AshRyan

I can't give quotes that prove his altruism off the top of my head, but it's not uncommon for free market economists (or today's conservatives) to advocate self-interest in economics and altruism in morality simultaneously. Sure it's a contradiction, but that doesn't stop them. Most of them evade even noticing it. It's called compartmentalization.

Not the happiest material, but this documentary on the Khmer Rouge death camp at Tuol Sleng has a very interesting approach. (Slight "spoilers" follow, if you can consider them spoilers in the case of a documentary.) Most of the film consists of former Khmer Rouge prison guards going through (discussing and reenacting) what they did there. There are also a couple of survivors of the camp interviewed, one of whom is a painter who depicts scenes from his time in the camp in his work, and who is given the opportunity to confront the guards, his former captors. There is also a scene in which one of the guards is taken to task for his actions by his parents. It's riveting stuff. And they don't try to prettify it at all; in fact, the film ends with the guards' recounting of how they carried out the actual executions of prisoners. It's quite horrifying. Has anyone else here seen this already? If not, it's worth seeing.

Hmm. That is cool technologically, but I'm not entirely sure how I feel about it otherwise.

I've just barely started the Sword of Truth series. My brother has loaned some of the books to me, and I'm about halfway through the first one. I'm enjoying it so far.

I finally saw The Village, and loved it. I'll echo Stephen's first post in this thread. True, there are some questionable things about the plot--though not nearly as much so as in some other recent movies, such as Spider-Man--but I think the essential thing about this movie is the love story, which is well told, well presented, and well acted. And a pleasure to watch. I think it's basically a good film, and I can forgive its flaws in light of its virtues.

I appreciate the effort to address Peikoff's argument, Betsy, and this is certainly much better than the straw men and question-begging epithets (sometimes combined--"Peikoff must be crazy if he thinks that America will be a theocracy in four years under Bush!") of which most of this thread has consisted. But I still don't think you're giving his argument a fair shake. I think it's much deeper and more subtle than all the people here who just want to dismiss it out of hand have given it credit for. I would like to post a detailed analysis of his argument myself, but I'll need to listen to it again first and spend some more time thinking about it, and it may be a while before I have time to do all that and make a lengthy post here about it, so it might be another week or so. But for the time being I'll just say that I think Peikoff is without a doubt right that religious fundamentalism is by far a greater long-term threat to the nation than pragmatic liberalism, so as far as this election is concerned, for me it's only a question of whether special war-time considerations should trump that. But most of what I've read in this thread has definitely pushed me more toward Kerry.

I don't think those Christian secessionists will get very far, but another fundamentalist Christian movement that seems to be gaining momentum is the so-called "patriot" or "militia movement" and the Constitutionalist party. Here is a good article about it. The Richard Mack guy mentioned in it is not dismissed as the fringe lunatic that he is, but is a popular speaker around the country. He received a lot of attention (most of it positive) when he spoke at my school, a very liberal university, last year, while the speaker hosted by the Objectivist club was virtually ignored. Mack says things like, "Hitler was more moral than Bill Clinton," and "The separation of church and state is a myth." Granted, that is still a rather small movement, and the Constitutionalist party ain't going to get many votes. But most Republican Christian conservatives I know are very sympathetic to their views. I'm not as worried about the Constitutionalist party becoming a major political force, as I am about their positions gradually seeping into the mainstream Republican platform. And it could easily happen. Bush isn't helping. Future prospects aren't bright, either. One of the names I've heard tossed around for potential Republican presidential candidates in a few years (and even tentatively endorsed by some Objectivists) is Massachussetts governer Mitt Romney. But he is a typical Mormon (just slightly more pragmatic, which is why he's gotten as far as he has in politics), and I am telling you now that if a Republican Mormon like him gets into the White House, he will steer the Republican party and this country in the direction of this "patriot movement" or whatever you want to call it. And that would be very bad, regardless of what concrete political issues we may have similar views on.

Sort of like how America is currently fighting it (under Bush)in, for example, Najaf, because we don't want to offend Muqtada al-Sadr (who has vowed to fight America until the last drop of his blood is spilled--if only we would take him up on that)?

