Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
VcatoV

Radicals for Capitalism?

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

Hello guys-so I am new here, and have not had the opportunity to share a few of my ideas with you all.

Over a year ago, I wrote an enthusiastic letter to Glenn Beck. At the time, the Tea Parties were at their height, and Beck was using a lot of his money/time/attention to get the 9-12 groups off the ground. I saw some serious shortcomings in these, especially in their predominant absence of youth. I assumed, or hoped, that his professions for the Free Market would entice him to back my projects. That failed.

Next, I turned to the Tea Party Youth. They even contacted me, and I am currently discussing with them about creating state-chapters. But, once again, I have disagreements. My desire is to unite and make active Radicals for Capitalism.

So-I will share my letter with you guys, and see what you think. The first process to any action is brainstorming. So I hope that we can brainstorm here, amongst like-minded Capitalist, and maybe come up with some killer ideas.

Mr. Beck,

I know that you are a very busy man, especially lately, and so would like to apologize in advance for my long email. I have been thinking long and hard about how to organize the youth, and have a few ideas which I assumed you might find interesting.

My name is Jason Roberts, and I am a 22 year old college student living in Austin, Texas. Having been involved in the Tea Party movement (I was at the San Antonio Tea Party Rally on April 15th), I have noted with wonder that I was of a very small minority. Every Tea Party rally that I have been to has consisted predominantley of older individuals, and has been particularly devoid of youth. This problem has troubled me since my first Tea Party rally, as I realized that the youth are a vital part of a coalition that is being developed to fight back against the change which Obama is bringing. I truly believe this absence to be philosophical in nature, and is due in large part to the liberal domination in the education system and in entertainment.

The far left has successfully misdirected the current youth away from the realm of ideas and politics through three main philosophies: cynicism, nihilism, and hedonism. The current entertainment for youth, especially from channels like Comedy Central, have all created a sense of cynicism within the majority of young people today. They feel cynical about the world around them, about their elders, about politicians, about the United States, etc. This cynicism has now become a requirement for participation in youth culture, and is driven by derisive humor. The youth are told to laugh and make fun of serious ideas and of serious issues: values and virtue have become the fodder for cynical derision, and the youth have become masters at laughingly destroying anyone who has values or virtues (think of the treatment that Sarah Palin gets from people like John Stewart, and how the youth now mock, ridicule, and make fun of her because of her virtues). The dangers of cynicism lie in its ability to undermine any pursuit of virtue, its destruction of morality, its subversion of the idea "right and wrong". Saul Alinsky knew this, which is why he stated in his opening chapter in "Rules for Radicals" that, "The prerequisite for an ideology is possession of a basic truth...to begin with, he does not have a fixed truth-truth to him is relative and changing; everything to him is relative and changing. He is a political relativist." (italics original, pg. 11). The entertainment industry and the education system have embedded this concept into the youth to the point to where it is now the accepted cultural norm, and those youths who disagree with this view become chastised and ostracized out of the general youth culture, this furthering the drive for "conformity".

Going hand-in-hand with cynicism is nihilism, the belief that nothing has any meaning or value. Notice the massive decline in religiosity amongst the youth, and the now all-pervasive belief that actions are truly worthless, that no belief system or morality is superior to another-in fact, that all morality is meaningless. Once again, the far left have used laughter and cynicism to destroy any system of value or virtue, any belief in proper action or conduct. The youth are now led to believe that they only actions that truly have any meaning are actions which get them by, day-to-day. Long range goals, long-term thinking, honor, or any kind of truly glorious life are now seen as meaningless activities in a meaningless world. Thus the youth have, en mass, abandoned the liberal arts (history, philosophy, etc.) in favor of the "practical and pragmatic" fields which will gain them the income necessary for the most destructive of all ideas, and the most widely cherished by the youth: hedonism.

