Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 43

Thread: Atlas Shrugged [Rand]

  1. #31
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    2 Hours Ago @ 02:48 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,891
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,192
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,292
    Thanked in
    550 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    I think the Germans were already engaging in a market system even back to the Roman period.
    Maybe you, along with most of your fellow Americans, should actually have a look into the difference between (random) market systems and Liberal Free Market Capitalism, and understand what this "liberal free" in there actually means.

    It's really tiresome to discuss a topic with defendends of a system that they dont even understand, or deny what it generates in the real world.

    For a start, NS Germany was, China and Japan are "capitalist" nations, but they are not "liberal free market capitalist" nations. There's giant difference.


    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    In any case the "Slaves" were imported by imperialist hundreds of years in the past, and for the most part it was a corporatist enterprise. And official Libertarianism had not even been invented at the time.
    But it's been the same people who pinned down the Liberal / Libertarian ideology. In order to not have the nations, the people, the govt mess with their profit. It's these same people who invented (and really literally invented) the atomised individual and its "inherent natural enmity" to its own nation.


    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    Not really because when you start adding up the cost, you have to factor in all the extra expenses that you get with extra people. In reality it is almost always cheaper to Do It Yourself, and that goes for the individual as well as the nation.
    Thanks to Liberal Free Market Capitalism, extra costs, or even the real costs of a product are not factored, and this is really the only reason why societies (as the collection - not collective - of individuals who happen to share a living space) still exist, to make them pay for these costs in order to maximise profits for the corporations.


    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    On the other hand, for a Government and especially interest groups that want to overturn the existing population then importing "Immigrants" in the name of Cheap Labour are an ideal option to get instant support.
    It's interesting that we, Germany, after WWII, when the US had "liberated" us and had enforced "liberal free market capitalism", that our govt wanted to pin down strict rules for guestworkers, so that they'd leave after max 2 years, and the Turks no one wanted, not the govt, not the people, not the companies, not the unions, no one. It was the US that enforced that we take them in. And it was the US that then enforced their stay on grounds of "human rights". And it was the "human rights" proxy that enforced "freedom of religion".

    It is, btw, the most retarded argument that a govt would profit from (illegal) immigrants. Illegals cannot vote, so there is no way to gain any support from illegals. And legal immigrants, of the non-western extraction, reject democracy and dont go voting even if they can. So it's utter BS.

    Maybe in the US illegals can vote? I dont know.


    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    What we should be discussing here is not how bad the market system is, but how to move things to the next phase. And that would be how to decentralize production, and open up the business world so corporations do NOT OWN everything.

    IE get rid of Patent Law copyright law. Farm out R&D to small development groups. Then Allow the end result to be sold and produced in multiple communities.
    Aha, and who is going to enforce decentralisation, when private corporations already own everything - including the government (everything must be privately owned in liberalism/libertarianism, there's even talk about privatising the courts and prisons in America!) - and would never in their dreams think about giving up their Patent Laws (which is a pivotal point of Liberalism to protect the interests of the inventor and get rid off competitors), and even more, right now introduce SOPA / PIPA and ACTA to protect their inventions and products world wide?

    You see, capitalism, when left unchecked, ie liberal free market capitalism, will ALWAYS - and MUST - propell towards Monopolies, it's inbuilt. It's not a "flaw" of the current implentation, it is an inbuilt mechanism.

    You call that "competition", where the "bigger" eats the "smaller" competitor, and eliminates the competitor with that. In that process, concurrenting inventions, which regularly represent the better product, vanish in drawers forever so the products of the winning competitor dominate the market while the better products never see the light of day. When you want to generate maximum profits, it's not in your interest to produce products that last forever, the Light Bulb Mafia f.e. invested millions to find out a way that light bulbs would die after 1000 hours usage, because the original Wolfram light bulbs lasted literally forever. There's one still lighting a fire station in America, it recently celebrated it 100th anniversary. That's not very profit oriented, now is it?

