Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

William Scott Scherk

Regulars
  • Posts

    52
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

Reputation Activity

  1. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to EC in Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny   
    Seriously? Why are you guys playing these silly games?
  2. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Doug Morris in Suppression in Belarus   
    The US government has a lot wrong with it, but it is much more rights-respecting than the Belarus regime.  They are not equivalent.
    MAGA consists of people who have let the lying demagogue Trump stir up their emotions to dangerous levels.
     
  3. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Boydstun in Reblogged:Who 'Slow Walked' Trump's Immunity Claim?   
    As opposed to slow-walking the decision to hear the appeal on absolute immunity for ex-presidents, the Supreme Court could very well have been in an interval of trying get enough Justices to agree to hear the appeal from the appellate court decision and opinion, with some Justices initially undecided and open to persuasion. We don't know. But Gus neglects comparison of the speed of the Supreme Court (and them slowing things down by earlier throwing the appeal back to the DC appellate court for decision) with the Supreme Court speed in the Nixon case* and in the Bush v. Gore case. Unless the Court gives their decision in this coming week, it will look very like the political-party alignment of the Court in Bush v. Gore. Delaying until end of June to give their decision and opinions could very well say all Yes to the lengthy opinion of the lower appellate court, say that ex-Presidents are not immune from criminal prosecution, while, having slow-walked the time-sensitive case, made the ruling de facto inapplicable to the one case that has ever come up.
    (Although, I must admit, it is not clear that most American voters would not vote for Trump even knowing that he was convicted in the pending criminal cases. I've apparently in the past credited the American people with too much valuation that America be a constitutional democratic republic. Now they just deny it ever was such a thing, rationalizing their own instigation of its downfall.) 
    On the slowness of the prosecution bringing the DC case and the Georgia case, that could easily be a matter of the time needed to gather sufficient evidence to have a high chance for conviction, even when the accused is a rich litigant and a former President.
  4. Like
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Boydstun in Closing of the topic "Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny"   
    A forum can be run however the owners want to run it. There will be consequences in who wants to participate or read, but that's it. Owners can monitor as little or much as they please. There are forums within Facebook for which each post is monitored and each thread-origination has to be pre-approved. That's fine, and the owners will get satisfaction (or not) from who all participates and what sort of things bloomed in the forum they created. One thing about forums (at least ones of any interest to me) is a circumstance not set by the owners: It is written language. There are choices set by the owners (ultimately) that are firm constraints on participants, such as time limits on editing a post or eliminating your post.
    I created, published, and edited the hard-copy journal Objectivity for eight years. My choices of constraints on it were simply my design for it. The options open to the designer are really very wide; there can be many variations of such options while still counting as a journal. Similarly, it goes for a forum such as this one.
    Constraints I laid on Objectivity* included: no political or cultural topics or commentaries. No basement or garage science or kook science; only standard science (mostly physics and developmental psychology). No advertisements. Writers had to go through an iterative process with the editor on addressing in the content any pertinent external literature, and there was always a lot, of which the writer knew little at the outset. I did not agree entirely with everything in any compositions not authored by me (and I often came to disagree with things in my own compositions in later years). I was pleased with the quality of the production. It was a worthwhile, challenging project. For my efforts, I prefer these later years to simply write for venues others have set up. I appreciate this one and the intelligence and background training showing here in writings of its participants.
  5. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to DavidOdden in Closing of the topic "Remembering the CG Computer-Generated Pandemic Tyranny"   
    OO is supposed to serve a particular purpose, which is not the same as the purpose of Twit-Face or alt.philosophy.objectivism and its spawn HPO, if you remember them. When content deviates from that purpose, it is right for management to take corrective action. My judgment is that adherence to that purpose here is not strict, and it has gotten much looser since I first joined about 20 years ago.
    Every person who contributes here should be able to articulate their justification for contributing, to say what value you receive in exchange for your posts. If you can’t do that, you should re-evaluate your self-sacrifice. In fact, very many former contributors have done so (by which I mean, the vast majority). There are loose guidelines which state what the purpose of OO is and what contributors should and should not do. Intellectual honesty is one of those requirements, the problem is that intellectual dishonesty comes in many flavors, one being evasion and the other being unreasoned reliance on authoritative statements. The covid thread reeks of evasion and was worthy of closing on those grounds. I concluded that there was no rational value to be had in the thread, and that put paid to my participation there. I might, in another incarnation, contemplate whether just leaving the thread open does any harm.