I know that part of being young, throughout all of history, is a wild countenance and a "party" spirit. The youth have always partied, and always will. But the degree to which they do it, and more importantly, the almost sacred nature that it has gained, is the most vile cancer upon the minds of the youth. Drinking, partying, drugs, and the immediate pursuit of instantaneous gratification have destroyed the psychologies of the youth. Is it any wonder that they no longer think of virtue or value, that they disregard long-term thinking and goals, when they have been led to believe that everything is meaningless and the only happiness possible on earth is the immediate gratification of their desires? I used to work for a professor who has been teaching since the 1970s. He told me that, especially since the 1990's, he is shocked at how hedonistic students have become. It is now expected that Fridays are "hangover and recuperate" days at school. It is now expected that the professor forgive students and allow them to retake tests if they missed it because they partied too hard. It has now even reached the point to where Wednesday night is the beginning of the weekend! Once again, these kind of actions are reinforced in the popular media and entertainment industry. All one has to do is watch the music videos of the top 10 songs on any given week to see that a large majority of them display the lifestyle that the youth are so eager to emulate: party, party, party! Relationships are crumbling, marriage has become meaningless, and now the human bond has devolved into "one night stands", "sexcapades", competitions amongst who can sleep with the most people. At the same time, STD rates and teen pregnancy rates have skyrocketed, and less and less youth are becoming married, choosing instead the "bachelor" lifestyle of multiple parties and multiple sex partners.

These three philosophies go hand in hand, and the far left knows it. Karl Marx was wrong when he said that "Religion is the opiate of the masses." The truth is that pleasure is the opiate of the masses, and the far left have utilized this to misdirect the youth away from any concern for real world issues. Notice even that the most popular source for news amongst the youth is John Stewart, whose entire job is to ridicule (cynically) the current issues as jokes (nihilism) for the amusement (hedonism) of the young.

Does it come as any wonder or surprise, then, that the youth have by and large exited the public sphere and show little concern for any of the actions going on? They don't care about Capitalism or Socialism-they don't care about tax hikes or Cap and Trade. As long as they have "Bread and circuses", they are content! Science Fiction author Robert Heinlein, in "To Sail Beyond the Sunset", once said:

""The America of my time line is a laboratory example of what can happen to democracies, what has eventually happened to all perfect democracies throughout all histories. A perfect democracy, a ‘warm body’ democracy in which every adult may vote and all votes count equally, has no internal feedback for self-correction. It depends solely on the wisdom and self-restraint of citizens… which is opposed by the folly and lack of self-restraint of other citizens. What is supposed to happen in a democracy is that each sovereign citizen will always vote in the public interest for the safety and welfare of all. But what does happen is that he votes his own self-interest as he sees it… which for the majority translates as ‘Bread and Circuses.’

‘Bread and Circuses’ is the cancer of democracy, the fatal disease for which there is no cure. Democracy often works beautifully at first. But once a state extends the franchise to every warm body, be he producer or parasite, that day marks the beginning of the end of the state. For when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so, until the state bleeds to death, or in its weakened condition the state succumbs to an invader—the barbarians enter Rome."

Thus the left have used these philosophies to guide the voting habits of the youth. Looking only at the range-of-the-moment, whim-worshiping gratification of desires, the politician who is most popular will be the politician who most gratifies (or sustains) the availability of desires.

So what do we do? How do we mobilize the youth? This problem seems almost insurmountable, and in many ways, it is. Yet nothing is impossible, no cause too great, and never before has time been more important.

One approach would be to fight on all fronts: to topple the entertainment industry and retake the education system. These indeed must be done, if only to create a new generation of youth who are capable of maintaining the mantle of the Republic. Yet this process is long, and will take a considerable amount of time, money, and energy, to effect change. Thus I have been looking, as I see that you have too, at "community organization". I have read Saul Alinsky's "manual" 3 times already, and have been studying in depth how such a small group of people have been able to capture such large amounts of power. While his tactics are vile and immoral, a lot of his methodology can be used effectively to mobilize the youth.

The youth have always found radicalism appealing. This is how the far left was able to mobilize so many young individuals during the 1960's-capitalism and freedom were seen as the status quo, while socialism was seen as "radical". We must steal the radical mantle from the left. Liberty and capitalism must become the new radical phenomena. If the youth can be convinced that a true dedication to capitalism and liberty is the most radical approach that they can take (for truly, except for Ronald Reagan, the 20th century was nothing more than a long march towards socialism), then I truly believe that we can begin to mobilize them. Indeed, we must begin painting the picture in a different light. The US is not currently "changing" into a socialist nation-it has been a mixed socialist nation for quite some time, as history has proven. Thus the youth must learn that capitalism is not the status quo, but instead is a radical idea that has only partially been tried. One need only look at the success of Ron Paul and the Libertarian party amongst the youth to realize that this approach is possible, and that there are youths out there willing to be "radicals for capitalism".

