If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(National Review)   Libertarianism is just an ideal   (nationalreview.com) divider line 1480
    More: Followup, modern, communist state  
•       •       •

12202 clicks; posted to Main » on 14 Jun 2013 at 11:39 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



1480 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-06-14 04:34:08 PM
That incoherent article, my friends, is the end result of writing to choral approval for too long.  Ignoring the actual topic, that's one of the worst reasoned articles I've read on FARK in a long time.
 
2013-06-14 04:35:30 PM

Ishkur: cybrwzrd: In my younger days I was an objectivist. I still am in many ways. I do believe in the Randian idea of rational selfishness. That is - doing what is best for yourself as long as it does not harm another.

You mean like blowing up a housing project or destroying civilization or raping women as a token of divine selfishness?

Here's what's wrong with Ayn Rand and Objectivism:

What Ayn Rand did was simplify a complex network of economic theories, ideas, practices and human motives and constructed a mono-dimensional faux-reality as a vehicle to push her pulp. Then she filled it full of cardboard cutout characters and mary sue ubermensches who don't talk but lecture for tedious pages about why the rich and powerful have divine right to being rich and powerful. And of course things play out exactly the way her philosophy says because she's the author and she controls the farking outcome. In clear violation of every standard of ethics, politics, economics, reality, life, human nature, philosophy, and farking national train corporation management. It's dishonest, and it's wrong.

As an example of how wildly skewed her understanding of reality really was, just looked at how she twisted the Robin Hood fable. She called him the most evil fairytale hero in history because he stole from the producers to give to the moochers. On the contrary, Robin actually stole the people's taxes from the oppressive government and gave them back to the their rightful owners. He should be a Tea Party icon. I don't understand why she didn't look this up thoroughly enough. It was a bad allegory because it's heavily dependent on point of view.

The book's premise is ridiculous because NO ONE is so important that they think they can destroy the world by retreating from it. Nature abhors a vacuum. Everything important and meaningful that has ever been created -- from thoughts to ideas to products to technology to companies -- is instantly taught, copied, and spread around, effectively build ...


Actually, Roark had a sound reason to blow up the housing development. He designed a self sustaining building, but due to politics it was corrupted to the point of becoming an absurb mockery of itself. He didn't blow it up because of what it was to be used for. He blew it up because it was not his design.

You obviously have never read any of the fiction or the books surrounding Objectivism, and I am not going to try and sell it to you as you are not going to listen. I am not naive enough to believe it would ever work in practice. Hell I probably agree with you politically. I just think that you should maybe focus your vitriol on the idiots who have taken the Objectivist philosophy and corrupted it instead of the philosophy itself. I don't hate Marx either, but I am not exactly a fan of Lenninst Communism either.
 
2013-06-14 04:37:49 PM

Diogenes: There has not been a "pure" and strict implementation of a political ideology in history, ever.

 Of course there have, crack a book
/Pol Pot's communist Cambodia for one
 
2013-06-14 04:38:51 PM

cybrwzrd: Ishkur: cybrwzrd: In my younger days I was an objectivist. I still am in many ways. I do believe in the Randian idea of rational selfishness. That is - doing what is best for yourself as long as it does not harm another.

You mean like blowing up a housing project or destroying civilization or raping women as a token of divine selfishness?

Here's what's wrong with Ayn Rand and Objectivism:

What Ayn Rand did was simplify a complex network of economic theories, ideas, practices and human motives and constructed a mono-dimensional faux-reality as a vehicle to push her pulp. Then she filled it full of cardboard cutout characters and mary sue ubermensches who don't talk but lecture for tedious pages about why the rich and powerful have divine right to being rich and powerful. And of course things play out exactly the way her philosophy says because she's the author and she controls the farking outcome. In clear violation of every standard of ethics, politics, economics, reality, life, human nature, philosophy, and farking national train corporation management. It's dishonest, and it's wrong.

