, though you'll get some good arguments.

Also check out the website of The Atlas Society and Objectivist Center for lots of articles, info and the like:

http://www.objectivistcenter.org/

Best,

Ed Hudgins

Exec. Director of TAS/TOC

Hello Ed,

I've run across your web site in the past, probably from a link from OOL. Thanks for bringing them to my attention.

Tolerant, perhaps, and I get a distinct sense that this is one of two distinct camps that have formed after the 1968 breakup of Rand and Branden. Oh, what I would have given to have been a fly on the wall at that fateful meeting betwen them. If I could know the truth before I die, then perhaps my life would be complete.

[mweiss]

Hi Ellen,

Even though I don't regard myself as a Libertarian, since anarchy is a practical contradiction and nature abhores a vacuum--especially when it is a society without a strong governing body, I may be inclined to visit that discussion group.

I have been involve anonymously on several anarchy, anti=government discussion forums in years past, mainly pointing out the flaws in pure anarchy. Those were some of the stubbornest people I have ever met.