But the youth, especially under the onslaught of the three destructive philosophies (cynicism, nihilism, and hedonism), will not be organized and mobilized on words alone. They are individuals of action, and they need to feed upon action in order to sustain their short-range interests. Thus the youths must become the "shock troops" for capitalism. This does not mean violence in the streets, or any kind of destructive action. It is here again that we can learn from Saul Alinsky-actions can be taken which are neither illegal nor harmful to individuals, yet which can institute massive change (think of the scenario in his book where he describes how he fed a large group of African-Americans massive quantities of beans, and then bombarded the stuffy "rich, white" people with their stench during an opera in up-state New York). These kind of actions are what the youth will flock towards, if only we can "radicalize" them towards capitalism and liberty. The catalyst which ignited action during the American Revolution was very, very small: the Boston Massacre. In our own way, we need to engineer (as did Samuel Adams) our own "Boston Massacre". We need to begin strategizing certain actions which might appear to be small and insignificant, yet which will institute mass change.

I will admit that I am still "stumped" as to what such actions will be, yet I have had no help in trying to discover these. I do know, however, that these actions will only be possible when we have recruited and organized enough of a youth base to enact such tactics. Thus part one of this plan must involve organization and mobilization around a central idea or premise: the radicals for capitalism. Once we have organized even a small body of youths, we can work in conjunction with the tea parties, adults, and the elderly (the "voices", or the "brains", for the "actions", or the "muscles") in a coordinated policy. Threats must be targeted, separated, and acted against. While the adults and the elderly speak out against ACORN, let the youth act out against ACORN. While the adults and the elderly speak out against GM, let the youth act out against GM.

I know your concern for being viewed as one who is insinuating violence and building an army, and I do not think that either are valid nor necessary. As you know, Gandhi gained freedom for India through passive resistance. It is the same kind of passive resistance that can be used, whatever the tactic may be, to target and bring down the left. If ACORN is the shock troops for the socialist, let us develop our own organization as shock troops for capitalism. If ACORN is going to intimidate and scare banks, let the radicals for capitalism intimidate and scare ACORN. If the far left is going to riot outside the homes of executives, let us riot outside of the homes of any treacherous and treasonous politician, or "community organizer". It is imperative that the ball change courts. For too long, the capitalist have been passively in fear of socialism. It is now time for liberty and capitalism to go on the offensive: it is now time for socialism to be the one who is afraid.

I will continue to brainstorm specific tactics and actions which can be taken. Having listened to your radio show and watched your television program, I know that you are currently in the process of brainstorming ideas as well (ie., your Constitutional Watchdogs). When I think up tactics, I will gladly and whole-heartedly share them with you.

Like I said, I apologize for the length of my email-I felt like I had a lot to say, and I also felt like you were the only individual who would be interested in it. If you have read this far, I thank you from the bottom of my heart for reading it. I am ready, and I am motivated. I hope that what I had to say will not fall upon deaf ears, but will be appreciated for the amount of time I have invested in this venture.

Thank you very much, and please continue the good work,

Jason Roberts

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are clearly above glen beck. I listen to him on the way to class (I commute) in the morning. I have found him to be a poor defender of capitalism.

1.

I thought your analysis of youth culture was good. There are some elements of youth culture that you didn't talk about, but considering the scope of the letter, you did a good job. We can talk about the other stuff later.

2. I am kind of torn on this. On one hand I would rather offer something positive than attacking something negative. Yet I think it may become necessary to be nasty and cruel with Hollywood and Academia as establishments.

A word of warning. The founding fathers used these tactics, and I am not sure if it got them the desired effects. Only a few years after our republic was ultimately founded (the second government) we had a populist (mob man) elected who sent the civilized and integrated Cherokee on a death march. So I am not entirely sure how successful they were in the end.

How we can and do change culture for the better:

1. I don't think one should make art in order to advance a cause, but art will advance our cause if it is done well and expresses certain themes. Even art by non capitalists can on a more fundamental level advance our cause.

