Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Cicero

  1. 1. It is faster and cheaper than conventionally carpet-bombing the city.

    2. It's pretty hard to miss with a nuke.

    3. Millions of people whose central purpose in life is to kill us: well, tables get turned.

    4. The single most dangerous external threat to the West gets turned into a crater.

    5. It's the right thing to do.

    Or were we supposed to argue the other way around?

    Why do we need to destroy Tehran? It's not the people who want to destroy the West, it's their regime! No, if our security was ever threatened we should not attack Iran- we should attack the government. The government isn't even popular; the government doesn’t even represent the views of everyday Persians. The thing we must all remember is that Persia of old was a tolerant society. Persians today are still a tolerant people; however it's their theocratic rulers who give Iran its intolerant connotation. If we are to intervene in Iran we must do so in a swift, silent, and effective way; and we are to only intervene if our security is directly challenged. (ie nukes)

  2. America was once a far more principled small government nation than it is now, but there were some fatal flaws in the system. Hans Herman Hoppe has said that if the government has a monopoly on the court system, then there is a conflict of interest. In any dispute between the government and an individual, the government court will tend to rule in the government's favour, and the same applies in other areas such as law or executive functions. Is there something about an Objectivist government that would be inherently more stable?

    Absolutely! Capitalism is the only moral political system, and it’s been generally conceded that morality breeds stability. Stability comes as people become civilized- as people become fit to live in a rational way. In the long term, a country based on Objectivism is very stable and practical.

  • Create New...