Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Jon Letendre

Regulars
  • Content Count

    70
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Posts posted by Jon Letendre

  1. 2 hours ago, whYNOT said:

    DM, you would have it that children would all be masked up too, I guess. Not because they are at much more than the least risk, but because they must protect any one who may be? You must have seen them, or know of a few. Look at them out in that dangerous place called "In Public", their large eyes appearing over their masks, their paranoid parents having warned them, and nagging them, don't touch that; don't play with those kids; don't approach those adults. What kind of curious, inquiring, happy go lucky lives are they enjoying? You said I exaggerate the psychological consequences. Truth is I haven't touched the surface, but here's one stab of prediction. For anything up to the next 50 years today's children will be lining up outside psychotherapists rooms and probably addicted to all manner of substances.  And paranoid over their own kids, and... and so on. The far-reaching psychological costs for a society amount also to sacrifices.

    No sacrifices on their part are too great when his precious serenity is attached to the matter.

  2. The cold-causing viruses, that we have always had with us and will always have with us, stimulate our immune system and are an inextricable part of human life.

    They are not ton-and-a-half masses impacting at 100 mph.

    Mass home detentions, mask edicts, distancing edicts, guest count limit edicts, etc., are all blatant violations of basic rights, without any justification. —>Thedelicate can always stay home<— Therefore, those are massive, blatant violations of basic individual rights.

    The little bastards have not really even yet scientifically identified their so-called “novel covid-19 coronavirus.”

    The Great Scamdemic of 2020.

  3. I'm with Stephen.

    Since Alice was born in very early 1905 we know she was conceived in spring of 1904. Now, she could have not been conceived — if say Zinovy had inhaled any more of what he was heating and compounding at the shop the day before then his sperm count would have been lowered and a different cell would have won the race to the egg. Or if maybe Anna had exercised any extra the two weeks prior then a different egg would have travelled to the uterus. Alice would not exist if those or any other choices incompatible with her actualization had occurred.

    But her actualization did occur. So we know that at 12:01am the day of her conception everything required for the existence of Alice, existed. Therefore the full-blown potential for Alice existed. The non-existence of the potential for Alice at that moment of the universe is incompatible with her conception later that day. Therefore her potential to exist fully existed, it was and will always be one of the existents of existence, even if she had never actualized. 

  4. 1 hour ago, dream_weaver said:

    Proven? Under which legally recognized venue did this alleged proof transpire?

    Before any punishments may rightfully ensue, court convictions are required. But court findings are not the cognitive end-all for you, right? You can know a thing is so before a court tells you? Certainly the people who can read our texts and emails and turn the microphones on our phones on at will can know things before a court tells them, and I was talking about those people.

    Biden has openly admitted much. At a Council on Foreign Relations meeting he publicly explained how he had a Ukrainian prosecutor fired. He explained he held up one thousand million dollars in aid $ until they fired the prosecutor who was investigating  Hunter. He says he made the billion dollar threat and "well, son of a bitch, they fired him!"

    Have you seen this video?

  5. Chin up, Tony.

    President Trump will be sworn into his second term in two months.

    That is the only possible outcome, for we won a long time ago and have the legislatures and Supreme Court. Try to relax and enjoy this *literal* show. None of this is truly "live action" but only post-triumph exposure of the bad guys for the sake of the many people who still don't get it. They were closely monitored and allowed to cheat massively. You are about to witness the dead in its tracks takedown you alluded to. Enjoy.

  6. The President, members of the military, the Supreme Court, State Legislatures and others, are not going to sit and watch a proven traitor assume office.

    Yesterday the President granted a full pardon to Michael Flynn -- a man who knows where all the bodies are buried and who is now safe and angry and free to sing like a bird -- said today: "we will never again allow the rightful power of the citizens of this country to be uprooted, undercut, usurped, or held hostage by a coup against our nation, a duly elected President or any future president of these United States."

     A Personal Statement from General Flynn to America: Faith, Family, and Friendships - UncoverDC

     

  7. On 11/5/2020 at 8:32 PM, tadmjones said:

    Q and anons (followers) are as real as real gets, the only fruitful discussions to be had are those concerning the validity of any information disseminated and shared. No ?

