Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    JASKN reacted to MisterSwig in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    The shooting never stops, dude. Take a look around. That's why we have a right to carry (or more precisely a right to self-defense).
  2. Like
    JASKN reacted to dream_weaver in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    This edited passage from The Roots of War comes to mind:
    "So long as . . . some men have the right to rule others by force, and that some (any) alleged “good” can justify it—there can be no peace within a nation . . ."
    When government officials sanction (by not stepping up to the plate) what groups like Antifa and BLM orchestrated, it is not much of a stretch to suggest a proxy extension that some (Antifa and BLM) have the right to use force in order to convey their pseudo freedom of speech.
  3. Like
    JASKN reacted to MisterSwig in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    So that's a big NO to my question. Hitler was elected in 1933. The Kristallnacht was in 1938. My point: you have no clue when to forcefully oppose an elected leader.
  4. Like
    JASKN reacted to MisterSwig in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    I'm confident many could articulate a better political ideal than the Founders, whose flawed "ideal" led to civil war.
  5. Like
    JASKN reacted to Tenderlysharp in How many masks do you wear?   
    How is it that a year ago it was much more common to feel derision toward germaphobes and hypochondriacs?  
    Humans die without contact, I wouldn't trade anything for my 4 year old niece jumping my lap and giving me a kiss on the cheek with her booger face.  I get a tissue, clean up her face and tell her she is adorable.  A germ or virus is nothing compared to human consciousness.  Why teach children to feel overwhelming helplessness in the face of something you absolutely have the intelligence to adapt to?  
  6. Haha
    JASKN reacted to Easy Truth in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    Vilifying the truth teller,  Classic.
  7. Like
    JASKN reacted to dream_weaver in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    Biden Nannyism, good. Trump Nannyism, bad. A variation on "If you don't like dad's answer, ask for mom's answer instead."
  8. Like
    JASKN reacted to tadmjones in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    Any federal property and any interstate transportation, I believe.
    I don't think 'unconstitutional' is the barrier it once was.
  9. Haha
    JASKN reacted to Easy Truth in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    A national mask mandate on federal property. I believe that it would be unconstitutional for him to mandate it nationally but time will tell.
  10. Like
    JASKN reacted to dream_weaver in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    The court's struck down the entity that is currently sitting in the office of the honorable of the governor of the state of Michigan's executive order akin to being able to make law ex-nilo. Now it has been delegated to the Michigan Department of Health to enforce the regulations (that they create ex-nilo.)
    The Nanny state requires willing charges to submit to having a nanny. The department of de-education has been cultivating that soil since implementing compulsory education. The operation of moral law does not require anyone's belief. And by extension: nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.
  11. Like
    JASKN reacted to 2046 in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
  12. Like
    JASKN got a reaction from Tenderlysharp in How many masks do you wear?   
    This mask (etc...) debacle has ironically made me friendlier to the general populace. I wear a mask begrudgingly only as required by businesses, but I find myself being nicer and smiling genuinely more to people, whether they're wearing the muzzles themselves or not. I think friendliness is very important right now. However, I have no tolerance or sympathy for tattlers or do-gooders, and if they stop me they get a sharp dismissive reply.
  13. Like
    JASKN reacted to DavidOdden in What is the best reply to this argument from anarchists?   
    The one error I have to point out in your comment is that anarchism does not ignore the concept of government, it misunderstands the concept. The anarchist position denies the validity of government, but has not resolved the problem of thieves under anarchy. One view is that anarchy is a utopian ideal, which can exist only when no person would ever use force – it’s a Platonic form towards which we might strive, but it is excruciatingly unlikely that it will ever exist. A closely related next-most surreal form of anarchism, sour grapes anarchism, declares that anyone using force has ipso facto become a government. If you steal my stuff, you have become a taxing government. The third circle of anarchism, more familiar to us because it is widely held in libertarian anarcho-capitalist circles, maintains that there is no special entity, government, which has a rightful monopoly on the use of force. Instead, anyone can rightfully use force, as long as they do not initiate use of force.
