Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

What's the use?

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was looking for pity. My aim was to ask other Objectivists how much of my gloomy outlook was accurate, although I might have phrased it better if I weren't in such a despairing mood then. Also, if this is the wrong place in the forum to post this topic (would current events be better?), I apologize.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 97
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I've thought about Florida, Texas and Arizona. Colorado seems too cold. But I guess the biggest challenge is to actually get in to the US, or allowed to stay there atleast.

Personally, I like the South East portion of the US. The areas have always been a bit more "independent" in thinking state vs federal. Taxes have certainly been reasonable to those that I know live in the area. I really enjoy places like Tennessee, Virginia, the Carolinas, Alabama, and Mississippi. Might see some snow and cold weather at some point, but it's not going to be sustained like north of that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to hear some thoughts on whether or not we'll start seeing states secede from the Union in the near future. I believe that there's large secessionist groups in at least Oklahoma, Vermont, Texas and Alaska, though I may be mistaken. If a state does secede, it'll probably restore some degree of liberty. Do you believe that the federal government would use military force to prevent states from seceding?

If a state did secede, would it inherit a share of the national debt, based on the size of it's population?

Also, would any of you consider it positive if states did start to secede?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I guess I don't recognize that there is solid effort for anyone to leave the Union. Would it be positive? I don't know for sure. Are some state constitutions better at recognizing and ensuring freedom compared to the US Constitution?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I guess I don't recognize that there is solid effort for anyone to leave the Union. Would it be positive? I don't know for sure. Are some state constitutions better at recognizing and ensuring freedom compared to the US Constitution?

Ask rather, are some state governments better at recognizing and ensuring the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution than the federal government?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd love to hear some thoughts on whether or not we'll start seeing states secede from the Union in the near future. I believe that there's large secessionist groups in at least Oklahoma, Vermont, Texas and Alaska, though I may be mistaken. If a state does secede, it'll probably restore some degree of liberty. Do you believe that the federal government would use military force to prevent states from seceding?

If a state did secede, would it inherit a share of the national debt, based on the size of it's population?

Also, would any of you consider it positive if states did start to secede?

The dissolution of empire is rarely peaceful.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Also, would any of you consider it positive if states did start to secede?
Most definitely not.

The U.S. got to where it is because people across the country, city after city, county after county, and state after state, have a certain political philosophy.

Leave talk of secession to the right-wing kooks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ask rather, are some state governments better at recognizing and ensuring the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution than the federal government?

Well, if one recognizes one's ownership of profit as moral, the immediate issue of taxation would be a quick test. Don't come to Wisconsin. ;)

I think New York and California are up there on that list too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think this is bull.

Time will tell. If you are right, I will lern. If I am right, you will learn. One will win, both will profit.

The consequences of my error will be small, some lost face and a few annoyed friends. Cosidering the alternative, I think I am choosing a wise path.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's analogous to Pascal's wager.

Not really Pascal's wager was in response to something non-existent -- possibly existing; the existence of god. This is foolish and should be dismissed because god doesn't exist.

My wager (yes that is the correct term) is between two entirely possible REALITIES; an economy and social order which does not collapse in the next few years, and one that does. It would be perfectly reasonable to debate the likelihood of either event based on evidence (although not in this thread). But to dismiss both possibilities by casually tossing them in the the same rubbish bin as Pascal's wager is intellectually dishonest.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is going to be very difficult ahead, and dead weight or attempts to convince us that it is pointless are not without consequences. There is going to be a point in our near future where decisions will have to be made on who is worth the effort of trying to save. Mistakes in this area will be devastating.

You haven't offered anyone any salvation. You just went out of your way to make a smarmy comment about someone's life.

And while we're on the topic of salvation, if things go bad, how do you intend to save people? John Galt had a secret and a long term plan, both of which he shared with those he considered trustworthy. What do you have to offer a Hank Rearden or an Ellis Wyatt (or me and the NewbieOist for that matter) in the middle of a hypothetical crash and depression, that you're talking about being selective and cutting "dead weight"?

In other words, what would attract people to you, that you would have to be selective?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And while we're on the topic of salvation, if things go bad, how do you intend to save people?

