|
Creating polls with physical violence against an individual or group as an option, or advocating for / supporting physical violence against an individual or group in a post = ban. This is your only warning. |
The same thing can be said about the right, and Charlottesville.
|
Can we add communists to the poll? To make it fair towards equal genocidal ideologies.
Edit: I think "censored" and "ridiculed" should be different items on the poll, I don't think the government should be censoring people but we should def be ridiculing them.
|
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x)
|
Northern Ireland27234 Posts
I don’t think Antifa can really be accused of hypocrisy on their application of violence as they’re pretty damn open about it being an option.
One can think it’s wrong certainly, but it’s hardly hypocritical for the ‘punch a fascist’ crowd to punch fascists.
|
On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. Show nested quote +On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities.
On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x)
i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. When pressed for precise details you do not provide them.
as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. The question of whether or not physical force or its threat occurred in any one particular instance is an open question for a court of law to decide should it go that far.
I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. If you wish to delve deeper into it I'd recommend checking out Leonard Piekoff's rebuttal.
|
On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher.
Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it.
As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism.
|
Its in my previous posts.
You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw.
On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism.
again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff.
http://www.peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/fact-and-value/
this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me.
|
|
|
On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me.
It's not in your previous post, and I never said you were alt-right. I will definitely PM you though.
|
Canada5565 Posts
On November 05 2019 03:34 Ryzel wrote:
Odd, I didn't delete those posts/polls and I didn't get a message explaining what was wrong about them. If a mod could see this and help explain to me via PM and delete this post I'd appreciate it!
Check the public note at the top of the thread.
|
On November 05 2019 03:38 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) True! i stand corrected. here is what you said. On November 02 2019 22:04 Nebuchad wrote:
And of course, the last layer is to remember that people like Jimmy and Nettles are basically far right, or so far right adjacent that the difference doesn't particularly matter. Care to explain how supporting Bob Rae, Jean Chretien, and Hazel Mccallion makes me far right? Thanks for the PM. I'll answer it fully when I have time. i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me. It's not in your previous post, and I never said you were alt-right. I will definitely PM you though.
True! I stand corrected. Here is what you said.
On November 02 2019 22:04 Nebuchad wrote:
And of course, the last layer is to remember that people like Jimmy and Nettles are basically far right, or so far right adjacent that the difference doesn't particularly matter.
Can you explain how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion, and Jean Chretien makes me "far right"? How does opposing the privatization of "Ontario Hydro" make me "far right"?
I'll provide a full response to your PM when I have time.
|
On November 05 2019 03:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Can you explain how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion, and Jean Chretien makes me "far right"?
How does opposing the privatization of "Ontario Hydro" make me "far right"?
It doesn't. Maybe I was wrong. I just based my impression on basically every post that I've ever read from you on this site.
|
On November 05 2019 03:53 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:48 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
Can you explain how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion, and Jean Chretien makes me "far right"?
How does opposing the privatization of "Ontario Hydro" make me "far right"?
It doesn't. Maybe I was wrong. I just based my impression on basically every post that I've ever read from you on this site.
fair enough sir. check out the Starcraft threads. I'm wrong there all the time. 
off topic.
+ Show Spoiler +I'm pragmatic. If there were some other jurisdiction in North America that had lower hydro prices and the great working conditions of "Ontario Hydro" then I'd be in favour of examining and possibly emulating that superior private model. However, Ontario Hydro offered the lowest electricity rates in North America. Privatizing Ontario Hydro was a bad move. If there were some right wing guy as brilliant as Bob Rae... I'd trumpet his praises. I can count on one hand the # of Canadians with the legal smarts, political experience, and street smarts of Bob Rae. So, I support Rae even if he doesn't hold every core belief I hold. Viewpoints like this got me kicked out of the local Objectivism club.
|
On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. http://www.peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/fact-and-value/this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me.
come on jimmyj you owe it to yourself, non-philosopher though you are, to get past this objectivism stuff
|
Canada11590 Posts
I don't think it can be demonstrated that Andy Ngo was looking to beaten up to play the victim. Isn't that literal victim blaming? Now if he was coming in, armed to the teeth or challenging people to a fight- well all right, I'd say he's looking for a scrap. As it was, he deliberately did not bring a helmet because he did not want to look like he was looking for a scrap.
On November 05 2019 00:07 Dangermousecatdog wrote:
Well, I've changed my mind. Not by arguments by those who see it as a problem but rather by the usual alt-right posters in the thread who are desperate to convince people that the spread of alt-right scoial media memes in gaming communities is not a problem, but the reaction to prevent its spread is a problem, the only conclusion I can arrive at is that it is indeed a part and parcel of the alt-right that needs to be spoken against.
Who in this thread is alt right?
|
On November 05 2019 10:23 IgnE wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. http://www.peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/fact-and-value/this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me. come on jimmyj you owe it to yourself, non-philosopher though you are, to get past this objectivism stuff
If you are bored please read the spoilered section of my post above yours. I was kicked out of the objectivism club for supporting Bob Rae along with thinking David Kelley was correct and Leonard Piekoff was wrong..
I'd describe myself as a "David Kelley libertarian" .. not an objectivist. As far as Objectivism goes.. I'd say Ayn Rand is a literary genius and an important 20th century intellectual.
|
Canada11590 Posts
Literary genius? Oh goodness.