2. Cryptography. This is a little exotic, but cryptography could lead us to a tax free society. The idea is to develop ways of trading secretly so the government can no longer track transactions. This would collapse the mob driven state.

3. Home schooling.

4. For youth, try to get kids to develop a high epicurean view of desire. This means instead of getting smashed on 24 pack of keystone lite, by expensive drinks that actually taste good. Instead of being a chain smoker, smoke hookah, instead of smoking nasty weed every day, smoke only the best once every few weeks (if that is your thing).

To sum it up it is a "All things in moderation, and only the finest of all things (which one can afford B) ) ".

That is basically how I have handled party culture (I am 18). This of course is meant to be applied in the context of partying, and isn't meant to be some grand moral principle.

5. Institutions. If you ever run into large amounts of money, you can always pay intellectuals to tackle the issues you think you are important.

If I offered a donation to lets say, the Mises institute for 10,000$, in exchange for writing a book that criticizes parecon, they most likely would.

The Volker fund was a fund set up by a regional business man. Because of him and his associates, capitalist ideas are getting more and more popular by the year.

Same thing goes for CATO or ARI, or whoever you think will best advance the cause of an individualist society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wow-thanks for the detailed response! :)

You are clearly above glen beck. I listen to him on the way to class (I commute) in the morning. I have found him to be a poor defender of capitalism.

1.

I thought your analysis of youth culture was good. There are some elements of youth culture that you didn't talk about, but considering the scope of the letter, you did a good job. We can talk about the other stuff later.

Maybe we should start that in a new thread? We could create one called "The Nature of Youth Culture" or something like that-just let me know. I really would like to continue the discussion and find it to be quite important.

2. I am kind of torn on this. On one hand I would rather offer something positive than attacking something negative. Yet I think it may become necessary to be nasty and cruel with Hollywood and Academia as establishments.

A word of warning. The founding fathers used these tactics, and I am not sure if it got them the desired effects. Only a few years after our republic was ultimately founded (the second government) we had a populist (mob man) elected who sent the civilized and integrated Cherokee on a death march. So I am not entirely sure how successful they were in the end.

I agree that the positive is always better than the negative. But two things:

First, I think that the proper agent of true positive action ought to be organizations like ARI. It is their job to fight the intellectual fight-fiercely, with the most advanced weaponry. But do you expect ARI to have made a presence at the highly-mediacized Education Rally by the Socialist in California? Would they have been there-with signs, with the message, that education ought to be private? These kind of actions are not necessarily negative. Also, think about Capitalism Day. Hosting, organizing, and mobilising Capitalism Day rallies would be positive, would it not? Prodos Capitalism Day Website

Second, we have a powerful tool on our side-the truth. Those who know and use the truth do not have to smear. You can be aggressive with the truth, and with ideas.

How we can and do change culture for the better:

1. I don't think one should make art in order to advance a cause, but art will advance our cause if it is done well and expresses certain themes. Even art by non capitalists can on a more fundamental level advance our cause.

Do you regard political posters as art? I think they may have elements of art on it (drawings, essentially-colors, highly stylized). But they are not in and of themselves art. What kind of art are you talking about?

2. Cryptography. This is a little exotic, but cryptography could lead us to a tax free society. The idea is to develop ways of trading secretly so the government can no longer track transactions. This would collapse the mob driven state.
A black market?

3. Home schooling.
Sure, or proper alternatives to state-education. Would this be a role for the radical capitalist?

4. For youth, try to get kids to develop a high epicurean view of desire. This means instead of getting smashed on 24 pack of keystone lite, by expensive drinks that actually taste good. Instead of being a chain smoker, smoke hookah, instead of smoking nasty weed every day, smoke only the best once every few weeks (if that is your thing).

To sum it up it is a "All things in moderation, and only the finest of all things (which one can afford B) ) ".

That is basically how I have handled party culture (I am 18). This of course is meant to be applied in the context of partying, and isn't meant to be some grand moral principle.

I see what you are saying. But I also believe "partying" to be an effect, not a cause. Even if they had the "nice" stuff, they will still consume to excess. Now, if you want to focus on campaigns of moderation-that would be a good idea.