I don't intend to save anyone but myself. I am in league (so to speak) with several others who are doing the same. We are traveling the same path by our own volition for our own sakes. The fact that we are not alone is and added plus. If in the process of doing so my actions cause others to be saved as well, they will reap the benefit of my sound planning. I don't expect that you, or anyone else fo that matter, will or should come running to me for salvation, nor have I indicated such (although you have made presumptions about me that have caused you to infer it). I have sound reason to think that I will find myself in the company of others who also took it upon themselves to save themselves. I find these kind of people to be "my kinda guys. " And interestingly enough they seem to tolerate me as well. Maybe its because we make smarmy comments about each other all the time.

As to the specifics of how... do you really think I would post them here?

In other words, what would attract people to you, that you would have to be selective?

My charming and deferential personality, of course. :)

Edited by wilicyote
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But to dismiss both possibilities by casually tossing them in the the same rubbish bin as Pascal's wager is intellectually dishonest.
That's quite a malevolent view of humanity you have there, Coyote! First you cheer on a depressed person to suicide; then, you conclude that dishonesty is the best explanation for my post. I suppose this must be the charming personality you're speaking of. it could get you banned from forums, if you meet up with an intellectually dishonest moderator! Edited by softwareNerd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's quite a malevolent view of humanity you have there, Coyote! First you cheer on a depressed person to suicide; then, you conclude that dishonesty is the best explanation for my post. I suppose this must be the charming personality you're speaking of. it could get you banned from forums, if you meet up with an intellectually dishonest moderator!

Yes, you are correct, it would take an intellectually dishonest moderater to ban me from this forum for the posts I have written in this thread.

I notice that you have not argued why your likening my postion to that of Pascal,s is valid. Instead you offer (poorly) veiled threats. Does this mean that you agree that it was intellectually dishonest? If not, what is, pray tell, the "best explanation" for your post?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the OP;

If you look back through history, our country goes through these economic cycles frequently. We have had tough times like these in the past and there is no real reason to think we cannot pull ourselves out of them again. Of course the only people who aren't around to see this were those people who panicked and jumped out of skyscraper windows. I don't think we've reached the "end of days" just yet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was looking for pity.
I assume you were wondering if you would find empathy, rather than pity. I know that I can empathize with occasionally feeling dejected when the correct actions seem so clear, and when I see people (particularly the government) taking the wrong action. I think there are three ways to address this:

- one has to keep a historical perspective, as RationalBiker said, and realize that things could get bad, while also realizing that does not imply the end of the world

- also, one can do one's bit to fight back in the form of activism... as Rand said, "those who fight for tomorrow, live in it today"

- perhaps more important than these, though, is to realize that your happiness in life comes mostly from the small circle of values that surround you: an interesting career, good friends, the music and books you like... things like that. Then, act to create that world of values

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To the OP;

If you look back through history, our country goes through these economic cycles frequently. We have had tough times like these in the past and there is no real reason to think we cannot pull ourselves out of them again. Of course the only people who aren't around to see this were those people who panicked and jumped out of skyscraper windows. I don't think we've reached the "end of days" just yet.

I would agree with you, except the bleeping government won't allow things to get better naturally. In the name of "doing something", the government is acting to make things worse, and it seems like most people agree that it's better than doing nothing. At some point, they may cause irreparable damage. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

FWIW, I have a Vermont secessionist-themed T-shirt and I'm quite fond of it.

As to the OP, you should not be discouraged because you have Asperger's. This may sound like I'm playing around but I assure you I'm not, honestly the best thing to help you would be some good friends. You are obviously intelligent and have value to offer, and good people will want to be your friend if you make an effort (which I recognize could be hard for you). But in return, they can help you out with understanding what's going on in the social world if you want them to, and that can save you a lot of anxiety. And at the end of the day, anxiety is really what you're fighting, isn't it?

I'd love to hear some thoughts on whether or not we'll start seeing states secede from the Union in the near future. I believe that there's large secessionist groups in at least Oklahoma, Vermont, Texas and Alaska, though I may be mistaken. If a state does secede, it'll probably restore some degree of liberty. Do you believe that the federal government would use military force to prevent states from seceding?

If a state did secede, would it inherit a share of the national debt, based on the size of it's population?

Also, would any of you consider it positive if states did start to secede?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with you, except the bleeping government won't allow things to get better naturally. In the name of "doing something", the government is acting to make things worse, and it seems like most people agree that it's better than doing nothing. At some point, they may cause irreparable damage. :)

Well, to some degree it would appear "irreparable" damage has already been done to the free market anyway. We've been a mixed market with welfare for a long time. We've gone through a number of depression/recessions in the past. However, I'm still of the opinion that it is way too premature to panic or give up. Things will almost certainly be worse if people just philosophically throw up their hands or kill themselves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The dissolution of empire is rarely peaceful.

