Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby Philly » Sun Jan 04, 2015 11:31 pm

Yeah I get the sense that menson is imagining a bunch of OWSers but more malnourished and with less personal electronics.
ImageImageImageImageImageImageImage
User avatar
Philly
Governor
 
Posts: 9332
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2014 6:36 pm
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 944 times
Been thanked: 1097 times

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby spacemonkey » Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:14 pm

The only weapon needed to bring the WTC down was box cutters. All the high tech and mighty military did not stop it.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby eynon81 » Mon Jan 05, 2015 1:32 pm

and there's the small point that the objectivist underclass in the US is extremely well armed. there would be blood.
User avatar
eynon81
VIP
VIP
 
Posts: 19475
Joined: Mon Aug 20, 2012 10:38 am
Location: Golden, Colorado
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 3875 times
Been thanked: 1821 times
Political Leaning: Very Conservative

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby Southern Dad » Tue Jan 06, 2015 5:19 am

spacemonkey wrote:The only weapon needed to bring the WTC down was box cutters. All the high tech and mighty military did not stop it.


However, we had things that could have stopped it but didn't have the resolve to use it. We were too worried about mistakes, lawsuits, etc.
User avatar
Southern Dad
Senator
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:40 am
Location: The Peach State
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 113 times
Political Leaning: Conservative

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby spacemonkey » Tue Jan 06, 2015 12:53 pm

Southern Dad wrote:
spacemonkey wrote:The only weapon needed to bring the WTC down was box cutters. All the high tech and mighty military did not stop it.


However, we had things that could have stopped it but didn't have the resolve to use it. We were too worried about mistakes, lawsuits, etc.

Some time the best way to fight fire is with fire. It might not be pretty or PC and all that. But sometime you just have to do what needs done.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby Southern Dad » Tue Jan 06, 2015 2:52 pm

spacemonkey wrote:
Southern Dad wrote:
spacemonkey wrote:The only weapon needed to bring the WTC down was box cutters. All the high tech and mighty military did not stop it.


However, we had things that could have stopped it but didn't have the resolve to use it. We were too worried about mistakes, lawsuits, etc.

Some time the best way to fight fire is with fire. It might not be pretty or PC and all that. But sometime you just have to do what needs done.


Conventional wisdom at the time was that when your aircraft was hijacked you did what the hijackers demanded. If you can you squawk 7500 but you do whatever the hijackers ask trying to get your aircraft back to the ground. No one ever anticipated that the aircraft itself could become a missile. There is no doubt that we could have "splashed" American Airlines Flight 11. there was plenty of time between the time it was hijacked, 15 minutes into the flight until it struck the building. The aircraft was hijacked at 8:14 and struck the building at 8:46. At 8:21 the aircraft stopped transmitting it's transponder.

The urgency to get the F-15's airborne wasn't there because they thought that they had a standard "Fly me to Cuba" hijacking. The F-15's took off at 8:53.
User avatar
Southern Dad
Senator
 
Posts: 1946
Joined: Fri Jan 02, 2015 8:40 am
Location: The Peach State
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 38 times
Been thanked: 113 times
Political Leaning: Conservative

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby ndz » Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:20 am

The question isn't whether Communist societies can exist; they did for millenia prior to the Neolithic revolution. The question is whether advanced Communist societies can exist. I believe they can and inevitably will occur; just that we won't see them for at least another century. The goal right now is to advance technology to the point where scarcity no longer exists as a meaningful limitation (socialism). Once that is done, the notion of money, labor, private property, and statism will evaporate.

Objectivism is so obviously defective as a political theory that it fails in principle alone. Simply apply the test of universality to it. If everyone looked out for their own self-interest and didn't care about others' welfare, then people who were incapable of looking out for their own welfare due to disability or social conditions would simply die. This is obviously immoral, so the system fails.
ndz
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Sep 21, 2015 3:04 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 0 time
Political Leaning: Communist

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby spacemonkey » Mon Sep 21, 2015 11:07 am

It just shows the advantage of having a plan. Something this country does not have for much of anything. I just call it living in the state of la-de da, searching for the land of Duh.
The hardest part of doing nothing is knowing when your done.
spacemonkey
Governor
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Mon Aug 27, 2012 10:54 am
Location: cyberspace
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 62 times
Been thanked: 261 times

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby lnrw » Mon Sep 21, 2015 12:23 pm

the pentagon has a contingency plan for everything................except for what actually happens.
Image

Lifetime member of the NRA
User avatar
lnrw
Governor
 
Posts: 3199
Joined: Sun Aug 26, 2012 6:38 am
Gender: None specified
Has thanked: 359 times
Been thanked: 256 times
Political Leaning: Libertarian

Re: Ayn Rand Objectivsm v. Karl Marx Communiusm

Postby Motown » Tue Sep 22, 2015 7:59 am

ndz wrote:The question isn't whether Communist societies can exist; they did for millenia prior to the Neolithic revolution. The question is whether advanced Communist societies can exist. I believe they can and inevitably will occur; just that we won't see them for at least another century. The goal right now is to advance technology to the point where scarcity no longer exists as a meaningful limitation (socialism). Once that is done, the notion of money, labor, private property, and statism will evaporate.

Objectivism is so obviously defective as a political theory that it fails in principle alone. Simply apply the test of universality to it. If everyone looked out for their own self-interest and didn't care about others' welfare, then people who were incapable of looking out for their own welfare due to disability or social conditions would simply die. This is obviously immoral, so the system fails.


I agree with you about Objectivism, I think Rand was a bitter little charlatan. What I don't understand is why you think technology will eventually eliminate scarcity or why you think elimination of scarcity will lead to Communism.
User avatar
Motown
Council Member
 
Posts: 99
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 7:43 am
Gender: Male
Has thanked: 20 times
Been thanked: 5 times

PreviousNext

Return to Philosophy

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest