Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  • ICQ

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Previous Fields

  • Country
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
  • Sexual orientation
    No Answer
  • Copyright
  • Experience with Objectivism
    I have fully read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead and Anthem. I have partly read other books by Ayn Rand and book on Objectivism issues by other authors. I listen to the Yaron Brook radio show once or twice a month via his Facebook page.

Oxygen's Achievements

Junior Member

Junior Member (3/7)



  1. Thank you very much for your assistance. I see more clearly that the owner may see me as a preferable tenant compared to unknown persons. It is not a company queue so I won't step on any company toes. I now am willing to accept the apartment. This is an important decicion for me so I am grateful for your help. It warmed my heart to receive your help on this.
  2. I need you opinion on a situation. I know the owner of an apartment building. Usually the owner find new persons to rent apartments to by using a queue that is free for anybody to get into. I am not in that queue. But the owner has offered me an apartment anyway. If I accept the apartment I will get an apartment before the persons in the queue without standing in it myself. Is it immoral of me to accept the apartment? Immoral because I "cut the line". This question has tormented me and therefor I would appreciate your views on this.
  3. A better culture is one of the alternatives I think about. I try to be virtuos. Your'e probably right that that wish I sometimes have to forbid Islam is fascistic. I've read Atlas Shrugged and it really made a big impression on me (may sounds like i'm joking but i'm not).
  4. This never happended in Sweden I think, in France it happended though.
  5. Hello. In Sweden where I live, the number of Muslim in the population is rising. The larger the Muslim part of the population becomes, the higher the risk of a ) parliamentary enforced limitations of freedoms, like the topic of this thread, free speach. But in the long run, say 100 years, all women may be forced to wear headscarves, like in Iran. b ) non-parliamentary enforced limitations of that kind. Like the murder of the anti-islamist Theo van Gogh in Holland. I have a need. That is the need to live without the worry of these threats to those freedoms. I would rather live in a country that forbids the practice of Islam and forbids signs of Muslim faith, like headscarves, than having this worry (if the worry is fair). In Sweden this may be implemented by sending those who violate this to an existing Muslim country, or to a newly created Muslim country which is taken out from existing Swedish land. I have thought about moving to China, in hope that they are harsh on the practice of Islam. This is an old question I think: when you are in or when you might come into in a situation where there are only bad options to choose from, which would you choose? And is making a choice unliberal and non-action the only liberal thing to do? (I may have choosen and phrased these questions in a unfair manner). Would forbidding the practice of Islam ever become justified? When? Any thoughts?
  6. Ok, thanks man. The focus you present here is valuable, I´m gonna use it. "Systembolaget", you knew about that. Systembolaget is a strange phenomena. A completely unrelated true story. My my father told me his father told him that "I work for free 10 months of the year and get paid for two months". What he meant is that what he took out from his business for his own salary he only got to keep 2/12 = 1/6 of the money. That is ... little. All right, thanks for your advices MichaelH.
  7. Because I have a handicap which makes things more complicated for me. Plus, unemployment is rather high. It mostly correct. But I don´t have to lie, but I have to NOT take a copletely voluntary initiative to contact them to tell them about my changed ambition.
  8. I followed an advice some months ago on OOF about a clip I posted on youtube, and removed it. I would very much appreciate your advice on an issue that is strongly nagging me. An interaction with a therapist in March made the spark for college disappear and I took a break from it. I asked a welfare program for help in getting an no brainer job. I started a 13 week training program today. It is expensive for the tax payers. On Friday, after some interactions with a lively, passionate and good person, I got back the spark for continuing on college. Before I resume college in March I could fit in the welfare program, which could get me some summer work. While applying for the program I told them what was then the truth, that I wanted to work full-time with the kind of work the program would educate me to do. Now I do not have the ambition to work full-time with that, well, if college studies does not land me a job after graduation I may use the program in that case. If I tell them about my new ambition, they may kick me out of the welfare program. If I do not tell them then I attend the welfare program under false premises, but they will not kick me out. About using tax payer money: My grand parents were successful and payed large sums of money for decades in a perverted Swedish socialist system. My parents has payed taxes to. None has used as much as they ever paid in taxes. I consider, in my mind, that the government owes my family a lot of buck, much more than the cost of the welfare program. This premise may be correct or corrupt, please feel free to argue about it. The alternatives are: 1. tell the people that finances the welfare program about my change of ambition and continue the welfare program if they let me. 2. do not tell them and continue the program. 