As an example of how wildly skewed her understanding of reality really was, just looked at how she twisted the Robin Hood fable. She called him the most evil fairytale hero in history because he stole from the producers to give to the moochers. On the contrary, Robin actually stole the people's taxes from the oppressive government and gave them back to the their rightful owners. He should be a Tea Party icon. I don't understand why she didn't look this up thoroughly enough. It was a bad allegory because it's heavily dependent on point of view.

The book's premise is ridiculous because NO ONE is so important that they think they can destroy the world by retreating from it. Nature abhors a vacuum. Everything important and meaningful that has ever been created -- from thoughts to ideas to products to technology to companies -- is instantly taught, copied, and spread around, effective ...


ME CROTCH SEE NO VALUE IN IDEAS THAT CAN'T BE TESTED OR FAIL WHEN APPLIED IN REAL WORLD. ME NO CARE ABOUT PHILOSOPHY THAT NO MAKES GOOD IDEAS FOR REAL WORLD.
 
2013-06-14 04:40:37 PM

cybrwzrd: He blew it up because it was not his design.


Do what you want so long as it does not harm others. Rand's own protagonist violates what you claim to be the central tenet of her philosophy and you want to defend it?

cybrwzrd: You obviously have never read any of the fiction or the books surrounding Objectivism


Oh I'd say he's read them, and properly recognized them as hackwork fiction, not anything to be taken seriously. Others on the other hand, are still fourteen year old boys rebelling against their parents while listening to Rush.
 
2013-06-14 04:41:59 PM
GRUNG MAKE THIS FOR THREAD BADGE
i.imgur.com
 
2013-06-14 04:42:11 PM
TARSO ALWAYS LATE TO THINK PLACE

ALL GOOD THINGS ALREADY SAID
 
2013-06-14 04:44:32 PM
yeah there went my entire afternoon. Glad it is friday...
 
2013-06-14 04:44:58 PM

SordidEuphemism: GRUNG MAKE THIS FOR THREAD BADGE
[i.imgur.com image 286x400]


I like!
 
2013-06-14 04:46:33 PM
LOL EPIC THREAD! cool story bro swag YOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
FAIL TAG hashtag ##lulz
 EPIC MEME i troll u

imageshack.us
 
2013-06-14 04:46:35 PM
This is why I love Fark.
 
2013-06-14 04:46:37 PM

mrshowrules: is an ideal of the greedy and self serving suggesting that left to their own, people will look after each other


Librertarianism would be fine if the majority of people (and supermajority of Libertarians) weren't selfish pricks.
 
2013-06-14 04:49:32 PM
This thread: Fark Sharkjump
 
2013-06-14 04:49:51 PM

SordidEuphemism: GRUNG MAKE THIS FOR THREAD BADGE
[i.imgur.com image 286x400]


I was making one too, but I think yours is more in line with the thread.

i1078.photobucket.com
 
2013-06-14 04:51:31 PM
And thanks to  <a target="_blank" data-cke-saved-href="<a href=" href="<a href=" http:="" www.fark.com="" users="" greatglavinsghost"="">GreatGlavinsGhostfor the caveman drawing.
 
2013-06-14 04:51:53 PM

CheekyMonkey: mrshowrules: is an ideal of the greedy and self serving suggesting that left to their own, people will look after each other

Librertarianism would be fine if the majority of people (and supermajority of Libertarians) weren't selfish pricks.


"I'd be a Libertarian, if they weren't all a bunch of tax-dodging professional whiners. " - Berke Breathed
 
2013-06-14 04:52:32 PM
Libertarianism only sounds bad once it's explained.
 
2013-06-14 04:53:23 PM

whidbey: This thread: Fark Sharkjump


WHAT WRONG? DERP TRIBE NO LIKE LIVING IN VALLEY WITH NO STONE PILE WALLS TO KEEP RAPTORS AND SABRE TOOTH TIGERS OUT?

ROCK TAXES GO TO BUILD THEM... DERP TRIBE COULD START DOING THAT BUT YOU WOULD NOT BE DERP TRIBE ANY MORE.

ME CROTCH TELL YOU WHAT, YOU DERPS PAY SLIM TRIBE ROCKS AND DERPS CAN BECOME SLIMS, BUT THEN YOU MUST ACT LIKE SLIMS.
 
2013-06-14 04:53:42 PM

StRalphTheLiar: SordidEuphemism: GRUNG MAKE THIS FOR THREAD BADGE
[i.imgur.com image 286x400]

I was making one too, but I think yours is more in line with the thread.

[i1078.photobucket.com image 310x390]


I like both
 
2013-06-14 04:53:57 PM
STOP.  BADGE TIME:

lh4.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-06-14 04:55:11 PM
NOG TALKING TO CAVEGIRL AND HEARD SHOUT FROM CANYON SAY GET AWAY FROM CAVE DAUGHTER!
NOG TO TO CANYON BUT EMPTY
CAVEGIRL SAY HER CAVEDAD CRUSHED BY ROCK LAST YEAR
THEN WHO WAS CANYON?
 
2013-06-14 04:56:24 PM
ok, wow, didn't realize that a few badges had already been made.  sorry to pile on like that.
 
m00
2013-06-14 04:56:28 PM
I wasn't aware that the political ideology currently employed by Congress is so perfect, and there are so little problems with the country that so many people have the energy to build, and knockdown strawmen regarding an ideology which isn't practiced in government.
 
2013-06-14 04:58:20 PM

CheatCommando: cybrwzrd: He blew it up because it was not his design.

Do what you want so long as it does not harm others. Rand's own protagonist violates what you claim to be the central tenet of her philosophy and you want to defend it?

cybrwzrd: You obviously have never read any of the fiction or the books surrounding Objectivism

Oh I'd say he's read them, and properly recognized them as hackwork fiction, not anything to be taken seriously. Others on the other hand, are still fourteen year old boys rebelling against their parents while listening to Rush.


He didn't harm anyone by blowing it up... The building was empty and noone was hurt.

The rabid anti objectivist are as bad as objectivists.
 
2013-06-14 04:59:11 PM

Victoly: SordidEuphemism: HERE GRUNG PROBLEM...

NOW TELL HOW GRUNG BECOME SON-ELDER OF CAVE CALL ROCK-AIR


SIT AND LISTEN FOR ELDER TALE
THIS STORY ABOUT GRUNG LIFE CHANGE
PLACE WHERE SUN SET IN LAND OF BROTHERS WHERE GRUNG BORN
SPENT MANY SUNS THROWING ROCK THROUGH CIRCLE
BUT OTHER TRIBE CAUSE PROBLEM, STEAL ROCK, EAT ALL BERRIES
SHE-ELDER SENT GRUNG TO SISTER-SHE-ELDER AT TAR PITS
GRUNG SCREECH AND MAMMOTH-RIDE COME
DANGLY METAL PLATE HANG FROM TAIL
DANGLY DEAD SQUIRREL HANG FROM EARS
STRANGE MAMMOTH BUT GRUNG RIDE ANYWAY
WE GO TO TAR PITS
GRUNG GET THERE AT SUNSET, TELL MAMMOTH HE STINKY
FIND FANCY ROOM NEAR TAR PIT CAVE
SIT DOWN AND AM CALLED NEW HE-ELDER OF TAR PIT
 
2013-06-14 04:59:51 PM

trappedspirit: keylock71: So glad I saw this thread before I quit working for the day...

Every time I go to the zoo I am still surprised to see the number of people that consider making animal noises at the animals to be a good joke.  But this thread, I am not sure what it is.


YOU SPECIAL ROCKFLAKE, MAKE MAUG FEEL BAD
 
2013-06-14 05:00:15 PM

cybrwzrd: Actually, Roark had a sound reason to blow up the housing development. He designed a self sustaining building, but due to politics it was corrupted to the point of becoming an absurb mockery of itself. He didn't blow it up because of what it was to be used for. He blew it up because it was not his design.


Irrespective, it still makes him a hypocrite champion of Objectivist doctrine.

cybrwzrd: You obviously have never read any of the fiction or the books surrounding Objectivism


I have read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead, Anthem, Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal and the Virtue of Selfishness. That's how I know her so well -- even better than you. You think I cribbed all that shiat I wrote above from Wikipedia or something? ....do a search, I've been posting in Fark Objectivism threads for years.