But--although many of these people are evil and they are all responsible for their own positions on some level--many of them are honestly mistaken. (Do you think that you were evil before you discovered Objectivism, because you held some wrong ideas?) The real source of the problem is with the philosophers and intellectuals, who have defaulted on their responsibility to provide intellectual guidance for the country. The main responsibility lies with them. They are the ones who hate America and have betrayed her. They are the ones we must fight and overthrow. Most people, including many of those you mentioned and even many Michael Moore fans, are to some extent innocent victims of the battle of ideas.

I do not believe that the extremists in Hollywood represent the views of a major segment of the American people.

Betsy, you're not even making any sense here. Yes, I know that Left-Wing talk radio hosts and Michael Moore himself are corrupt and genuinely hate America. But the context of the discussion was not just Left-Wing talk radio hosts and Michael Moore himself, but Michael Moore fans. You keep switching back and forth between those two as though there were no difference. But that doesn't make sense when you then say that these people are a small minority, because, in case you hadn't noticed, Michael Moore has a very large popular following. Fahrenheit 9/11 is the most popular documentary ever. Roughly half the country are Democrats or have Democratic leanings, and most of those people consider themselves Michael Moore fans. Most of them have read his books and seen his films, and enjoyed and agreed with them. My point was that not all of those people are the corrupt, evil, despicable monsters that you paint them to be. My point is that at least some, if not many or most, of them are part of the vast majority of Americans you speak of who are decent and reachable by reason. My roommate for six weeks this summer was a Michael Moore fan, and yet he was (believe it or not) otherwise a perfectly intelligent, honest, reasonable guy. And he didn't hate America. I liked him a lot. I can certainly understand your antipathy toward Michael Moore--in fact, I share it. But I still can't comprehend your extension of that antipathy to all Michael Moore fans, because that seems out of character based on most of your posts. Just because Michael Moore is an awful person doesn't automatically make all of his fans awful people. I think that at least some of them are honestly unaware of just how awful he is.

Welcome to the forum.

Even if any of these supposed facts were true, you would still be engaging in a logical fallacy--argumentum ad ignorantium. You can't argue from: "We don't know that god doesn't exist," to: "Therefore, god exists!" or even: "Therefore, god might exist!" What I'm curious about is, why do you want so badly to hang onto that possibility? Somehow, I don't think that it's to explain the "beginning of the universe."

Is it Dr. Peikoff's claim that he will? I'll say it again: I've seen little discussion of Dr. Peikoff's actual arguments here (in a thread that is supposed to be about those arguments), and even less that indicates a deep understanding of them.

Honestly, Betsy, for someone who's usually so optimistic and gives the benefit of the doubt to common American people, your last post was rather surprising to me. Do you honestly think that most Michael Moore fans would say the things you are ascribing to them, or even somewhat believe them implicitly? I can be pretty damn cynical, but I'm not cynical enough to believe that that many millions of Americans actually hate America.

Did you even listen to Dr. Peikoff's statement? Anyway, there's one bloody obvious fault that Bush has that Kerry doesn't: he's a committed Christian who wants to use his political position to push his religion!

This entire thread is shameful. Hardly a person here seems to have given any serious consideration to Dr. Peikoff's position and his argument for it, instead taking their previously held political views as a given and ignoring anything which contradicts them. I'm not saying that Dr. Peikoff is right (I have yet to reach a conclusion about that), but quotes such as the above--which are far too common in this thread, and are representative of its general tone--illustrate that most people here have failed to even attempt to grasp what Dr. Peikoff is saying. That being the case, I don't think those people have any business discussing Dr. Peikoff's position in this thread. (Sorry to single you out, BlackSabbath, nothing personal.)

I agree that books are somewhat different, for the reasons you mentioned. But even for music, as I said before, there will always(?) be sentimental consumers like blank_frackis and myself. I even still buy vinyl records on occasion.

Ooh, I like this update! Now it actually keeps track of posts I haven't read, rather than just new posts since my last visit.

When you hit 1000 posts, you get an assistant who does all your typing for you.

I think you get the halo at 10,000. Get crackin'!

...And less than another three months later, we've surpassed 20,000 posts. Slow down, you guys!

Looks like I've joined you in the Advanced Member club, Stephen.

That's the only reason I've let this thread continue, is because your posts are entertaining, Stephen.

Well put, Thoyd Loki.