3. drop out of the program regardless. Is the premise about a government virtual debt to my family correct? Which alternatives are morally good and which are evil and why? Which alternative is most good and why? Honestly, I am confused about the right answers. Once again, I would appreciate much your help in answering the questions. Late additional information: I do not prevent any other person from attending the program by staying on it. The person on the welfare institution that decided that approved my application may take a hit if they follow up on me and find out a went to college right after the costly program ended instead of using it for full time work
  9. If Atlas Shrugged would be made in the form of a audio book, I would prefer if Harry Binswanger would be the narrator. Because he has a intelligent, calm, assertive and pleasant voice. (Ayn Rand Bookstore sells several products of his, for example "Ayn Rand' Philosophic Achievment"). AS as audiobook would be great to listen to.
  10. A note about the clip: The clip is/was free to watch on Fox News´ webpage. As a previous writer wrote I think this is not how it works. YouTube won't get sued. My first concern, which is manifested in the post I originally posted, about the well-beeing of the cool dudes in Iran, have I settled with help from the responses, I think the guys are not gonna be harrassed. Your objections to that I ripped Fox News of their property made more aware that was what I really did. Q and A: No, I don´t say that. Or at least, I think I don´t say that. Yes, I think so. Yes. I´m saying that in the end individual rights - not just mine - violations has been minimized in the long run. Fox has probably not decided to post all the clips they for some time offer (for free all the time) on their own site on YouTube (if they had, I would perhaps have seen some on YouTube.) Perhaps it is more cost-effective to only post the clips on their own site, using YouTube would probably cost Fox News money. If they would choose to post on YouTube only those clips that minimizes the risk that the western world will be ruled under the law of Sharia in a 100 years, they would be labeled as crusaders or something, which might be bad for business. I´m saying Fox News might be glad I put it there. It is possible that Fox News decides not to remove some clips owned by them from YouTube because Fox News decides that these clips are good pr for Fox News. They can´t decide that if they are unaware of it´s existence. I´m gonna ponder about if I should email Fox News about this clip so they can decide for themselves if to remove it (or to sue me (and win - I would not hide the fact that I stole from them.)) I will also ponder if I should remove the video myself.
  11. Nothing gave me the right. It is owned by Fox. (I am now a easy shot if they want to sue me, I guess) My reasoning with myself is that Fox made the clip partly because they want to stop islamification of USA. So by posting it on youtube I´m helping them out, was my thinking. It would be a shame if this wonderful clip is made unavailable to the Internet audience in a week like usually happens with their clips. I still think that is a reasonable logic. What propells me is that I hate the prospect of me or dear ones living in a country - I live in Europe - that at some point has Sharia, which has very low respect for individual rights. Also, Fox News is exposed to a lot of hate on the Internet and I guess on Youtube and I liked using Fox as a credible and respectful source because it would strengthen Fox´s reputation on Youtube (but I guess that is nothing that Fox cares about). I would be curious to read arguments against this reasoning.
  12. I was wondering if the government there are harrassing people that accepts being interviuved by foreign media. The more publicity of the guys get the more likely that the government find out they were on camera and tries to punish them, I was thinking. Dictatorships seems to be very anxious about how they are portrayed.
  13. Hey guys/gals I uploaded a video today to Youtube. It's a Fox News segment about young people in Iran that are rebelling by having western haircuts. Do I put these guys in the clip in danger by exposing them on youtube? Ox the clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGllKCFXav4
  14. Hey guys/gals I uploaded a video today to Youtube. It's a Fox News segment about young people in Iran that are rebelling by having western haircuts. Do I put these guys in the clip in danger by exposing them on youtube? Ox the clip: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YGllKCFXav4
  • Create New...