America Disarmed

The Ayn Rand Institute ^ | Released: October 22, 2001 | By C. Bradley Thompson

[PatrickHenry]

My usual bump, with essential links for anyone interested in liberty:

A TREASURY OF PRIMARY DOCUMENTS . The ultimate source of history links.
A Chronology of US Historical Documents.
The Avalon Project at the Yale Law School, more historic documents.
Laissez Faire Books.
Ayn Rand Bookstore. (formerly Second Renaissance Books)
Reason Foundation.
Ayn Rand Institute.
Religion and the Founding Fathers
Religion vs. Morality, from the Ayn Rand Institute.

[Free the USA]

Good Post

[Jolly Rodgers]

bump

[clintonh8r]

Very astute analysis. This is a war between civilization and barbarism. Islam, in its current incarnation, is a religion of domination, war, hatred and murder. Those who cling to it must be exterminated, before they exterminate us. So far, they have the upper hand. But then, so did the Japanese on December 8th, 1941, after their atrocities against us. In the end, the same weapons that defeated Japanese imperialism may be needed to vaporize the terrorists.

[Stand Watch Listen]

Philosophy, who needs it?
Source: Ayn Rand's Speech to West Point; Published: March 6, 1974
Author: Ayn Rand

[Jolly Rodgers]

Islam, in its current incarnation, is a religion of domination, war, hatred and murder. Those who cling to it must be exterminated, before they exterminate us.

I prefer to be a bit more selective in my calls for extermination -- focusing in particular upon only those who directly threaten to harm me or my fellow citizens. As such, I reject a call to exterminate every muslim, just as I reject the call to exterminate every inhabitant of Afghanistan.

[mercy]

Of course a bunch of joiners who run around in the made up name of an ego-maniac who, while postulating a new 'true' morality of virtue and honor, actually helped herself to another woman's husband and regularly stepped on her own husband as one would squash a bug, surely have contrubuted NOTHING to the general malaise of the American psyche.

[Jolly Rodgers]

Is it your jealousy that prevents you from reading and responding to the content of the article?

[Khepera]

the problem is that now they tell us that most muslims are not the enemy. With Japan all Japanese where the enemy.

[RetiredArmy]

Is it possible to have a convention of all the liberal college professors and liberal anti-gunners, conservative and republican haters at say the Rose Bowl and call in some of those F16 strikes? Just wondering.

[clintonh8r]

So far I haven't seen any evidence that Islam as a culture has any remorse for the events of 9/11 or has any objective other than imposing its philosophy on the rest of the world, not by persuasion, but by intimidation and violence. When moderate (by Western definition) Muslims dominate the religion, I may moderate my own position.

[mercy]

Jealousy ..... hmmmmmmm??? Could I be jealous of a bunch of whacko libertines? Nope? Don't see how. Sowwy.

[Carry_Okie]

I agree that mercy's comment did not address a reasonably decent insight about the impotence of power, but I had to address her comment on Rand.

Actually, I think the Randians have so far been relatively irrelevant when compared to the Popular Front. The reason that the public has (correctly) not gone wholesale for objectivism is that Rand's was an incomplete philosophy. She never addressed the externalities of production, and her system therefore lacked the integrity to supercede the political justification for regulatory governance.

That does not mean that the market is incapable of such. I think it is, but we need a better understanding of the nature of mobile property.

[mercy]

Besides .... I DID comment on the contents of the article. could it be your blind rage that kept you from seeing this plain fact?

[Jolly Rodgers]

Jealousy ..... hmmmmmmm??? Could I be jealous of a bunch of whacko libertines? Nope? Don't see how. Sowwy.

So, I guess you just agree with the leftist professors who blame America and comfort the enemy.

[Jolly Rodgers]

Of course a bunch of joiners who run around in the made up name of an ego-maniac who, while postulating a new 'true' morality of virtue and honor, actually helped herself to another woman's husband and regularly stepped on her own husband as one would squash a bug, surely have contrubuted NOTHING to the general malaise of the American psyche.

This is what you call a comment on the content of the article? I see an attempt to smear Objectivists. I see a comment on Rand's sexual proclivities. And, I see a reference to American psyche. What I don't see is even the slightest hint of a reference to the content of the article or the issues it addressed. I suppose when you have no grounds to address the content you have to settle for trying to smear the messenger.

[ffusco]

I agree. Hoiwever i believe that the US response to terrorism should be so overwhelmingly swift and forceful that no-one would dare retailiate. Some suggestions: Nuke the 20 mile square territory that UBL is hiding. The collateral damage would be slight. Most of Afghanistan is barren and not populated. But the image of a mountain range being turned into glass would remain forever. Capture all family members of the Laden clan, starting with mom and dad and have them call UBL at gunpoint and demand he surrender or become an orphan.Next move on to brothers and sisters. Reverse terrorism: thru diplomatic channels let rogue nations know that their capitols will be razed if any terrorist attacks the US again.

[mercy]

You really are dumb aren't you? The writer began his whole premise by commenting on the deplorable state of collective American morality and how it had been debased by various persons and movements. I simply stated that your group had done no better. That in fact you have contributed wholesale to the degeneration of our collective mores.

There, I spelled it out for you but I know it doesn't matter because you are a group thinker and you are subserviant to the group and I think your group is a pile of $hit so I must be attacked. Dolt.

[Jolly Rodgers]

Actually, I think the Randians have so far been relatively irrelevant when compared to the Popular Front.

On this point I'll agree that Objectivism has had minimal impact on the culture. However, it does have a very strong impact on the individual lives of those who embrace it.

The reason that the public has (correctly) not gone wholesale for objectivism is that Rand's was an incomplete philosophy. She never addressed the externalities of production, and her system therefore lacked the integrity to supercede the political justification for regulatory governance.

I don't see that as a shortcoming in the philosophy. Rand laid down a full fledged philosophical foundation, but the detailed implementation of that philosophy through externalities is up to us. It would have been nice if she would have fleshed out examples of how the philosophy could be implemented at the concrete level. On the other hand, that might have had the unintended consequence of suppressing creative application by leading us to think that her example is the only possibility.