[What is Keynesian economics based on?]

How, exactly, would people spending more without necessarily producing more lead to a utopia? What is the cause-and-effect relationship?

I don't know. I'm not advocating this; Keynes is. Although he doesn't expect them to spend more than they produce, to be fair. He just says that if he can get the savings down to 0% interest rates, then there will be no reason to save so that we spend all our productive activities on producing his "wonder cities," rather than the "slums" that capitalism builds because it saves productive assets for the future. I told you Keynes is crazy.

[What is Keynesian economics based on?]

I think my friend is refering to Keynes's utopia where interest rates become 0% so that the capitalists get choked out of existence. And so that all resources are used now to create Keynes's "wonder cities." Keynes and my friend believe that savings keeps us from acheiving our best standard of living. Thus Keynes's end goal was to do away with savings by using government to make interest rates 0% and thus rendering savings useless, so that people consumed all that they could and used all resources to acheive his G.E. Moore-ian ideal of living in the moment and making the most joy out of it.

(Edited to remove quoting of the entire previous post. - softwareNerd)

[You Are All Cultists]

I've often heard people suggesting that Objectivism is a cult. I'm sure many of you heard it too - and since I've read some questions about dealing with this issue, I'd like to share my thinking on the subject.

It really bores me to death to write about these things, but it may prove helpful, so here goes:

1. There are some objective similarities between Objectivists and members of cults.

2. There are also many crucial differences.

3. The honest, intelligent person may get the impression of a cult in early stages of familiarity with Objectivism, but will soon learn to distinguish Objectivism from a mindless cult.

4. The dishonest will persist, in face of evidence. Their attitude will show clear disinterest in learning the facts. They will pronounce a judgement and will never agree to examine it objectively.

First, let's look at the definition of cult, from the Oxford English Dictionary:

I have no problem with someone charecterizing Objectivism as #3: "something popular or fashionable among a particular section of society". What they mean, however, is usually 1 or 2.

So let's start with some objective similarities between Objectivism and real cults:

* Objectivists believe in their ideas very strongly, and speak very confidently.

* Objectivists feel very strongly towards their ideals. They may get protective of Ayn Rand or Objectivism if they feel it is wrongly attacked.

* Objectivism may affect decisions throughout an Objectivist's life, including his choice of career, his artistic taste, his choice of a spouce, his way of dealing with other people, his political inclination, etc.

* Objectivists enjoy meeting and talking to other Objectivists, and there is a kind of international network of ties that spans cultures, locations, and languages. Objectivists often feel a strong bond with someone upon discovering he is an Objectivist (this is many times unjustified, BTW).

Some crucial differences:

* Objectivism is not a religion, and is not based on faith. It's an atheistic, secular philosophy which upholds reason. Objectivists should therefore always willing to consider a logical argument. This is outside the realm of any real cult.

* Objectivists do have a sense of worship towards its ideals, but only in the sense of something being "extremely important and valuable", not as a self-degrading act. The objects of worship are experienced as beneficial to life, and therefore important. They are not above life, or above happiness, in any way.

* There is no leadership or heirarchy in the conventional cult sense. No one is giving or following orders. There are no orders, and there can never be orders since one of the top principles is that every man is an end in himself, with his own happiness as his goal. Some philosophers and intellectuals might be considered an "intellectual leadership", but only in the sense of their words being very convincing and hence influencial.

* Objectivists usually have non-Objectivist friends. They are involved in many activities, hobbies, careers that do not involve Objectivism. They usually don't live around other Objectivists, or choose their location according to the this. They often marry non-Objectivists, and they judge people according to their character, not their stated philosophy.

Once in a while, as with any other philosophy, a mentally unhealthy and evil individual will try to use Objectivism as a basis to forming a real cult, with mind-control techniques, group pressure, and deceit. In these cases, however, the real strength of Objectivism is revealed. These cults usually either fall apart very soon after, when the followers discover the real nature of their "leader", or the cult leader finds that he cannot use Objectivism, and drops it for a more "constructive" philosophy that leaves room for faith and subjugation.

Any other thoughts on the matter?

I originally thought Objectivism was cultish. Only because anyone I knew or argued with who was an Objectivist would often same almost the same thing word for word as another Objectivist did, when arguing with me about taxes. Only after reading Atlas Shrugged did I realize that they were nearly quoting Rand word for word. And I still find that most Objectivists do this. However, after acquainting myself with the philosophy I would say that it is not a cult.

[What is Keynesian economics based on?]

I have a very liberal friend who always complains that Republicans don't know enough about economics to learn that Keynesian economics dictates that a type of utopia can only be acheived through consumer spending, and less gross savings. I haven't quite come up with a free market reply to that, because I am just now getting into economics seriously, and particularly free market capitalism.

*Personally, from what I've read of Keynes, I think he was a lunatic.

[Predation: Virtue Or Vice?]

What does any of this have to do with murder and Objectivism? I would like to see this get back on topic. I too have a lot of friends here at college that hate Objectivism because they think selfish can justify bad things.

[Hey]

I'm new here. I recently read Atlas Shrugged and loved it. I'm an economics major at MSU. I plan to be a teacher, it has kind of been my goal to change youth by fighting our government using its own unjust powers (e.g. being a state certified teacher in poli sci and economics). I hope to learn alot here, while on this forum.

Thanks

Chris