    There have been many fora for Objectivism, most of which have fallen into complete inactivity. When you peruse the content of other Objectivist fora, ask yourself if you would want to be associated with that group and if not, why not? My judgment is, “No: crappy content” (NB this explicitly does not refer to HBL). The potential harm of crappy content to Objectivism should be obvious, so now we know the basis for closing crappy threads, what remains is a specific evaluation of one or more threads, to decide if they are overall above that crappiness threshold (I will not engage in a specific autopsy here). I would like to avoid reaching the “crappy content” conclusion w.r.t. OO.
  6. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Boydstun in Reblogged:Will Independents Save the GOP From Itself?   
    The facts about Manning are physical facts of his surgery, hormone injections, and consequent changes in its body. Also, its facts of action as charged in his criminal conviction. The facts in the charges against Assange will be determined by a jury from the evidence. Those facts are whatever they are already, but they will not be accepted legally unless he is convicted. We have designed that legal determination process such that some guilty people will be judged Not Guilty even though the alleged facts of the case as brought by the prosecution are indeed the facts of reality; so that fewer innocent people will be wrongly found guilty.
    Persons who have their sex changed by surgery and hormones are not the same as someone who senses they are psychologically a different sex without such a physical-alteration project (I'm not entirely convinced there are any such things as male versus female sexual psychologies, such as put about by Rand and Branden, that are independent of brainwashing of the children by the culture, i.e., there may well be no such distinct psychologies that are purely an outcome of biological nature). In official government documents, I'd think the proper pronoun or salutation for them is just as for those us who don't feel that way. Manning is in a different category: the category of having undergone the medical, physical alteration, last I heard.
    There is a marble sculpture of old of an hermaphrodite, which turns my stomach. Also, I dislike drag queenery. But the circumstance that such matters are top political issues for voters grossed out by such sculpture or human behaviors is bad for the future of our country. Such cultural issues promoted to political hay have gotten way out of proportion in comparison to the circumstances that people are having to pay so much for groceries or are having their life savings stolen due to government-driven inflation or, as could come in the future if the federal budgets in the red are not stopped, police protection and armed forces can no longer be paid.
  7. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Yes, this is an Ayn Rand fan-forum, but it is practically unmoderated (the nominal moderator is @dream_weaver).
    As a consequence, @whYNOT does not consider having an obligation to back up his claims with facts, even if asked to. Also, he is approvingly referencing and quoting Putin's Russia governmental media and non-Russian commentators working for these media, which also don't back up their claims with facts, or back them up with fake "facts".
    You may follow my debate with @whYNOT in this "About the Russian aggression of Ukraine" one year old thread. It is very long, so that you have to be quite motivated... Pay attention to his constant anti-Western, particularly anti-Western media stance.
    He sees the generally pro-Ukraine position of the mainstream Western media as being a result of the activity of a centrally-driven propaganda machine - a conspiracy, IOW. He sees no other possible explanation.
    The tactics I am using with him is to challenge him to prove his claims with facts. He never does, thus confirming his irrationality, but this doesn't bother him, nor does it bother the moderator...
    So yes, @whYNOT is an Ayn Rand fan, but only in the sense that he quotes her from time to time, with no visible understanding of Objectivist epistemology and ethics/politics. Maybe this happens only with the subject Putin vs Ukraine...
    His current defense of Israel's right to exist and defend itself is not based on principles, it is a whim: as I already said, even a broken clock is right twice a day.😁
  8. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to EC in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Ukraine isn't the one threatening WW3 and nuclear annihilation on the world, that's Russia and their buddies.
  9. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Boydstun in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Since the preceding post by Alex, Putin and Prigozhin reached an agreement, avoiding armed conflict among the Russian mercenary group and the regular Russian troops. I see this as a victory for Putin in his Ukraine quest. Those mercenary troops, as well as the Chechen mercenary troops, are now returned to Ukraine to continue Putin's aggression and hegemony. Prigozhin in exile in Belarus is surely a dead man walking, although Putin may leave him alive until he has secured unity of the Wagner troops with the regular Russian troops, all under regular Russian military command. I still think Putin will not enter negotiations bringing peace to Ukraine until after the US elections of 2024, hoping for Republican wins that might cut US Military aid to Ukraine and bring him advances in the war for bargaining position or perhaps victory.  
  10. Like
    William Scott Scherk reacted to AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    YouTube channel "1420", Daniil Orain, micro-interviews, April 2023, in Moscow. 
    Question: "How is our war with NATO going?"
     
