US Politics

WPMUFC said:
No clue where else to post this, but if you want a background/investigation into the "intellectual" bedrock of the modern right wing, this is excellent.
Click to expand...
Thanks! Will hear it tomorrow at work.

Was getting rather late into contact with her, through Fountainhead which was promoted in a subtle way by a brillian but controversial architect I follow. Found the book so-so, no great literature for sure more like a superhero book about an almost human like architect - so even kind of silly fun in a way. But after that I started to read Atlas Shrugged and stopped after 20ish pages and started googling her. That was it for me. I think I can kind of see her starting point but then it gets overtly muddy and incomprehendible (for me at least) and reaches a conclusion that just reads as a half-assed excuse to do shitty stuff. But I also never found her thoughts and writing interesting and well versed enough to really read up on her but the fact that she gets used a lot as a background for those right wingers makes it almost mandatory.
 
nimic said:
That's not a problem for libertarians, because they're also wrong about nearly everything.
Click to expand...

"She wore a cape because she thought she was a super hero, essentially mimicked Stalin in a personal sex cult and got Alan Greenspan to disavow her lover whom she cheated on her husband with" - The least insane Libertarian. :lol: :lol:

Genuinely folks...give the podcast a listen. :lol:
 
WPMUFC said:
"She wore a cape because she thought she was a super hero, essentially mimicked Stalin in a personal sex cult and got Alan Greenspan to disavow her lover whom she cheated on her husband with" - The least insane Libertarian. :lol: :lol:

Genuinely folks...give the podcast a listen. :lol:
Click to expand...
It's super funny. Didn't fully understand all of it unfortunately (no native speaker myself) but parts had me laugh out loud. They present it in a very good and relatable way as well. She must have been so bonkers in person. Questioning in public "What would have Howard Roak done?" One of her cardboard characters she herself invented. :lol: Making your husband wear bells attached to his slippers so he can't sneak up to her in their house. WTF! :D
 
weetee said:
It's super funny. Didn't fully understand all of it unfortunately (no native speaker myself) but parts had me laugh out loud. They present it in a very good and relatable way as well. She must have been so bonkers in person. Questioning in public "What would have Howard Roak done?" One of her cardboard characters she herself invented. :lol: Making your husband wear bells attached to his slippers so he can't sneak up to her in their house. WTF! :D
Click to expand...

The intellectual mind that inspired the Chair of the Federal Reserve of the United States (1987–2006) :lol:
 
NotThatSoph said:
Guys in here disrespecting the philosophic mind that got from A=A to Objectivism.
Click to expand...

"Nuance and complexity of thought are a conspiracy of the medicore and poor against the idea that rich people are awesome" - Crazy Bat Lady in her cape

Actual Philosophers:

giphy.gif
 
WPMUFC said:
"Nuance and complexity of thought are a conspiracy of the medicore and poor against the idea that rich people are awesome" - Crazy Bat Lady in her cape

Actual Philosophers:
Click to expand...

My favorite is her absolutely butchering Kant, which is why her disciples are known for blaming him for Nazism among other things. In Kant's deontological moral framework a moral action is one where you do something because it's your moral duty to do so. It follows from this that e.g. a pharmacist selling someone a life saving medication because she wants to earn a profit isn't doing something morally good because she's motivated by profit rather than saving lives; it's an amoral action, as in it has nothing to do with morality. Galaxy Brain Rand manages to interpret that reasoning as Kant saying it's an immoral action, i.e. it's morally wrong to sell medicine (and further that any sale or barter is immoral).

Her messing up of basically everything lives on in books by the likes of Leonard Peikoff, and more current Stephen Hicks's Explaining Postmodernism. The latter which is coincidentally Jordan Peterson's main source of philosophical opinions. A is A and existence exists, though, so I guess they're right.
 
She clearly deserves her own appreciation thread I reckon.

Imagine despising Robin Hood as a child because he gave it to the poor.
 
nimic said:
That's not a problem for libertarians, because they're also wrong about nearly everything.
Click to expand...
I haven't met any libertarians or anarchists who have a sophisticated understanding of how the world economy works. Though that being said I haven't met many people at all who could claim that. Who studies systems? Everyone is a specialist.

For most, freedom+economics=libertarianism.
 
Beans said:
I haven't met any libertarians or anarchists who have a sophisticated understanding of how the world economy works. Though that being said I haven't met many people at all who could claim that. Who studies systems? Everyone is a specialist.

For most, freedom+economics=libertarianism.
Click to expand...

I don't think it's fair to compare libertarians and anarchists. Libertarianism has never existed, but there have been serious attempts at anarchism. The problem is that they were so counter to the prevailing order that they were never allowed to survive. It doesn't help that they always began in time of crisis, because that is when people could be easier convinced that a system revolution is necessary. Anarchism has ten times the intellectual backing that libertarianism is. It's also not inherently immoral.

(That said, I see that maybe that wasn't what you were saying, I just had to add it!)
 
nimic said:
I don't think it's fair to compare libertarians and anarchists. Libertarianism has never existed, but there have been serious attempts at anarchism. The problem is that they were so counter to the prevailing order that they were never allowed to survive. It doesn't help that they always began in time of crisis, because that is when people could be easier convinced that a system revolution is necessary. Anarchism has ten times the intellectual backing that libertarianism is. It's also not inherently immoral.