Interestingly, you are not the first Objectivist to reply to one of my anti-Ayn Rand rants with "You've obviously never read any of her works". In fact, that's something of a common retort from you guys: Blind dismissal instead of rational argument. That makes you no better than Creationists.

cybrwzrd: I just think that you should maybe focus your vitriol on the idiots who have taken the Objectivist philosophy and corrupted it instead of the philosophy itself.


Like who, Leonard Peikoff or Alan Greenspan? ...or Ayn Rand herself?

Listen: She was damaged goods, dude. Those mean ole Bolsheviks took her daddy's business and robbed her of the privilege and position she most undoubtedly deserved in Russian society and she spent the rest of her life whining about it. She was an absolutely despicable person according to EVERYONE who ever had the misfortune of working with or even meeting her, indomitably defiant, obscenely difficult, and was known to completely suck the life out of a room. She never smiled or laughed, she abhorred small talk, and she would often approach strangers with random questions like "Tell me about your premises." She just didn't get people -- she was a pure autistic in every sense of the meaning. And her problem with her philosophy was, like all philosophers, she assumed that everyone thinks like her, or ought to.

She was wrong. Horribly, depressingly, ridiculously wrong.

/And now, a fun Ayn Rand fact:

"Suppose you are a nice family of Russian Jewish immigrants living in Chicago in the 1920s. Suppose you get a frantic letter from some distant cousin in Russia, begging for help because their daughter is a stubborn loudmouth who will certainly be killed if she stays in the country for much longer. Suppose you happily provide the necessary affidavit of support for a visa, promise her a job in your family business, and open your home-a five-room apartment already so crowded that the cousin will have to sleep on a cot in the dining room-to her for six months.

Now suppose your cousin keeps everyone else in the house up all night, every night, with her incessant typing (which you translate into English for her) or her long baths that use up all the hot water (although she will later abandon this practice). Suppose that during the day, while you are faint from sleep deprivation, your cousin roams the apartment singing "I'm Sitting on Top of the World" as loudly as she can. Suppose she declines to speak to you because your conversation topics don't "interest me." Suppose she leans on you to arrange an extension of her visa, borrows a bunch of money from you to move to Hollywood, and promises to buy you a "mink coat and a Rolls-Royce" when she makes it big.

You might, then, be forgiven for holding a grudge when your cousin becomes wealthy and famous and she neither buys you anything nor pays you back the money she borrowed. Instead, all you get are copies of some ponderous novels, tickets to a couple of revolting lectures, and the pleasure of learning, in many interviews, that your cousin "had no family in America" and that "nobody helped [her]" when she immigrated."
 
2013-06-14 05:00:18 PM

RobertBruce: InmanRoshi: RobertBruce: InmanRoshi: RobertBruce: InmanRoshi: Every libertarian utopia somehow revolves around people living off the land in some rural outpost.   The trouble is commerce and capitalism encourages population density.    I'd love to hear how libertarianism works in a condensed urban environment where 9 million people are forced to share a finite amount of resources and land.

Same as now, except without laws other than those that protect body and property.

So basically a 3rd world shiate hole?  Gotcha.

What's your alternative:?

How about the opposite of Calcutta?    Ever been there?   You would love it.


No stupid government forcing you to pay for things like community housing, so the poor just sleep and shiat in the streets literally turning the entire city into a gigantic cesspool.    No Obamacare, so the sick and dying just decompose out in the sun.    No public policy, so malaria and AIDS just runs rampant.   No major public projects, so limited public transportation leaving 15 million people living in a congested polluted mess.

Just everyone out there living their own lives, just totally free from the tyranny of government thugs.

That's a good start.   Also, sounds like a good business opportunity to clean things up.


And to the surprise of no one, we once again find "libertarianism" being used as a thinly veiled disguise for sociopathy.
 
2013-06-14 05:00:41 PM

m00: I wasn't aware that the political ideology currently employed by Congress is so perfect, and there are so little problems with the country that so many people have the energy to build, and knockdown strawmen regarding an ideology which isn't practiced in government.


