"Who is John Galt?"

Log in

SmokingPipes.com Updates

Watch for Updates Twice a Week

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

PipesMagazine Approved Sponsor

Status
Not open for further replies.

skraps

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 9, 2015
790
6
Can't say I was familiar with Hardin. Thanks for sharing that.

 

deathmetal

Lifer
Jul 21, 2015
7,714
35
Hardin is, to my mind, the only viable challenge to individualism as a social order. Every other argument pales in comparison.
But, I'm a fanboi. You rarely see writing that clear and thoughtful, outside of Sam Huntington. I love good nerdly political analysis :)

 

skraps

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 9, 2015
790
6
I'm going to read up on some of his stuff. Very interesting.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
Hardin is flawed in this instance, because of the fallacy of equality. No one is equal, no one will create equally. As far as the 24 Hour anal pornography shops, I choose not to live in New York City.
IVe not read Hardin, probably need to. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
Create means to form from nothing. In this instance, I am using the word create, in place of produced. Of course when I use the word create, I am directing one to think of their magickal output also. When we bring our thoughts and ideas Into fruition, we have created from nothing. Not one man will do this creating, the same way as another man. This metaphysical outlook is where I separate from Rand and the Crowley kicks in. Crowley and Rand were very similar in some ways. I haven't built a shrine for either, Im a philosophical scavenger, I build upon the knowledge instead of settling.

 

skraps

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 9, 2015
790
6
Here is an interesting story that relates to some of what we have been talking about. Back in October here in Philly, a 2 year old was found wandering in Love Park. Turns out, the family was homeless and the child had got out of the small cardboard enclosure that his parents had in the park. The event made the news, the child was taken by protective services and the parents were beside themselves.
A local non-profit came forward and helped raise $12k in 24 hours, to help this family get an apartment, enroll in counseling and get their child back. Both the parents had job offers flowing in. Things were looking up for this family, the community came together to help them.
Fast forward to this morning. I hear on the news that the non-profit that helped raised the money pulled the plug. The parents after receiving this help started rejecting services and becoming hostile toward the staff. Help was offered, provided and the couple chose not accept it with the conditions that came along with it. The organization pulled their lease and authorized the landlord to take whatever action he needed to.
Luckily this was a private organization. They were able to reach a point where they could make that decision. I don't fault them. The difference between an organization like this and our government is there is a cutoff point. Why should anyone who doesn't want help, and displays that, continue to receive it?
Is there an obligation to provide even when people don't want the help? Where does that responsibility end? My personal opinion is that this family was given opportunity. They chose not to make the most of it. There is where the responsibility ends.
You cannot help those who will not help themselves. The bleeding heart idea that we should continue to throw money, time and resources at a problem without consideration for whether that problem can or wants to be solved, is insane.

 

deathmetal

Lifer
Jul 21, 2015
7,714
35
When we bring our thoughts and ideas Into fruition, we have created from nothing.
I think this is an important distinction, and not just in a hermetic sense: those who create are not acting within what is, but forming something that did not exist prior to their intervention. This is growth, as opposed to maintenance, which is what other work involves.
You cannot help those who will not help themselves.
And another excellent point. Those who would be helped cannot be so inert that they do nothing for themselves. Also, as you saw, they often become resentful, because each gift from us to them hammers home the message that we are successful and they are in need of help. It's like tweaking their noses, at some point.
I spent a decade living in a boom town. The main industry took off; growth went through the roof; jobs were plentiful as were other opportunities. If you applied yourself in even a small way, there was wealth to be had. Some refused to because they hated jobs; I understood that. Others went around talking about their misfortunes. I didn't understand that. Even without education or skills, it was possible to make a good living in the boom.
But, putting my Devil's Advocate hat on again, even those who are not motivated: are we right to allow them to just fail and die? What does that say about us as people?