    Mass production is only profitable with low quality products. Or rather, low quality is a precondition for profit generation. So "competition", since it is reduced to price and profit, ie the financial aspect, is inherently opposed to quality.


    Quote Originally Posted by EQ Fighter
    IE a Practical Option as opposed to a Imaginary Option.
    Again, who is going to enforce this practical option against the corporate interests?



    Quote Originally Posted by Oski
    To me, race is the natural collective, not the state. Individuals comprise this race and the extreme individuals create its culture. The big debate should be between the state and the individual.
    "Extreme" individuals do not create culture, they are anti-social and usually consider themselves to stand above profane things like "culture".

    But when you think that race is a natural collective, and this natural collective comprises a nation, do you imagine that this nation-collective has no right to organise it's culture into a political entity, ie a state?

    Look at the Indian Nations in your country what happens when your "nation" is merely a recognition of ethnicity, but that they further have no rights to claim their own territory, where their laws rule, where their culture is dominant and the governing culture etc. They cease to exist. Because they have no means to protect themselves.


    The kind of fantasy of an anarchic, self-governing people is a fantasy of the stone age, when humanity around the globe consisted of maybe a million people world wide and there was basically no contact between races. Yet, we know that tribes did protect their tribal territory against other tribes, even back then. And they had chieftains and a council of elders looking over and governing the tribe.

    A nation, as the recognised entity within international law today, comprising the ethnicity AND their nation's territory with recognised borders is a necessity in a world with hundreds of tribes/ethnities claiming self-governance for themselves. The state, as the political organisation of that ethnicity is likewise a necessity both for internal and external representation and communication with other nations.

    It is on very same plane natural to form an organisation as the collective is natural that comprises the nation.

    The government is a product of that collective.

    Then came Liberalism (in the 18th century, btw, read up on Locke), created the "anti-social individual", teached that anti-social individual that is has rights that exceed the rights of its collective nation as a whole, and also didnt forget to teach the anti-social individual that the state, therefore, is its arch enemy wanting to cut the imaginary rights that exceed the rights of the collective, that allegedly "natural" collective, and created the "hostile government" as the product of the anti-social individual.


    Which is the most unnatural seperation of individual<->nation that could possibly have been invented.


    Quote Originally Posted by Oski
    Should the state be able to oppress an individual of your race if they have harmed none?
    So you think, because it doesnt do direct harm to anyone, that individuals should be allowed to import cheap labor (aka immigrants) or products that, although they dont do harm to other individuals directly, but to the collective (through making jobs superfluous because the products imported are "cheaper" to produce elsewhere than inside the nation), because that individual has the right to generate profit regardless of the side effects this has on the collective?

    And is is a collective, that takes care of its interests as a whole, "oppressive" to an individual that breaks the collective's rules and laws and undermines its self-interests in favor of that individual's egoism and greed?

    Is a collective "oppressive" when it enforces its rules and laws, or can the individual do whatever it pleases with no regards to rules and laws and the collective interests?



    Quote Originally Posted by Oski
    If you were the head of state, would you oppress the individuals that have not harmed your race because of petty disagreements?
    When it endangers the functioning of the collective society with its ideas, workings, writings, ideas, products and employment conditions, isnt it rather my job, as the head of my nation-state, to enforce the protection of my race-nation against pity, egoistic desires of an anti-social individual?
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  2. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, August 6th, 2012 @ 08:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    German/Irish
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Computer CAD/ Civil
    Politics
    Libertarian/Conservative
    Posts
    1,773
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    Well then... Just disband the Border Patrol, let the police focus on providing physical security and leave it to the free markets to deport all your illegal aliens. I'm sure that all the Mexicans would be out of Texas by the end of summer.
    Honestly man we have a volunteer group here called the Minutemen, and they have done a far better job then the well paid "Border Patrol".

