Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Hairnet

  1. I kind of know where Harrison is coming from. I have been investigating the following idea. Would like to discuss it. I noticed Harrison't comment that we can't prove that people could act other than they did. It seems absurd to argue that an action, once taken, could be anything other than it was. One could posit an alternative action, but we would never have evidence that they were capable of anything else. You could only argue that different actions should be taken in the future in order to achieve certain goals. You can only really talk about what comes next. This doesn't reall
  2. The issue of internalized bigotry, collectivism, and conformity are hugley important. Its kind of sad, but even if blacks were as oppressed as some leftists claim, they would most likely worse off with their own governments just because of how unwilling they are to see one another as individual people with their own lives to live. I think that a combination of learned prejudice and normal in-group biases in majority groups does lead to injustices being done to minority groups in the United States. This isn't just true for race though. Its all over the place, and in some places the roles ar
  3. This appears to have been the case with many Communist Party states. Most of the people just didn't get it and only went along with it because thugs terrorized them into doing it. What is funny about this is that it shows how totalitarian methods tend to show a weakness in government not strength. Another example of mixing the two is a monarch like George III of England. Despite being the bad guy in the revolutionary war, he was actually well liked by his people once he appointed William Pitt as prime minister. The Wikipedia article about him is fascinating. England always had a stran
  4. If anyone is to blame it is the parents of the people who had those kids. I don't understand what is so difficult about wearing a condom.
  5. I would point out to people that Hamas is not interested in protecting the rights of its subjects. Even if we accept the premise that the palestinians are being subjected to racist oppression, their response is insane. Armed conflict against Israel could never be effective in securing the rights of Palestininans. Israel is too heavily armed and because of the actions of Hamas the war effor against Hamas has about 95% of the Israeli Jews supporting the conflict. Jews make up about 75% of Israel's population. Hamas could never in their wildest dream secure the rights of their people through arm
  6. Ghost In The Shell is great. Its probably the most thoughtful series I have watched. I thought One Piece was a satire though. I heard there was a guy who wields one of his three swords with his mouth.
  7. The issue with despotism is that a rights respecting despot would become irrelevant as soon as 'the people' got wealthy enough to replace him with their preferred system. Its a pattern I have seen running from the Revolutionary War, the English Civil War, The French Revolution, Pinochet's Chile, and so forth. The monarchy\autocracy provides just enough security to make people wealthy and they use that wealth to replace the monarchy with the modern state. I am not sure if a liberal autocrat can sustain its existence. I agree though that a liberal monarch would be preferable to a democratic
  8. The Carnegie book isn't that cynical. I don't think its particularly profound though. Dr. Hsieh has a review of it on her podcasts. But from what I recall, it claimed that the ability to sincerely listen to people and show that they are being heard is a decent way to get people to like you. Its a mostly true idea and the one valuable thing I remember from the book. I don't recall it reaching "Pick up Artist" levels of self-delusion and dishonesty though. Alex, you sound well adjusted. There will be a lot of fakers in your life. Don't ever feel bad about distancing yourself from toxic peo
  9. You should stick to the ethical ideas before you try formulating a political philosophy. First try and work with direct quotes from Rand and then use real world examples with citations to demonstrate what you find problematic with her ideas.
  10. No. I can't say whether or not you should have rejected this woman from your life but there wasn't anything objectionable in the way you did it. Rejection is a part of life I am sure she knows that. I hope your mother does better.
  11. I want to add another dimension to this discussion. I don't think that a vote for the Democrats is a vote for socialism. Democrats pander to the left for sure, but not more than Republicans pander to (real) Christians. Both parties are ran by people who want to steal money and who pander to populist movements to get votes. However I don't think that most Americans are Fundamentalist Christians. I also don't think that most Americans are leftists. The "Liberal Media" is actually very non-egalitarian. Liberal Seth McFarlane's Family Guy is most likely one of the most insensitive progra
  12. So now you have gone from arguing one point to an entirely unrelated point. You were just listing opinions that you agree with and changing the subject to the economic viability of capitalism. Start a new thread about Austrian economics and stick to it if you want to do that, I am not going to be baited into enduring an endless chain of your pretentious rants.