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
What's wrong with Social Darwinism? Oh, it's Perfectly fine for a species to disappear out of existence from natural selection. Yet in Marxism, a gun has to be aimed to the head and an individual has to pick up his fallen neighbor. But hold on, I used Social Darwinism, from which Eugenics springs. Which Progressives(Marxist) now love to fund in memory of Margret Sanger's Social Darwinian dream. You can see the hypocrisy, we know this.
Your last comment "are we right to allow them to just fail and die". DM you know that's a Myth, designed to confuse and manipulate. Man is an animal! The great Modern Scientist tells us this. Animals first instinct is to survive. We live in a civil society, therefore if survival consist of theft, we have laws to deal with this. In the civil society we ask all to take a moral risk, not infringing on another man's Liberty.
Charity:I know and am involved in organizations that help out the less fortunate, but it's on our terms, not the receiver's. Altruism no way.

 

fordm60

Part of the Furniture Now
Dec 19, 2014
598
5
Funny thing, I was taught humans were not animals as we have the ability to feel and reason. We are above base animalistic drives. I personally find the civilian world to be disgusting. No honor, everyone just doing whatever will make them money. Money is a God to most I have met, if they increase their income then they are right they feel. I was taught and believe that is selfish B.S. supported by civilian society. They seem to have no care for anything worthwhile, they will never do anything worthwhile. Lie, cheat, and steal is encouraged and completely acceptable as long as you increase your wealth. Honor, dignity, doing what is right, being part of something larger than your miserable life, never leave a fallen comrade, stand the line and defend your beliefs, all these ideas I believe are ignored by civilian society.
Defend the country, sign a blank check for everything up to and including my life for my country and beliefs, no sir don't want that. I let others fight for my libertarian rights, but not me thank you I just want to live off the blood of soldiers. Live in comfort, eat everyday, sleep in a bed, bang my girl, make lots of money, but no I don't want to do anything to defend it. Bah!!

 

perdurabo

Lifer
Jun 3, 2015
3,305
1,581
Interesting ford, you bring up some good points, Civilian? I take it you are/were in the military. Thank you for your service. Yes the American Civil Society was paved in blood. That can't be forgotten. But you have to realize without the Producers, the military can't be what it has become. The soldier has allowed his Government to steal from him and others to provide security for the state. Constitutionally, the Navy, was the only welfare recipient. The founding fathers never intended a full time Army. An armed citizenry was the intention. Now they want to take the arms away. Doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out why! What you are referring to is Lassiez Faire, it's mentioned in the constitution under the term happiness. Which means moral risk. That Honor and dignity that you speak about is no longer a priority in society. It's greed in all its forms.

 

pitchfork

Lifer
May 25, 2012
4,030
611
fnord, those names bring back some great memories for me. When I was 16 or 17, I couldn't get enough Hemingway, Fitzgerald, Dos Passos and all the other great American writers of that period. Not many people read Dos Passos anymore, but I loved the USA trilogy. Don't think I ever finished it, but the ambition of it was really exciting for me when I first discovered that literature could be as interesting as girls or baseball. I'll have to revisit some of those writers when I have a chance. Thanks for that reminder.

 

deathmetal

Lifer
Jul 21, 2015
7,714
35
What's wrong with Social Darwinism?
Well.... I dunno. It just kind of seems mean. Maybe it will make our society meaner. Does it work? It seems like most of the people getting paid a lot today are government workers, union babies, affirmative action hires, Facebook consultants, bureaucrats created by 10,000 lines of government regulations, middle managers of no particular utility, and entertainers. Are the right people succeeding?
I was taught humans were not animals as we have the ability to feel and reason. We are above base animalistic drives.
Only if people are using their logical faculties and are mature enough to pursue the truth. It's an egalitarian fallacy to say "we" are above base animalistic drives; it's more accurate to say that some are, most of the time.
I personally find the civilian world to be disgusting. No honor, everyone just doing whatever will make them money.
I find this compelling. Oddly it's very much Romantic (Shelley, Keats, Byron) as well.