    The real issue here is the Texas, Arizona, and California border is hundreds of miles wide. If you doubt me check it out on Google earth. In some places all you need to do is drive across in a four wheel drive vehicle.

    The US Federal government is virtually worthless at patrolling any of this, and attempts to control the flow of drugs by "Law Enforcement" basically works as a artificial scarcity on the supply of Drugs. So this Law drives up the price and makes it very lucrative to push drugs. So much to the point that when the Cops do show up they are facing down Drug Dealers that armed like a military complete with Humvee with top mount .50 caliber machine guns.

    To make matters worse the BATF and CIA are themselves more or less and organized crime syndicate, and have been since the Vietnam war.

    My point here is there MUST ALWAYS be some sort of oversight of government or else you have a crime syndicate. The BECOME the criminals.


    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    Pool boys, cheap housemaids, gardeners. Yes, the Holy Market provides.
    Florida maybe, not Texas.

    And to be honest the first Immigrants in Texas were white and mostly from Germany brought in by the Mexican Government to "Settle the Land".
    Battle of San Jacinto From Wikipedia.

    During the early years of Mexican independence, numerous American immigrants had settled in Mexican Texas, then a part of the state of Coahuila y Tejas, with the Mexican government's encouragement.[3] In 1835 they rebelled against the Mexican government of Santa Anna because he rescinded the democratic Constitution of 1824, dissolved Mexico's Congress and state legislatures, and asserted dictatorial control over the nation.[4] After capturing military outposts and defeating the Mexican army garrisons in the area, the Texans drove the remaining Mexican forces from Texas after a siege and a major confrontation in San Antonio.[5] Texans then formed a provisional government and drafted a Declaration of Independence.[6]
    Quote Originally Posted by Neophyte View Post
    Oh boy, you really do not see the woods for the trees. Ask not what your government is doing for you, but what you can do about your government.
    Sounds like a JFK Quote, sorry man that was a bit before my time and he was a democrat, so not a party I support.

    In any case I will restate the question, Do you have any hope of the Swedish Government or for that mater any government, market forces or otherwise will take action and correct any immigration problems.

    I personally would think not.

    In fact they are probably not even capable of it. And if they were it would be against "Multiculturalism" which is a dynamic which they feed on. Do not expect the dog to give up his food bowl without taking your hand off.

    Immigration is a cultural problem, NOT a government problem, the only real solution is to offset the incoming with the internal. IE to have your own people as place keepers in the system. If a native is in the seat then a Immigrant cannot fill the seat.

    One final thing, there seems to be some misinterpretation about Mexicans here, in comparison to say Arabs who are the primary invaders in Europe.

    Mexicans are brown and so are Arabs, but beyond that there is not much they have in-common. I think Arabs are driven to far more of a degree, than say the Mexicans, who are driven by self interest. Granted there are things I do not like a about Mexicans or Mexican culture, but the same could be said about some of white culture.

    Another point here, is that even though you have Mexican and say German communities in Texas, there has never been a problem with the "Multicultural stuff until the post war 1960's era. That is the Shit ideology that brought in the the social disease that has swept the face of the earth. That is the disease that needs to be cured.

  3. #33
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Oski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 15th, 2019 @ 03:11 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    England & Norway
    Subrace
    Faelid + Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-M405
    mtDNA
    U5a1a1
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Gender
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Property management
    Politics
    Germanic Preservation
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,679
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    But when you think that race is a natural collective, and this natural collective comprises a nation, do you imagine that this nation-collective has no right to organise it's culture into a political entity, ie a state?
    If that were to happen (a racial state, a racial republic) you could, with a proper constitution, protect the individual's natural rights and the nation as a whole from from racial aliens immigrating. What you end up with is a germanic country with its people free from a government that oversteps its boundaries.