5. Institutions. If you ever run into large amounts of money, you can always pay intellectuals to tackle the issues you think you are important.

If I offered a donation to lets say, the Mises institute for 10,000$, in exchange for writing a book that criticizes parecon, they most likely would.

The Volker fund was a fund set up by a regional business man. Because of him and his associates, capitalist ideas are getting more and more popular by the year.

Same thing goes for CATO or ARI, or whoever you think will best advance the cause of an individualist society.

I agree-and once again, do you think ARI will be going door to door? But what if we could radicalize student capitalist, forming ARI fundraising drives-even if the people did not donate, pamphlets and information could be mass-spread. With the climate of today, I would bet that a good deal of Americans would be receptive to many of the ideas of Ayn Rand-if they are exposed to them.

I like your thinking, and this type of creative brainstorming. I think the biggest difference to keep in mind is that I intend to organize or create a group of agents of action, not agents of the mind. The "arm" of the intellectual side, if you strip away the violence aspect ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Do you regard political posters as art? I think they may have elements of art on it (drawings, essentially-colors, highly stylized). But they are not in and of themselves art. What kind of art are you talking about?

I'm sure he means literature or music, for example. I do think that since art can advance such a cause, then art ought to be made in order to advance that cause. Not only do I think that art reflects a culture, but it can also change a culture if there is an actual definable art movement. Genuine art - if there is a message behind it - in today's world spreads quickly and it *can* change a person's sense of life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm sure he means literature or music, for example. I do think that since art can advance such a cause, then art ought to be made in order to advance that cause. Not only do I think that art reflects a culture, but it can also change a culture if there is an actual definable art movement. Genuine art - if there is a message behind it - in today's world spreads quickly and it *can* change a person's sense of life.

Exactly.

While I support propaganda, I want it made clear that it is a separate thing than Art, because it is a separat function.

My opinions on this are fairly consistent with "The Romantic Manifesto" by Ayn Rand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1. "Blackmarkets?"

I suppose, it is just a way to hide transactions from the government, thus "robbing" them of revenue.

2.

I am getting that you want an organization that does protests and spreads propaganda.

I am wondering if this is already done.

If it is, then why is it not working?

If it isn't, why is it not being done?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1. "Blackmarkets?"

I suppose, it is just a way to hide transactions from the government, thus "robbing" them of revenue.

A black market really is just a market that does not exist legally. This could be anything from burned/ripped DVDs to marijuana. The majority of the black markets around the world, however, are in place precisely because of government regulation/control.

2.

I am getting that you want an organization that does protests and spreads propaganda.

In a sense, though I do not consider the truth propaganda.

I am wondering if this is already done.

If it is, then why is it not working?

I do not know, and I have not found it. There are think tanks and other intellectual ventures. But there are not, as far as I know, any organizations of action. I could not give you a reason.

If it isn't, why is it not being done?

Because I haven't created it yet ;).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do not know, and I have not found it. There are think tanks and other intellectual ventures. But there are not, as far as I know, any organizations of action. I could not give you a reason.

Because I haven't created it yet :).

Propaganda just means distributing ideas. I know today that it is a pejorative, but I think that there is a legitimate function making posters. That is exposing people to ideas that they haven't considered before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VcatoV (and others sharing the enthusiasm): That letter to Beck at a very young age is quite impressive -- the mark of a good politician / worker in the making. (I saw it only today else I would have got in touch earlier). Unfortunately, I did not see any follow-up action. Your analysis about democracy is quite correct, but only in parts, because it is not holistic. You will not believe, but the best civilizations (namely Greek and Roman -- and today Western) have collided against this problem AND COLLAPSED. One of the best studies of this problem belongs to Plato -- yeah, it is as old as that -- who very correctly predicted the way Rome collapsed, and today GOP and Dems are behaving! Exact path has been described by him to surprising accuracy. I am myself studying this problem -- because some people here (in India) value what we got from the English and Americans a lot. I am starved to discuss this problem.

There is one VERY IMPORTANT statement in your post: "But, once again, I have disagreements" (with the tea-partiers). This is an important reason (apart from 1 – 2 others) why Good gets defeated by Evil when a democracy is eroding. The good fail to join hands over minor points of differences -- the Evil surely join hands because they have a single agenda -- to defeat the good, and to loot them as much as possible, by joining hands. Today America is failing because of this point - it is that important.

