Re: An Open Letter To Open-Minded Progressives

On Apr 20, 5:14 am, raven1 <quoththera...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Apr 2008 00:03:24 -0500, "skysi" <f...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>
> >"DanielSan" <danielsan1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >news:rMOdnTU8H6BrJJfVnZ2dnUVZ_qmlnZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> Shrikeback wrote:
> >>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>news:M4KdnZfaKqQBKJfVnZ2dnUVZ_rHinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>> skysi wrote:
> >>>>> "DanielSan" <danielsan1...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> >>>>>news:dbednUfYnvuc5JfVnZ2dnUVZ_sTinZ2d@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >>>>>> ?????? ???????? wrote:
> >>>>>>> Folks, read works of Ayn Rand and a lot of your confusion in
life,
> >>>>>>> politics and economics will go away. You probably heard of Atlas
> >>>>>>> Shrugged, but that's not enough.
> >>>>>>> She is the founder of philosophy of Objectivism. The
fundamentals of
> >>>>>>> her philosophy are set forth in such nonfiction books as:
> >>>>>>> For the New Intelectual, The virtue of Selfishness, Capitalism:
The
> >>>>>>> Unknown Ideal., and Romantic Manifesto. Also read the following:
> >>>>>>> Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, edited by Harry
Bibswanger
> >>>>>>> and leonard Peikoff.
>
> >>>>>>> This will open your eyes on a lot of things.
>
> >>>>>> Ayn Rand was so scared of communism that she went to the other
extreme
> >>>>>> of fascism/cor****atism.  Rand was a nutcase.
> >>>>> Please, before making an ignorant statements like that studdy the
> >>>>> subject you are talking about.
> >>>>> Besides, do you even know what fascism is?
> >>>> Yes.  Individual rights are subordinate to interests of an
authoritarian
> >>>> state.
>
> >>> Which isn't Rand's ideology at all.  Still, that doesn't change the
> >>> fact that Objectivism is quasi-religous belief system with a weird
> >>> epistemology.
>
> >> Actually, you are incorrect.  The ideology of Rand is authoritarian
> >> because individual rights are subservient to the so-called "free
market".
> >> In a Randian world, individuals are NOT allowed to collectively get
> >> together and create rules for everyone.  Randians espouse "personal
> >> freedom" while denying "personal freedom" for to form labor unions;
to
> >> form governments.
>
> >> It's pure propaganda and a really bad lie.
>
> >As I said, apply your brain instead of emotion when you read her works.
> >Somehow, I don't think you really read anything, because if you read
you
> >wouldn't have come up with the rediculous statements above.
>
> What do you think John Galt or Howard Roark's opinion towards labor
> unions would have been?

I believe that somewhere in the two-thirds of _Atlas_
_Shrugged_ I managed to read long ago she has
one or more _bad_ people who represent union
leaders.  (It's been about 40 years so my memory
is a little hazy.)  However, in the classical-liberal
principles which Ayn Rand seems to espouse
much of the time, there is absolutely nothing wrong
with unions -- like cor****ations, they are simply an
expression of the right to associate for economic
advantage.  I don't think Rand is tremendously
logical or consistent, however, and she is certainly
not much of an observer of human behavior.   It
would not surprise me if my memory turned out
to be correct, as it sometimes does.