It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

"Who is John Galt?"

page: 1
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:
+5 more 
posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 12:03 AM
link   
He is the mysterious figure of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged who led society's most productive members on a silent and decidedly unceremonious strike in order to "stop the motor of the world". The book was first published in 1957 and since then has inspired hundreds of thousands of people who have come to regard Galt as an iconic or iconoclastic hero, however in strictly literary terms, John Galt was the antagonist to Dagney Taggert who was the novels true protagonist.

"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine."

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

Dagney watches the world crumble around her as the government continues its steady march towards more and more regulation and control over all industry, indeed over humanity itself. The novel functions primarily as a mystery in its beginning as Dagney, the Executive of a giant railroad company, struggles to keep her company alive in a time where collectivism is the order of the day. As she struggles to keep her company alive she begins to notice that many of society's productive members are mysteriously disappearing, including some of her friends. While stumbling onto a strange and remarkable motor that turns static energy into kinetic energy she finds this motor was created by a man she dubs "the destroyer" and the search to find this man becomes the thrust of much of this novel.

"The evil of the world is made possible by nothing but the sanction you give it."

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

The novel ends with Dagney finally discovering the truth about "the destroyer" and that he is, in fact, John Galt, who has organized this audacious strike against wanton parasitism and collectivism, and has brought the government to its knees and made it face its own hubris. He offers in replace of this abject tyranny and collectivism a society where enlightened self interest and celebration of individual achievement are held to be crucial to a vital and functioning civilization.

"Why ask useless question? How deep is the ocean? How high is the sky? Who is John Galt?"

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

The expression "Who is John Galt" became a meme of society in response to perceived useless questions similar to the ad campaign by a major beer distillery in the early '90's that asked; "Why ask why?" Why ask why indeed! Why is there only one Monopolies Commission? Of course, that commission was merged into just one commission known as the Competition Commission but it remains just one commission...why? Why are people who invest YOUR money called BROKERS? If you can't drink and drive why do saloons have parking lots and why do they demand you show them a drivers license before selling you booze? Why do we even need a license to drive? Were there such demands when all we drove were horse and buggy's? Why are we required to obtain a business license in order to go into business? Why are licenses required for activities that are rights? Ahhhhhh, why ask why? Who is John Galt?

"An inventor is a man who asks 'why?' of the universe and lets nothing stand between the answer and his mind."

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

There have been many threads created recently urging a call to arms and making a loud and noticeable stand against the U.S. government. Indeed, I allowed some user to lead me down the path of advocating violent overthrow in the absence of justice, and I think about this imprudent declaration of mine and how I regret allowing another to lead me down a road I otherwise wouldn't take. While the 2nd Amendment is clear in its intent and that intent is indeed to ensure the people have the means to protect their rights by force if necessary, violent revolutions are a costly proposition and can be to easily squashed by tyrants in today's modern world of high tech and weapons of mass destruction.

In fact, in 1989, a year where people across the world witnessed the collapse of several communist governments, in China there was the Tiananmen Square Protests, officially known by the PRC as the "June Fourth Incident". This protest did not lead to a popular revolution, but instead led to the death of at least 400 protesters and maybe as many as 800. The government crackdown that followed did not weaken the PRC but in many ways strengthened it, as those government officials perceived to by sympathetic to the protesters were purged from the government and thousands of people imprisoned and/or executed. Today, China is no closer to a free society than they were then and the U.S. is inching further and further away from a free society, actually imprisoning more people than any other country in the world.

"I refuse to accept as guilt the fact of my own existence"

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

Change is no doubt necessary in the U.S. if We the People are ever to be truly free. There may come a tragic time in history when a call to arms is necessary but that time is not now! There is just too much We the People can do as individuals to change the system peacefully and quietly. We can take a page from the book of Atlas Shrugged and we can quietly and mysteriously go on strike. We can respectfully disengage from a system of tyranny and live our lives as we see fit. We can decline to take part in a system hell bent on controlling people. We can, instead of empowering those rakish rogues who blindly steal from us by referring to them as TPTB, boycott them and refuse to do business with them.

"Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where the gun begins."

~Atlas Shrugged---Ayn Rand~

Instead of mindlessly lining up in airports to allow tyrants to prod and poke us into submission we can find others like us traveling in the same direction and charter a private jet or plane to get where we are going. We can do business with local farmers at local markets, we can refuse to do business with banks and keep in their institutions only what is necessary to get by, while creating our own system of currency to break free of this stranglehold imposed upon us. We can learn the law in every way possible in order to effectively challenge the jurisdiction of those who seek to rule us by way of our own ignorance. There is so much we can do before agreeing to violence. We can use this thread to discuss ways in which we might "stop the motor" of tyranny!




posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 12:21 AM
link   
Yes, very prophetic.

The roots of America's corruption, and coming destruction go back a very long way.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 12:50 AM
link   
Rand is just as utopian as Marx and Engles

Angry because the Bolsheviks took her pony -

Both are extreme and unrealistic, we are not angry rogue gorillas or drone worker bees.

Moderation

We are humans who can adjust, think and adapt - I suggest we be not imprison ourselves with such absolutes.

[edit on 30-12-2009 by Janky Red]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 01:20 AM
link   
Nice thread, very inspiring. This book has been on my "To Read" List for a while now.

Thanks for blowing the ending for me, though!!! Was that really necessary?



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 01:29 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


If somebody took my pony I would be pretty angry about it too. While Rand, even posthumously, remains one of the most ardent cheerleaders for the individual, and her own efforts are indeed worthy of praise, this thread was not designed to praise Rand or sell objectivism as much as it was designed to encourage people to engage in a discussion on how we might disengage from a tyrannical system. Ad Hominem attacks on Rand won't help us do so.

Let's be perfectly frank about Rand, she was as flawed as any human and her creepy rape fantasy in The Fountain. coupled with her own strange relationship with her own husband and her lover Nathaniel Branden suggested she was a woman who had some issues. So what? Both The Fountain. and Atlas Shrugged remain perennial best sellers that have, in fact, seen an upsurge in sales in the past decade, not due to an imprisoned populace blindly following her objectivist movement, but due to the desire and need to flourish and prosper.

Where Marx and Engels would reduce the individual to a collective "masses" where any individual who has the audacity to own their own business becomes a slave owner to the "worker", Rand endeavored to encourage people to find within them the means to their own creativity and ability to rise up and flourish and prosper without any reliance on others.

While Rand most certainly saw absolutes, she quite effectively communicated how there were indeed absolutes with her simple but very clever rhetoric; "A is A", and as free from absolutes as one might declare themselves to be, A is still A.

In fairness to you Janky, I do believe Atlas Shrugged tends toward a Utopian ideal, but it is not Utopia's I encourage in this thread but only that we do what we can as individuals to break free from systems rigged to reduce us to nothing more than the "masses" or "workers" and to forget class struggles and be free. If you view freedom as a Utopia, I know not what to say to such an idea, except that freedom is too messy to qualify as a Utopia. As messy as it may be, I much prefer freedom over Utopias.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 01:31 AM
link   
reply to post by dude_outside
 


Lol! Oops! I don't think I really blew the ending for you and I assure you it will be a compelling read all the way through and that you will enjoy it all the way to its end...I think. Who knows? I have read it three times now and the third time was my favorite reading of it, so I hope you do read it, and enjoy every page.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 01:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by Janky Red
 


If somebody took my pony I would be pretty angry about it too. While Rand, even posthumously, remains one of the most ardent cheerleaders for the individual, and her own efforts are indeed worthy of praise, this thread was not designed to praise Rand or sell objectivism as much as it was designed to encourage people to engage in a discussion on how we might disengage from a tyrannical system. Ad Hominem attacks on Rand won't help us do so.