  13. Why is everyone who is critical of the Fed automatically Alex Jones now? That isn't fair at all. Anyways, I am not an expert on this at all, but is this relevant? http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robert-auerbach/massive-misconceptions-ab_b_3490373.html
  14. Try reading that blog again. It doesn't matter to any of us either way if what climate scientists claim is true or not. What we do know is that the government is the tool of plutocrats and vainglorious politicians who couldn't solve the problem even if they wanted to.
  15. Well methodological individualism is a major part of Austrian Economics. Although Rand didn't comment on that very much I believe. Economics is a value free science. What economists argue is that the market meets consumer demand, whatever those demands may be. The market provides people tons of bad things all the time. As an example, one of the first areas of privatization in our civilization was that of religion. Churches gradually went from being state operated entities to private entities dependent on meeting consumer demand. Many religion preach poisonous and harmful ideas,
  16. There is no such thing as "Randian Economics". Rand only outlined her ideas, and never argued that her opinions on the special sciences were part of her philosophy. There is no Randian psychology, economics, or anything else. There are Objectivists who work in those fields but those ideas are their own and aren't part of Objectivism. I think most of us would agree with you there.
  17. I was attempting to like a post by Softwarenerd and it told me that i had reached by maximum quota for positive votes for today. I haven't liked anyone's post today so that doesn't seem right. Its not a big deal I just thought I would let you guys know.
  18. What is interesting is that the real argument going on is between the plutocrats and the entrepreneurs. JP Morgan helped form the Federal Reserve and that institution evolved to become a very important part of modern statism. He made it big so he got to determine an important part of the political economy. A great deal of those nineteenth/twentieth century industrialists and financiers ended up giving power to the government. Welfare may be a legitimate attempt to invest in society and turn low tax revenue generating individuals into higher tax revenue generating individuals. Earlier I d
  19. If I was just going to take his politics at face value it seems like he thinks of the state as a guild. A lot of liberals aren't even egalitarians in any serious way. They just think that the state is supposed to build the economy like OhReally points out. I actually had a liberal argue to me that taxes weren't theft, they were "guild dues", and that without them there wouldn't be infrastructure or technological progress. You don't have to be a leftist nutbag to find this argument persuasive. If it were true however that the only for the ecology, infrastructure, and technology to be devel
  20. Thanks! There are instances in which you could blame a professor or praise a construction worker for the failures or successes of the people they support. The source of wealth is ability, the choice to use those abilities rationally, and the choice to use those abilities fruitfully. If one doesn't have abilities, no wealth can be produced. If one uses their abilities in a self destructive way, that won't lead to wealth. Also sometimes things just don't work out and the right things don't get produced, and all entrepreneurs have to deal with that risk. Capitalism is a results orie
  21. Its an argument from dependence. If you are dependent on something you can't argue with it. Its a basic method of abuse. Its horrible when done in non-coercive settings like work or romance. Its even worse when done in the context of the state or family where one rarely has any choice in the matter at all. The fact is that there are many immoral acts that in some indirect sense led to my existence and prosperity. Our hominid ancestors broke off from chimps five million years ago. Do you think every woman in your bloodline gave birth due to consensual sex? We are still against rape thoug
  22. Rand - I know what New Buddha is driving at, but he doesn't seem to be using the term entity in the primary sense.
  23. Does't every single dictator in the modern era and on claim to be protecting some ethnic group or equivalent? I am going to avoid using obvious analogies because they are overused.
  24. I see what you are getting at 425 but pornography is there to help people masturbate. That doesn't seem like art. By the way, the kind of pornography you like is critically acclaimed. X-Art, Abby Winters, MetArt, and other studios that feature what I would consider healthy sexuality are all critically acclaimed. It is not as though the industry shuns this stuff. TheBestPorn.com gave X-Art a 90 out of a 100. Abby Winters is its top rated site with a 95.5 tied with what is essentially the netflix of pornography. MetArt is its second place pick at 95. Anti-porn feminists and Christians
  25. There are better ways to do good than through voting. Your vote doesn't matter, because there isn't a "Capitalism" voting block. You will do more good politically convincing people to not abuse their kids and to live rationally.
  • Create New...