Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Swerve of Shore

Regulars
  • Posts

    55
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Swerve of Shore

  1. You make some excellent points. The stunted nature of Santorum's view of rights is further made clear in this quote from his interview with Byron York: "We in America should be big enough to try to surround ourselves and help women in those terrible situations who have been traumatized already. To put them through another trauma of an abortion, I think is too much to ask. So I would absolutely stand and say that one violence is enough." To suggest that allowing women to choose to have an abortion is more traumatic than forcing them to carry their rapist's baby to term is really quite an impressive feat of il-logic.
  2. Interesting points. I'm not sure what in my posts, if anything, raised the question of whether Objectivism is misanthropic. While I agree that it is not necessarily so, that happens to be a topic I plan to post on ... largely because it seems to me that Ms. Rand was herself a bit of a misanthrope. But, I get ahead of myself, that topic is a good ways down the list of ones I want to discuss. As for what Objectivism is "opposed" to, I meant it in what might be called a linguistic dialectical sense: i.e., what is the antithesis of Objectivism in the same way that Egoism is set up as the antithesis of Altruism.
  3. I am almost done with The Virtue of Selfishness and will soon make my first substantive post. Until more than half through, I was prepared to tell you all that the book adds very little to the philosophy so well developed by Atlas Shrugged. Atlas Shrugged is really quite an amazing book. I know of no other book that is an entertaining novel at the same time as it develops a coherent philosophy. Plato's Republic has no story. The closest I can think of are the books of Daniel Quinn, such as Ishmael and especially The Story of B. Anyway, once I got to Chapter 14 of The Virtue of Selfishness, where Ms. Rand starts developing political philosophy more, and found new and useful content. It will definitely help my next post: I had thought Objectivism was primarily opposed to Relativism, essentially a question of whether there is absolute pre-existing truth; but Chapter 14 showed me that Objectivism is more properly opposed to Subjectivism, essentially the need for the rule of law over the rule of man, but the recognition that there may be good faith disputes and different viewpoint on the truth.
  4. I am here seeking intelligent discussion. On the spectrum of individualism to collectivism, I lean toward collectivism. On the spectrum of objectivism to relativism, I lean toward relativism. I am a fervent atheist and anti-militarist. I read Atlas Shrugged (AS) in the summer of 2011 and was fascinated. Saddened by the state of public discourse, which has been debased ever since the polar opposites of Goldwater and Reagan taught self-styled conservatives that they can achieve their objectives better through misdirection and bombast than through reason and civility, I am thrilled to find a community like this one. Rather than talking to the converted at Daily Kos, here I can test my assumptions and see other perspectives. At least at first, I probably will not comment on others’ posts, but rather will start a series of threads laying out what seem to me to be the faults or inadequacies of objectivism. I look forward to reasoned responses. By way of background, I was born in Southern California in 1963 to a Catholic mother and agnostic father. I was raised Catholic and participated in Boy Scouts, which largely shaped my father’s moral code. Before I was 10 years old, I began questioning Christianity and theism in general … first on logical grounds and later on moral grounds, disagreeing with teachings on sexuality and other issues. Later, as an adult, I tried evangelical Christianity and studied the Bible more closely. This cemented my atheism as I was appalled by the Bible’s sanction of genocide and other atrocities. My own moral code was nonetheless strongly influenced by the teachings of Jesus, including his skepticism of wealth, his rejection of violence and his emphasis on altruism. Driven by reason and justice rather than mysticism or fear, I was naturally drawn to communist ideals. I went to Berkeley in the early 1980’s, where I studied impractical humanities and protested Reagan’s illegal wars in Central America. Over time, I came to realize that true communism is impossible outside of a small community setting. As Ayn Rand showed clearly with AS’s Twentieth Century Motor Company, it creates harmful incentives and is inherently prone to corruption. As a youth, although I appreciated the idealism in the maxim “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”, I realized that it pessimistically assumed there would be no surplus created. My view at the time was that the surplus should, in theory, be distributed in proportion to the extent to which each person achieves his potential. Obviously, this could only be theory since it would require godlike insight to implement and therefore is certain to be applied incompetently or corruptly. I came to understand that capitalism was a powerful engine of prosperity that harnesses human nature (what I believe objectivists call egoism) and realistic incentives. However, I continue to believe that capitalism must be tempered by fairness and redistribution is necessary to reduce the major roles played by luck and happenstance. While there is no perfect and incorruptible system to do this, I believe multiparty democracy is better suited to the task in the long run than any alternative. After a few years doing computer programming, in the early 1990’s, I first went to Columbia University where I got a law degree (JD) and then went to New York University for a masters in taxation (LLM). I practice international corporate tax law at a major accounting firm, having worked for the IRS for several years. Given my radical and progressive roots, my practice paradoxically includes helping companies move intellectual property offshore. I am able to do this with a clear conscience since I do not believe in the corporate tax, which is economically distortive and has an unknown incidence. From a tax policy perspective, I believe in a strongly progressive tax on individual income or consumption. My name, Swerve of Shore, comes from the first line of Finnegan’s Wake by James Joyce. For professional reasons, I cannot share my real name at this time – perhaps, when I retire.
×
×
  • Create New...