Welcome to Objectivism Online Forum

Welcome to Objectivism Online, a forum for discussing the philosophy of Ayn Rand. For full access, register via Facebook or email.

Democles

Newbies
  • Content count

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Democles

  • Rank
    Novice

Previous Fields

  • Country United States
  • State (US/Canadian) NewYork
  • Relationship status
  • Copyright Must Attribute
  1. Sorry that necessities of routine life distracted me for a while. My intent is surely to spread the message of a very good website – I have made it my mission to spread it amongst as many Americans as possible and intend to post sub-articles from it for members’ awareness; plus I am doing that on several forums. I have made good arguments on this thread too, but it is partly in the nature of arguments that the two sides tend to not see each-others' point, so we have to leave it there. I am repeating that neither am I declaring a civil war at the moment, nor Michael Spencer the author of the blog I quote. But he does say, after very good explanations, derivations, etc., that the threat of a civil war could be the only way of avoiding a civil war / collapse.
  2. But I do believe that you respect Dr. Peikoff and give some weightage to his arguments -- after all he was AR’s choice to lead the movement. Another currently live article on this forum is discussing about the demise of the dollar (too many are predicting that), in recent reports 20,000 people have pledged to shift to New Hampshire to be away from rest of US ….. Etc. The probability of collapse and / or civil war is sufficiently high to merit discussion. There could be a civil war between Christians and socialists -- white supremacism too is rising alarmingly and likely to operate from behind “Christianity”. Dr. Peikoff has given a call to “core Objectivists” who as per him are in five figures, to fight to the end -- they are as good as “motley crowd” you mentioned, but still huge number compared to the example he has evoked, that of 300 Spartans who died fighting three days a million strong army of Persians, but thereby saved civilization! Neither the author of the blog, Michael Spencer, nor I intend to declare a civil war -- he has addressed his writing to “individualist Americans” and his view is that collapse of America via civil-war or otherwise is imminent if *individualists don’t join hands* to change the course (i.e. neglect minor differences to take on a far bigger enemy)! This is the most important point and he has given his views about what needs to be changed. Reference to civil war is only to convey seriousness, which I also said in the OP. It would be unfortunate if we remained limited to this kind of diversion out of Spencer’s excellent writing. So as said previously, I have posted a new essay for discussion: Equality vs. Inequality.
  3. This essay is posted as a continuation of the forum discussion Is Democracy the Nemesis Also of the Americans. The entire essay post is available on Michael Spencer's blog at: Equality vs. Inequality and an excerpt is provided below. For the abbreviations used in the blog you can refer the Legend. I found this really useful - members' thoughts are welcome. There are a few concepts of political philosophy that have affected mankind’s development since pre-historic times, but have remained unresolved to this day and are contributing to the present slide of America. For example one important concept is as follows: Are all men equal? If yes, then in what way? Men do not seem so in terms of their performances, their capabilities, productive outputs, intelligence, hard-work, ambition etc. All religions say they are equal because all are God’s children. But that in itself is one instance of religion’s cheating, because simultaneously, based on their inequality, all religions have a standard structure of social division, which corresponds to Plato’s social pyramid and division of men into Men of Gold, Men of Silver and Men of Bronze. (Surprisingly, in the long history of the rule of religion, not many people have pointed out this simple contradiction about equality and gradation.) Christians had this division as Clergy, Nobility and ordinary citizens. Similar division in India is four-layered, Brahmins (priests), Kshatriyas (Noble-men, men of sword), Vaishya (traders) and Shudras (lowest workers, slaves). Muslims have Ulema (scholars) as their men of gold to rule Islamic societies. Communism’s cheating also starts with the tenet of equality of men (as rebellion against inequality perpetuated by religion and capitalism), but they finally ended in the classes of rulers and slaves. Calling lowest strata as God’s children, talk about emancipation of proletariat etc is a means of grabbing power, after which equality turns into political inequality and God’s children are crushed under the boot. (The issue of equality and inequality of men, capitalism versus socialism, returns to men out of their efforts, etc is so ancient that it is referred to in Homer, centuries prior to classical Greek civilization. Achilles is an example when he decried: “I do the maximum work, but the booty is shared equally”. Also, do not think I am referring to some ancient issues of by-gone ages like Greek, Roman and Dark Ages. As shown herein the Dem-libs’ love for the poor (expressed by raining productive peoples’ money on them while taking commission) supported by their evil interpretation of men’s equality is a major contributor to America’s slide today. The solid, strong, united Doles Vote Block they have created for themselves, is by showering doles on lowest strata of society, and now they are increasing the immigrants which is their final blow to destroy America!) If men were unequally graded (in a pyramid) then how was the society to be ruled? Universally the answer turned out to be the one described at length by Plato in The