 

mso489

Lifer
Feb 21, 2013
41,211
60,650
Ayn's idea that talented men and women are entirely self-made and should be, by merit of their genius, accountable to no one, and measured only by their own standards is a beautiful adolescent dream well expressed in her intensely self-romaticizing novels. If you understand them as poems, they make a certain amount of sense. If you take them as political philosophy (which unfortunately many do) you are headed over the edge. Ayn was pretty much of an egomaniac, bully and tyrant, jumping her men through hoops in a most cold-hearted way; writer's biographies are not the measure of their work, but usually offer some clues. I take her work at the same level of reality as "Alice In Wonderland," as brilliant fantasy commenting on life, but not as any kind of grounded depiction of life in families and communities. Personally, she was a pretty scary specimen.

 

skraps

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 9, 2015
790
6
As I have said multiple times... from any concept, theory or philosophy, there are morsels of good that can be extracted. I don't think--nor do I suspect anyone else in the conversation does--that Rand's writing should be treated as a bible of political philosophy, but there is some truth to some what she writes. Fact of the matter is, most of her observations on the collectivist traits in our society and the slippery slope of collectivism are spot on. While it certainly should not be followed as doctrine, it is much more valuable than "Alice in Wonderland." Just my observation.
I let others fight for my libertarian rights, but not me thank you I just want to live off the blood of soldiers.
For the record, Ford... I would gladly give every dime that I pay to support the lazy, unmotivated, leaches in our society to every veteran that needed it. I may be Libertarian in my views, but it in no way implies that I do not appreciate and respect the sacrifices our soldiers have made for me and for this great nation. The more disgusting fact is that our own government doesn't seem to appreciate it like they should.

 

fordm60

Part of the Furniture Now
Dec 19, 2014
598
5
perdurabo, you are correct U.S. Army Airborne Infantry for 8 years before I got hurt and banished to the civilian world. Thank you for your thank you for my service. I understand that the Military needs producers completely. What I despise is what we apparently defended. I wonder if what I see out here is worth one dupers life see my last post. In the end I decided it is worth it for two reasons I will list. 1. While civilian society sickens me I think that there is a chance that if it is protected and nurtured perhaps it can relearn honor and become something worthwhile. It the savages tear it apart I suspect all is lost....at least for a while. 2. I cannot explain to civilians the love combat troops have for each other. The comradere, the genuine concern carefully hidden in dark humor, the bond that is there is like nothing else I have ever felt or seen. Civilians seem to think we fight for weird reasons, America, Apple Pie, God, and Country. I feel those are reasons you join, but we fight because we will not let our brothers on the left and right down. If I fail my brother pays and I will not let that happen. That bond makes a whole lot of shit worth it.
deathmetal, romantic is probably correct. I feel chivalry is correct. I believe in the code without it life makes no sense to me. Honor, nobility, courage, strength with restraint. I agree with whomever wrote that line for Rambo, it is 100% correct to me!

 

dmcmtk

Lifer
Aug 23, 2013
3,672
1,711
Gentlemen, this has been a very interesting discussion to have followed, and it continues to be so.

 

tuold

Lifer
Oct 15, 2013
2,133
172
Beaverton,Oregon
I like a lot of what Ayn Rand proposed in objectivism and dismiss other parts. Her thoughts on the concept sacrifice are interesting, that no society can survive for long if they give up something more important for something less important.
And I like that the idea that if we are empowered to take care of our own affairs everybody else will be able to do the same.
Both of those things are not popular ideas right now. Yet somehow, as we get dragged down to collectivism and "social/economic equality" we are starting to see what those things really mean. That is, higher prices, scarcity of supplies and overall mediocrity.I think that's really what's putting the squeeze on the middle class. Were spreading out a finite amount of material goods over a wider population segment. I think the number of actual "poor" Americans is quite low. It's certainly a lot different now from what we used to call poverty. Maybe it's a good thing. I'm not sure, but it is different from how I grew up.

 

blackbeard

Part of the Furniture Now
Sep 13, 2015
706
0
I still need/want to read her book "The Virtue of Selfishness." I do wish I could live by the oath.
"I swear by my life and my love of it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

― Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged
Unfortunately, I live my life for others, rarely myself.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.