Atlas Shrugged at least I thought the best descriptor by someone else is far too little story spread over far too many pages.
For myself, I thought it was an essay, slumming as a novel in disguise, but doing an awfully poor job at it. (Particularly with that 50! pages speech. Talk about abandoning any pretense of story and launching straight into didactics.)
|
On November 05 2019 11:24 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 10:23 IgnE wrote:On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. http://www.peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/fact-and-value/this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me. come on jimmyj you owe it to yourself, non-philosopher though you are, to get past this objectivism stuff If you are bored please read the spoilered section of my post above yours. I was kicked out of the objectivism club for supporting Bob Rae along with thinking David Kelley was correct and Leonard Piekoff was wrong.. I'd describe myself as a "David Kelley libertarian" .. not an objectivist. As far as Objectivism goes.. I'd say Ayn Rand is a literary genius and an important 20th century intellectual.
well 1) why did you link to a 100 page tract by Piekoff about why Kelley is wrong? and 2) even so, this looks suspiciously like objectivists arguing amongst themselves
do you or dont you believe that values are discoverable facts about the world?
|
On November 05 2019 11:24 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Show nested quote +On November 05 2019 10:23 IgnE wrote:On November 05 2019 03:33 JimmyJRaynor wrote:Its in my previous posts. You also didn't resolve how supporting Bob Rae, Hazel Mccallion and Jean Chretien makes me alt-right. These are some great leaders and great thinkers , btw. On November 05 2019 03:29 Nebuchad wrote:On November 05 2019 03:25 JimmyJRaynor wrote:On November 04 2019 09:51 Nebuchad wrote:I have asked ten different libertarians so far why they aren't a libertarian socialist and none of them provided a satisfactory answer, feel free to be the eleventh. On November 04 2019 09:41 JimmyJRaynor wrote:
when in the "somewhat distant past" was the world "good and moral" ? you're speaking about the entire planet? so China, Madagascar, Canada, and Argentina were all simultaneously.. ."good and moral" ? Probably varies depending on people but I'd have to guess feudalism or something. When we didn't have individualism, human rights and all that crap, and people stuck together with their communities. On November 05 2019 02:34 Nebuchad wrote:
Want to answer both 3 and 4 I guess? Feels like 3 is stronger than 4 so I'm going with 3.
Edit: for those unfamiliar with my complete position, it's that we should use state violence against them, and in cases where this isn't happening like in the US, then we rely on Antifa and the likes.
Second edit: there were some polls here that disappeared, we're not just talking into the void x) i think a contributing factor in you not getting detailed responses to your questions is you make ridiculous claims and broad sweeping over generalizations about the entire planet. when pressed for precise details you do not provide them. as to your last detailed question to me about libertarianism... i'm a David Kelley "fact and value" Libertarian. The state enforces to the best of its a ability a ban on force in human relationship; the state also protects its citizens from outside invaders. the state funds these activities via taxation. I didn't go much deeper than David Kelley's perspective and analysis though. I'm a software craftsman//engineer.. I'm not a full time philosopher. Let me know what answer you think I haven't provided and I'll give it to you. You don't have to be this grandiose about it. As I already pointed out in my last answer, the distinction that you bring up helps you distinguish between libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism, but it's useless when it comes to distinguishing between libertarian socialism and libertarian capitalism. again.. check out the debate between David Kelley and Leonard Piekoff. http://www.peikoff.com/essays_and_articles/fact-and-value/this is way off topic. if you want to delve into this further PM me. come on jimmyj you owe it to yourself, non-philosopher though you are, to get past this objectivism stuff If you are bored please read the spoilered section of my post above yours. I was kicked out of the objectivism club for supporting Bob Rae along with thinking David Kelley was correct and Leonard Piekoff was wrong.. I'd describe myself as a "David Kelley libertarian" .. not an objectivist. As far as Objectivism goes.. I'd say Ayn Rand is a literary genius and an important 20th century intellectual.
On November 05 2019 11:40 Falling wrote:
Literary genius? Oh goodness.
Atlas Shrugged at least I thought the best descriptor by someone else is far too little story spread over far too many pages.
For myself, I thought it was an essay, slumming as a novel in disguise, but doing an awfully poor job at it. (Particularly with that 50! pages speech. Talk about abandoning any pretense of story and launching straight into didactics.)
I liked the read and I thought it was thought provoking. The characters were ... umm ... operatic. The themes were a bit overdone. But for what it was, I liked the read, and the way the various characters and their struggles played out in long throughlines. But I didn't pull out the big "and this is the way the world really is" kind of objectivist/libertarian bent. The author of one of my formational books, Whittaker Chambers, wrote this review, which I thought was spot-on.
On an unrelated note, I think if people knew more objectivists, and libertarians, and tradcons social-cons fiscal cons, they'd be less liberal in in sprinkling "far-right" or "alt-right" on TeamLiquid users. The term is becoming synonymous with someone possessing unorthodox political views on one subject or more.
|
If we're going with an ideology of selfishness like objectivism, why not be far right? As long as you are on top of society, which of course you are, it will follow from others being treated worse that you are treated better.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