Republic, viz. that ordinary men were to submit themselves (i.e. their ego) to the Men of Gold, who would look after everybody’s welfare. No matter how much Plato talked of an ideal society in The Republic, no matter how many volumes religion wrote about salvation of souls, welfare of all, and establishing a society of brotherhood and love – they all ended in Dark Ages, a real heartless, cruel rule with a very few rulers using remaining society as lower than cattle. While rebelling against this inequality of religion, the communists also ended with the same structure, inequality and injustices – continuous flow of society’s blood was needed to satisfy the ruling monsters. Plato’s men of Gold and all their counterparts in every other society turned out to be far worse than beasts of prey. It took several centuries or thousands of years for mankind to draw the inference that power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Anybody who gets power over others mostly misuses it for corruption and vested interests and to turn others into his slaves. (For those who have not understood: this is what the priests all over earth did to mankind – and Christianity will again do to Americans if they allow GOP to get away with their cowardice and inability to answer Dems’ communist onslaught.) One notable exception in human history was George Washington described ahead. One reason why all religious systems ended similarly with the rulers crushing the ruled under their boots is that all men are only politically equal, otherwise they are unequal, have different capabilities. Because of the deception of imposing equality on them by calling them as God’s children, and considering ego to be the root of all evil (i.e. allowing rulers to use ego but not the ruled, which means curbing the freedom of thought of the ruled), men’s differences manifested in the forms of physical power of kings and intellectual deception of priests. The Greeks also came up with the idea that all men were equal, but implemented it differently from rest of the world by means of the Greek Democracy based on majority opinion – all citizens had the same right to govern society as the Men of Gold. Majority opinion is a big progress over the animal like capricious rule of the tribal chief or of Plato’s Men of Gold, but since it continued the same contradiction with reality (though in a milder form), that all men do not have as good thinking capacity as the best men, Greek civilization itself collapsed. (The major difference between the democratic rule versus Plato’s Men of Gold is epistemological – first one is based on the tenet that whatever the majority decides is right for society including the people better at thinking, the second one says whatever the elite decide is right even for all others. Even today this remains an unresolved issue that highly influences human societies.) The Greek system was adopted and improved by neighboring Romans, who borrowed intellectuality and intellectuals from the Greeks, and who restored democracy into the hands of a small upper strata of society (the Patricians), but knowing that power corrupts and is almost always misused, they put in place several checks and balances so that the rulers could not become dictators like Plato’s Men of Gold. They called it a Republic as against Greek democracy. This civilization lived for long time (around 500 years) as the mightiest in a large area around. But at a later date two important points emerged which most of mankind have not studied: One, that no matter how much the Patricians were superior, yet they also depended on the Plebeians, and when the latter became restive as well as suspicious of the former, rights had to be spread to the lower strata of society. Second point was that as rights spread to the lower strata of society and they got more and more involved into ruling the society, the Republic got reduced to the same as Greek democracy – and then the rule was taken over by internal fighting, plutocracy and so on, till dictators emerged and society collapsed in the historic Dark Ages of Christianity. (See the relevance of these points to today’s America just ahead, viz. that starting from British aristocracy (i.e. Patricians), rights were ensured to the lowest strata (Plebeians) to the extent of ensuring emancipation of Af-Ams, and now it is the lowest stratum (the DVB) that is overturning FFs’ republic by means of its vote! Also note that the above point was discussed in Intro II as hi-fi calling ordinary Americans as Christian-nutters, Libertarian-hippies etc – that no matter how much the heroes may be great, Washington may be a great general etc, but they still need the ordinary people, have to correctly take them into account, which is what Washington did by means of behavior described ahead. Problem occurs from one side (dictatorship) if ordinary people are not given any importance and their thinking is not taken into account at all; but problem also occurs from other side (democracy) when, because of their large numbers, their thinking is allowed to overshadow that of the best men in society which is the position in America today! And part solution also consists of giving higher weightage to the upper strata of society, the Patricians or the aristocrats, albeit with checks and balances over misuse of power – and devising this without injustice to ordinary citizens will be a test of wisdom!) After Dark Ages, rediscovery of Aristotle by Aquinas from the Muslims, and some reason (i.e. some human-ness, some civilized-ness) being pumped into society, all the above steps were repeated in America – abhorrence of concentration of power, a constitution of checks and balances (i.e. a Republic to control misuse of power), spreading rights to lower strata to the extent of emancipating the slaves, and so on. Thomas Jefferson’s statement “All men were created equal” was in reality continuity of the same drama, except for the strong Aristotelian atmosphere of the days, due to which it was interpreted and implemented in a totally different manner than all previous history. It became highly celebrated just because it was against British (and European) aristocracy, who were the enemies then. Their big progress over religion was that their rule was based on the sanctity of the human mind, i.e. they did not consider ego and selfishness to be evil – only flaw was that, as said earlier, they did not declare this explicitly, but went in a roundabout manner using words like pursuit of happiness, right to life (a substitute for rational selfishness), first amendment for freedom of mind (i.e. right to usage of ego) etc, i.e. they left scope for return of religion. Continue reading the rest of the essay on the blog: Equality vs. Inequality.