    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    So you think, because it doesnt do direct harm to anyone, that individuals should be allowed to import cheap labor (aka immigrants) or products that, although they dont do harm to other individuals directly, but to the collective (through making jobs superfluous because the products imported are "cheaper" to produce elsewhere than inside the nation), because that individual has the right to generate profit regardless of the side effects this has on the collective?
    Quote Originally Posted by velvet View Post
    When it endangers the functioning of the collective society with its ideas, workings, writings, ideas, products and employment conditions, isnt it rather my job, as the head of my nation-state, to enforce the protection of my race-nation against pity, egoistic desires of an anti-social individual?
    Sounds egoistic

    If the immigration of non germanic people is considered harmful by the constitution, then that solves the whole immigration issue when it comes to the topic of individual and the state.

    I'm talking about a germanic america with a constitutional republic form of government that has no racial-others, whats so wrong about that?

  4. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Last Online
    Sunday, February 10th, 2019 @ 08:45 PM
    Ethnicity
    Norse
    Subrace
    Nordid
    Country
    Norway Norway
    Gender
    Politics
    National Socialist
    Religion
    Norse/German
    Posts
    70
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    4
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    7
    Thanked in
    3 Posts
    I read Ayn Rand's (Alicia Rosenbaum's) books many years ago and came under her spell. Looking back I think I can make out what attracted me to her. I grew up in a social democracy which discouraged young people to develop their potential and excel. Gifted and clever youngsters striving to achieve something were resented, ignored, obstructed and bullied. The social atmosphere was a cult of the weak, miserable and depraved. Society so to speak approved of failures. We were expected to drive around in cars playing noisy rock music, drinking and smoking dope, engaging in indiscriminate promiscuous sex, being generally silly and primitive. Those of us who weren't comfortable with such a lifestyle were looking desperately for a spiritual leader who could confirm our moral worth.

    I hated the political and cultural climate in that society. It was crassly materialistic and denied everything beautiful and noble in life. It denied the importance of an upright character and a moral life. A bold and radical voice to support me in that distress was nowhere to be found - until I chanced on this jewish witch. After all the intellectual cowardice I had seen I felt liberated by her fearless and confident radicality in an anti-marxist direction. It wasn't difficult in this newfound bliss of hope to shut my eyes to her ugly doctrines. I suppose I unconsciously reinvented her in my imagination.

    I contacted a group of socalled "objectivists" and attended a meeting. It was an eyeopener; I woke up from my idyll. They hadn't had any new members for twenty years. For all the rhetoric about reason and rationality they were utterly closed to my attempts to discuss Rand's ideas. They laughed at everything I said and rejected it out of hand like so much baby babble. They didn't discuss anything among themselves either, they listened to recorded lectures and when they were finished they didn't even express any thoughts or feelings about what they had heard. The lectures were dry, abstract, simplistic and boring. Later I read about other groups and Rand herself and her disciples. There probably never was a more tyrannical sect guru. She deprived her disciples of all personality, reacting aggressively, even furiously, at the least departure from her barren thought matrix and any expression of personal character. Those who didn't get out became timid empty shells, keeping silent and doing what they were told and asking the timid questions she sort of put in your mouth.

    Being used to being an independent minded outsider I got out before I ever properly got in. I had occasion to speculate on the fascination of her novels and the nature of her ideas. What attracted me to her was her hero worship, her celebration of the strong independent courageous man sacrificing everything for his convictions, fearing nothing. This she had picked from various germanic authors like Ibsen, Shakespeare and Victor Hugo. It was a powerful antidote to social democracy. But when I tried to justify her doctrines about ethics and politics I could not. Much as it ran counter to the prevailing social system - at which I rejoiced! - it wasn't tenable either, in fact it was indefensible.