  11. Like
    William Scott Scherk got a reaction from AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Austin's remarks in full: Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark A. Milley Hold a Post-Ukraine Defense Contact Group Press Conference, Ramstein Air Base, Germany
     
    In a fuller context:
    Now, we also heard today from the European Union on its proposal to speed up the production and delivery of ammunition for Ukraine, and more countries are thinking about how they can increase industrial production not just for the near term, but also for the medium term and the long term, and that is a powerful reminder that we stand with Ukraine's defenders for the long haul. 
    You know, Putin made a series of grave miscalculations when he ordered the invasion of Ukraine more than a year ago.  He thought that Ukraine wouldn't dare to fight back, but Ukraine is standing strong with the help of its partners.  Putin thought that our unity would fracture, but Russia's cruel war of choice has only brought us closer together.  And I'd note that Finland, which has long taken part in this contact group, is here today as a new NATO ally.  I expect that Sweden will soon follow, and that makes something crystal clear — Putin's war of choice is not the result of NATO enlargement, Putin's war is the cause of NATO's enlargement.
     You know, when I first convened this contact group, I saw nations of goodwill that were eager to help Ukraine resist Russia's imperial aggression, I saw a coalition that stood united and firm, I saw countries determined to stand up for an open and secure world of rights and rules, and all of that was just as true at Ramstein today as it was a year ago. 
    The Ukrainians are still standing strong in their fight for their freedom and they have the courage and the capability for the road ahead and we will have their backs for as long as it takes.
    Alternatively, imperialism of the Russian kind is not popular in the West. If the supreme ruler of the Russian Federation had not miscalculated ... 
    More war reporting from the folks at Kyiv Independent:

    https://kyivindependent.com/tag/russias-war/

  12. Like
    William Scott Scherk got a reaction from Boydstun in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Austin's remarks in full: Secretary of Defense Lloyd J. Austin III and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff General Mark A. Milley Hold a Post-Ukraine Defense Contact Group Press Conference, Ramstein Air Base, Germany
     
    In a fuller context:
    Now, we also heard today from the European Union on its proposal to speed up the production and delivery of ammunition for Ukraine, and more countries are thinking about how they can increase industrial production not just for the near term, but also for the medium term and the long term, and that is a powerful reminder that we stand with Ukraine's defenders for the long haul. 
    You know, Putin made a series of grave miscalculations when he ordered the invasion of Ukraine more than a year ago.  He thought that Ukraine wouldn't dare to fight back, but Ukraine is standing strong with the help of its partners.  Putin thought that our unity would fracture, but Russia's cruel war of choice has only brought us closer together.  And I'd note that Finland, which has long taken part in this contact group, is here today as a new NATO ally.  I expect that Sweden will soon follow, and that makes something crystal clear — Putin's war of choice is not the result of NATO enlargement, Putin's war is the cause of NATO's enlargement.
     You know, when I first convened this contact group, I saw nations of goodwill that were eager to help Ukraine resist Russia's imperial aggression, I saw a coalition that stood united and firm, I saw countries determined to stand up for an open and secure world of rights and rules, and all of that was just as true at Ramstein today as it was a year ago. 
    The Ukrainians are still standing strong in their fight for their freedom and they have the courage and the capability for the road ahead and we will have their backs for as long as it takes.
    Alternatively, imperialism of the Russian kind is not popular in the West. If the supreme ruler of the Russian Federation had not miscalculated ... 
    More war reporting from the folks at Kyiv Independent:

