Aynd Rand was the greatest philospher. Ever.

TakuanSoho · #**131** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

Do you think overall, Western society is a culture run by knuckle dragging Burutes ?
With a couple notable exceptions...hardly

Bush is not a “brute” he is just stupid, reactionary and scared

The example I gave Chickie, was the civil rights movement, when the knuckle draggers were beaten down by the enlightened simply "assuming the sale" and creating social injunction* against them

social injunction*
This is a word you will see me use a LOT when discussing social change, because it is powerful, and can, and has, moved mountains

Western society has been fortunately NOT dominated by state imposed ~isms. When it HAS happened, brutality has occured.

Idealism is great to "aim" for, and when coupled with reason it is something that should be pursued. My point is with the use of force to impose an ~ism. Generally speaking when force is used to impose idealism, brutality occurs.

Look at the French Revolution as another example.

smart makes a comeback · #**132** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TakuanSoho

Western society has been fortunately NOT to be dominated by ~isms. Idealism is great to "aim" for, and when coupled with reason it is something that should be pursued. My point is with the use of force. Generally speaking when force is used to impose idealism, brutality occurs.

Look at the French Revolution as another example.

Ohhh ok...now I am reading you

And this is interesting, because a fact of life is, no matter how enlightened and progressive a society is, it requires a certain element of militants to keep it so, ior make it so

The other point to be made is, idealism is not always noble in origin and intent, and neither is it, as you pointed out, devoid of the need for militancy

I would suggest that for the most part, western society since the end of the 19th century has done a good job of keeping their pit bulls on a leash and in within the confines of the chain link fence, except when needed (With as I stated, a few notable exceptions)

This has been going on since the dawn of man. We all dragged our things behind us in a deer caucus originally, but eventually, the ‘smart” progressive, dare I say Liberal folks who invented the wheel, prevailed

ricechickie · #**133** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

The rest of the world almost always end up cooperating, be it kicking and screaming sometimes.

If they're kicking and screaming, then it's not "cooperation."

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

The stupid of the world are appeased, but usually weaned off of their stupidity till they think doing the "right thing" was their idea all along.
Classic example:
The civil rights movement
Segregation was defeated by so marginalizing the concept, that the segregationists either had to conform or live in a cave.
The intellectuals have always led, the stupid have always followed…eventually

Of course. So? The ends justify the means?

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

You just reputeated Rand, see bolded text. There is hope

The bolded text read, "in my own self-interest to make sure that the government respect the rights of ALL of its citizens." That's Rand in a nutshell. The government (by fiat of intellectuals, upper class, military, or all three) have no right to coerce citizens to give time, money, or energy to pursuits not of their choosing. Therefore, it was a very Randian idea that those who make the government respect the rights of everyone are not sacrificing themselves to help others, but acting in their own self-interests.

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

In any society worth a damn, it is a collective decision, erring on the side of over generosity and aiding even the “unworthy”
The alternative is Auschwitz or gulags

But the gulags were a reflection of the "stupid" being dragged along, kicking and screaming, to see the wisdom of their intellectual betters (who happened to run the government). And don't the stupid always follow along.......eventually? All they need is re-education!

smart makes a comeback · #**134** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricechickie

If they're kicking and screaming, then it's not "cooperation."

Sure it is,,,allas well that ends well

Of course. So? The ends justify the means?

If it is a positive end,,within reason...yes

The bolded text read, "in my own self-interest to make sure that the government respect the rights of ALL of its citizens." That's Rand in a nutshell. The government (by fiat of intellectuals, upper class, military, or all three) have no right to coerce citizens to give time, money, or energy to pursuits not of their choosing. Therefore, it was a very Randian idea that those who make the government respect the rights of everyone are not sacrificing themselves to help others, but acting in their own self-interests.

That is NOT rand in a nutshell..it is her polor opposite

But the gulags were a reflection of the "stupid" being dragged along, kicking and screaming, to see the wisdom of their intellectual betters (who happened to run the government). And don't the stupid always follow along.......eventually? All they need is re-education!

They do not exist to the extent they once did do they?
eventually....is not over yet
Human evolution nis just that...evolution

ricechickie · #**135** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

That is NOT rand in a nutshell..it is her polor opposite

So, if Rand didn't believe in the rights of all being protected by the government, whom did she believe shouldn't have equal rights? Cite specific examples.

ricechickie · #**136** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

They do not exist to the extent they once did do they?
eventually....is not over yet
Human evolution nis just that...evolution

The dissipation of gulags, concentration camps and various and sundry re-education camps is the results of rampant individualism, not collectivism.

TakuanSoho · #**137** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

I would suggest that for the most part, western society since the end of the 19th century has done a good job of keeping their pit bulls on a leash and in within the confines of the chain link fence, except when needed (With as I stated, a few notable exceptions)

When your "exceptions" are Imperial Germany, Imperial France, Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and Spain, Communist Russia, those are pretty HUGE exceptions.

And again, Rand wasn't knocking individuals fighting for what they believed. Her whole argument was against using the State to impose it on people.

And imposing has a specific definition. For instance, while I do not know for a fact what her views on Civil Rights 1964 were, I don't think she would have had an issue with the federal government enforcing equality before the law on states. In this case she should (again I don't know) have argued that on a State level people were imposing their beliefs through the State on others to deprive them of their rights. In my interpretation of her writings, using the federal government to stop this would have been allowable. She would have drawn the line with affirmative action, because that is the state trying to impose its will on individuals.

Now again, I am not trying to convert you, you might not agree with Rand's position, but I am trying to inform you that how you have portrayed Rand is wrong.

smart makes a comeback · #**138** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ricechickie

The dissipation of gulags, concentration camps and various and sundry re-education camps is the results of rampant individualism, not collectivism.

That is not only incorrect, but sorry to say, illogical

By the way..I never said it was "the result of collectivism", at least not collectivism in the vein you are using it.

However, the very things you claim ended due to "individualism" could never have existed in any condition other then "individualism" run amuck

Suburbanite · #**139** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:26 PM

this is such a gay thread

ricechickie · #**140** (**permalink**) 05-16-2008, 05:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by smart makes a comeback

That is not only incorrect, but sorry to say, illogical

By the way..I never said it was "the result of collectivism", at least not collectivism in the vein you are using it.

However, the very things you claim ended due to "individualism" could never have existed in any condition other then "individualism" run amuck

Again, cite specific examples of how Rand believed that certain people were not deserving of equal rights......

Explain how gulags, concentration, and re-education camps are a result of individualism run amok.