Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Living for the state

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

Ilya, have you ever considered focusing on investigating, exposing, or better yet, seeking a position in the "shadow government," which you have several times mentioned. Think of it: You could become the head of this opaque organization, and initiate a new society, one that could make its peace with the world. This could be your contribution to saving the world.

I, for one, would be interested in learning more of the "shadow government."

Edited by Repairman
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 177
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

My goal, for the moment, is clarifying any misconceptions you, or anyone reading this, may have regarding my outlook on globalization. I have no other goal.   An individual is the ultimate minority

Don't worry - I only got it after a lot of reading and lectures too, and actually some very thoughtful posts here too.  Some of that is really deep and outside of my interest points (ethics and politi

Your tribalistic thinking is for savages.

Ilya, have you ever considered focusing on investigating, exposing, or better yet, seeking a position in the "shadow government," which you have several times mentioned. Think of it: You could become the head of this opaque organization, and initiate a new society, one that could make its peace with the world. This could be your contribution to saving the world.

I, for one, would be interested in learning more of the "shadow government."

It's a great dream, Keith. The issue with it is that these individuals are controlling trillions of dollars, and do you know how much I have in my bank account? $300. That's with a zero-zero after the dot :) I don't want to earn a lot of money; I just need enough of it for my modest means of surviving. However, I hope that those individuals (who must not be named!), will change and embrace a better view of the world, such as Objectivism. Maybe, someone will enter their race, and help them change. Putin may be doing that, but they are putting much pressure on him, chipping at his armor, trying to take Ukraine away from their free trade agreement (i.e., Commonwealth of Independent States). I am not ready to learn more about this "shadow government" yet. I guess you can say that I am a bit scared. The same way as I was before entering these forums...

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a great dream, Keith. The issue with it is that these individuals are controlling trillions of dollars, and do you know how much I have in my bank account? $300. That's with a zero-zero after the dot :) I don't want to earn a lot of money; I just need enough of it for my modest means of surviving.

What's stopping you from earning it? That others have trillions? Do you think that if they didn't, then it would be easier for you to earn what you need?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe, someone will enter their race . . .

Race? :huh: As in type of competition or as in type of creature? (please don't say reptilians! Please don't say reptilians! D: )

 

 I am a bit scared. The same way as I was before entering these forums...

We don't sneak up and bite, I promise. Actually, I think there's less cause to fear us than most of the rest of the world. :worry:

Link to post
Share on other sites

bluecherry:

Race? :huh: As in type of competition or as in type of creature? (please don't say reptilians! Please don't say reptilians! D: )

REPTILIANS! lol, j/k. Of course, I meant race as in voluntary competition on who can control more. Rothschilds started in the 18th century, Rockfellers in the 19th, Putin in the 21st. The world is a divided place, ladies and gentlemen. (Are there any ladies on these forums?)

Edited by Ilya Startsev
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a topic to ponder: are the aforementioned individuals creating something valuable when making money? They are not in culture-generating creative trades, like all the ideal people in Rand's stories. The individuals with the most money today create, in my opinion, nothing, other than strife among others. They get their money from interests paid to them on continual basis and from oil. Do you know that there are alternative energy technologies out there? Do you know that these oil magnates with the most profitable companies in the world (ExxonMobil is Rockfeller's, BP is Rothschild's, GasProm is Putin's) do NOT want any alternative energies or cold-fusion reactors or any kind of engines that run on air or even on mere magnetic fields? Oh, no! They want to ossify the economy by just reaping natural resources without allowing or creating new ones (think Rearden Metal in this case. They are the opposite of Rearden.).

Edited by Ilya Startsev
Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is a topic to ponder: are the aforementioned individuals creating something valuable when making money? They are not in culture-generating creative trades, like all the ideal people in Rand's stories. The individuals with the most money today create, in my opinion, nothing, other than strife among others. They get their money from interests paid to them on continual basis and from oil. Do you know that there are alternative energy technologies out there? Do you know that these oil magnates with the most profitable companies in the world (ExxonMobil is Rockfeller's, BP is Rothschild's, GasProm is Putin's) do NOT want any alternative energies or cold-fusion reactors or any kind of engines that run on air or even on mere magnetic fields? Oh, no! They want to ossify the economy by just reaping natural resources without allowing or creating new ones (think Rearden Metal in this case. They are the opposite of Rearden.).