Let's be perfectly frank about Rand, she was as flawed as any human and her creepy rape fantasy in The Fountain. coupled with her own strange relationship with her own husband and her lover Nathaniel Branden suggested she was a woman who had some issues. So what? Both The Fountain. and Atlas Shrugged remain perennial best sellers that have, in fact, seen an upsurge in sales in the past decade, not due to an imprisoned populace blindly following her objectivist movement, but due to the desire and need to flourish and prosper.

Where Marx and Engels would reduce the individual to a collective "masses" where any individual who has the audacity to own their own business becomes a slave owner to the "worker", Rand endeavored to encourage people to find within them the means to their own creativity and ability to rise up and flourish and prosper without any reliance on others.

While Rand most certainly saw absolutes, she quite effectively communicated how there were indeed absolutes with her simple but very clever rhetoric; "A is A", and as free from absolutes as one might declare themselves to be, A is still A.

In fairness to you Janky, I do believe Atlas Shrugged tends toward a Utopian ideal, but it is not Utopia's I encourage in this thread but only that we do what we can as individuals to break free from systems rigged to reduce us to nothing more than the "masses" or "workers" and to forget class struggles and be free. If you view freedom as a Utopia, I know not what to say to such an idea, except that freedom is too messy to qualify as a Utopia. As messy as it may be, I much prefer freedom over Utopias.



Fair enough star for you and your measured ways, I respect that

However if this becomes a repeat of the 08 Galt/Rand threads I will come in with my guns blazing being janky as ever. I appreciate the sentiment and find objectivism to be a very strong part of modern American conservative economic ideology, unbeknownst to many I suspect. However I do not believe this practice benefits a society, my opinion.

Enjoy






[edit on 30-12-2009 by Janky Red]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


You REALLY NEED to amend your .line with a SPOILER ALERT.





posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 02:18 AM
link   
I have to say I have found myself commenting more and more that "Atlas Shrugged" seems to be occurring all around us all the time.

"The Fountain." seems to have been happening to innovators and artists for quite a bit of the mid to late twentieth century: someone comes up with a motor running on water and ends up completely edged out of the industry and forgotten, or some talented creative type inspires and communicates the human experience in a way that gives dignity to people, and is blackballed, since dignified people think for themselves and are harder to handle.

I have had a changing relationship with these stories as I mature. They were instrumental in validating my own struggles to keep people out of what I hold sacred, my own vision, my own talents, my own destiny and its right to unfold without interference from those who wish to profit from it or to control it in any way. I have felt that weird co-dependent attitude illustrated in "Atlas Shrugged" by the brother of Dagny and the family of Hank Reardon.

People who were close to the movers and shakers benefited from the fruits of their efforts and talents, but became spoiled and felt a sense of entitlement. They did not understand the sacrifices necessary for big visions and they were jealous of the joy these movers and shakers took in their long hours of "work." It is more like a passion to those people who are doing what they are born to do, and who have an ingrained, natural sense of responsibility and integrity in their work.

They were the rare ones, and they had to withdraw from society, really, because that small amount of talent could not run the country and fix it. They tried to do what they could, but it was overrun with stupid, egotistical morons who barely perceived how shallow EVERYTHING had become, through social and creative stagnancy and the destruction of fresh blood.

Now, as I consider this again, as I have found myself doing as it seems to unfold weekly, I realize that, IMO, her solutions were not the chosen ideal, but rather a stunning victory against the total destruction of society, and of our greatest citizens and the treasures they have produced, in industry, medicine, the arts...also, she was forecasting the onset of co-dependence relationships, policies, etc.

Her approach was necessary to come out of the prison of carrying others who do not wish to walk at all, but interdependency is the global trend now.
And after the co-dependent relationship is healed or ended, life does go on.

In some cases, the survivors go on to form new, healthy relationships.

