"To sum up a Liberals feelings towards the conservative ascendancy is an anomaly, and wax nostalgic over the administration of a lecherous sociopath who offered soothing words but never a vestige of reality, substance or results. They yearn for a choreographed fantasy world which disputes human nature. They swoon at the idea of standing on the side of the hill while reciting poetry with talking raccoons and drinking decaffeinated Coke." Ron Marr
The attempt to discredit people or beliefs based on the actions of an advocate(s) is fallacious. If a person is against people murdering others and then murders someone, does that action make it any less true that murdering someone is not a good thing? Whether it be the high carbon foot print of Al Gore, who preaches for less carbon, or the selfish actions of a religious leader that preaches for charity, the debate of whether an action(s) is desirable or not is independent of the messenger. To point, Objectivism (or any other philosophy, belief system) should be judged on its own merits regardless of the actions of anyone.
To point, Objectivism (or any other philosophy, belief system) should be judged on its own merits regardless of the actions of anyone.
My point is that Rand's philosophy - and those who are foe - will stoop to any level in an attempt to discredit. They are the most hypocritical of all.
Where would the socialist and communist movements be without people like Rand - the producers of this world?
The real and logical result is - bankrupt. The left's philosophy - left to it's inevitable conclusion, is bankrupcy.
Ayn Rand and her libertarian philosophy does not result in failure - quite the opposite it would result in more freedom and more prosperity for more people all over the world.
And like Rand, I agree with the idea that what I produce and earn belongs to me - and not to anyone else unless I (the producer) willingly give it to another. No one has the right to steal it away from me with the force of government and robbing me of what I create.
It is immoral to steal the product of our effort and labor, against our will. The socialist believes the opposite, that the wealth created by individuals belongs to the state.
And like Rand - I wish to see the day when the producers withdraw - leaving the socialist agenda without a source to fund their bankrupt philosophy and forcing them to become their own producers.
And I think to a certain extent, this has started to happen. If not by motive of philosophy, just the necessity of surviving in a country becoming more adverse to producers by means of government intrusion.
And for those who refuse to accept this moral responsibility, they can eat mud cakes for dinner, like they do in the socialist state of North Korea.
To point, Objectivism (or any other philosophy, belief system) should be judged on its own merits regardless of the actions of anyone.
My point is that Rand's philosophy - and those who are foe - will stoop to any level in an attempt to discredit. They are the most hypocritical of all.
Where would the socialist and communist movements be without people like Rand - the producers of this world?
The real and logical result is - bankrupt. The left's philosophy - left to it's inevitable conclusion, is bankrupcy.
Ayn Rand and her libertarian philosophy does not result in failure - quite the opposite it would result in more freedom and more prosperity for more people all over the world.
And like Rand, I agree with the idea that what I produce and earn belongs to me - and not to anyone else unless I (the producer) willingly give it to another. No one has the right to steal it away from me with the force of government and robbing me of what I create.
It is immoral to steal the product of our effort and labor, against our will. The socialist believes the opposite, that the wealth created by individuals belongs to the state.
And like Rand - I wish to see the day when the producers withdraw - leaving the socialist agenda without a source to fund their bankrupt philosophy and forcing them to become their own producers.
And I think to a certain extent, this has started to happen. If not by motive of philosophy, just the necessity of surviving in a country becoming more adverse to producers by means of government intrusion.
And for those who refuse to accept this moral responsibility, they can eat mud cakes for dinner, like they do in the socialist state of North Korea.
That day is coming.
"Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel or envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery." -
"The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money"
True, but if all life gives you is lemons then all you can do is make lemonade.
daisypusher wrote: The attempt to discredit people or beliefs based on the actions of an advocate(s) is fallacious. If a person is against people murdering others and then murders someone, does that action make it any less true that murdering someone is not a good thing? Whether it be the high carbon foot print of Al Gore, who preaches for less carbon, or the selfish actions of a religious leader that preaches for charity, the debate of whether an action(s) is desirable or not is independent of the messenger. To point, Objectivism (or any other philosophy, belief system) should be judged on its own merits regardless of the actions of anyone.
The snide, dismissive reviews start rolling in
Posted on February 13, 2011 6:27 am UTC by Joshua Zader
ShareMany of us have long anticipated that the Atlas Shrugged movie will earn the same kind of reviews that Miss Rand’s novel earned: disparaging, dismissive, and completely clueless about why the novels have resonated deeply with millions of intelligent readers — especially those with a streak of independence and entrepreneurship. And if the early reactions to the trailer are any indication, then … well … we won’t be disappointed.
neptunechimney wrote: The snide, dismissive reviews start rolling in
Posted on February 13, 2011 6:27 am UTC by Joshua Zader
ShareMany of us have long anticipated that the Atlas Shrugged movie will earn the same kind of reviews that Miss Rand’s novel earned: disparaging, dismissive, and completely clueless about why the novels have resonated deeply with millions of intelligent readers — especially those with a streak of independence and entrepreneurship. And if the early reactions to the trailer are any indication, then … well … we won’t be disappointed.
A dog will write a symphony before logic enters a liberal mind. ( I know CG this should have been in the let's insult each other thread, but in this instance it is a fact not an insult)
