On 04 Nov 2013, at 16:20, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:




On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 1:10 PM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com> wrote:
On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:03 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy
<multiplecit...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Well reasoned opportunism taken literally still remains what it is. I don't > reason against it and nature has good reason for these tendencies locally.

Yes, but one has to be careful about global narratives. Our culture is
filled with them "the american dream", "globalisation", "left vs.
right", "patriotism", "the spread of democracy", "the west vs. the
east", "first world and third world", etc. These narratives were not
necessarily created with out best interest in mind.

> My main problem is that I just can't picture myself around a bunch of Rand > fans licking their fingers "greed is good, keep deregulating all things > financial, if my greed implies profit through poisoning the earth, good > because stellar Profits....muahahaha!!!" Where's the fun in that, except
> maybe for Halloween or something?

Ok, but these people are just plain criminals. Deregulation in Rand's
speculations happens in a world where nobody controls the supply of
money and nobody has the power to create new money out of thin air.
Pushing for deregulation in a world were central banks still exist is
just another attempt to steel money from everyone. Someone who is
honest and believes in Rand's ideas would push to end the central
banks and fiat money before demanding any other types of deregulation.
In fact, some believe that this might be enough. What the Wall Street
criminals want is the freedom to risk _our_ resources for _their_
profit. They pretty closely match the villains in Rand's world, with
their preferential ties to the government and all.

> So this is mere aesthetic Muahahaha refutation, where I understand and am > convinced the reasoning is sound on many levels, but I am disgusted by being > pushed into situations in which I have to think and operate in that kind of > way, reducing people to vectors greed related, thus determining my circles.
> So I do my best to avoid being Gollum ;-) PGC

I understand this, but there's another way to look at it. If I am
against violent cohertion by the state, this means that I want freedom
for you. I want you to be able to practice your music and art as you
see fit, charge and make a living from it and be free from fear that
some storm troopers will show at you doorstep because you are smoking
something to attain a state of consciousness that the state does not
approve of, or refusing to give part of your money to the state. And
let's be honest here, this money is going to be used to fund more
violence, not help the poor. Violence in the form of real wars, total
surveillance, drug wars and so on. This is the reality of the world we
live in now, not some speculation. Rand's work is speculation, and it
remains to be seen if a radically free society could work.

Telmo.

I haven't read enough because it always tasted like Muahahaha.

But I am curious: what is higher up the list in this thinking: honesty or greed?

Why not: "Honestly, I am greedy. So my ends justify my means and so I can lie, harm others etc.?" PGC


Hmm... This is more "I am greedy and stupid, so my little local private ends justify my lie, harming others, etc."

But if I am greedy and a bit less stupid, my ends can include my children's ends and other long term prospects, and, still because I am greedy, I might play the win-win game by not lying, not harming others, etc.

Greed, nor money is a problem. Dishonesty is a problem. And dishonest government lying on something is a big problem.

From the little egocentric ego to the unnameable transcendental self, selfishness can go from a social plea to a free collective divine harmony.

Bruno










>
> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 9:18 AM, Telmo Menezes <te...@telmomenezes.com >
> wrote:
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 4, 2013 at 12:36 AM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> > On 11/3/2013 3:17 PM, Telmo Menezes wrote:
>> >
>> > On Sun, Nov 3, 2013 at 11:51 PM, meekerdb <meeke...@verizon.net> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On 11/3/2013 10:49 AM, John Clark wrote:
>> >
>> >>>
>> >>> Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia is considered by many to be a >> >>> intellectual, in fact the leading intellectual on the Supreme Court,
>> >
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Of course that "many" consists of bible thumping Tea Baggers,
>> >> worshipers
>> >> of
>> >> Ayn Rand, and snake handlers who have general contempt for
>> >> "intellectuals".
>> >
>> > I don't understand how Ayn Rand find herself in such dubious company.
>> > She was a harsh critic of religion and she essentially praised
>> > science, philosophy and other intellectual pursuits as the source of
>> > all that is good in the world.
>> >
>> >
>> > Because she preached greed is good
>>
>> I think it was Gordon Gekko who preached that greed is good :)
>> In fact, Gordon Gekko's speculative activities would be much harder to >> pull off without the leverage made possible by fiat money, which Rand
>> opposed.
>>
>> > and implied that if you were richer and
>> > more powerful than other people it was no reason to do anything to help
>> > them, you earned it (even if you inherited it).
>>
>> In Atlas Shrugged, an important story arc is the contrast between two >> inheritors: Dagny and James Taggart. Dagny is a hero and Taggart is a
>> villan in the story. She never opposes helping anyone, she just
>> opposes being forced to do so.
>>
>> Furthermore, her point is that competition in a free market actually
>> helps everybody -- by providing better goods and services at lower
>> prices -- while redistribution of money based on violence does not,
>> and is in fact generally a con used by politicians to extract even
>> more money from the population.
>>
>> The ineffectiveness of wealth redistribution through taxation is not
>> such a crazy idea. Compare this graph:
>>
>> http://wmbriggs.com/blog/?p=7373
>>
>> with this one:
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_Unite...
>>
>>
>> >  And it would be immoral for
>> > the government to take any of your money to help those proles.
>>
>> Because this is ultimately enforced by violent means. If you oppose
>> violence, again, not such a crazy idea that you would consider this
>> immoral.
>>
>> >  This of
>> > course appeals to people with money and power who fund political
>> > astroturf
>> > movements that oppose anything that might upset their favored position
>> > in
>> > society.
>>
>> Ok, but it's not her fault if her ideas are distorted. She abhorred
>> religion, as I said.
>>
>> > She glorified the ultra-individualist. Did you read about her
>> > thoughts on William Hickman?
>> >
>> > "...the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatsoever for all that
>> > a
>> > society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who
>> > really
>> > stands alone, in action and in soul. … Other people do not exist for
>> > him,
>> > and he does not see why they should." She called him "a brilliant,
>> > unusual,
>> > exceptional boy," shimmering with "immense, explicit egotism." Rand had
>> > only
>> > one regret: "A strong man can eventually trample society under its feet.
>> > That boy [Hickman] was not strong enough."
>>
>> No, I don't even know who Hickman was. Wikipedia mentions a
>> frontiersman, a stunt driver and a criminal. Who is she referring to
>> an in what contest?
>>
>> > She was so taken with idea of the Ubermensch and hatred of communism
>> > that
>> > she did not appreciate that man is a social being and progress depends
>> > on
>> > empathy and cooperation as much as genius.
>>
>> Again, I find this to be a distortion. She highly praises free
>> cooperation and natural empathy. She opposes that these things should
>> be enforced by violent means.
>>
>> > Brent
>> > "If I have seen farther than other men it is because I have stood on the
>> > shoulders of giants."
>>
>> Yes, Rand thought the same. On a side note, Newton tried to make a
>> fortune by speculating in stocks (and failed miserably). Ayn Rand
>> never speculated in stocks, as far as I know.
>>
>> Telmo.
>>
>> >     --- Isaac Newton
>> >
>> > --
>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google
>> > Groups
>> > "Everything List" group.
>> > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send
>> > an
>> > email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> > To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com . >> > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list .
>> > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>> --
>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
>> "Everything List" group.
>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
>> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
>> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com .
>> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "Everything List" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com .
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.


--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/



--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to