BTW, we should also recall that the Utopia they went to create was the silver lining, not the goal.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Janky Red
 


Thanks for providing that clip of various interviews with Rand, I enjoyed it as I had never seen her in an interview before. However, in fairness to me, I am not attempting to make this a thread about Rand or Galt and am unaware of the threads on Rand/Galt you are referring to and perhaps I should have done precursory look before posting my own thread, but I did not create this thread out of a need to hail Rand or even John Galt, but to address the current political madness in the U.S.A. and how we might cure this madness by refusing to fall prey to it. Indeed, as I mentioned in my original post, I had come to regret an advocacy of violence I imprudently engaged in another thread, and this thread is in a large part, a sort of penance for that. Note how I use the word penance...

That said, I will take a brief moment to clarify my admiration for Rand and where we part ways. I too am a huge fan of individual effort and lament how terms such as Captains of Industry have been replaced with Robber Barons and the Exploits of Hercules have been reduced to the Labors of Hercules and somehow Marxism has seemed to permeate our culture in language, thought and deed. While Marx also is worthy of note, and all should read his work, I do not wish to debate the efficacy of either Rand or Marx in this thread.

As to Rand's own admonishment of religious or spiritual beliefs, I wholeheartedly disagree with her. While many a religious belief can indeed be irrational, so too can Marx and even Rand exhibit moments of irrational beliefs. Indeed, her unfortunate dismissal of Eddie Willers in Atlas Shrugged is one such irrationality.

Eddie was a loyal friend to Dagney and an important part of her success as a railroad magnate and while he tends to represent the "common man" not necessarily sharing the Promethean qualities of the producers who endeavored to "stop the motor of the world", what he may have lacked in creativity he matched the producers and creators in courage and morality and was more than capable of appreciating the gifts bestowed upon humanity by producers. It is important to have those who can appreciate the work of others as much as it is important to have those who create. David or Picasso mean nothing without viewers who appreciate their work. Shakespeare would be relegated to a verbose clown if it weren't for the fact that others came to profoundly admire his work.

Eddie, in my humble opinion, had as much right to exist in Rand's "Utopia" as any of her Promethean producers did, and would have served a vital function in that society that still to this day makes me wonder how such a society can exist without people like Eddie.

Now, to Rand's declaration that reliance on faith is irrational and disrespectful to ones own mind. This is just not so and there are many moments in science where it is faith that has led to discoveries not empirical data. One such example would be the discovery that scurvy is caused by a lack of vitamin C. Whence the lack? What empirical data showed a lack of vitamin C? It was a Scottish surgeon, James Lind, who first proved through empirical data that scurvy could be treated with citrus, but he came to his discovery through a leap of faith. Indeed, long before Lind proved this herbal remedies rich in vitamin C were being used to cure scurvy since pre-history.

One can no more prove a lack of vitamin C than they can prove the existence of God and it took faith in vitamin C in order to show it was the source of curing scurvy, because a lack can not seen! Rand was smart and even wise, but she had her misconceptions just as Plato and Aristotle had theirs. I offer this just for you Janky, and only to clarify my own respect for Rand and how that has not in any way made me blind to her flaws in logic and reasoning.

I no more want this thread to become a discussion of Ayn Rand and her beliefs than you seem to, however, if you keep bringing her up instead of offering suggestions in how we might extricate ourselves from a tyrannical system, or if you believe we shouldn't extricate ourselves from this system an argument as to why not, then this thread will become just another thread about her and Galt instead of what I hope it will become.

In the U.S. more and more people are finding it increasingly difficult to flourish and prosper and I strongly believe this is because they are playing by a set of rules designed to allow only those at the top to win while everybody else looses. I believe this has been caused in a large part by corporatism that has endeavored to crush competition, to ensure a heavily regulated market place where only the "elite" are above such regulations, and to flood that marketplace with worthless paper currency known as fiat money. These are problems that have created a playing field where for most people it is a no win proposition. When faced with a no win proposition it is time to change the rules.

