Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Dupin

Biden is our only hope, says Yaron Brook

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

5 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

The only thing that Trump ever did that experts recommended was wear a mask that one time he visited a veterans' hospital.

Basically, if anything goes well, WhyNot will immediately attribute that to Trump enforcing or promoting some good policy and having been right all along, and if anything goes badly, will attribute that to the fact Trump "had to" bow down to consensus. It's a strange way of thinking, because if he wanted to be consistent, and if he thinks that Trump had to bow down, then he should think that Trump is making things worse by not standing by his principles. At which point he'll say your standards are too high. Such is the result of someone using anti-concepts, as you identified. 

For the sake of the entire thread, don't bother engaging him. You won't learn anything, even if you think you might. You'll get dizzy going in circles.

On 7/28/2020 at 7:57 PM, SpookyKitty said:

Trump's insane response to COVID-19 should be enough to immediately disqualify him from being given any further consideration as a serious Presidential candidate.

I'm curious about your thoughts on Biden though? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Eiuol said:

Basically, if anything goes well, WhyNot will immediately attribute that to Trump enforcing or promoting some good policy and having been right all along, and if anything goes badly, will attribute that to the fact Trump "had to" bow down to consensus. It's a strange way of thinking, because if he wanted to be consistent, and if he thinks that Trump had to bow down, then he should think that Trump is making things worse by not standing by his principles. At which point he'll say your standards are too high. Such is the result of someone using anti-concepts, as you identified. 

For the sake of the entire thread, don't bother engaging him. You won't learn anything, even if you think you might. You'll get dizzy going in circles.

I was about to respond but then I read this. Good advice.

Quote

I'm curious about your thoughts on Biden though? 

Put it this way. At this point, I'd rather have 8 more years of Bush than endure another second of Trump.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Eiuol said:

Basically, if anything goes well, WhyNot will immediately attribute that to Trump enforcing or promoting some good policy and having been right all along, and if anything goes badly, will attribute that to the fact Trump "had to" bow down to consensus. It's a strange way of thinking, because if he wanted to be consistent, and if he thinks that Trump had to bow down, then he should think that Trump is making things worse by not standing by his principles. At which point he'll say your standards are too high. Such is the result of someone using anti-concepts, as you identified. 

For the sake of the entire thread, don't bother engaging him. You won't learn anything, even if you think you might. You'll get dizzy going in circles.

 

Address your comments to me, Eiuol. Show a little respect. And nowhere have I stated Trump has consistently good judgment, nor any of that inane bs you presume of me. He understands the economy - I repeat. He knows what is good for the country: much reduced State Welfare, more employment available and greater productivity. No one here I've read or at ARI has had the grace to credit him for this -at least - and in justice and honesty, by O'ist virtues they ought to. He has more trust in the self-responsibility of Americans than do - some Americans. He is far less able at making nice and how to look after civilians who need to be ordered what to do by a Nanny.  But what do you expect? Trump to override his scientific advisers? if the experts specify a course of action, an unversed political leader has to abide by them, although reluctantly and against his principle of a working USA. 

Edited by whYNOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:
8 hours ago, SpookyKitty said:

Nonsense. Abject science-denial.

 

 

Today's total of pandemic deaths in the United Kingdom: 45,961. Estimated possible deaths by the Imperial College back in April: approx. 5 million for the UK. A little off, yeah?

Something similar was the prognosis for the USA which  I don't recall right now, but out by also a large factor.

Heh. Tell me that's science denial. The experts' own figures. But do your own fact checks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/28/2020 at 8:28 AM, DavidOdden said:

some day (like, already), some president is going to exploit the powers inadvertently granted to him.

That is arguably the most dangerous issue that we are dealing with as a country. To hear that Trump has been talking about removing the two year limit for a President, was terrifying. Then his believe in complete presidential immunity and the fact that he pardoned people convicted of doing his dirty work. I thought this type of thing only happens in third world fascist systems. When Trump recently tried to remove the position of inspector general, the GOP revolted.

On 7/28/2020 at 8:28 AM, DavidOdden said:

I originally assumed that Trump had a team of competent behind-the-scenes managers who would guide him and therefore us away from the brink of destruction if the occasion arises, that has proven to be over-optimistic.

I admit, I was a Trump fan for a generation, watching the Apprentice and trying to learn something from him and yet, from day one of his presidency, claiming his crowd was bigger than Obama's first inauguration, not acknowledging that it is hard to beat an actual first African American President in the History of the United States was shockingly disappointing.

On 7/28/2020 at 8:28 AM, DavidOdden said:

a non-Democrat exercising veto power against the left could be important.