I was not aware that criticizing one implied endorsing the other. But then, I don't go around trying to make the world simpler than it is.
 
2013-06-14 05:01:32 PM

cybrwzrd: CheatCommando: cybrwzrd: He blew it up because it was not his design.

Do what you want so long as it does not harm others. Rand's own protagonist violates what you claim to be the central tenet of her philosophy and you want to defend it?

cybrwzrd: You obviously have never read any of the fiction or the books surrounding Objectivism

Oh I'd say he's read them, and properly recognized them as hackwork fiction, not anything to be taken seriously. Others on the other hand, are still fourteen year old boys rebelling against their parents while listening to Rush.

He didn't harm anyone by blowing it up... The building was empty and noone was hurt.

The rabid anti objectivist are as bad as objectivists.


WZRD MISS POINT. BOMBING BUILDING WAS STILL CHILDISH TANTRUM. PEOPLE IN RAND'S ANIMAL SKIN SKETCHINGS ALSO NOT ACT LIKE ANYONE ME CROTCH HAS MET IN OR OUTSIDE OF SLIM TRIBE.
 
2013-06-14 05:02:06 PM
OK....  What did I miss?
 
2013-06-14 05:03:25 PM
[MAUG HEARS m00'S THOUGHTS IN SLEEP]

THEN WHY SUCH DUNG-SPLATTER RATING FOR LESSER-CLAN-CHIEF-GATHERING??
 
2013-06-14 05:04:24 PM

m00: I wasn't aware that the political ideology currently employed by Congress is so perfect, and there are so little problems with the country that so many people have the energy to build, and knockdown strawmen regarding an ideology which isn't practiced in government.


The concept of libertarianism is pretty easy to knock down. And yeah, society needs some form of government because people do tend to be selfish assholes who don't share with the community, or in many cases even acknowledge it.

Sorry if that makes you mad.
 
2013-06-14 05:06:44 PM

cybrwzrd: He didn't harm anyone by blowing it up... The building was empty and noone was hurt.


Yes he did, he harmed the property owners, the builders, the contractors, the insurance doods, the marketers and realtors and people who had invested money into the project! That's their farking paycheck, and now things are tied up in courts and legal battles for years and their families are going to suffer because the project they worked so hard on was destroyed by a disgruntled architect. Roark is a god damn asshole. His actions harmed thousands of people.
 
2013-06-14 05:07:43 PM
We were somewhere around Barstow, on the edge of the desert, when the drugs began to take hold.
 
2013-06-14 05:10:23 PM
The epic lulz of this thread aside, Ishkur and cybrwzrd have put on a debate clinic.  I can only assume that one or both of them were on debate teams in HS/College.

Bravo to both of you.
 
2013-06-14 05:10:54 PM

InmanRoshi: And to the surprise of no one, we once again find "libertarianism" being used as a thinly veiled disguise for sociopathy.


That's because in the end, that's pretty much what it is. It certainly isn't the classical liberalism that some adherents want to claim it to be any more than neoliberalism is.
 
2013-06-14 05:11:44 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: The epic lulz of this thread aside, Ishkur and cybrwzrd have put on a debate clinic.  I can only assume that one or both of them were on debate teams in HS/College.

Bravo to both of you.


The last thing I expected this thread to do was lurch back on track somewhere north of post 1200.
 
2013-06-14 05:14:07 PM

qorkfiend: Grand_Moff_Joseph: The epic lulz of this thread aside, Ishkur and cybrwzrd have put on a debate clinic.  I can only assume that one or both of them were on debate teams in HS/College.

Bravo to both of you.

The last thing I expected this thread to do was lurch back on track somewhere north of post 1200.


FINE, UGG GO BACK TO DRAWING ON WALL OF CAVE.   :D

/lulz
 
2013-06-14 05:15:22 PM

God-is-a-Taco: LOL EPIC THREAD! cool story bro swag YOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
FAIL TAG hashtag ##lulz
 EPIC MEME i troll u

[imageshack.us image 250x188]


You do realize that the oar did not hit Chuck Norris.  chuck Norris reached out and slapped the oar with his forehead.  ;)
 
2013-06-14 05:18:06 PM

cybrwzrd: The whole idea of objectivism is that you have a right to work towards your own goals as long as you are not harming another through greed


But there are countless examples of big business corporations and individuals doing exactly that.