How about it, Janky? Any ideas on how we might change the rules and level the playing field without relying upon corrupt politicians to get us there? This is what I hope to see this thread turn into and if you strongly disagree with my notions of breaking free of corporatism I welcome your arguments, but if you insist on bringing up Rand and her philosophy then it will be you who is turning this thread into just another Rand/Galt thread. I realize I relied upon her novel and quotes from it to get across my idea, but that is because I think she very prophetically described in 1957 a society we live in today, and perhaps a disconnect from that system might be the best answer to changing the system to a more effective and level playing field for all parties involved.




[edit on 30-12-2009 by Jean Paul Zodeaux]



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Jean Paul excellent post and rundown on Rand! So, lets get to the dialogue on what this post is about.

Only trouble I can see is by your Headline, most people will just argue the Ayn Rand issue and not what you actually are trying to start and discuss.


I think this is an excellent place for such a dialogue because of the diverse nature of the board. People from every corner of the United States of America, along with countless other nations are here.

Your initial ideas that you threw out there are an excellent start and should be expanded upon. Numerous methods could be employed, but a lot of these would have to take hold on the smallest levels and build rapidly before they are squashed under the thumb of the Federal government.

Encourage your towns and cities to hold weekly farmer's markets and then encourage the townsfolk to buy locally. One thing I see, is that people by tonnes of frozen food products because of their ease to prepare, thus they buy their groceries in bulk, enabling large box stores like Wal-Mart of other supermarkets to push out the small farmers and local growers. Be honest, why buy, say, a bushel of corn from a local grower at $1.00 an ear when you can go to Wallie World and get it for 3/$1.00.

With all this talk of globalization, this is where the problem lies I believe. Although I am an individualist at heart, I believe family and community need to be strong. Stop ignoring your neighbors and actually meet them. Get involved with your city councils, local businesses, etc.

I have more but not really sure yet what exactly I would suggest. Be back later



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by Copperflower
 


I appreciate your use of the word "interdependent" as I think there can too often be a confusion between interconnected and interdependent. I believe we are all interconnected beings who need each other very much and it only takes a cursory glance at any hermit or misanthropic individual to understand that we are better served as individuals by living our lives in society and not apart from it.

However, society is an artificial construct that only exists by our agreement. There is much blather about "social contracts" and the "needs of society" which endeavor to dismiss the importance of the individual in order to elevate the needs of the collective. In the strictest sense of contract law, I nor anybody else has any valid contract with society as none of us have ever met this thing called society. Society does not have any needs only the individuals in it do.

The needs of the individual are best facilitated by that individual who needs. There are, of course, exceptions to this rule as some individuals are less capable of facilitating their own needs than others. I have a friend who is a quadriplegic and relies upon aids who he pays to help him get through the simplest of daily functions, and to those aids he may be nothing more than a helpless quadriplegic but to me he is not just a friend, he is a successful lawyer and author far more successful than I at the moment and he obtained this success on his own terms through his own effort.

There is much ballyhoo and divisiveness about those who are poor by choice and just simply refuse to work as to those who are willing to work and yet are in many ways just as poor as those who rely upon government assistance to get by. Here is a fundamental problem in U.S. society today. In the State of California and in particularly the City of Los Angeles, there are many poor people, most of them immigrants, who attempt to make a living by selling goods on the sidewalks of the city. However, there is an ordinance that prohibits such activity, so the very necessary police powers we the people rely upon to establish justice and maintain domestic tranquility is often tied up issuing citations to poor people who are embracing an entrepreneurial spirit and attempting to earn a living.

The State of California has consistently shown it can not handle the welfare system it keeps insisting on keeping in place. This state can not afford to keep taxing, (plundering), others in order to redistribute that wealth to others who hardly benefit from it. Yet, in spite of what the State constitution says, the City of Los Angeles has deemed it necessary to stop people from operating their own businesses on public sidewalks even though they know this ordinance is unlawful. It is not just unlawful, it is immoral and unethical and does far damage than it does good.