Indeed. I don't think that any American state could secede peacefully. At the very least there would be civil unrest caused by those loyal to Obama, er, Washington.

If we were talking about Canadian provinces, however, I think that a province could not only secede peacefully but that it could be morally justified in doing so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think the feelings that NewbieOist is expressing are not all that uncommon for, well, newbie Oists. You discover a philosophy that in every way seems right only to notice that the whole of civilization is tripping over itself in a race in the opposite direction. To be honest, every time our new president opens his mouth, the words "we're doomed" run through my head. I dont advocate giving up, but I think we are in for a long night. And it might be that few, if any, of us will be around when the dawn finally breaks.

I must say I agree 100% with fletch's statements. As Objectivists or students of Objectivism we have this profound philosophical understanding of the very underpinnings of all that is wrong with the world. Our views and knowledge are met with dismissal, derision and outright hatred from people in our daily lives. Our philosophy is in direct opposition to the dominant morality of our society. Every day the news is filled with reports of our "leaders" rushing headlong down roads that we know lead straight to oblivion.

It is very, very easy to give in to pessimism, despair, even fatalism. I have been known to harbor such thoughts, and I am sure I am not alone in this.

How does a rational individual get beyond it? As softwareNerd pointed out, happiness is achieved in the values of your own life.

We also have a great advantage that did not exist in Ayn Rand's time. The internet allows for discussion forums like this for us to share ideas with like-minded individuals. Knowing you are not completely alone in a hostile world is instrumental in helping you find the strength to live in it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would agree with you, except the bleeping government won't allow things to get better naturally. In the name of "doing something", the government is acting to make things worse, and it seems like most people agree that it's better than doing nothing. At some point, they may cause irreparable damage. :)

I suppose you might want to give some thought to what constitutes "irreparable damage." Those irrational fools (admittedly the majority of citizens of the USA and other mixed economies) who beg and plead for the government to "do something" will get what they've asked for, but reality will catch up to them. I can offer no better illustration than the plot of Atlas Shrugged.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- perhaps more important than these, though, is to realize that your happiness in life comes mostly from the small circle of values that surround you: an interesting career, good friends, the music and books you like... things like that. Then, act to create that world of values

To expand on this excellent thought a little...I have personally found Howard Roark to be a far better role model than John Galt. In both cases, the world is opposed to them in pretty fundamental ways. If you happen to be John Galt; if you have a source of nearly free energy by way of an ingenious invention, then great. Change the world. If not, then just build your buildings. Don't worry overmuch about about the rest. Proselytize when it's convenient, but don't live your life based on what others do or don't do. Sure, pay attention to what's going on in the world; it might keep you from getting nailed as hard, but don't care too much. If you are frozen, incapacitated by wondering if, after you build your building they'll take it away, stop wondering and worrying. They will. At least half of it, maybe more, but it doesn't matter. All that matters is that you built it.

The evil bastards out there that want to steal all this shit, wish to do so because they lack the all important understanding of the nature of cause and effect. They think that having the toys will make them happy and wonder, after they get them, why they're not. Building the toys, now, that's where it's at. The ability to shape YOUR world...that feeling of efficacy, of ownership, of control, of empowerment...that can't be replaced. Don't make their mistake in reverse and think that if they take your building, you won't be happy. Sure it will sting and it's a bloody crime and they ought to be put to death for it, but they can never take away from you the most valuable part, the fact that YOU built it. They can't own that. They don't even know what it looks like. So build your buildings. Fuck them.

Man, it's your life and the only way they can truly hurt you, is if you get so busy caring about what they do, that you forget to live it. That's second handed. Then they win, not because of their strength, but because you gave up. They don't just have your building, they have your soul. The part they can't take from you, you tried to give to them freely? It would be the height of irony to think that because they have the power to take your building, you should give up your soul. Don't do that. Build your buildings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Indeed. I don't think that any American state could secede peacefully. At the very least there would be civil unrest caused by those loyal to Obama, er, Washington.

If we were talking about Canadian provinces, however, I think that a province could not only secede peacefully but that it could be morally justified in doing so.

Yes, that's what you get when your country is born out of a convention instead of a war. Canada is the great impossibility and the fact that we have lasted for 141 years (and counting) is remarkable.

Wait and watch though... If in the next election the Liberals win a majority by dominating the ridings in Ontario and Quebec, the western succession movement (in some form) may very well become an idea that could take firm hold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...