You are assuming that Trump is not a socialist. He wants to create public works like FDR, having the government become the biggest employer. When the Covid first bailout was being negotiated, he wanted the government to have equity in the bailed out companies (even Bernie had not pushed for overt communism).

What will Trump Veto?? He claims that Biden has stolen his economic plan.

Currently he is exacerbating racial tensions, appealing to a silent majority mob, and acting like he fights the evil that he already embodies.

People are worried about a highly unlikely journey to communism with Biden and his Supreme Court nominees, while the worst Americans will tolerate is what it is like in Canada or the UK or Sweden. We are not headed to Communism.

But, we are already a crony capitalist, fascist lite country. Full blown fascism is any easy next step. Trump will not stop it, in fact he is opening the door to it (potentially for the next racist leader that actually likes to kill people). 

The other possibility is civil war. Again, who is best equipped and temperamentally suited to bring factions together?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To "bring factions together", ET, is what individuals do of their own accord. At work and leisure etc. with each other in freedom of association. A government should not be charged with any more than protecting rights and rule of law, irrespective of 'group' and faction identity. And make a bigger mess when they attempt to do so. Even Obama didn't manage to do so, to bridge the much-exaggerated racial divide, while there were high hopes he could. The "faction" which is on the hard Left is presently and clearly doing its damnedest to not be brought together, to go all-out "radicalized", to maintain and increase the division in America - all to intimidate voters in the next election. That is Marxist-inspired fascism already in action, with the implied threat that they will arise and cause havoc and fear at any stage the Left doesn't approve of something. This shock-troop tactic is what I saw happen in Zimbabwean elections and in South Africa.  If there's a hint of Trump's supposed racism, that is all gleaned from the racialist media; I notice he is totally color blind as is any resort builder accustomed to working with multi-races on construction projects, and dealing personally with everyone from foreign heads of State down to the worker on the site. His black and Hispanic supporters know that.

The nation's divisions - wealth and racial, mainly - were already occurring, pre-Trump. He was the catalyst not the cause of them coming to the surface.

Edited by whYNOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 5:05 AM, Eiuol said:
On 7/28/2020 at 8:53 AM, AlexL said:

because GOP is the only major party which could be in the future for some individual rights etc., more than the Dems

if that's all you meant, Republicans have historically failed on this. All evidence points to "not gonna happen". You would need a new political party. I don't have reason to think that any Republicans will reform their ideas if Trump loses. 

A new political party to compete with Reps and Dems - it not gonna happen.

And: if Trump loses, maybe GOP will select in the future much more carefully its presidential candidates.

And finally: there is zero chance that Dems will switch to individual rights, economic freedom etc.

Given all this, getting rid of Trump it is a priority (unless the Dem candidate will be of the extreme left).

Edited by AlexL
Format

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, AlexL said:

And: if Trump loses, maybe GOP will select in the future much more carefully its presidential candidates.

But why do you think this could happen? Why are they any more likely than Democrats? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Easy Truth said:

You are assuming that Trump is not a socialist.

I am not assuming that Trump has any principled foundation whatsoever. He's not a capitalist or a socialist, he's a random behavior generator. He's an unprincipled statistical machine that tries something, sees if it works, then tries something else. I don't assume that he will veto the left's press for socialism on principled grounds. I do assume that the alternative candidate tends to support socialist legislation. So the difference could come down to a slightly higher chance of veto with Trump as POTUS.

The primary threat, IMO, comes not from what Biden will do, but what his successor will do when the Presidential Succession Act is triggered and ?Kamala Harris is the next president.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, DavidOdden said:

Succession Act is triggered and ?Kamala Harris is the next president.

aw bbbbbut the Democrats would never let the far left drive policy decisions.... wwwwwould they?

Naw... everything’ll be fine....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Eiuol said:
7 hours ago, AlexL said:

And: if Trump loses, maybe GOP will select in the future much more carefully its presidential candidates.

But why do you think this could happen? Why are they any more likely than Democrats? 

Because I think that, if Trump loses the election, GOP will examine the hypothesis that this had something to do with Trump, the previous GOP choice from among several candidates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand that part, but Democrats could do the same thing. For example, if Trump won, some significant portion of Democrats I think would go more towards Yang (who I think is more libertarian friendly based on what I know compared to anyone else who is politically relevant) in terms of political beliefs, at least being marginally more individualistic than Democrats are now. You are saying that Democrats would never move towards individual rights, and Republicans could potentially. But I don't see why you think Republicans are any more likely. I would actually propose that many Republicans will think that they were not authoritarian enough, proclaiming that Communists are coming, and radical measures must be taken, perhaps with Pence at the frontline. I can come up with similar scenarios for Democrats, which I imagine is what you meant by "zero chance" that Democrats will switch to anything. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 12:26 PM, DavidOdden said:

Executive Order 13769, the Muslim travel ban, violated the McCarran–Walter Act, and the provision favoring immigration of members of minority religions in listed countries violated the First Amendment.