Indeed, I believe its purpose, this ordinance, is to punish those who have ignored the licensing schemes imposed by that city to do business, and even ignores the tax schemes imposed by that city, the state and federal governments and just does business as it comes natural to them to do so. The prohibition of street vending is insane, the demand that people obtain a license is insane unless the business one wants to engage in is potentially harmful to others. A license is a permit to do something otherwise illegal. How is it that booksellers and shoemakers need permission from the state or city to do business?

They don't need permission to do business and it is insane to ask permission from a city or state or even federal government to earn a living! Yet, most "responsible" people in "society" do so, they go to their city government and apply for a license and before they are granted that license they must obtain a state and federal tax I.D. number and here is the key to why these licensing schemes exist. Here is the key to reigning in an out of control government. Stop asking permission to do that which is a natural right to do!

There are many people who have succumbed to dependency simply because it was easier than fighting city hall. Why work when that effort will accomplish little more than a welfare check and food stamps can accomplish? People are not inherently lazy, children do not refuse to crawl and they all at some point insist on standing on their own two wobbly little legs and make that big step towards walking and when they fall, they may proceed with more caution the next effort, but they don't just simply refuse to walk. They keep trying until they have accomplished the task and once accomplished the smiles on their face says it all! Every child capable of walking learns to walk and does not refuse to do so just because their parents are willing to carry them.

I think most people endeavor or aspire towards some sort of greatness and they are far more likely to accomplish this without government intrusion than with it. As John Galt told the government: "Get the hell out of the way!"



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 03:43 AM
link   
That is were the power of the State comes in handy for cities, states and the feds though. It is the only entity in the world that can use deadly force to achieve what it wants within the means of the law.

Speaking of laws, with the amount of laws that are currently on the books, one merely can walk down the street and be breaking some kind of law, somehow.

Your example of licensing, codes, etc is an excellent in what it takes to conduct 'business' in this country. The general feel though is that most people in government believe that the masses are too dumb and lazy to be able to conduct private contractual business without the oversight of their committees, codes and laws.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 03:57 AM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 


It was so cool to see you in this thread Ownbestenemy and to be honest I had considered U2Uing you and inviting you to join, so imagine my great and pleasant surprise when I saw you all ready here! Now, on to your points;

Corporations such as Wal-Mart and others are able to push out smaller businesses because of their buying power. However, there have been signs of local farmers who have shown the wisdom to form co-operatives and associations that in effect give them the same kind of buying power as a large corporation without sacrificing their own individual ownership. There were countless mom and pop hardware stores that went out of business because of companies like Wal-Mart and yet, they could have survived if they wanted to. I suspect that many mom and pop hardware stores were being run by second or even third generations not as passionate about the family business as were the founders.

Anyway, the mom and pop hardware store can compete with the Wal-Marts and Costco's by approaching the other mom and pop hardware stores and creating an association where they pool their resources to purchase large quantities of hardware at a better price and there by able to compete with Wal-Mart and Costco. While both Wal-Mart and Costco offer the convenience of variety in the goods they sell, their are still many people who would maintain loyalty and indeed, look forward to a weekly trip to Ed's Hardware store, not just to pick up some nails and a new monkey wrench, but to chew the fat with Ed about last weeks game and the price of rice, things that can't effectively be done at Wal-Mart even if they supply their customers with "greeters" and other such pretenses.

There are many ways in which to circumvent the corporate system that would allow a smaller business to offer their customers a competitive price with better service and far more concern for their clients than a corporation can reasonably accomplish. Consider just the notion of doing business at a farmers market. First of all, there are many smaller farmers today who have formed the necessary associations and cooperatives that would grant them more purchasing power and protection against intrusive laws, unfortunate natural disasters and the various diseases and insects that can create such a loss for a farmer. However, beyond this, when you become the customer of a local farmers market you are befriending people who become intimately aware of your needs.