    My understanding of Rand now is this: She used some germanic ideals as a carrot to lure young germanic men frustrated with cultural marxism and liberalism into her trap. Her doctrines are actually an unabashed statement of ugly jewish character pretending to be an ideal! She celebrates egoism and antisocial ruthless brutal coldhearted ambition. All her "heroes" in the novels are sociopaths, isolated persons hating humanity, having no family and rarely friends. Children do not exist in her world. Love and compassion are completely absent. Sex is almost always rape! Trying to live according to her ideas would be utterly destructive to germanic community and heritage.

    Rand always pretended to be anti-communist, but I wonder. Her personality and doctrines are strikingly similar to bolshevism. I guess it's the jewishness that they have in common. Just about every jewish woman in politics is a feminist, atheist, communist, sexual "liberator" etc. What's the difference between Emman Goldman, Rosa Luxemburg, Golda Meir and Alicia Rosenbaum? I think if you study them closely you'll find an essential unity.

    An interesting question is whether she was sent to America as a soviet agent. Could well be. And she cooperated with powerful New York jews. She claims that she took the name Rand from her type writer, but the Rand Corporation has been busy with mind control technology. See f.ex. http://www.whale.to/b/tav.html#RAND_..._CORPORATION__ where we read: In Educating for the New World Order, B.K. Eakman tells of a training manual for "change agents" developed for the U.S. government by Rand Corporation: " ... for the purpose of exploring ways to 'freeze' and 'unfreeze' values, 'to implement change,' and to turn potentially hostile groups and committees into acquiescent, rubber-stamp bodies by means of such strategies as the 'Delphi Technique.' ... BRAINWASHING remains the primary function of RAND

    Is it possible that Rosenbaum was working in a Rand Corporation project? The founder of this corporation was a fellow jew, Herman Kahn.

    Anyway, the main target of her agitation was Germany. She hated everything german, not just the NS party. She hated german thinkers (notably Immanuel Kant) and poets and musicians (Beethoven). She got hysterical by the mere mention of Germany. Her most important novel, The Fountainhead, was published during the war, and one should suspect that it was part of american war propaganda. As already suggested she takes some of the most appealing aspects of the german spirit, of National Socialism, and gives them a jewish packaging, a venomous potion dished out as propaganda for America. In this way she rounds up those americans who might harbour sympathies for National Socialism and makes them an instrument of jewish capitalism and the rule of money.

  5. #35
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Last Online
    Monday, August 6th, 2012 @ 08:12 AM
    Ethnicity
    German/Irish
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    Texas Texas
    Gender
    Age
    43
    Family
    Single
    Occupation
    Computer CAD/ Civil
    Politics
    Libertarian/Conservative
    Posts
    1,773
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    2
    Thanked in
    2 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by solkorset View Post
    I had occasion to speculate on the fascination of her novels and the nature of her ideas. What attracted me to her was her hero worship, her celebration of the strong independent courageous man sacrificing everything for his convictions, fearing nothing.
    I would say this was for sure not something invented by Ayn Rand. But a great ideal, and has been a great Ideal, for Germanic men for a very long time.

    I can say that is the thing that attracted me to some of her stuff as well, but I have never really been any sort of follower in the true since of the word.

  6. #36
    Funding Member
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    Oski's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Last Online
    Thursday, August 15th, 2019 @ 03:11 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American
    Ancestry
    England & Norway
    Subrace
    Faelid + Nordid
    Y-DNA
    R-M405
    mtDNA
    U5a1a1
    Country
    United States United States
    State
    California California
    Gender
    Family
    Single parent
    Occupation
    Property management
    Politics
    Germanic Preservation
    Religion
    Heathen
    Posts
    1,679
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    8
    Thanked in
    6 Posts
    I look at this forum as the ultimate example and voluntarist form of ethnic and racial collectivism on the internet. No one if forcing us individuals to be here. Individuals can do do this in real life without displacing another collective of humans or oppressing our own collective with violent statism. We can have a race without crushing our member's individuality, this forum is proof. For example: You can be pro-germanic and contribute to us constructively and peacefully for the advancement of our race, or you are free to leave. If you initiate hostilities towards individuals of merit or towards our race as a whole, you can be banned.