    The provenance of Q qua “Q” is a straw man. Is Anonymous real?

    The lack of interest in any of the information disseminated is rather notable.

    Instead, straight to 'it is obviously evil and Jon too if he dares think otherwise."

    Hardcore Objectivist epistemology right there, huh? Pathetic.

     

  8. On 11/11/2020 at 11:32 AM, MisterSwig said:

    I'm glad you went on the record with this prediction. If the courts rule against Trump and Biden takes over, will you step off the Q-train?

    The basic task of the Trump team (this includes their Q operation) is very delicate and difficult: Alert the masses of the reality of a global gang that gained control of governments, International NGOs, Fortune 500 companies, mass and social media, etc. so that they will abandon their widespread (mostly unknowing) support of it and join the fight to destroy it -- all without triggering WWIII or a second US civil war.

    Telling people what this gang has done and has in mind for us does not work, you have to show them. Arresting all the guilty today would fail, as way too many people would view such action as unjust harassment of mere political rivals. The People still have their heads in the sand and it would bring civil war and it would fail.

    I think there is a small chance the enemy will be allowed to continue proceeding with their plans. In this scenario, Trump accepts court decisions that don't go his way. He doesn't explicitly concede, but his posture changes to one of acquiescence. And the enemy continues exposing itself in real time, maybe even be lead into committing more treason, right out in the open in front of the whole world.

    Allowing a period of time during which the world thinks Biden/Harris will be taking power at the end of January so they may show the world what they really are is not inconsistent with anything from Q that I aware of.

    So, no, I would not then " step off the Q-train." Trump and Flynn and others have signaled their affiliation with Q in thousands of ways. It is quite plainly an operation of US military intelligence committed to the destruction of the global enemy. They are going to do it in a way and at a time that can succeed.

  9. 37 minutes ago, Eiuol said:

    You brought this up about the QAnon movement to suggest that you are being given a loyalty test implicitly. Then why are you trying to prove your loyalty? No one asked you to prove anything with loyalty, but you went ahead and did it anyway. Of course I told you to get out of here, but that was to dispel any illusion that a QAnon supporter is any more welcome than a Communist. 

    For the same reason there is no loyalty test, no one really cares. 

     

    That would be psychologizing. You are an interesting case study though. What are the motivations of believers in Q? Are there common personality traits or personal histories? How does the conspiratorial nature of QAnon relate to that radicalization of otherwise reasonable people? Does QAnon radicalize people in the first place? How does a QAnon supporter validate their beliefs? The one commonality that I see is an inclination towards feeling victimized or persecuted. 

     

    Communist like the CCP regime which owns the Biden Crime Family?

    In which Q posts #s will I find justification for a comparison to the ideas of communism? That's a strong a specific claim, now let's see some honest intellectual work to back it up.

    In all the Q posts I have read the appeal is to fight those who violate rights and certainly none say to take their bribes and help them hide their crimes, as Joe did, but if you think you can make the case, show me the posts.

  10. 14 minutes ago, dream_weaver said:

    You are the one that introduced the "if I had to choose" element.

    Yes.

    I had written: "If I had to pick one based soley on the quality of the people and the breadth of their thought, the range of their real-world knowledge, their openness to new facts, there would simply be no contest."

    I now see I made a mistake in how I formulated that statement, I mis-expressed my thoughts and humbly withdraw the above sentence.

    Having given it more consideration I choose to write:

    I know both and if anyone is curious which circles have attracted better people in terms of the breadth of their thought, the range of their real-world knowledge and openness to new facts and people who think differently, there will be no pause before I deliver my answer.

  11. Objectivists can show up and talk with Q people and they will be welcomed. All are encouraged to think for themselves in every Q circle I pay attention to. Loyalty tests are absent, let alone emphasized. Just one example is Martin Geddes, https://twitter.com/martingeddes

    Compare that to how I am being received at this circle. My bona-fides are excellent, but there is a problem with one of my beliefs* that becomes the focus of all my participation. Again, there is no comparison, but also no conflict and no need for me to pick.