In terms of health care, truly it begins with our diets and if this country is so insistent that health care is a major political issue then you would think they would be willing to discuss the primary differences between eating frozen foods and fresh organically grown foods. Not to dismiss frozen foods as this can be a necessary back up to a daily supply of fresh foods, but frozen foods and fast foods as a regular diet is a recipe for chronic illness and this chronic illness is a big reason why the cost of health insurance is so damned high.

The trick is to convince small scaled farmers to learn how to organize with other farmers to form a co-operative capable of creating the necessary buying power as large corporations still allowing them to operate as individual farmers. I would even go as far as to suggest that these farmers should avoid any statutory corporate model and simply form non-statutory co-operatives not reliant upon permission from the state in order to exist.

Just a few thoughts and ideas to your points, Ownbestenemy. Thanks so much for joining this thread and I look forward to hearing your thoughts.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 04:00 AM
link   
Ayn Rand and her acolytes are the people that destroyed America's economy.

Guess who was Rand's biggest fan in the US economy...

Give up?

Why Alan Greenspan of course.

If you wanna pretend that Rand is a genius, that's OK, but the reality is that her ideas are long discredited.

As for the idea that you guys could somehow bypass airlines and rent a private plane....hahahahahahahahahahaha...

That's too incredibly stupid to waste time debunking, but dear god it's funny.

Ayn Rand = Joke.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 04:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
That is were the power of the State comes in handy for cities, states and the feds though. It is the only entity in the world that can use deadly force to achieve what it wants within the means of the law.

Speaking of laws, with the amount of laws that are currently on the books, one merely can walk down the street and be breaking some kind of law, somehow.

Your example of licensing, codes, etc is an excellent in what it takes to conduct 'business' in this country. The general feel though is that most people in government believe that the masses are too dumb and lazy to be able to conduct private contractual business without the oversight of their committees, codes and laws.


Too dumb or not, before there was even a Bill of Rights passed as Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America, there was the contract clause all ready in existence. People have the right to contract and the states are forbidden from impairing the obligation of contracts.

I can't remember who said this and I don't think I am quoting directly and only paraphrasing but I have heard it said that you can gauge the insanity of a society by the number of laws they have on the books. If the legislation passed is not in effect to protect the rights of individuals then it is a bogus law and has no legitimate force.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux

Originally posted by ownbestenemy
That is were the power of the State comes in handy for cities, states and the feds though. It is the only entity in the world that can use deadly force to achieve what it wants within the means of the law.

Speaking of laws, with the amount of laws that are currently on the books, one merely can walk down the street and be breaking some kind of law, somehow.

Your example of licensing, codes, etc is an excellent in what it takes to conduct 'business' in this country. The general feel though is that most people in government believe that the masses are too dumb and lazy to be able to conduct private contractual business without the oversight of their committees, codes and laws.


Too dumb or not, before there was even a Bill of Rights passed as Amendments to the Constitution for the United States of America, there was the contract clause all ready in existence. People have the right to contract and the states are forbidden from impairing the obligation of contracts.

I can't remember who said this and I don't think I am quoting directly and only paraphrasing but I have heard it said that you can gauge the insanity of a society by the number of laws they have on the books. If the legislation passed is not in effect to protect the rights of individuals then it is a bogus law and has no legitimate force.


All of this is nonsense.

I have lived in multiple countries and I can tell you that there's NO correlation between the number of laws and ANYTHING.

You're just making # up.

The free-market economy as described by Rand is essentially ONE BIG PYRAMID SCHEME.

The ideas she espoused were used by the neo-cons to justify lying the US into war.

This is not only stupid and wrong, but dangerous.

If you're not a teenager then you really need to take a civics lesson. Society is for ALL OF US.