Another statement: "My desire is to unite and make active Radicals for Capitalism". I take you are sincere about this and I would like to be in touch with you about it for some future co-operation. One caveat is: Do not start going into strong arguments / opposition over some points, but look at the bigger, overall picture / position / argument – and then finally decide what is possible (or not at all). As a starter, I urge you to see my post on the same topic in Philosophy / Political Philosophy on this forum – Link: http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=19427

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There is one VERY IMPORTANT statement in your post: "But, once again, I have disagreements" (with the tea-partiers). This is an important reason (apart from 1 – 2 others) why Good gets defeated by Evil when a democracy is eroding. The good fail to join hands over minor points of differences -- the Evil surely join hands because they have a single agenda -- to defeat the good, and to loot them as much as possible, by joining hands. Today America is failing because of this point - it is that important.

This is similar to what Rand discusses in her essay "Anatomy of a Compromise", for more info on this phenomenon, thats a good one to familiarize yourself with. FYI.

j..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is similar to what Rand discusses in her essay "Anatomy of a Compromise", for more info on this phenomenon, thats a good one to familiarize yourself with. FYI.

j..

Nobody is making or preaching any compromises. One has to LOUDLY declare one's own premises, maintain philosophical differences -- and let it be known properly that of the available choices I choose this one because it is the least offensive or evil from my point of view. When you vote either for a Democrat or a Republican what big purity of philosophy do you maintain? They hold the same premises as Objectivism -- so that the communists have finally entered the white house? I suggest that you re-read "Anatomy of Compromise" particularly with reference to declaring one's premises properly.

In the present case, your choices are limited, and you have to vote to register your political voice -- so its better to choose the least evil. Also read the given link, will give more info on my stand.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Nobody is making or preaching any compromises.

My post wasnt meant as an attack. The portion of your post that I quoted is discussed directly in that essay. Your latest post has left me with some confusion:

When you vote either for a Democrat or a Republican what big purity of philosophy do you maintain? They hold the same premises as Objectivism -- so that the communists have finally entered the white house?

Im not sure what this means.

and I dont have to vote.

j..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Your analysis about democracy is quite correct, but only in parts, because it is not holistic. You will not believe, but the best civilizations (namely Greek and Roman -- and today Western) have collided against this problem AND COLLAPSED.

What part did not seem holistic to you? It was, in fact, my studying of Ancient Greece and Rome (I even learned Latin and Greek) that led me to many of the conclusions I have. I am a firm believer in this St. Augustine quote (though I do not believe in his philosophy! lol):

"Rome was founded and extended by the labors of those men of old; their descendants made Rome more hideous while it stood than when it fell. For in the ruin of the city it was stone and timber which fell to the ground; but in the lives of those Romans we saw the collapse not of material but of moral defenses, not of material but of spiritual grandeur. The lust that burned in their hearts was more deadly than the flame which consumed their dwellings."

One of the best studies of this problem belongs to Plato -- yeah, it is as old as that -- who very correctly predicted the way Rome collapsed, and today GOP and Dems are behaving! Exact path has been described by him to surprising accuracy. I am myself studying this problem -- because some people here (in India) value what we got from the English and Americans a lot. I am starved to discuss this problem.

In which work did Plato discuss this idea?

There is one VERY IMPORTANT statement in your post: "But, once again, I have disagreements" (with the tea-partiers). This is an important reason (apart from 1 – 2 others) why Good gets defeated by Evil when a democracy is eroding. The good fail to join hands over minor points of differences -- the Evil surely join hands because they have a single agenda -- to defeat the good, and to loot them as much as possible, by joining hands. Today America is failing because of this point - it is that important.

I actually agree with you. I believe that it is essential to build a coalition of people around a few, central, limited principles. I actually meant that I disagreed more in the methodology of the Tea Party.

