Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Devil's Advocate

Regulars
  • Posts

    2179
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    34

Devil's Advocate last won the day on June 28

Devil's Advocate had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Not Specified
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Real Name
    Not Telling
  • Copyright
    Public Domain

Recent Profile Visitors

7046 profile views

Devil's Advocate's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (6/7)

112

Reputation

  1. In Spielberg's Taken, Owen Crawford states (paraphrasing from memory), "The war was won by keeping secrets, knowing theirs and keeping ours". Deception, in the context of war, is a tactic, and history tends to be written by the victors. Taken together, the ethical value of deception depends upon surviving the application.
  2. I'm not convinced that Sun Tzu's work is reflected by Dagny killing a guard for following orders, but I can appreciate parallels between The Art of War and Objectivism. Sun Tzu was a rational warrior, and I think Napoleon's escape from Elba to march on Paris with troops he turned from his enemies may be a better example of The Art of War, and one that is better reflected by John Galt's actions, than Dagny's.
  3. The issue of whether or not The Statue of Liberty ought to shrug, meaning to allow (for a time) "the Blessings of Liberty" to go unsecured, is presented in the context of what "Atlas Shrugged" by examining whether or not Looters can be defeated by removing their freedom to loot, in a manner similar (and for similar reasons) to that taken by the Producers. I believe our current President's political opinion that, "Healthcare is not a privilege, it's a right", along with our Former President's actions to overturn the election that unseated him, makes this a relevant discussion of political philosophy. If, for example, Lady Liberty ought not to shrug due to the collateral damage for multitude of America's Eddie Willers (a character I personally identify with), then I think your conviction to the political philosophy expressed in Atlas Shrugged is compromised. For similar reasons, a belief that I am comparing a work of fiction to real political events compromises your conviction by dismissing without addressing the underlying political philosophy involved. Are we there yet? I think not, but we are certainly already engaged in a showdown between those who favor the redistribution of wealth and those who don't. And I believe that John Galt was essentially offering the same remedy against the very real prospect of wealth (property) redistribution we are facing today.
  4. I believe the truth of that is belied by the removal of Liz Cheney's conference chair. The Republican Purge is real, and certainly isn't the action of a party that tolerates dissent and open disclosure.
  5. -- Reporter: "The neo-Nazis started this. They showed up in Charlottesville to protest --" Trump: "Excuse me, excuse me. They didn’t put themselves -- and you had some very bad people in that group, but you also had people that were very fine people, on both sides. You had people in that group. Excuse me, excuse me. I saw the same pictures as you did. You had people in that group that were there to protest the taking down of, to them, a very, very important statue and the renaming of a park from Robert E. Lee to another name." https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/apr/26/context-trumps-very-fine-people-both-sides-remarks/ -- There's an obvious contradiction in the claim that "very fine people" protest non-violently with "neo-Nazis" in any circumstance. It's the same kind of argument being used to rationalize the January 6th insurrection as some odd mixture of political adversaries cooperatively breaking into the Capitol, with the ensuing violence only being attributed to "some very bad people" who weren't Trump supporters.
  6. In Neil Gaiman's, "American Gods", a god's strength is generated by its users, which is likely a more accurate account of the relationship between those who worship, and the object of their fancy. And Pankaj Mishra's, "Age of Anger", examines the power of political divisiveness in a historical context to account for today's headlines. Both works go a long way towards accounting for the rise and sustainability of the Former President's political influence.
  7. The Donald remains the most influential political figure of the 21st Century, and probably only lost his second term to a pandemic disrupting the economy he ran on. Given his continuing influence over the Republican Party in the wake of January 6th, he probably doesn't need a second term to maintain his political relevance. Lady Liberty, on the other hand...
  8. "Darker" in contrast to, "that vision of a shining city on a hill." "Lower" in contrast to, "A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name Mother of Exiles." Yes, the shadows were already there, but January 6th happened because of Trump. Called out by a standard of, "very fine people, on both sides" of violent political protests? Called out by a standard of, "alternate facts" and "fake news"?
