Posted on 09/30/2022 3:44:58 AM PDT by EBH
Is the only way to let it/them all die?
Can people of this mindset be saved from this fate?
Yes, N/A, No.
Objectivism implies it is not within our ability to 'let it/them all die' any more than to save them from their fate.
A=A
Yes. And a better idea might be to push back before the killing starts.
Christians should reject an erroneous pastor’s teaching that “turn the other cheek” means to accept all manner of atrocity with meekness.
Rand does a great job of describing the parasitic nature of Communism. The people she described riding that train could have been made to confront reality sooner.
You cannot argue with a liberal.
They are smug in their arrogance and self-righteous indignation, that you are an ignorant Cretan and must be ignored, destroyed or imprisoned for your useless, antiquated and selfish ideas..........................
Now you’ve gone and done it! I have to read the book again.
For the 4th time!
Ayn Rand was so profoundly stupid that, not only did she name her purely subjective philosophy "objectivism", but she disseminated the internal philosophy of communism as somehow anti-communist. The supposedly earned-wealth of all of her theoretical protagonists was always fiat currency backed up by the threat of government violence.
Post; comments BUMP!
“The people she described riding that train could have been made to confront reality sooner.”
Probably not. You can’t reason a person out of a position they weren’t reasoned into. Besides, it’s so much better when people who refuse to deal with reality are forced to by that same reality.
The Left is incapable of reason. In fact they hate it. They’d sooner smash your head open with a rock. History proves me right on that.
L
“The supposedly earned-wealth of all of her theoretical protagonists was always fiat currency backed up by the threat of government violence.”
That was all they had. And Francisco D’Anconio dealt with that in his Money Speech.
L
Ouch! A Libertarian who finds Rand to be “soft”!
Did you find, as I did, that she had her protagonists resort to the force that she spent so much time decrying? It seemed a cop-out, to me.
I don’t think I understand how she was Communist, but I never understood how “objectivism” could be a morality, either.
In Atlas Shrugged, there was a strong emphasis on a gold standard currency. Dagney and Hank lived in the real world, of course, and not Atlantis, as did the reader.
In Galt’s Gulch the only currency allowed was gold.
If Rand was unaware of fiat currency why would this have been emphasized in these chapters of her book?
Perhaps I am not clear. You do not help these people to confront reality by reasoning with them. You de-fund their non-realities. The “professor” may learn what reality is, when he has to learn to ask “Do you want fries with that?” Additionally, he will be more productive.
Oh wow. I didn't expect the argument to end so quickly.
“The “professor” may learn what reality is, when he has to learn to ask “Do you want fries with that?”
Maybe. But I think it far more likely he’d be out in the street destroying other peoples property.
L
There was a book study group right here on FR a few years ago.
You’d have to search the archives for the weekly chapter threads. Great commentary!
One of the FReepers even published a follow-up on Amazon books.
“I didn’t expect the argument to end so quickly.”
Why not? It was easy enough to refute.
L
“fiat currency backed up by the threat of government violence”
Your post reminds me of an old favorite:
https://www.amazon.com/No-Treason-Constitution-Authority/dp/1938357000
Truth hurts—a lot.
The truth is that homo sapiens still hasn’t figured out how to live in a society where we are not ripping off other people and telling them it is for their own good.
Communism is the preferred espoused philosophy of high-functioning sociopaths who don't actually believe anything they outwardly preach. They operate under a "rules for thee, but not for me" methodology that creates a two-tiered society in which they live like kings among the squalled masses whom they regard as inferiors. They create this society by differentiating between those who are politically inside a certain political sphere (the communist party itself, usually), and those who are to be politically disenfranchised over ideologically differences or who are necessarily keep outside the sphere of influence in order to rarefy wealth and power for the elites.
Rand (who was educated in a communist institution) was a low-functioning sociopath who picked up on the internalized morality of communism and repackaged that philosophy as her own without the intellectual wherewithal to realize that she was just another anti-christian-post-morality leftist saying the quiet part out loud.
Ask Bernie Sanders, John Fetterman, Cenk Uygur, Hasan Piker, or any other rich socialist why they can't give their own wealth away before touch the common man's, and they will unfallingly espouse Randiest rhetoric -- "Why should I?"
But you didn't refute anything. You admitted that Randians only have the threat of government violence behind them.
“You admitted that Randians only have the threat of government violence behind them.”
When did I do that? They participated quite unwillingly in the fiat money scheme and more than once character warned of the consequences.
So your premise is flawed.
L
I agree, only He can. Unfortunately the majority of people who hold these mindsets do not believe in Him- they arrogantly believe they are smarter and know more than anyone else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.