    The point about wielding force “autonomously” is obscured by the unmodified use of the word “force”. The problem is that if some jackass threatens me with a knife, I have to act autonomously right then and there, and will not roll over and get stabbed to death because I don’t have the right to use force on the premise that only the government can use force. It is very important that we not suggest that the Objectivist ethics requires you to roll over and die when attacked (Objectivism is not pacifism). Rather, the use of force is to be put under the control of objective law. Objective law mandates that force only be chosen by certain agents of the government who compare the facts and the law to see if force is justified, but it also provides an exception for life-threatening emergencies, where you can defend yourself if attacked.
    I know that interjecting law as an intermediary complicates the computation of rightful use of force, but it is an essential complication. Force is to be under the control of objective law. The government states what that law is. A proper philosophy is necessary for the government to devise proper laws.
  14. Like
    JASKN reacted to Boydstun in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    14 January 2021
    We will crush their violence enacted under their feast of self-delusion and contempt for our Constitutional rule of law. The republic will prevail. The citizens on both sides are armed if it should come to that, but I expect the organized force of the American government will succeed in defense and in bringing the violators to commensurate penalty.
    Tony: Indeed the American citizens overwhelmingly are not so stupid as to buy into Left-tarring of the bulk of Republicans as fascists and white-supremacist. And they are overwhelmingly not so stupid as to buy into the Right-tarring of the bulk of Democrats (and Biden/Harris) as socialists or communists.
    Many of my relatives and friends voted for Donald Trump in 2020. Most of them have detested his behaviors with regard to the election result. What they had in common with Trump voters who bought and sold the BIG LIE of a purported Trump/Pence win of this national election being STOLEN was only a preference for that ticket over the Democratic one. It is not the case that those who showed up for the fateful Trump rally are representative of the majority of citizens who voted for Mr. Trump.
    ~American Republic Forever~

  15. Like
    JASKN reacted to happiness in What is the best reply to this argument from anarchists?   
    Anarchy ignores the concept of government—a monopoly on the use of physical force. Whoever is an a position to weild physical force autonomously IS the governor. The “private physical force entity” in the anarchist thought experiment IS a government.
  16. Like
    JASKN reacted to dream_weaver in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    Riots break out over the country, zones were even created in some parts to accommodate rioters while apologists tried to veil it as free-speech and dismiss the looting as not directly injurious to the life of the looted. A riot breaks out in Washington DC and it is escalated to an insurrection.
  17. Like
    JASKN reacted to Easy Truth in National Conservatism   
    Yes, there are two side that are attacking individual rights.
    Many Objectivists I know find fault in Rand being against Reagan. In a world where authoritarianism is considered to be necessary, it's hard to distinguish which force is worse, the Socialist or the Fascist.
    One of the problems I am concerned about is the constantly shifting definitions. One day Socialist means one thing, another day it means being like Sweden. Similarly China is not considered communist one day and the next day it is. South Africa seems to have a communist constitution, yet is it communist?
    In one debate a prominent leftist (in fact he moderated a debate with Yaron and another person), said he believed that Marx and the Soviet union had nothing to do with each other, as Adam Smith and the US have nothing to do with each other. Well, we can't say nothing, but they may also not be identical.
    The problem is that it does not allow you to identify friend from foe when they change colors like that.
    Also, in the process, certain problems get confused in the public. One example is many Bernie people want Socialism simply because it means free education. Some of us get stuck in the idea that it is Socialist so it is wrong and never consider it.
    Meanwhile a free education has always been available, we've always had it. It's called a scholarship, or just go to the library. In fact the European model is more geared toward "merit based education" kind of like a scholarship. In this case free market alternatives do exits but lost in the debate because of the fear that it might give socialism good publicity. So we end up with a gridlock rather than knowing what really works best.
  18. Like
    JASKN reacted to Repairman in National Conservatism   
    The numbers suggest a trend of fewer people identifying themselves as religious in America. However, those with strong Christian faith (mainly Protestant), are reacting to the decline of Christianity. They are in rebellion. They have good reason to distrust the mainstream media. They are mostly white working families with children, longing for the security that their parents promised them, if only they would study hard in school and work hard. I share their sentiments, although I can be realistic enough to see that we are witnessing the decline of white Christian America. At the risk of seeming deterministic, I stop short of any fatalism.