So you didn't mean that he "arbitrarily rewrote the law." You meant that he issued executive orders that got challenged in court. I'm pretty sure that happens to every president, often because the law in the first place is arbitrary or bad or outdated. Sometimes because the EO is bad or poorly written. In this particular case the law (McCarran-Walter Act) looks bad, probably racist even. Trump eventually tweaked his position into Proclamation 9645, which was upheld by the Supreme Court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 12:26 PM, DavidOdden said:

Executive Order 13768, where the federal government illegally commanded local governments regarding enforcement of federal immigration policy, was in clear violation of 8 USC 1373 and well-established law regarding the 10th amendment.

Based on the Wikipedia article it looks like Trump made a dumb move here. Some of his initial EOs revealed his inexperience or dependency on people like Steve Bannon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

Some of his initial EOs revealed his inexperience or dependency on people like Steve Bannon. 

A cardinal Characteristic of the Trump Presidency is an anti immigrant stance. The idea that they take our Jobs (they are rapists etc). This is clearly unambiguously supported by Steve Bannon as a populist, vote getting position. People who saw a stagnant economy after the real estate crash were swayed by this rhetoric. Especially in swing states.

Even with Steve Bannon gone look at the Trump administration's position on H1b visas.

"Proclamation Suspending Entry of Aliens Who Present a Risk to the U.S. Labor Market Following the Coronavirus Outbreak"

The most talented immigrants cannot come here based on this view of the world. This is not inexperience, this is core beliefs. It is also a huge loss to us as a nation. It comes across like racist, but it is the basis of the America First Policy. In addition to mercantilism.
The anger at the outsider, the "other" (a key element of Fascism) is part of the political makeup of this presidency.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 12:26 PM, DavidOdden said:

The matter of banning Acosta from press briefings, clearly contravened established First and Fifth amendment law.

That is debatable. There are valid reasons to ban particular news groups or individual reporters. CNN and the WH reached a compromise so we don't know how that case would have turned out.

On 7/29/2020 at 12:26 PM, DavidOdden said:

Termination of the DACA program violated the Administrative Procedure Act and the Due Process Clause of the 5th amendment.

Technically it wasn't the termination itself, but the method of termination which was deemed unlawful. I don't think this is a great example of him arbitrarily rewriting a law. He might have arbitrarily ended a DHS program. Though DACA itself has problems and will probably be ended anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Easy Truth said:

The most talented immigrants cannot come here based on this view of the world. This is not inexperience, this is core beliefs.

If it's his core belief why didn't he ban them before the apocalypse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A nation that is of value to a person will be inclusive by him of every other citizen who was born there or equally becomes a legal citizen there, in that sovereign nation. The outsider - the other - needs to go through the same process and would be keen to ... if he/she perceives that value too.

I see Trump as extremely embracing of all who do. In essence: That you are "here" indicates your value in America and to America. I have never bought into that xenophopic/racist criticism by people who, in the final analysis don't understand Trump's love for the country and view him with cynicism: he's out for himself.

What I also could not help gather over the last 20+ years is the gradual decline in pride in the USA by Americans. It came through most visibly from the (Leftist) media and powerfully too by the (Leftist) movie industry, in the content and themes of many or most of its films. The third leg has been well documented by many commentators, being the Leftist professors and teachers in colleges. With almost complete control of those three areas, it's clear that the Left/Progressives/etc. have dominated many citizens' attitudes and it shows. First came self-doubt (America isn't and wasn't perfect, many mistakes and moral grievances were committed). Then loss of confidence, in even the Constitution. Then cynicism. The shame felt by many for their country became extremely apparent just now, destroying monuments/taking a knee/riots/"systemic racism"- meekly accepted as morally-valid assaults on the country.

In the last 10 years the drift I notice has been outwards, towards the Old World and merging the US character/political/cultural nature closer with the (supposedly) 'sophisticated, European elitism'. 

This sea-change of many Americans' attitudes to the USA, the rhino in the parlor, needs to be acknowledged here in the election debate. This is a crucial turning point, for you and for the world - obviously not "politics as normal". The battle is ideological, for the soul of a nation. And if "Biden is our only hope" - America will succumb one way or other to the self-disgust promoted by some/many Leftist Americans. 

Edited by whYNOT

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, MisterSwig said:

If it's his core belief why didn't he ban them before the apocalypse?

