I find this action by America baffling

[Bold Standard]

Thank you AisA and Iakeo for the compliments on my post. Iakeo, I sympathise with you in this regard: the conceptual chain between "A = A" and "conservatives are enemies of freedom" is not simple- there are a few levels of abstraction between them! Definitely Objectivists don't expect that to be immediately self-evident.

One of the advantages of Objectivism is that with it you *can* make the connections between the two. But first you have to be aware of who the conservatives are and most imporantly why. For the first question, I recommend Ayn Rand's essay "Conservatism: An Obituary" in _Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal_. For the second question, you could begin by investigating the works of John Stuart Mill, on whose philosophy conservatism (at its origins) -- and British socialism -- are based.

Once you have an idea of what Conservatism *is*, then it should be easier to come to the board with specific questions regarding.. why it's antithetical to freedom. But it's worth mentioning that when Ayn Rand first came to America, she tried to work with the Conservatives.. Her private letters as published in _Letters of Ayn Rand_ are filled with correspondence with the best of the Conservatives to try and make movements toward saving capitalism.. But she was met again and again with resistance. Eventually she caught on to their games and came to regard them as bigger enemies than even the Liberals of that time. Much of her later writing and speaking deals with her reasons why. Good luck in researching the issue!

Very good..! 

I agree that my questions were formed by rather overstripping the context from

around what AisA had said. And I did that specifically to elicit more information

about that context. And more information about the "motives" of the speaker.

The reason I did so was because I'm interested in finding out the specific

definitions used for many of the terms which "everyone knows", but are generally

left AS unsaid context. Sometimes restatement is not a bad thing, and

the "emotions" tied to having to restate your terms is an indicator of whether the

original statements were "preaching to the choir", simple invective directed at

the "bad guys" (emotional outburst), or an attempt to point out evil.

Perhaps it is some combination of those. Most probably that. 

Clearly, AisA is "unsympathetic" toward "conservatives", however AisA defines

them, and takes issue with many of "their" acts.

Thanks also for the method for which to deduce the meaning of "conservative"

from the examples of acts that "they do".

I have more information now than I had before, though perhaps not as much as

I'd like,.. but you get what you get, eh? 

Thanks!

-Iakeo

[Iakeo]

...I recommend Ayn Rand's essay "Conservatism: An Obituary" in _Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal_. ...

Once you have an idea of what Conservatism *is*, then it should be easier to come to the board with specific questions regarding.. why it's antithetical to freedom....  Good luck in researching the issue!

I've GOT to get that book..!

((All of my exposure to objectivism thus far has been through the internet and

audio-books. "Capitalism: TUI" is difficult for me to get in audio.))

I am guilty of that sin that I complain about probably more than anyone else

here,.. that of not conversing for understanding but to promote or denounce an

agenda.

Mea culpa..!!

Thanks so much to both you (Bold Standard) and AisA (whom I rather dislexically always see

as "Asia") for not making me look any more silly than I need to have.

To add some actual intellectual capital to this post, I'd like to say that it would be

lovely if an actual objectivist government could come to power somewhere, but I

don't think that is possible.

An objectivist population will always be a minority population in any nation,

because it calls for too much "seeming sacrifice" from individuals. The comforts

that irrationality gives to so much of a population are too "dear" to them to part

with.

Luckily, all that a society needs to be overall successful is a small minority of

objectivists, or intuitive objectivists.

But I think the only way that an actual objectivist government could come to

power is for a larger society to fragment into MUCH smaller groupings, each with

full sovereignty, where the objectivists could come to power by (I hate to say it)

force. (Force to drive out the irrational into the "irrational sovereignties", where

these "irrational sovereignties" would be dealt with as the eventual criminals they

would have to evolve into when they actually commit crime.

Then, perhaps, in this "post apocalyptic" world (where the apocalypse is not

a "battle" but a "realization of the irrationality of irrationality") the rational

sovereignties could get on with the business of human advancement of happiness.

But I don't see this happening for QUITE some time..!

-Iakeo