"Objectivists never cease to misuse words for their own subjective agendas."
he's a subjectivist, no doubt.
Jackson: "Objectivists never cease to misuse words for their own subjective agendas." he's a subjectivist, no doubt.
I would say pet agendas, rather than subjectivist, as many Neo-Objecticons would view their own agenda's as objective in the first place (talk about subjective, lol.)Personally, I think if more Objectivist's spent time examining Rand's words & other supposedly "blasphemous" traitors that are outside of the ARI & Peikoff's influence (The Atlas Society, Post-Objectivism, etc.), & less time worshiping her novels & generalizing theory from the imagery in her writing, there would be less collectivist's & elitist's sullying the possible aims of Rand's Objectivism.Perhaps that would explain the ficitious role of Objectivism condoning the War on Terror, if a source of worship regarding Rand is through her fiction
"Look at me, I'm quoting another user to show how wrong I think they are, out of arrogance of my own position. Wait, this is my own quote, oh shi-" ~ Nitroadict
Marko: Nick. B: So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought? No need to fight them, they are too insignificant.
Nick. B: So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought?
So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought?
At this point I think more people would agree to an Objectivist platform than an ancap one. Anyway, what is with all the Objectivist bashing? Is it really necessary to bash one of our closest allies?
"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay
Solid_Choke: Marko: Nick. B: So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought? No need to fight them, they are too insignificant. At this point I think more people would agree to an Objectivist platform than an ancap one. Anyway, what is with all the Objectivist bashing? Is it really necessary to bash one of our closest allies?
I would hardly call Peikoff & the ARI allies.
Nitroadict: Solid_Choke: Marko: Nick. B: So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought? No need to fight them, they are too insignificant. At this point I think more people would agree to an Objectivist platform than an ancap one. Anyway, what is with all the Objectivist bashing? Is it really necessary to bash one of our closest allies? I would hardly call Peikoff & the ARI allies.
Alright, there are points for Objectivists for being our allies and enemies. We have to settle this issue though. We have to began fighting for our desired society, otherwise we've already lost. The time for talking is ticking down fast. The question now is how we fight and who to target first!
Nick. B: Nitroadict: Solid_Choke: Marko: Nick. B: So can Objectivist ever be our (AnCaps) allies or are they a deadly enemy that should be fought? No need to fight them, they are too insignificant. At this point I think more people would agree to an Objectivist platform than an ancap one. Anyway, what is with all the Objectivist bashing? Is it really necessary to bash one of our closest allies? I would hardly call Peikoff & the ARI allies. Alright, there are points for Objectivists for being our allies and enemies. We have to settle this issue though. We have to began fighting for our desired society, otherwise we've already lost. The time for talking is ticking down fast. The question now is how we fight and who to target first!
IMO, those who are not of the ARI and/or of Peikoff's influence tend to me far more rational regarding their own philosophy, but obviously can there be exceptions. I would deem those of The Atlas Society (whose founder was "banished" from "Objectivism" by it's elitists for simply holding civil conversation with libertarians) & Post-Objectivists to be allies.I personally do not think the Elitist Collectivist Objectivists (those that apply) & the Neo-Objecticons would put up much of a fight, anyway. I think a good deal of them would retreat further into their collective meet-ups & schools out of bitterness.
Nitroadict:IMO, those who are not of the ARI and/or of Peikoff's influence tend to me far more rational regarding their own philosophy, but obviously can there be exceptions. I would deem those of The Atlas Society (whose founder was "banished" from "Objectivism" by it's elitists for simply holding civil conversation with libertarians) & Post-Objectivists to be allies.I personally do not think the Elitist Collectivist Objectivists (those that apply) & the Neo-Objecticons would put up much of a fight, anyway. I think a good deal of them would retreat further into their collective meet-ups & schools out of bitterness.
Well DAMNIT, let's reach out to the ATLAS SOCIETY and POST-OBJECTIVIST, align with them, AND START FIGHTING!!!!!!
Nick. B: Nitroadict:IMO, those who are not of the ARI and/or of Peikoff's influence tend to me far more rational regarding their own philosophy, but obviously can there be exceptions. I would deem those of The Atlas Society (whose founder was "banished" from "Objectivism" by it's elitists for simply holding civil conversation with libertarians) & Post-Objectivists to be allies.I personally do not think the Elitist Collectivist Objectivists (those that apply) & the Neo-Objecticons would put up much of a fight, anyway. I think a good deal of them would retreat further into their collective meet-ups & schools out of bitterness. Well DAMNIT, let's reach out to the ATLAS SOCIETY and POST-OBJECTIVIST, align with them, AND START FIGHTING!!!!!!
The force is strong with this one...
Nitroadict:The force is strong with this one...
Just hope I don't turn out like Darth.
But seriously we have got to become more active. We can't just rely on education, WE HAVE TO DEMAND FREEDOM, WE HAVE TO WORK TOGETHER! I'm going to be blunt here: RIGHT NOW ANCAPS, ALONG WITH ALL OTHER ANARCHIST, ARE SEEN AS A JOKE, AND FOR THE MOST PART THEY'RE RIGHT! THIS YEAR HAS TO BE THE END OF THAT PERCEPTION, AND THAT'S UP TO US!
Nick. B:THIS YEAR HAS TO BE THE END OF THAT PERCEPTION, AND THAT'S UP TO US!
I agree, and if you have ideas on how to change that feel free to post them on this thread:http://mises.org/Community/forums/t/5150.aspx
I am an eklektarchist not an anarchist.
Educational Pamphlet Mises Group
Libertine Joseph:BTP = bunch of cry babies. Why even bother?
Buch of cry babies? You mean they are principled libertarians who are upset that the Libertarian Party is no longer libertarian.
ryanpatgray: Libertine Joseph:BTP = bunch of cry babies. Why even bother? Buch of cry babies? You mean they are principled libertarians who are upset that the Libertarian Party is no longer libertarian.
Libertine Joseph: ryanpatgray: Libertine Joseph:BTP = bunch of cry babies. Why even bother? Buch of cry babies? You mean they are principled libertarians who are upset that the Libertarian Party is no longer libertarian. Splitting the vote won't achieve much. I guess we can call them statists? hm
If "splitting the vote" is your concern feel free to vote for one of the two major party candidates. Or, if you want to be productive and not insult people you could support run-off elections or IRV.
Libertine Joseph:Splitting the vote won't achieve much.
But voting for a candidate in general does? Hah.
AnCaps shouldn't be loyal to a party, we should be loyal to the cause. One party may betray it's princilples so we should have a spare.
Nick. B: Libertine Joseph:BTP = bunch of cry babies. Why even bother? AnCaps shouldn't be loyal to a party, we should be loyal to the cause. One party may betray it's princilples so we should have a spare.
Well said, and if the BTP one day does betray its principles ancaps should leave it as well. So far, it has not.
As are you.