Are you saying that quarantine is not effective and we should prevent the most talented human capital from entering now?

What is the justification for banning healthy people that will improve our lives in the long run?

Because of an anti immigrant core belief.

"You know, mass illegal immigration, which the chamber of commerce pushes all the time, and more legal immigration and trade are just two sides of the same coin, right? The two sides of the same coin, it’s suppression of workers’ wages, OK? Mass illegal immigration is to flood the zone against predominantly black and Hispanic working class so that you’ve got unlimited, you know, unlimited labor pool, and you can keep wages down for higher margins. Immigration and H-1B visas are the same thing in the tech area, that you don’t have to hire American citizens; I can do it with these visas to increase margins."

https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/interview/steve-bannon-2/

The attempts to get rid of H1B visas was starting day one.

"BANNON: Where are we in the Trump campaign with the H-1B visas? Because we got the oligarchs down there, man, and they have got Karl Rove and literally hundreds of millions of dollars, and they are coming with one reason. And they are coming for unlimited ability to go throughout the world and have people come here and compete with kids coming out of engineering schools and IT jobs. If you are in your 40s and 50s right now, people will tell you, they haven’t had a raise in decades in IT. What was supposed to be a great career turned out not to be a great career. It’s because of these visas."

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/2/2/14472404/steve-bannon-legal-immigration-problem

This is an actual anti immigration core belief.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Easy Truth said:

Are you saying that quarantine is not effective and we should prevent the most talented human capital from entering now?

No, and neither is Trump. There are exceptions for immigrants who are needed here. Have you read the EO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Easy Truth,
Most Americans (excluding Third World immigrants) want a more anti-immigration stand from their government.  The tough job market is one reason but only one.  That Trump delivered only part of what he promised on that issue during his last campaign is a liability for him how.

Though Trump has been a disappointment he has done some good things.  Probably the most important is that his administration made the existence of the “Deep State” – or whatever you want to call corrupt rogue bureaucrats and those who pull their strings – public knowledge.  And he has been slowly – too slowly – chipping away at it.

LizCrokin.com/uncategorized/trump-takes-two-dozen-elite-pedophiles-including-celebrities-politicians

As with his immigration policies, his two Supreme Court appointments were nothing to write home about but at least they were far better than what we would have gotten under Hillary Clinton.  Ruth Bader Ginsburg probably won’t make it through another presidential term so a Biden presidency will affect that branch of government for a generation or two.

The article alluded to in the original post is
Biden Must Win or America is Doomed
It quotes most of the pro-Biden speech that Brook made on his show (link in the original post).

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MisterSwig said:

There are exceptions for immigrants who are needed here. Have you read the EO

So the government is to determine "immigrants who are needed here", not the employer. What brand of Capitalism is this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dupin said:

Though Trump has been a disappointment he has done some good things.  Probably the most important is that his administration made the existence of the “Deep State” – or whatever you want to call corrupt rogue bureaucrats and those who pull their strings – public knowledge.  And he has been slowly – too slowly – chipping away at it.

The problem is that he has replaced the previous deep state with his own deep state. Bill Bar, Paul Manafort, Roger Stone are from the Nixon Era. Fortunately they were plucked out by the deep state.

The Crony-ism has increased under Trump, not decreased. You think his proposed FDR type public works would decrease the size of "the deep state", or make is gigantic? As in Mussolini size. The attack on the deep state has turned into a Maoist type cultural revolution, where they would destroy whatever was built, just to start from scratch. Telling Putin that he believes Putin over Trump's own intelligence agencies is what should be the norm?

1 hour ago, Dupin said:

Most Americans (excluding Third World immigrants) want a more anti-immigration stand from their government. 

Are you arguing that Trump's immigration promises "should" have been kept? Not sure where you are going with this.

Edited by Easy Truth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Eiuol said:

I can come up with similar scenarios [...]

Yes, there is a non-zero probability that the Dem party will quantum-tunnel to individual rights, economic freedom, limited government etc.😁

Edited by AlexL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/29/2020 at 5:30 PM, SpookyKitty said:

"Politicization" is an anti-concept, similar to "polarization"

I kind of like how "politicized" was used in this sentence:

I seldom agree with Mr. Wicker, but he had the honesty to say that to reject Mr. Rehnquist's nomination solely on the basis of his political views "is dangerous business. It presumes some kind of rightful political orthodoxy; it would tend to politicize the courts according to the temporary political coloration of Congress; it could punish some individuals for their ideas and frighten others out of having any." (Which, in today's context, is unanswerably true.)

The Ayn Rand Letter
Vol. 1, No. 6  December 20, 1971
The Disfranchisement Of The Right

 

 

Share this post


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...