  7. #37
    Senior Member velvet's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Last Online
    2 Hours Ago @ 02:48 AM
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    German
    Ancestry
    Northern Germany
    Subrace
    Faelid
    Country
    Germany Germany
    State
    North Rhine-Westphalia North Rhine-Westphalia
    Gender
    Age
    46
    Zodiac Sign
    Sagittarius
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Pestilent Supremacy
    Politics
    Blut und Boden
    Religion
    Fimbulwinter
    Posts
    4,891
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    1,192
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,292
    Thanked in
    550 Posts
    Quote Originally Posted by Oski
    I look at this forum as the ultimate example and voluntarist form of ethnic and racial collectivism on the internet. No one if forcing us individuals to be here. Individuals can do do this in real life without displacing another collective of humans or oppressing our own collective with violent statism. We can have a race without crushing our member's individuality, this forum is proof. For example: You can be pro-germanic and contribute to us constructively and peacefully for the advancement of our race, or you are free to leave. If you initiate hostilities towards individuals of merit or towards our race as a whole, you can be banned.
    But isnt this ultimately oppressive on the banned individual? Dont we enforce a certain standard by banning someone?

    Yes we do. Because we consider the standard of pro-Germanicism to be more important than the whims of a random individual.

    So in fact, Skadi is a benevolent dictatorship, in which only those individuals enjoy freedom who comply to the standard of pro-Germanicism.

    While your joining is volunatary, your continued membership depends on your compliance to the standard. The community and Skadi's expressed pro-Germanicism will always trump the individual's whims. The moment you transgress the standard, your individual voluntarism ceases to have meaning.


    It's simply an Illusion that a community, whether virtual or a real life one, works solely on voluntarism. Either it enforces standards, or it becomes the mess we find in the real world because standards=discriminatory to the whims of egotistic individuals.


    Quote Originally Posted by Oski
    If that were to happen (a racial state, a racial republic) you could, with a proper constitution, protect the individual's natural rights and the nation as a whole from from racial aliens immigrating. What you end up with is a germanic country with its people free from a government that oversteps its boundaries.
    If you have a powerless state that cannot enforce standards, because you think that this is overstepping its boundaries, it can also not uphold the constitution, or any law for that matter. It can also not protect the borders, because you deny the state to have military personell to do so.

    You see, America's problem is that individuals rallied for 200 years against a "strong government", 100 years ago your government became a private corporation over which you no longer have control as the voting sheeple. Your constitution has become a worthless piece of paper. Your law bases on "contemporary interpretations", not on written words. Americans take pride in that fact, because it makes the law "flexible" and "progressive". In truth this means that "law" doesnt exist. It is a reflection of fashion of the thoughts of the judges. America had a law that prohibited immigration of Eastern Europeans (and specially their Jews), today America houses more Jews than live in Israel. Why? Because the one in charge just ignored it, and an established fact overrides law, the law adjusts to the whims and indeed lawbreaking of individuals. There is no one, because there is no government that could possibly protect its standards, who could prevent this from happening.

    Long story short: if you dont enforce standards and dont have the power to enforce standards, standards simply dont exist. Everyone does how he wants and any try to enforce standards is rejected with hinting on the "individual rights" to do whatever you want to do.

    America has exactly the government it wants. A private club powerless to enforce standards, but beside that free to do whatever it wants. So what do you whine about? You have all the freedom you want. Everyone can do how he pleases. Import cheap products, import cheap labor, no one oppresses poor individuals who just look for a better life in the American Nightmare, you're free do run whatever business you want (provided you can stink against the corporations that rule the sector) or you can decide to live under the radar and log out of the system and no one will come to get you back in.