    https://kyivindependent.com/tag/russias-war/

  13. Confused
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Grames in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    Since when is Ukraine a western interest?  Never.  It is only a relatively western place from the perspective of Russia.  Only the imperial conceptual framework that undergirds the American Empire can possibly construe Ukraine as a western interest.  The point of being an empire is that expansion to the maximum possible limit is necessary to keep the currency flowing, and what defines the maximum possible limit is repeated failures when attempting further expansion.
    The American government has no business being as deeply involved in Ukraine as it is.  The personal finances of American government officials are tied to Ukrainian finance schemes, so they make Ukraine into government business.  It is corrupt.
    "Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it". Mark Twain
  14. Haha
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Grames in What are the similarities and differences between 'Q' haters and Ayn Rand haters?   
    I hate Q.  Fuck Q and the boomer fantasists who want to believe that the system they have lived with their whole life will somehow correct itself as they passively watch the show.   Q is for people who have spent their entire lives sitting on their ass watching television, being mentally passive.  Q is a pacifier.  Q is a distraction.  Q is a propaganda operation by an unfriendly power, your own government (probably the FBI with possible cross training and skill sharing with the CIA and DIA).  
  15. Confused
    William Scott Scherk reacted to tadmjones in What are the similarities and differences between 'Q' haters and Ayn Rand haters?   
    It may even be a psyop to ferret out those inclined to “do” something, and this sense to push back at the current regime. 
    Like Erdogan’s ‘coup’ to find those in his military ranks who may pose a credible threat to his regime.
  16. Like
    William Scott Scherk reacted to AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    @RationalEgoist,  @tadmjones, @whYNOT 
    About the figure of "14,000 pro-Russians dead":
    14,000 is the number of the total conflict-related deaths in Ukraine in 2014-2021, civilian and military, as reported by the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (see the January 2022 Report here). UN and OSCE had about 1,000 observers in the Donbass region.
    Considering the putinist propaganda about an alleged genocide perpetrated by Ukraine in Donbass, it is interesting to look at the numbers in more detail, by distinguishing between civil and military deaths.
    total: : 14,200-14,400 (estimated) military: 4,400 Ukrainian forces, 6,500 members of armed groups [incl. 4-500 Russian military] (estimated) civilian: at least 3,404 civilians (including the 298 deaths on board Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 in July 2014) The civilian death represent 20% from the total; this suggests, and OSCE and UN reports confirmed, that there was no identifiable pattern of targeting civilians and, therefore no genocide perpetrated by Ukraine in Donbass.
    The first two years of conflict (2014-15) account for 90% of victims, the last three (2019-2021) for 2%. Therefore, propaganda claims that the Russia's February 2022 attack on Ukraine was designed to stop the ongoing genocide is ridiculous. It is one of the excuses, beside an alleged imminent NATO-sponsored Ukrainian attack, US bioweapons laboratories, nuclear weapons program and so on.
     
  17. Confused
    William Scott Scherk reacted to whYNOT in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    If Russia is a dictatorship so is Ukraine. But they are both sovereign nations. Your idea of what constitutes dictatorships is at fault.
    There have been many atrocities committed by Ukraine and its ultra-nationalists: I have recently viewed some. They don't receive -any- msm publicity.
    I've gone on at length as to the justification(s) for the invasion. This affair doesn't resolve as simplistically as you'd like it. The conditions that Putin was facing: a NATO-assisted militaristic Ukraine, the potential of NATO membership and ICBM bases on its borders, the plight of Russian-Ukrainians--would not be tolerable to any nation. Why should Russia be different? Oh, right - it's an outlaw nation! It is innately inferior. It can't defend its own people!
    I have to caution everyone to prepare for disappointment, since those unindoctrinated by 'experts' can see Russia is getting close to driving back the opposition from its four annexed regions. Ukraine has been taking heavy losses.
    Everything could have been circumvented peacefully with honest participants in Kyiv and the West.
    It seems that a Russian win is the only way the world will finally realize how much they have been lied to altogether from the start. It did not have to be this way.
     