(That said, I see that maybe that wasn't what you were saying, I just had to add it!)
Click to expand...

One of my favorite attempts was Canudos in Brazil, a story fictionalized brilliantly by Mario Vargas Llosa in The War of the End of the World. The true story is mostly the same as the fiction and a fascinating chapter in human history where you actually had basically functional anarchism (but you could say there was still a hierarchy to a small extent) but the government couldn't stand it.
 
nimic said:
I don't think it's fair to compare libertarians and anarchists. Libertarianism has never existed, but there have been serious attempts at anarchism. The problem is that they were so counter to the prevailing order that they were never allowed to survive. It doesn't help that they always began in time of crisis, because that is when people could be easier convinced that a system revolution is necessary. Anarchism has ten times the intellectual backing that libertarianism is. It's also not inherently immoral.

(That said, I see that maybe that wasn't what you were saying, I just had to add it!)
Click to expand...
Some people I've talked to use the term libertarianism instead of anarchism because of how reactionary people are to the word anarchy.

Some see a minimization of government as the closest you can get to self government.

None of these people are anything approaching an expert, and neither am I, it must be said. I'd be happy to learn more about it all.

Thought it seems to me we did have minimalist government once upon a time. And we kept needing to add more rules to clarify the intent of the original ones. I don't see how this can be avoided.
 
Beans said:
Some people I've talked to use the term libertarianism instead of anarchism because of how reactionary people are to the word anarchy.

Some see a minimization of government as the closest you can get to self government.

None of these people are anything approaching an expert, and neither am I, it must be said. I'd be happy to learn more about it all.

Thought it seems to me we did have minimalist government once upon a time. And we kept needing to add more rules to clarify the intent of the original ones. I don't see how this can be avoided.
Click to expand...

Anarchism is a lot more than just minimalist government, though. I'm not an anarchist in any way, but fair is fair.
 
Beans said:
:lol:

Who hated Robin Hood?
Click to expand...


Ayn Rand did. And with a passion. :lol:

Imagine saying on the one hand that i) those that don't worship money are directly advocating for a lawless society where everybody loots and robs everybody else (at gun point and by using force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims) while also ii) criticising Robin Hood for taking what doesn't belong to him + even getting bonus points for that from others while the whole point of the story is kind of that the evil king worships money which doesn't belong to him originally (he hasn't produced and sold anything) but he was able to take by force (or taxes! :D) the wealth from his disarmed citizens/victims.
 
weetee said:


Ayn Rand did. And with a passion. :lol:

Imagine saying on the one hand that i) those that don't worship money are directly advocating for a lawless society where everybody loots and robs everybody else (at gun point and by using force to seize the wealth of disarmed victims) while also ii) criticising Robin Hood for taking what doesn't belong to him + even getting bonus points for that from others while the whole point of the story is kind of that the evil king worships money which doesn't belong to him originally (he hasn't produced and sold anything) but he was able to take by force (or taxes! :D) the wealth from his disarmed citizens/victims.
Click to expand...
:eek::annoyed:...

:lol:

Just goes to show if your underlying axioms are wrong, you can use logic to get to some very, very strange places.

If you find yourself hating Robin Hood, or wanting to kill a lot of people from some "group" that only exists as a concept, your axioms might be wrong.

I used to keep a copy of Atlas Shrugged in a little cabinet on the wall in my kitchen, to punish it. They should be kept in the dark since destroying books is gouche.
 
People might wonder how the Congress worked 10 years ago or so, considering all the tactics that we are seeing nowadays.

 
The step was a remarkable one for Mr. Biden, who vowed to be “the most pro-union president you’ve ever seen,” and for Democrats in control of Congress, who count organized labor among their most loyal constituencies.

Senate Democrats, under pressure from progressives to insist on the additional compensated time off for workers, tried and failed to push through a House-passed measure to add seven days of paid medical leave to the agreement. It was defeated 52 to 43, failing to secure the necessary 60 votes needed to pass and prompting multiple liberal senators to oppose the agreement altogether.

Ultimately, a broad bipartisan group set aside reservations about inserting Congress into the labor dispute and backed the agreement that the Biden administration negotiated. The vote was 80 to 15, with Senator Rand Paul, Republican of Kentucky, voting “present.”

Mr. Biden had championed the negotiations that led to the tentative agreement, which his administration helped strike under the Railway Labor Act, a 1926 law that allows the president to intervene in rail labor disputes that threaten to cut off essential commerce or transportation service.
Click to expand...


Well done in particular to Joseph Reaganette Biden and Alexandria Hernan Cortez.

Biden is just doing his job, and doing it well. AOC is proving that Jimmy Dore has a better understanding of US politics than me and everybody else here. If the GOP manage to pull off their "realignment" of organised labour, well done to them.
 
berbatrick said:
Well done in particular to Joseph Reaganette Biden and Alexandria Hernan Cortez.

Biden is just doing his job, and doing it well. AOC is proving that Jimmy Dore has a better understanding of US politics than me and everybody else here. If the GOP manage to pull off their "realignment" of organised labour, well done to them.
Click to expand...

Per progressives in Congress, unions only asked them to vote yes on separate bills and not hold them up.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.