    Mine was one of those towns that caught fire this past summer. Jacob Blake was shot less than two miles from my home. I've seen first hand the results of these "peaceful protests," the social justice warriors, chanting, "No Justice; No Peace!" Eleven million dollars of municipal property damage later, the only thing that's changed is that otherwise sensible local merchants have particleboard covering the windows of their businesses, adorned with "BLM," and other platitudes of "unity," (presumed unity with the marauders who pillaged and, in some cases, looted their livelihoods.) A life-long student of history, I had to wonder if the Jews would have adorned their broken windows with swastikas and posters of Hitler after the Kristal Nacht. Both Trump and Biden visited for photo-ops, as if that made any difference. But Biden struck me the most, by pandering to the delusional Left, clearly sympathizing with the mob, those "peaceful protesters," and a man wanted for sexual assault charges, shot seven times after the police failed to subdue him by other means. I talked with shop-owners who defended their property from behind the glass doors of their stores, bearing arms, while another evacuated his inventory of used cars to safe locations. If it can happen in my town, it can happen in any town in America. And the mainstream media will respond by promoting the idea that the answer is to "de-fund the police."
    As for the national conservative movement, their position of power in mainstream politics gives them an advantage, while their lack of authentic ideological argument erodes their "moral high-ground." So well stated in the article you presented, blind fealty to God and country have drown out any well-reasoned argument for reviving the founding values of liberty in America. I have no statistics to support the causes of right-wing mob violence, but it is evidently happening. I suspect that it's in part related to economic changes happening over the past forty years. Many have been stripped of their security, and someone has to be held to blame. When frightened ignorant people are desperate, the pitch-forks and torches come out. Trump used those pitch-forks and torches in an extremely cynical way, and told them, "We love you." I don't know who is included in his show of love, but it ain't me. I am among those caught in between the crossfire. I refuse to take sides with either irrational collectives, and remain steadfast to my individualism. Damn them all, and if I'm martyred for my isolated position, then, "give me liberty, or give me death." 
  19. Like
    JASKN reacted to Repairman in National Conservatism   
    I read the article. It's great. I've been witnessing this transition toward integrating Church and state for years. Back in the day, I was willing to ignore it. I considered the evil of a leftist/socialist agenda to be the greater threat to American prosperity and stability. The left-wing agenda continues to be a monstrous threat. In 1980 and 84, I cast my votes to Ronald Reagan, believing that his support from the Moral Majority would not escalate to the threat to individualism and reason that it is today. The radical Christian conservative agenda now stands as large and menacing as a rival monster, eye to eye with the mystic monster of the Left. For this reason, I have abandoned my support for nearly all Republicans who exploits Christian value voters. My rejection of Trump doesn't mean that I support Biden. I vote with my conscience, and any third party candidate that presents no threat to individual liberty is fine by me. I show up at the polls, the respectable candidates have not. The American crisis of confidence has only radicalized the semi-literate electorate, playing on their fear and other emotions. Obama was a perfect example. I think very important issues were addressed in the past four years; some of Trump's policies were helpful. Some of his suggestions, (particularly his muted criticism against revisionist history in public schools), may yet have long term positive results. But overall, the recklessness of his language and management, his open displays of intimidation, his preference for authoritarian world leaders, I think the good does not outweigh the bad. It's quite unfortunate. Some good might come from all of this. I can only wait and see.
  20. Like
    JASKN got a reaction from Yes in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    A silver lining is that this is an obvious example of what not to do for anyone who's actually interested in freedom and the legitimate rule of law.
  21. Like
    JASKN reacted to 2046 in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    Also there's an argument to the effect that, well look, the representatives in Congress deserve this. While, strictly speaking, this is correct, it doesn't follow merely from that fact that this is the right thing to do. Every member of Congress deserves to be huddled in their home in fear, as they would have the rest of us do the past few months. But part of a virtuous action is that it is done in the right way, at the right time, for the right reason. 
    Consider someone performing some courageous act to impress an onlooker. Such an action isn't merely "doing the right thing for the wrong reason," it's literally not doing the right thing. This is an aspect of all agent-centered virtue ethics. The agent has to be in a certain state while performing the action. They cannot be counted as virtuous someone who does something by accident, in the same way consulting tea leaves and guessing the correct thing doesn't make some belief knowledge. See Aristotle's Nicomachean Ethics II.4 for details.