    You dont want standards, and even less you want that standards get enforced.
    Ein Leben ist nichts, deine Sprosse sind alles
    Aller Sturm nimmt nichts, weil dein Wurzelgriff zu stark ist
    und endet meine Frist, weiss ich dass du noch da bist
    Gefürchtet von der Zeit, mein Baum, mein Stamm in Ewigkeit

    my signature

  8. #38
    Senior Member Catterick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 7th, 2017 @ 01:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Germanic and Celtic
    Ancestry
    British Isles & Scandinavia
    Subrace
    Borreby x Nordic
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Aqua
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Gondolier
    Posts
    2,196
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    Ayn Rand's novels are like reading Nietzsche repackaged for dolts, after being filtered through US culture with its very different kind of individualism. Rand was too intelligent and educated to believe it herself and she even called her inner circle a collective.

    Objectivists seem to have died down since the early noughties when they were a regular feature on debate boards. But they are still worth listening to. Nowadays the same people are drawn to Molyneux's paranoia.

  9. #39
    Proffessional Hickerbilly
    "Friend of Germanics"
    Skadi Funding Member

    SpearBrave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Last Online
    @
    Status
    Available
    Ethnicity
    American of German decent
    Ancestry
    Bavaria/Switzerland
    Country
    Other Other
    State
    Kentucky Kentucky
    Location
    Central
    Gender
    Age
    53
    Zodiac Sign
    Libra
    Family
    Married
    Occupation
    Kunstschmiede
    Politics
    Self-Reliance
    Religion
    Asatru
    Posts
    4,573
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    2,794
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    1,312
    Thanked in
    609 Posts
    Having read Atlas Shrugged and Fountain Head I think she was a powerful writer, but as far as her objectivism theories go I find a lot of contradiction even in her books. She does a great job of exposing crony capitalism where big corporations hold sway over government policy (USA). But she fails to explain true individualism.

    Rand in both her writing and personal life had no sense of dedication to others. She was a hedonist with both the characters in her books and real life. Her characters had extra material affairs and so did she with members of her inner circles. Sorry, imo but a person that cheats is not a person of high moral character and should not be trusted.
    Life is like a fire hydrant- sometimes you help people put out their fires, but most of the time you just get peed on by every dog in the neighborhood.

  10. #40
    Senior Member Catterick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Last Online
    Thursday, September 7th, 2017 @ 01:29 AM
    Ethnicity
    Mixed Germanic and Celtic
    Ancestry
    British Isles & Scandinavia
    Subrace
    Borreby x Nordic
    Country
    Other Other
    Location
    Aqua
    Gender
    Family
    Single adult
    Occupation
    Gondolier
    Posts
    2,196
    Thanks Thanks Given 
    0
    Thanks Thanks Received 
    20
    Thanked in
    20 Posts
    If people cannot explain or define true individualism that's maybe because the individual is a phantom. It is. Absurd to consider any one individual apart from their habitus. Individualist theory (if it can be called that) ignores evolutionary biology, sociology, social anthropology, psychology and probably countless other things. It appeals because we all get frustrated sometimes with social impositions: some people take this to an unhealthy degree.

Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. What is Your Opinion of Ayn Rand?
    By Sindig_og_stoisk in forum Philosophy
    Replies: 65
    Last Post: Tuesday, March 19th, 2019, 06:02 PM
  2. Classify Ron and Rand Paul
    By celticviking in forum Anthropological Taxonomy
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: Monday, January 23rd, 2012, 09:41 PM
  3. Rand Paul
    By Æmeric in forum The United States
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: Sunday, October 24th, 2010, 07:01 PM
  4. Franstaligen in Brusselse Rand boos over nieuwe eedformule
    By Frans_Jozef in forum Netherlands & Flanders
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Wednesday, January 3rd, 2007, 09:05 PM
  5. Strike For Freedom: "Atlas Shrugged", by Ayn Rand
    By Ahnenerbe in forum Literature & Book Reviews
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: Monday, March 14th, 2005, 10:41 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •