On 11/4/2013 4:10 AM, Telmo Menezes 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.
Before central banks there were independent banks that issued script and stole money from
their depositors.
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.
Is Rand fine with the rich buying up land and water rights and intellectual property and
then getting richer by renting and selling them, while everyone is taxed to arm police who
will protect those property rights? Is it not violence if it's mere intimidation? I know
she thinks she is because of her personal experience under communism - but she never seems
to think beyond asserting her opinion.
Brent
--
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.