Ayn Rand preached totalitarianism, not capitalism and certainly not democracy.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 04:46 AM
link   
reply to post by seethelight
 


Okay, I'll bite. It is ironic your signature and a thread you started on logical fallacies and the non-arguments you've made in this thread. You've engaged in Ad Hominems, Needling and Argument by Dismissal and all that you have posted has been nothing other than fallacious arguments. How ironic is that coming from you? Do you see the light?

Instead of wasting your time attacking Ayn Rand or even my ideas why not recognize where we can agree and use that as a starting point for discussion or even debate. I gather from your original post that you are no fan of Alan Greenspan and neither am I. Here is a man, first of all, who is best known for being the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, which is a fraudulent organization suppressing the U.S. economy through the issuance of fiat money and Greenspan's ghastly suppression of interest rates only discouraged people from saving their money as they only stood to loose money given the rate of inflation. This suppression of interest rates only encouraged a reckless consumerism and did nothing sound for the economy.

The Federal Reserve is an agency that has to go. As to your dismissal of my other arguments, I can't even begin to debate you on this until you at least attempt to provide intelligent arguments as to why I might be wrong, if you can see the light long enough to make such arguments.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 04:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by seethelight
 


Okay, I'll bite. It is ironic your signature and a thread you started on logical fallacies and the non-arguments you've made in this thread. You've engaged in Ad Hominems, Needling and Argument by Dismissal and all that you have posted has been nothing other than fallacious arguments. How ironic is that coming from you? Do you see the light?

Instead of wasting your time attacking Ayn Rand or even my ideas why not recognize where we can agree and use that as a starting point for discussion or even debate. I gather from your original post that you are no fan of Alan Greenspan and neither am I. Here is a man, first of all, who is best known for being the Chairman of the Federal Reserve, which is a fraudulent organization suppressing the U.S. economy through the issuance of fiat money and Greenspan's ghastly suppression of interest rates only discouraged people from saving their money as they only stood to loose money given the rate of inflation. This suppression of interest rates only encouraged a reckless consumerism and did nothing sound for the economy.

The Federal Reserve is an agency that has to go. As to your dismissal of my other arguments, I can't even begin to debate you on this until you at least attempt to provide intelligent arguments as to why I might be wrong, if you can see the light long enough to make such arguments.



If you're not a fan of Greenspan then you're miserably confused. Greenspan did everything he could to create an economy that Rand disciples would thrive in.

You can't like Rand and hate Greenspan unless you don't understand Rand or Greenspan.

As far as attacking you is concerned: yes, if you wanna spread dangerous lies I will attack you.

There's no point in engaging you on Rand if you didn't even known about the Greenspan connection.

You're the sucker underclass in Rand's work... not the ruling elite.

In the early 1950s, Greenspan began an association with famed novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand that would last until her death in 1982.[9] He wrote for Rand’s newsletters and authored several essays in her book Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.[10] Rand stood beside him at his 1974 swearing-in as Chair of the Council of Economic Advisers

en.wikipedia.org...

So, really, it's Greenspan and his cronies you're trying to get me to support... no thanks.

Learn a bit more about Rand before you start telling us all to reject society.



posted on Dec, 30 2009 @ 05:08 AM
link   
reply to post by seethelight
 


There you go again refusing to offer any logical reasons as to why I might be wrong or incorrect and insisting on using only fallacious arguments to state your case. Along with Ad Hominems, Needling and Argument by Dismissal we can now add the list; Inflation of Conflict, Argument from Adverse Consequences, Excluded Middle, Psychogenic Fallacy, Argument by Emotive Language, Begging the Question, and Fallacy of Composition just to name a few.

If you wish to engage in debate then do so. If you wish to do otherwise and are attempting to derail this thread then I will simply ignore you and have an intelligent discussion with those who are interested in intelligent discussion or debates.




top topics



 
24
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join