  9. Unfortunately for us, "You can't fix stupid." (Ron White), and from Bumper Sticker Philosophy, "My kid beat up your honor roll student". If evil were a rating, it would draw a greater audience than Jesus. The Former President (whose name must not be spoken) excels at one thing, shock value. The seamless transition from TV reality personality (Your fired!) to "leader of the ""free"" world" (shithole countries), to Dark Lord of the Republican Empire (OK, that might be a bit much (is Mike Pence out of hiding yet?)), is notable because of the absence of a protagonist, which in a political context means chaos. I stand by my earlier comment that America has become a darker place. To borrow from Stephen King, America has hit the gutter and bounced lower... ... which is why I ask should the Statue of Liberty shrug? Or perhaps she already has??
  10. Given the Former President used his political authority to promote insurrection, given congressional leaders used their political authority to promote sedition, and given the current President is using his political authority to proclaim a right to healthcare, the Judiciary in its existing role as the final arbiter of constitutional law, is better suited to command (by court order) the appropriate use of government's monopoly on force. It would essentially be a check on the capricious nature of a political call to arms.
  11. It's all about the headlines that generate the ratings, that create and sustain a following that wins elections. The Republican Purge is real, and the midterms will determine its success as political strategy in American politics. An extended family member of mine recently noted, "Impeachment is just street cred for him," and that pretty much sums up my opinion of The Donald and his Dark Wing. The Donald's 1st term election was unimaginable, until it happened. Former republican opposition candidates undermining the election in Congress on his behalf was unimaginable, until it happened. January 6th was unimaginable, until it happened... and the Dumbercrats continue to campaign as though if only everyone understood what a bastard the Former President is, no one would vote for him, while those who vote for him don't care because, "He's our Bastard!" The Former President will be restored to office as the party default if the current political trend doesn't produce someone who can beat his political base. Do you see that coming? Last go round I gave him and his following 50/50 odds, and this time I think if the Republicans make gains over the Democrats in the midterms, it's their presidential election to lose, if narrowly. Lady Liberty was raped on January 6th. That's what I think.
  12. Agreed, and there is no benevolent form of a military dictatorship. However, a charismatic general with popular support might act well as a caretaker monopoly on the government's use of force until a voluntary force of Peacekeepers (military, police, 1st responders) could be formed, effectively becoming an un-elected or appointed 4th branch of government in charge of securing America's "blessings of liberty". The actual "blessings" would be narrowly defined and limited to an individual's right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness within the social context of America. The President and Congress maintain political authority over "the general welfare" of Americans. The Supreme Court has legal authority over the Constitution AND the Peacekeepers, and there's a provision to disobey orders that are contrary to the security of American Individuals, A.I.s, perhaps not unlike the first law Asimov applied to his A.I.s. Private security is allowed to operate within accordance to "the blessings of liberty", and held accountable when it does not... ... and please bear in mind, this is a discussion of political philosophy involving the objective use of force, not a call to arms.
  13. Yep, for me it's more of a slide show... Anyhoo, perhaps I'll reinstate myself as, "Abby Normal" someday.
  14. Eiuol, I honestly don't know how to clarify my initial response to you, "I believe that January 6th was an insurrection promoted by republican party seditionists, to state it bluntly. You may judge me by that." Are you trying to get me to confess that I'm actually a republican party seditionist testing the waters here? You and I have quibbled over definitions before, but this is a bit much for either of us. I intentionally use the word 'restore' to indicate moving forward as opposed to returning to a prior state. My use of, "to be restored", is the factual expression of an agenda (not shared by me), but not the fact of having occurred (yet). I believe that it is entirely possible that it can happen, but I am certainly not advocating for it to happen by initiating a discussion examining whether Atlas and Lady Liberty have something in common to shrug. Now we're getting somewhere, thank you! I envision that a General Galt would not command support in a overt form of military coup, but would talk the troops away from his adversaries as Napoleon did, https://www.warhistoryonline.com/napoleon/100-days-napoleon-returns-exile-rallying-army-words-alone-m.html , the obvious goal being standing down government's monopoly on force in a secure manner that could be recalled at a moment's notice, alert but non-responsive to anything but an objective defense of the founding principle of liberty. A new country is not required.
  15. Some time ago, in another Objectivist Forum, a poster noted that I appeared to assemble information in the form of images as, I guess a kind of transformation of written content. I do tend to think in terms of images, but as that is natural and unremarkable to me, I haven't any idea how different this may be generally. On reflection, my hope is that it is unique. I'd like to be really good at something no one else does!
×
×
  • Create New...