The current system isn't that vague. We have income tax and environmental laws. How, as a libertarian, would you justify keeping the statist structure in place to enforce those kinds of laws?

I maintain without the state, you can't enforce the laws.
 
2013-06-14 05:20:36 PM

Grand_Moff_Joseph: God-is-a-Taco: LOL EPIC THREAD! cool story bro swag YOLOOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLO
FAIL TAG hashtag ##lulz
 EPIC MEME i troll u

[imageshack.us image 250x188]

You do realize that the oar did not hit Chuck Norris.  chuck Norris reached out and slapped the oar with his forehead.  ;)


Is hitting things with his head how Chuck Norris comes up with his political views? It makes more sense that way. A thousand years of darkness? No, just a concussion.
 
2013-06-14 05:20:40 PM
Wow, looks like an epic thread.  I'd stick around but I have a beer-and-beef thing to go to.

/in meatspace, of course
//maybe I'll join in later
 
2013-06-14 05:20:56 PM
HONKE BIG BUBBLE CHEST LADY CAVE ANIMAL PICTURES BUSINESS MODEL:

1) HONKE MAKE FERTILE CAVE LADY SHAVE FUR OFF BIG BUBBLE CHEST!
2) HONKE HONK SMALL HONKE HORN!
3) HONKE MAKE OOK AND TONK PAY SHINY PEBBLE FOR BIG BUBBLE CHEST ANIMAL CAVE DRAW SHOW!
4) HONKE MAKE BIG BUBBLE CHEST CAVE LADY USE HONKE SQUEE TO DRAW CAVE ANIMAL PICTURE FOR OOK AND TONK SQUEE!
5) HONKE MAKE INCRIMINATING CAVE DRAW OF OOK AND TONK!
6) HONKE MAKE OOK AND TONK PAY MORE SHINY PEBBLES TO NOT SHOW UGG UGG CAVE WIFE!
7) HONKE PROFIT EVERY NEW MOON!
 
2013-06-14 05:22:52 PM
Ok people nothing to see here, go back to work, I mean really how much production has been lost today because of this shiat.
 
2013-06-14 05:24:43 PM
I guess I get it, but I kinda don't get it. When people begin discussing libertarianism, Ayn Rand sometimes becomes part of the conversation. Ayn Rand was not a libertarian and Objectivism is not libertarianism nor a form of it. She despised libertarians just like she despised most people.
 
2013-06-14 05:25:32 PM

Rabbitgod: Ok people nothing to see here, go back to work, I mean really how much production has been lost today because of this shiat.


Since when to people who come to Fark care about how much time they are wasting, how much work they are not doing?
 
2013-06-14 05:26:36 PM

IdBeCrazyIf: I'm laughing harder than I have all day so far from this thread, bravo all


Best thread.
 
2013-06-14 05:27:18 PM

Ishkur: cybrwzrd: He didn't harm anyone by blowing it up... The building was empty and noone was hurt.

Yes he did, he harmed the property owners, the builders, the contractors, the insurance doods, the marketers and realtors and people who had invested money into the project! That's their farking paycheck, and now things are tied up in courts and legal battles for years and their families are going to suffer because the project they worked so hard on was destroyed by a disgruntled architect. Roark is a god damn asshole. His actions harmed thousands of people.


Ever get the feeling that you are arguing with a brick wall?
 
2013-06-14 05:27:43 PM

jigger: I guess I get it, but I kinda don't get it. When people begin discussing libertarianism, Ayn Rand sometimes becomes part of the conversation. Ayn Rand was not a libertarian and Objectivism is not libertarianism nor a form of it. She despised libertarians just like she despised most people.


seems like a whole lotta overlap in political philosophy.
 
Displayed 50 of 1480 comments

First | « | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report