Another statement: "My desire is to unite and make active Radicals for Capitalism". I take you are sincere about this and I would like to be in touch with you about it for some future co-operation. One caveat is: Do not start going into strong arguments / opposition over some points, but look at the bigger, overall picture / position / argument – and then finally decide what is possible (or not at all). As a starter, I urge you to see my post on the same topic in Philosophy / Political Philosophy on this forum – Link: http://forum.ObjectivismOnline.com/index.php?showtopic=19427

You are more than welcome email me at [email protected] if you would like to discuss any of these ideas further. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jay R: If you don’t vote, you have already given up the fight – as a rational citizen you don’t give up so soon, till there is a chance to fight. As per Ms Rand, you vote for the least evil, which is a very sensible principle. If Objectivists were to fight on their own, they would get very few votes -- far from being popular, as I read on some forums, they are quite unpopular, the Libertarians are better off on this score. So they have to “choose the least evil” of the two equally bad big parties. We are now talking about forging a third alternative which could be far less evil than these two – there is not much choice about this, and the whole thing is not in your hands whether to compromise or no, except for trying to do the best, and restricting evil the most. The principle most applicable of the three in Anatomy of Compromise is the third one: when basic principles are clearly defined it works to the advantage of the rational side, other-wise to that of the irrational. So you declare your principles, disagreements etc clearly, and state the reasons and the extent for joining hands with those nearest to your position.

About “Communists have finally entered the White-House” – You are aware that GOP is banking on Christianity, war-mongering and consequent debt-mountain etc (contrary to Founding Fathers’ principle of “least wars”, they have taken over all of Europeans’ colonies as the sole super-power – but have pushed America into debt that could lead the country to collapse). Democrats depend on socialism as their election pitch – their social security, protection and massive payments to unionized workers, health-care bill, etc is way beyond communist Russia and China’s policies of welfare. Over and above this they have declared their intention to re-distribute top Americans’ wealth to rest of the society, which they are already trying to do. They have proclaimed communists in their group – a thing unimaginable in America even a decade back!

VcatoV: Thanks for one of the few encouraging responses to my endeavors -- we will continue the dialogue for several days, to know our thoughts, because this topic is quite complex, and being important, not to be given up so soon.

Several of your present questions here would have got solved had you clicked that link given by me. If you want to go there the other way, then it is the post “Socio-Political Situation in the US” by Reason Man (i.e. myself), in the > Philosophy > Political Philosophy section, and in response to Maximus’ reply to OP, I have pasted the entire write-up there. Plato has made his prediction about democracy in The Republic, and it is quoted in this post. It is certain section of society, called as Group G1 there, which is universally recognized, that takes up to hedonism (and other vices including parasitism / dependence on welfare state etc) because democracy and efforts of rational men make it possible for them to demand this. As people belonging to Group G2 (described there), we have to devise the means to overcome this. This is briefly described there, but basically this is a big topic and I have got a write-up showing how democracy is brought in by heroes, how this group (you call as hedonists) kills it, who aids them for what purposes, how democracy leads to moral degeneration, facilitates the rise of today’s cheap politicians as compared to yesterday’s Founding heroes …. And so on and on. All of this is classical and not limited to today’s America – and Augustine type of men cash in on it, calling it as “human nature”, the vice of the flesh etc. But I urge you to read my post in the Political Philosophy section given above. And I will get back to you on the email.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So you declare your principles, disagreements etc clearly, and state the reasons and the extent for joining hands with those nearest to your position.

....

They have proclaimed communists in their group – a thing unimaginable in America even a decade back!

Im fully aware of the altruist/collectivist principles that guide the decisions of most of todays politicians. I applaud your efforts to do something to spread the "good word" of capitalism so to speak, rather than growing old and bitter with your ideas, watching everything you value erode away, like many do. From your earlier statement, I took you to mean that the GOP and the Dems "hold the same premises as Objectivism", perhaps Im misunderstanding you, otherwise, I completely disagree. They hold the same premises as each other, that is why we see govt./welfare state expanding, as Rand predicted in the quote in my sig., i.e. the democrats are more consistent in their appeals for such nonsense. But they hold vastly different premises than Objectivism.

j..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The two parties together get more than 95% of the polled votes, so you can imagine what is going on -- they are supported by huge money which others cannot compete with; people are captured by this money, and the election is over. They share power alternately -- and then the perks. Don't under-estimate GOP's destructive power. This second phase of erosion of America after Nixon separated the dollar from the gold standard, was started by the GOP -- they are a full-scale plutocracy, merely paying lip service of "getting the govt off the back of the people", just as a slogan. Their policies are meant to benefit their cartels in most fields -- leaving America under today's debt-mountain.

