[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]
Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]
Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]
What happens where one guy’s utopian dream conflicts with another guy’s? Say, Tom’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. Dick’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. You’re Harry. What do you do? BTW - Dick and Tom broke into your house and took any firearms that were there.[/quote]
Conflicts don’t happen in a utopia.
[/quote]
Maybe not within but what about between different utopias?
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]
Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]
Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]
What happens where one guy’s utopian dream conflicts with another guy’s? Say, Tom’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. Dick’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. You’re Harry. What do you do? BTW - Dick and Tom broke into your house and took any firearms that were there.[/quote]
Conflicts don’t happen in a utopia.
[/quote]
Maybe not within but what about between different utopias? [/quote]
Man wants utopia.
Conflicts don’t happen in utopia.
Man does not want conflict.
Conflicts happen
Utopia does not exist.
I am just illustrating a point that SM always errs on.
He assumes that libertarians are utopianists when in fact we are libertarians and not utopianists precisely because we know that conflicts arise and we need a way to deal with them.
It’s one thing to want utopia. It’s another thing to act in ways that assumes it can exist which is the way SM incorrectly advances his argument against libertarians.
[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]
Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]
Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]
What happens where one guy’s utopian dream conflicts with another guy’s? Say, Tom’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. Dick’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. You’re Harry. What do you do? BTW - Dick and Tom broke into your house and took any firearms that were there.[/quote]
Conflicts don’t happen in a utopia.
[/quote]
Maybe not within but what about between different utopias? [/quote]
Man wants utopia.
Conflicts don’t happen in utopia.
Man does not want conflict.
Conflicts happen
Utopia does not exist.
I am just illustrating a point that SM always errs on.
He assumes that libertarians are utopianists when in fact we are libertarians and not utopianists precisely because we know that conflicts arise and we need a way to deal with them.
It’s one thing to want utopia. It’s another thing to act in ways that assumes it can exist which is the way SM incorrectly advances his argument against libertarians.[/quote]
If man didn’t want conflict he would not have invented marriage.
I never quite got Ryand. I understood her basic ideas, but they never made sense to me. Take Howard Roark. He rejects the old and wants to build his buildings the way he wants them. Now in order to survive, people need to pay him to do a job. Why is it unreasonable for them to want a job done the way they want it done if their paying him to do it? For a real world example, if I pay you to paint my house blue and come back and see that you painted it yellow because of your “artistic vision”, should you get paid?
[quote]FrankCastle wrote:
I never quite got Ryand. I understood her basic ideas, but they never made sense to me. Take Howard Roark. He rejects the old and wants to build his buildings the way he wants them. Now in order to survive, people need to pay him to do a job. Why is it unreasonable for them to want a job done the way they want it done if their paying him to do it? For a real world example, if I pay you to paint my house blue and come back and see that you painted it yellow because of your “artistic vision”, should you get paid? [/quote]
Of course, because you are a fool for wanting blue when yellow is clearly the only color for your house. Now shut up and worship at my feet… or I’ll blow it up.
I really liked the book , it took me two weeks to listen to the whole thing, I think it is brilliant . I do not buy the whole notion she sells but I do agree a strong market is mandatory for a healthy economy. I alos do not think Rand would condone a society with NO regulations . I understand it to be the only rule is to not harm another and that would be a good regulation
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I really liked the book , it took me two weeks to listen to the whole thing, I think it is brilliant . I do not buy the whole notion she sells but I do agree a strong market is mandatory for a healthy economy. I alos do not think Rand would condone a society with NO regulations . I understand it to be the only rule is to not harm another and that would be a good regulation [/quote]
Except that such a regulation would require a monstruously big and horrifically strong state. A totalitarian state would not even be enough.
No state in existence, no state in history has ever dream to achieve such a regulation or to enforce such a simple rule.
[quote]pittbulll wrote:
I really liked the book , it took me two weeks to listen to the whole thing, I think it is brilliant . I do not buy the whole notion she sells but I do agree a strong market is mandatory for a healthy economy. I alos do not think Rand would condone a society with NO regulations . I understand it to be the only rule is to not harm another and that would be a good regulation [/quote]
Except that such a regulation would require a monstruously big and horrifically strong state. A totalitarian state would not even be enough.
[/quote]
Au contraire, that is all a libertarian state would do.
It would also necessarily much smaller than a state that tries to safe you from yourself.
If you mean that this state is going to be successful, every time, everywhere, you are more of an Utopian than the average libertarian ever could be.
[quote]FrankCastle wrote:
I never quite got Ryand. I understood her basic ideas, but they never made sense to me. Take Howard Roark. He rejects the old and wants to build his buildings the way he wants them. Now in order to survive, people need to pay him to do a job. Why is it unreasonable for them to want a job done the way they want it done if their paying him to do it? For a real world example, if I pay you to paint my house blue and come back and see that you painted it yellow because of your “artistic vision”, should you get paid? [/quote]
I feel you offer a false analogy.
People pay him to build something but he still owns it when all is said and done. He owes the capitalists who helped him fund it but they have no claim on how it gets built. Just like when a person takes out a loan to build a business - the bank does not run that business.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:<<< I can regulate my own property and relationships and the same goes for every individual.[/quote]I know you didn’t really just say this. I’ll come back in a little while after you’ve fixed it.
[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:<<< I can regulate my own property and relationships and the same goes for every individual.[/quote]I know you didn’t really just say this. I’ll come back in a little while after you’ve fixed it.
[/quote]
We do every day. Some don’t get it right. So what?!
