Everything posted by FeatherFall
I had read The Fountainhead in middle school, and read Atlas Shrugged during my first year in high school. My mom gave me her copy of The Fountainhead, and a friend of mine encouraged me to read Atlas Shrugged by offering to by an eighth of weed for anyone who would do it . At the time I was sort of an anarchist/libertarian, and confused selfishness with hedonism. Needless to say, some of my habits at the time quelled my interests in academic pursuits. My introduction to Objectivism came at the end of my freshman year, I borrowed my mother's copy of Philosophy: Who Needs It? I would come to read more of Ayn Rand's nonfiction (and some of Peikoff's) in high school, in between skipping class and ingesting poisons. It was fun, but seriously retarded the progress of my learning and ego. This is when I started to become an Objectivist. It wasn't until recently that I began to apply the philosophy consistently and quit the drugs. Incidently, I implicitly hated everything that seriously messed with my mind. Hallucinogens were the worst, they made me feel like I had no control , so I didn't do them much... I stuck to stuff like pain killers, speed and pot. The more I internalized the philosophy and integrated my knowledge of the nature of emotions, the more I started to feel uncomfortable with the small stuff (like pot). So, being introduced to Objectivism sort of saved my mind in a literal/physical sense, too. I like to think it did the same for my friend, because he also cut out the substances.
Hello, I posted once or twice already, but I think it's time to make my entrance to this community formal. My name is Jacob Zeise, I recently moved to Phoenix from Green Bay, WI. I am 21 and have been reading Rand for about 8 years. I have had the pleasure of reading countless op-eds from the Ayn Rand Institute, and some works by Peikoff. I've considered myself to be an Objectivist for several years, but it's taken a while to iron out some of the major contradictions between my philosophy and actions. It's been about a week since I first found this forum, and now I feel like a kid in a candy store. This is great. JZ
I don't think we are seeing a pocket of despotism... More accurately democracy in action. We are seeing the enforcement response to the contradictions in laws that pull different ways on individual rights. Raves invariably attract a few people who want to enhance the experience with drugs. Drugs are illegal, so the people who use and sell them often break other laws that are considered by law enforcement officials to be more serious. Because, due to substance prohibition, one primary source of a "gang's" income is drug sales, many people associate drugs with the initiation of force. In fact, drug dealers must take justice into their own hands during disputes. If a bottle of pills is stolen, a dealer can't go to the police. He now has to make the decision to accept his loss, or to use force to regain his property. There are no courts that will settle the dispute nonviolently. One can see why many law enforcement officials associate drug users with violent crime, and extend this presumption to include venues where they can be fairly certain of drug activity. It is only proper that they use appropriate force to protect themselves when they expect a violent response is possible. They will also use what is referred to as "Verbal Jujitsu." It's a shame Johnny Law has to bring down the long arm of injustice. If our country consistently protected everyone's rights, they would recognize the rights of substance users. Drug dealers would be legitimate business entities, not gangs. But, alas, majority opinion rules on this issue, which bleeds force into areas that wouldn't normally require it. As far as "trial balloons" are concerned, I think every enforcement action is a test case. I would also like to note that I am disturbed by the allegations that some video equipment may have been destroyed. Cops should welcome additional accounts of the event if they were doing everything in a just manner.