Have you ever studied Physics?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you ever studied Physics?

Yes, and so have people who invent new technologies. Except they find something new that physicists have not discovered yet. Remember, there are always ways to go around the first or second laws of thermodynamics. Even in seemingly impossible situations, people find creative solutions. For example, read "Programming the Universe" to see how Seth Lloyd resolved a contradiction of the second law of thermodynamics in quantum computing.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

Where, and for how long?

 

For example, read "Programming the Universe" .

Programming the Universe is not a Physics manual. Have you ever studied actual Physics, on a level that would allow you to evaluate the viability of reactors or engines?

Edited by Nicky
Link to post
Share on other sites

(Are there any ladies on these forums?)

*raises hand*

 

Females are the minority around here (kind of funny given that a female created this philosophy the place is about), but there are some. There have been plenty over the years, just usually not too many of them are very active at the same time.

 

". . . are the aforementioned individuals creating something valuable when making money?"

Heh, I hear something along the lines of this as a complaint often around where I live. The main thing is, when it comes to stuff I think is junk getting money voluntarily from others, it's not my life, it's not my money, it's not my decision, it's not my problem, it's not my bees' wax. I simply don't give the junk any of my own money and go on my own merry way. I think though that a lot less junk would last for much time were we not in a mixed economy that uses money from taxes to prop up all kinds of bad, doomed endeavors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Have you ever studied actual Physics, on a level that would allow you to evaluate the viability of reactors or engines?

Nicky, I am more of a philologist than a physicist to evaluate engines. However, I studied Electrical Engineering at the Ohio State University and took 3 general physics courses (classical, electromagnetic, and relativity) and a quantum mechanics course. Yet, this is not enough for me to just go and evaluate other people's achievements. I simply evaluate videos online that showcase already implemented models. I watched a Russian video for a magnetic engine blueprint created in Russia and implemented in Japan. Then there is an air rotary engine from Australia. An engine that uses water for fuel in America, etc. Just search the net for magnetic, air, water engines, etc. and judge for yourself.

bluecherry:

*raises hand*

I bow to an intelligent woman.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't see myself in that statement. What is "the state"? It's other men. Why should one man live for another and why or what conditions would any man need another man to live for him? Men exist and the resources for their lives exist in the context they are in. They each and all have to work to obtain these, each one independently. So, my question back to you is under what normal circumstances in an adult's normal life does he need others to live for him? Is the individual incapable of acting for himself by nature, as a mature adult? My answer then is that men do not need other men to live for them because the individual is not congenitally incompetent. For "man to live for the state" presupposes some unrealistic factor or circumstance where the individual on principle is fundamentally incapable of acting for his own sake. The problem with men "living for the state" is always the same: it's the productive working for the non-productive as if other men whom you live for have some excuse why they cannot act for their own sake and need your sacrifice.

However, I also do not call myself and "Objectivist", but just objective. I understand Ayn Rand's view of the role of objectivity in man's life, but I just think "objectivism" is redundant  about it. So that's my answer, not from an "objecitvist", but just from an advocate of objectivity.

 

http://www.fostruh.com

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicky, I am more of a philologist than a physicist to evaluate engines. However, I studied Electrical Engineering at the Ohio State University and took 3 general physics courses (classical, electromagnetic, and relativity) and a quantum mechanics course. Yet, this is not enough for me to just go and evaluate other people's achievements. I simply evaluate videos online that showcase already implemented models. I watched a Russian video for a magnetic engine blueprint created in Russia and implemented in Japan. Then there is an air rotary engine from Australia. An engine that uses water for fuel in America, etc. Just search the net for magnetic, air, water engines, etc. and judge for yourself.

I'm not a physicist. It would take me many years of study to be able to judge for myself. 

 

My next best choice is to trust experts, who all say it's bullshit. What I was wondering is, have I finally found an expert who doesn't say it's bullshit. 