  18. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Eiuol in What are the similarities and differences between 'Q' haters and Ayn Rand haters?   
    What is being a fan supposed to mean? I'm a fan of Q but I only mean that in the sense "this is weird and bizarre and means little about reality but it's pretty fun and I really hope it's a psyops campaign aimed at weeding out violent fringe lunatics". 
    To say that Q is right is to say that you are a believer, even a little bit.  What it got people to do is become arbitrarily skeptical of just about everything, and those that believed any extent had opened their minds to arbitrary speculations as being just as legitimate as speculations made with evidence. I can't say that Q is right or wrong, the statements don't mean anything. 
    There is no evidence of these things ("incredible harm") which isn't to say that none of these things are bad. De facto vaccine mandates are fine (where you are not legally bound to get a vaccine) because it is pretty well established that vaccines are safe as a whole. Besides, all of these things the US are voluntary! So really, even your Q-lite beliefs reflect pretty well the mindset of Q believers. Most of the kinds of questions people ask about vaccine safety or the efficacy of certain measures are either arbitrary or are poorly phrased questions. It's why there is a significant overlap with Q believers. It's a kind of epistemological melting. "Trust the science" people of the same way, except the fortunate thing is that there are people involved with the science that are able to think clearly and ask legitimately skeptical questions, even research things you talk about.
  19. Sad
    William Scott Scherk reacted to tadmjones in What are the similarities and differences between 'Q' haters and Ayn Rand haters?   
    Well as a fan , not a 'believer', I'd say Q is more right than wrong and I appreciate the memetic resonance in whatever proportion of society that became ''red pilled" as a consequence of the phenomenon.
    Q is right in that there is a demonic cabal seemingly intent on sacrificing children, the real world example has played out in the US in the covid response. De-facto vaccine mandates , the lockdowns and forced masking has done incredible harm to children physically and psychologically.
    I'd rather my neighbors had yard signs that say "Q sent me" , than those that say "Trust the Science".
  20. Like
    William Scott Scherk reacted to AlexL in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    You should warn people that, if they challenge your claims, you will hit them on the head with an article from Russia Today (or TASS, or RIA Novosti). If they knew beforehand, they wouldn't dare...😁
  21. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Eiuol in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    You didn't, you asked for my judgment. So I did. But every discussion I've ever had with you on any topic, after a few posts, you forget my explanations, then act as if I never gave an explanation in the first place. I decided not to explain, there would be no point. 
    It's worse than that, because he agreed that it is autocratic, while denying that autocracy is a dictatorship. Not all dictatorships are autocracies, but all autocracies are dictatorships in the modern understanding of a dictatorship. 
  22. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to MisterSwig in The Bobulinski angle on Biden   
    What's the word from Q-land? Did the assassins get a flat tire or lose their nerve en route to Delaware? Is the plan still a "go"? Maybe something will happen on inauguration day? 
  23. Confused
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Jon Letendre in The Bobulinski angle on Biden   
    The owners intentions for the site are to be respected, of course.
    I will try to address honest questions so long as participants can refrain from vicious, baseless attacks on my character and stay focused on ideas. I am sure we agree that is the only atmosphere in which constructive exchange of ideas can occur.
    Thank you, Greg.
  24. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to RationalEgoist in About the Russian aggression of Ukraine   
    I'm honestly disturbed by some of the attitudes that appear in this thread. 
    Since this is an Objectivist forum, I will simply provide a reminder of the Objectivist view on national sovereignty: 
    It should be clear, then, that Russia lacks any right to forcibly establish a sphere of influence in Ukraine according to the Objectivist view. In fact, Russia doesn't even have a right to lay claim to its own geographical territory, but that's sort of secondary in this specific case since the war is taking place within the borders of Ukraine. 
    In the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War, Miss Rand publicly advocated for material support to be directed to Israel, although she was opposed to sending US troops to the battlefield self-sacrificially. Although Israel and Ukraine are not exactly on the same moral level as nations, I don't believe that it's particularly unfair to use this example as a frame of reference for how she might've viewed the current war. 
  25. Thanks
    William Scott Scherk reacted to Eiuol in What are the similarities and differences between 'Q' haters and Ayn Rand haters?   
    I don't think vague posts about things Epstein was already accused of at that time is evidence of anything. 
×
×
  • Create New...