    So it's possible to believe that the "demand side" if you will, the "getting what you deserve" might be good in some small way. I mean it certainly is funny to see the viking at Pelosi's desk. However, the "supply side" if you will, is people yearning for a dictatorship and indulging in epistemic vice. The "demand side" wasn't even substantial enough to change anything about lockdowns other than, people now screaming about "sedition" and "insurrection." Expect more bipartisan surveillance, policing, internet censorship.
  22. Like
    JASKN reacted to Yes in Shameful Display of Anarchy and Violence   
    As America prepares to certify our next President, a large band of hooligans have taken upon themselves to storm the Capitol.  This in the name of Freedom?  Are these hooligans striving to look for their Fuhrer?  As a footnote, something like this happened in fiction- in Atlas Shrugged.
  23. Like
    JASKN reacted to Boydstun in Intentionally Changing Sexual Orientation to Straight?   
    Yes, sounds sensible, James.
    I would like to add one point about sexual orientations. When it comes to sexual orientation in the context of romantic love, and all the more in long-term romantic relationships, it is the whole person of the other, not only their sexual allures, that is paramount; and the relationship is above all a relationship of persons. Embodied, sexual, to be sure. But persons. That is shown in relationships, whatever the sexual orientation abiding in them, in the way couples continue to be in love and take care of each other years and decades after the sexual aspect has gone away due to sexual declines in the body. The persons continue in their special, towering love.
    In the early ’90’s Allan Gotthelf wrote to me concerning my new philosophy journal Objectivity, and he inquired whether he perhaps knew me. I wrote to him and recounted what had transpired between us in ’78 and how things had gone on to Jerry’s death. I mentioned to him that in Jerry’s hospital room in the last hours and through his last heartbeat, I was alone with Jerry. And I wrote to Allan, “that is the way it was and that is how it ought to have been.” To have loved and been loved in that total way is a terribly fortunate thing, and it is a universe in which there is only you two persons.
  24. Like
    JASKN reacted to happiness in How many masks do you wear?   
    I wear one when required, out of respect for the fact that a private business is required to enforce the mandate. I never decided on a consistent policy to use in situations where I have a choice. I go for walks in a public park and don't wear one, even though it's required as far as I know, because no one is around to enforce. I'm not interested in wearing one without having a good medical reason to believe they actually work. If this premise were somehow proven, and this was communicated through a source I respect, I would be more interested in wearing one, but right now I feel like this is subjugation with unproven quackery at the hands of health authoritarians. 
  25. Like
    JASKN reacted to dream_weaver in Reblogged:It Is Not 'Self-Interest' to Take Illness Lightly   
    Defiant Michigan UP cafe owner told to shut down after serving indoor diners
    Since November, bars and restaurants in Michigan have been limited to carry-out service or outdoor dining in an effort to reduce the spread of the coronavirus.
    Who is mandating the limitation (and by what means)?
    Who's rights are being violated? Is it the people who chose not to frequent this establishment for CoViD-19 concerns? Is it the owner and voluntary workers at a restaurant violating a mandate to only fulfill carry out orders?
    A patient checks into a hospital and the diagnosis turns out to be CoViD-19. How did the patient acquire it? Was the patient get infected at a restaurant, a gym, a grocery store, Christmas or Thanksgiving dinner with friends and/or family, the local hardware store, the local mall while buying christmas gifts? Assume the patient was wearing a mask, as mandated by most states and counties-townships-cities-etc., and second-handedly requested by most establishments not quashed by law to allow customers to frequent.
    Keep in mind that this is by no means an exhaustive list. It is only intended to illustrative of another passage that comes to mind from Atlas Shrugged:
    "You propose to establish a social order based on the following tenets: that you're incompetent to run your own life, but competent to run the lives of others—that you're unfit to exist in freedom, but fit to become an omnipotent ruler—that you're unable to earn your living by the use of your own intelligence, but able to judge politicians and to vote them into jobs of total power over arts you have never seen, over sciences you have never studied, over achievements of which you have no knowledge, over the gigantic industries where you, by your own definition of your capacity, would be unable successfully to fill the job of assistant greaser." Yes, social order can come into play, but not by means of folk that harbor a vision of man as incapable of acting rationally when a new virus is discovered. 
    While a majority may serve as a deciding factor in a democracy, the morally decisive response requires a knowledge of what is the right recourse. Absent that, each individual should be granted the freedom to act according to their independent judgement, providing it does not infringe on anyone else acting according to their independent judgement.
  • Create New...