 

But it seems that no, I haven't, the consensus among experts remains untouched.

 

Instead, I found someone who doesn't think you need to be an expert before you judge something that takes years of study to understand. In other words, someone who talks out of his ass. An arrogant fraud, who likes to circumvent the requirements of rational judgment: a mystic. Have you come across those in Atlas Shrugged yet? If not, you will. Ayn Rand has a special place for them on her sh*&t list.

Edited by Nicky
Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, thanks for getting us back on track. Any conversation is good, though, as I am new here also.
 

What is "the state"? It's other men.

May I nudge you a little, Fostruh, and tell you that it's a mistaken definition you got there? The idea is that other men is a sum of bodies. The state is a society where those bodies are bound by an idea. So, in other words, "other men" is randomness, chaos; "the state" is harmony, order. Here is a definition of "the state" that I would prefer you to use: "a politically unified people occupying a definite territory; nation."
 

Why should one man live for another and why or what conditions would any man need another man to live for him?

There is only one condition: if that "other" shares your goals towards the society. This is the value that I see. Your values may be different.
 

Men exist and the resources for their lives exist in the context they are in.

Correct. And that context I call Environment.
 

So, my question back to you is under what normal circumstances in an adult's normal life does he need others to live for him?

If the individual is an Objectivist, he does not need others to do anything for him/her.
 

For "man to live for the state" presupposes some unrealistic factor or circumstance where the individual on principle is fundamentally incapable of acting for his own sake.

I don't think so. You do not see the whole picture here. In order for that individual to live for the state, that individual must live for him/herself first, and after (s)he is utterly bored with that narrow scope of his/her life, (s)he can always evolve to live in a true society of similarly minded people.
 

So that's my answer, not from an "objecitvist", but just from an advocate of objectivity.

And I agree that your statements were relatively objective. I think that we are in agreement then, don't you think?

Link to post
Share on other sites
someone who talks out of his ass. An arrogant fraud, who likes to circumvent the requirements of rational judgment: a mystic. Have you come across those in Atlas Shrugged yet? If not, you will. Ayn Rand has a special place for them on her sh*&t list.

Nicky, calm down. Why are you so afraid of mystics? Is it because they are heretics?

Edited by Ilya Startsev
Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicky, calm down. Why are you so afraid of mystics? Is it because they are heretics?

No, it's because irrationality is dangerous. Same reason I don't hug bears: you can't expect bears, mystics, rabid raccoons, or anything else unable or refusing to use Reason, to not bite you at any moment.

Link to post
Share on other sites
No, it's because irrationality is dangerous. Same reason I don't hug bears: you can't expect bears, mystics, rabid raccoons, or anything else unable or refusing to use Reason, to not bite you at any moment.

Have you ever considered that they may be using a different kind of Reason? I am not a mystic myself - I am an idealist - but I do not consider mysticism a threat. In fact, I consider them interesting and cherish their existence not differently than that of Objectivists. And I don't care about Rand's "sh*&t list." She was not 100% right in everything. If she were, her 60s streak with "a senior collective" would not have collapsed the way it did.

Edited by Ilya Startsev
Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and Nicky, would you believe that mystics channeled Ayn Rand's soul? You would say no, of course. But would you say no after reading "The answers to your questions about life"? It does remind of Rand's individualism, except her main three principles of Reason, Purpose, and Self-esteem are changed to Love, Create, and Learn. Something to learn from mystics, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, and Nicky, would you believe that mystics channeled Ayn Rand's soul? You would say no, of course. But would you say no after reading "The answers to your questions about life"? It does remind of Rand's individualism, except her main three principles of Reason, Purpose, and Self-esteem are changed to Love, Create, and Learn. Something to learn from mystics, no?

The only thing to learn from that is that if you don't pay attention to the meanings of the words you use, you sound stupid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Nicky:
From Ayn Rand Lexicon:
"Reason is the faculty that identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses."

"Reason is the source, the precondition of his productive work—pride is the result."

Mystics are saying that one's enjoyment of productivity depends on loving what you create. Learning from it is developmental impetus of every human being (except Rand).

Link to post
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...