    In three years no Q person has ever poo-pooed Ayn Rand or Objectivism to me, never not once suggested my agreement with Objectivism is a problem.

    * And what is the nature of this terrifying and abhorrent belief?

    It is simply that the 4,949 and counting posts found here: https://qanon.pub/ are worthy of consideration and were created by persons of substance inside the United States Military -- not just by a kid in their mom's basement. That's it. That's all.

  12. 10 minutes ago, dream_weaver said:

    And which would you pick?

    There is no conflict between the two, and no reason or need to pick. Objectivist circles are generally very closed-minded, they imagine themselves long-ago already in possession of everything required to grasp the nature of the world, including the political. True openness of thought I am sorry to say is just not abundant in (publicly observable) Objectivist circles. 

  13. 32 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

    Has Trump or the FBI director blamed the Obama administration for delaying capture of the Chinese agents?

    Trump routinely and publicly states that Obama and Biden committed treason.

    He has done so for about a year. He thoroughly exposes himself with that. Commits himself to taking them down. And that is because, again, he swore an oath to protect against all enemies, foreign and domestic -- then subsequently identified them that way. I think we can be sure that a lot of blaming will be forthcoming.

    To answer plainly, no, I do not think either person has specifically blamed in connection with Foxhunt. 

  14. 4 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

    Do you have some evidence for that claim? Has Trump or the FBI director blamed the Obama administration for delaying capture of the Chinese agents?

    Was it their job?

    Did they fail?

    Do we know about the blackmail now, which helps explain the "fail"?

    You don't need the Director to explain it to you.

  15. 4 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

    Why did Trump wait so long to "stop" Fox Hunt? Obama couldn't do it in two years. And it took Trump nearly four years (+2 inherited from Obama) to catch these agents.

    All of that is New York Times narrative.

    The nature of the delay was as I described.

    There would have been no point trying earlier as the deeply compromised FBI and DOJ inherited from Obama/Biden would have spiked any real action. The relevant law enforcement agencies were simply too busy framing Trump with Russia to deal with the CCP flipping us off and disrespecting our borders at will. Too busy framing Trump. But that was the old FBI.

  16. 2 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

    What should Obama have done about Fox Hunt?

    He should have performed his duty according to the oath he swore. He should have stopped it, as the next President has done, whose family is not blackmailed and controlled by the CCP and whose DOJ and FBI are not run by blackmailed scum.

    DOJ and FBI had to be cleaned out of yet more CCP-compromised human excrement in '17, '18 and '19 before that would be possible. Now it is possible, and being done. At least five arrests have already been made.

  17. 12 hours ago, dream_weaver said:
    16 hours ago, Jon Letendre said:

    Who here already knew that Q's name was a reference to Energy Dept security clearance, such as Bobulinski enjoyed during his career in the US Navy?

    A "God", incarnate, if you ask me.

    That's non-responsive.

    I have been inside the Objectivist movement since I was a boy and the Q movement since it began in late 2017.

    I can assure you that the preponderance of people whose minds are utterly closed to any new information is depressingly enormous in the former and non-existent in the latter. If I had to pick one based soley on the quality of the people and the breadth of their thought, the range of their real-world knowledge, their openness to new facts, there would simply be no contest.

    Regarding https://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/511396-qanon-backer-marjorie-taylor-greene-wins-georgia-gop-runoff

    Q is three years old and we have our first Congresswoman.

    To analogize with Objectivism, that would be Rand's first published work, Anthem in 1938 followed by the movement's first elected Congressperson, in 1941, (or '42, to be an election year.) Lot of catching up to do on the real word impact scene, versus never getting beyond arguing about words and their true definitions. Coming up fast on one hundred years, too.

    But "God" is too much, calm your imagination.

    Change yesterday's weather now and then, yeah, maybe. But "God"?

    Would you tell me which post (please provide post #s) of theirs seem to you like they are trying to become "God"? https://qanon.pub/

    Otherwise it is like when haters say Rand really advocated X, but then they go quiet when challenged to provide one example.

×
×
  • Create New...