  4. softwareNerd: I assume that most people here are Objectivists, who believe Dr. Peikoff to be a senior / respectable authority on politics, having been chosen by AR to lead the movement after her. Ayn Rand’s choice is the reason why I am referring to him here, otherwise there are many influential Americans who also share the view that America is very close to demise. I believe that at least some members here have read Dr. Peikoff’s “The DIM Hypothesis – Why the lights of the West are going out” which deals with the imminent fall of America into another Dark Ages due to takeover by resurgent, militant, fanatic Christianity – the fall is declared in the title of the book and the back-cover itself. The last sentence on the back cover says: The rescue of the US is still barely possible -- but not for much longer. But that is not the end -- in a later-day podcast of his, he says the Democrats are far bigger villains because of welfare state, and he even goes fully opposite to his previous views, viz that Mexicans should not be allowed into the US because they vote for Democrats! Now why should he be so very pessimistic about America’s survival and go back on his own previous opinions? The author of the blog I am referring to (americanemesis.wordpress.com), Michael Spencer, has reviewed DIM Hypothesis in his other essays and he says that Dr. LP is partly correct about both his views against GOP’s Christianity, as well as Dems’ welfare state -- and he is partly incorrect / contradictory because he / nobody else has analyzed democracy in as much detail as necessary. He hasn’t said we declare a civil war, but that threatening of it could be the best way of avoiding it, and otherwise too America will perish either by slow-poisoning or by civil war -- do read the excellent stuff on the blog to get detailed answers to these questions.
  5. I recently received an email introducing a blog titled “Is Democracy the Nemesis Also of the Americans” at americanemesis.wordpress.com. From my reading of the website so far I have found it to contain excellent analysis about the nature of democracy and how it is leading to America’s collapse internally and externally. I have not come across such writing so far and have made it an important mission to bring it to attention on the proper forums. I am planning to post essays from the blog on this forum for further discussion. It is commendable that these ideas are coming from a foreigner who is fighting fanatics to be able to continue writing. Would love to know thoughts of the forum members on the blog. Below I am including salient features of the writing as conveyed in the email. 1. Since prior to the Greeks nobody has so far studied democracy to the extent necessary and presented in his writing. Civilization has never transcended democracy, but has got always destroyed because of it. It is the most important key to saving America today. 2. The essays present formidable challenges to President Obama and individualist Americans at large about their hypocrisy of eulogizing the Founding Fathers and their philosophy / Constitution, while having totally destroyed both as evidenced by the domestic and foreign policies and actions of the United States over the last century. 3. The essays also challenge Americans regarding their cherished beliefs like “All men were created equal”, their political system being far superior to European aristocracies, etc. 4. The essays introduce several new ideas including how a republic erodes into a democracy, how democracy is a fertile ground for moral degeneration and the inevitability of nurturing a vote block by distributing freebies (led by Democrats), followed by a vote block based on war-mongering (led by Republicans). 5. To counter today’s massive doles, an essay presents a never-before analysis of L B Johnson. It proves that if Americans do not threaten of a civil war to restore Founding Fathers’ America then collapse is inevitable. 6. The UN’s impotence, yet murder, loot, sleaze and also intrusion into America's internal affairs (violation of her sovereignty) is well-known. The UN is the elder brother of ISIS, Taliban and Al Qaeda, but not called so only because America’s military-industrial complex is using it as their East India Company. Shockingly, only America’s support is the major reason for even the existence of that evil, like Americans hitting the axe on their own feet! 7. The author has challenged Americans to disprove his contention -- once the greatest emancipator in mankind’s history, today America has become the perpetrator of the biggest crimes against humanity because of its support to the UN. On the other hand, he has thanked the British Raj for civilizing the undeveloped societies to the extent that they are. He has also shown that it is the same big government and big military that perpetrates injustices externally as well as internally, which is the root of ever-increasing dictatorial Executive Orders by successive presidents nowadays. Read more at: https://americanemesis.wordpress.com/