We are trying to reduce this trap of evil -- the devil and the deep sea.

I urge you to see that post under Political philosophy -- the Socio Political Situation in America.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

VcatoV: America was too big a happening in man-kind’s history – the climax of rational man’s aspirations for civilization, as I have called it elsewhere. It could not have got built over-night, nor could it have got destroyed so easily – it has withstood huge erosion / onslaught, and even today standing as the greatest country with several positive attributes – but today severely eroded and in danger also. To talk about it (i.e. to describe the phenomenon of America), to reform it for the better etc, cannot be done so very easily, the way we see discussions on internet forums – there are a few sincere attempts (one of them being yours), but some of them go awry because they do not start with the very basic fundamentals (you have gone upto Greece / Rome etc), else they simply get drowned in the din of the trivia that goes all around.

To talk about America one has to go the very bottom (i.e. talk in terms of fundamentals) – how did this phenomenon, so very different from the rest of the world, come into existence in the first place? What did it / does it depend on? Then one will come to the conclusion about “inalienable rights of an individual”, freedom of speech and so on, i.e. a democracy / republic (there is confusion about the terminology starting with founding fathers of the US who referred to both the words to describe it. But we can get it clarified in due course.) Then one will realize that only 3 civilizations so far reached a meaningful democracy – Greece, Rome and now western. These 3 have a distinguishing feature as compared to the rest of the world, viz. that reason / logic was discovered – and meaningfully advanced -- only in Greece upto today’s western. Aristotle has made the most important difference! (You will see this theme all over Ayn Rand, but in particular read comparison between Plato and Aristotle in “For the New Intellectual”, every achievement of civilization has Aristotle at its base, “never have so many owed so much to one man”, etc. Post Kant, westerners not only lost Aristotle, but substantially even the Aristotelian sense of life, and what you are calling as capitalism today is merely the remnants of that sense of life. Ayn Rand re-discovered him for all of us. This theme is brought out in detail by me – and today’s erosion can only be explained / stemmed by getting Aristotle, i.e. reason, back into main-stream life. This is also the reason to talk about crisis of intelligence.)

Only after having seen all the above one can talk about why did America start eroding to the extent that today its almost on the brink – then one will find that all 3 civilizations reached upto this point, viz. democracy, and then collapsed. Why? Because democracy is fertile ground for moral degeneration, this group you call as hedonists (etc) comes to the fore and determines the govt --- and so on. Only after studying this aspect to the necessary extent one can think of how to overcome it.

Without doing all this its very foolish to engage in why GOP attacked Iraq, why Dems increased welfare etc. Their behavior is standard described by Plato step by step, so old it is – and Romans, America’s Founding Fathers etc everybody has studied them also (Washington was a fan of Cato), but so far solution has not been arrived at. If you take up these day to day issues, they will go into so many directions of discussions (with every Tom and Dick interfering and steering discussion to his ideas) – till you finally give up, thinking this is all senseless realm. If you have a great philosophy – e.g. Objectivism – that also does not work, because, as you pointed out, the hedonists laugh at you and your “great philosophy” + they overwhelm you with their numbers, you are nothing in front of them.

It is under all these conditions that I am trying to propose a solution to this problem – but I am myself under victimization / persecution here, ours being a fanatic society, my family back-ground being very bad etc. Also: I am not “one of you people”, this too has an effect no matter peoples’ stance to the opposite, and they tend to neglect me.

But note the few effects of not starting from such fundamentals, I have pointed in the link given to you – today, there is a huge fight to save capitalism by its alleged defenders (GOP making big noise about it) versus its total annihilation to save the people from its ill-effects like today’s recession! Capitalism in US has died decades back, and we are seeing recessions, corruption etc due to American socialism, and knowledgeable people are defending capitalism! The other example: The American is the greatest emancipator on earth – but today the white man is fighting to save himself from the emancipated people against allegations of being a racist oppressor, the noise reverberating all over the earth.

All such things will get erased because of my approach of starting from fundamentals. Having shown so much, I had like to hear something more from your side. See if you can take some time off.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×