Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I personally don't have a problem with the elderly needing assistance. Do you?
What you and your ilk have no problem with, is stealing your neighbors money and giving it to those you deem worthy. You have a perverted sense of what assistance is.
Ayn Rand who's family was devastated by the communist revolution of 1917
Objectivism is rational self-interest and self-responsibility – the idea that no person is any other person’s slave. The virtues of her philosophy are principled policies based on rational assessment: rationality, productiveness, honesty (in order to rationally make the best decisions we must be privy to the facts), integrity, independence, justice, and pride. The constitutional protection of individual rights to life, liberty, and property, and limited government.
Liberals are irrational self-interest and government dependence.
Hey, your first paragraph is from this website (the second paragraph):
What you and your ilk have no problem with, is stealing your neighbors money and giving it to those you deem worthy. You have a perverted sense of what assistance is.
Ah, so does that mean you and your kind are in favor of letting the elderly die from starvation in poverty if they never made it to be rich? Education for the wealthy few is the Conservative Ayn Rand way.
Ayn Rand was a hypocritical sociopath who's ideas, if implemented on a national scale, would have been on par with the Nazi's. Hell, even at the end, she took social security money, so she couldn't even stay true to her own selfish vision.
One of the fundamental concept of her horrific Objectivism belief system is "that the proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness." Even a child can figure out how quickly a society composed of nothing but individuals doing whatever they want - provided it makes them happy - will collapse. Such a guiding principle allows for everything from raping somebody if it makes you happy to plunging a nation into ruin if you happen to be in charge.
Oh, sure - she attempts to qualify her disgusting excuse for morality by claiming that her belief system also contains "full respect for individual rights embodied in laissez-faire capitalism."
There's just one problem - a society in which everyone SHOULD do whatever they want to make themselves happy is fundamentally incompatible with one that respects everyone's individual rights. Why? Because within a week, those in power - to make themselves happier - will immediately start stripping others of their rights... and that will be perfectly justifiable from the viewpoint of Objectivism. If you doubt this, just look at how many extremists are so eager to strip other people of their rights today because doing so would make the extremists happier.
Ayn Rand's belief system also rapidly degenerates into "makers" and "takers" - a convenient way to dehumanize the people you don't like and then justify denying them of basic rights since, after all, they are just "takers" so who cares? Every single Ayn Rand preaching extremist I've ever encountered has supported her beliefs by basically defining themselves as a "maker" and then using Objectivism to claim they should not be "shackled" by laws or morality since they are "special" and "need to pursue their own happiness." It's nothing but a cop-out - "I'm special so I should be allowed to do whatever I want!"
Everyone likes to pretend that they are John Galt - the only "hero" in any of Rand's works that could be remotely respected in the public eye. But, to better understand this insane woman's views, let us look at The Fountainhead and its hero... Roark. A man who rapes a woman - because he wanted her - and who blows up a building - because somebody dared compromise his "artistic vision."
Yeah... because that is the type of person we should emulate and hold up as a hero to society!
The sooner Ayn Rand and her endless attempts to justify selfish behavior are fully discredited and buried in the scrapheap of history's other failed ideas, the better.
None of this really sounds any worse than liberals to me. Liberals want to take other peoples' money and spend it themselves. They talk about compassion, but only want to be compassionate with other peoples' money and not their own. They support freedom of choice, as long as you don't choose to buy a gun. They are all for diversity, unless that diverse black person happens to be a Republican, then he's a race traitor. Free thought is wonderful and of course Jane Fonda should give a speech at a university, but Condoleeza Rice not so much. They're fine with a rodeo clown putting on a George Bush mask and horsing around, but when the same clown wears an Obama mask then it's racism and they get him fired from his job. They hate the evil Republicans for outsourcing jobs, but when Obama puts the head of GE in charge of his jobs council after the guy outsourced 30,000 jobs to China well that's also just fine with liberals.
Liberals elected Harry Reid as their top man in the Senate. This is a man who railed against immigration in the 90s and now claims that immigration reform is the only decent thing to do. This is a man who champions homosexual marriage, after he helped put the prohibition on it into place himself in the 90s when he passed DOMA. This is a man who champions getting big money from the Koch brothers out of elections, while his own campaign fund is overflowing with union campaign contributions. This is a man who railed against obstructionist Republicans, while tabling virtually everything sent to him from the House and refusing to let it be voted on. This is a man who said that changing the rules for Senate debate would dangerous to the fabric of the nation when Republicans were in charge, but then made the same change himself once Democrats were in charge. But there Reid sits in the Senate, term after term.
So pardon me if I don't take your diatribe against Rand followers very seriously. I mean, I haven't seen you advocating for throwing Reid out lately. There is nothing that liberals complain about conservatives doing that they don't do themselves and simply cover it up with loud proclamations of how moral and compassionate they are.
None of this really sounds any worse than liberals to me. Liberals want to take other peoples' money and spend it themselves. They talk about compassion, but only want to be compassionate with other peoples' money and not their own. They support freedom of choice, as long as you don't choose to buy a gun. They are all for diversity, unless that diverse black person happens to be a Republican. Free thought is wonderful and of course Jane Fonda should give a speech at a university, but Condoleeza Rice not so much. They're fine with a rodeo clown putting on a George Bush mask and horsing around, but when the same clown wears an Obama mask then it's racism and they get him fired from his job. They hate the evil Republicans for outsourcing jobs, but when Obama puts head of GE in charge of his jobs council after the guy outsourced 30,000 jobs to China well that's also just fine with liberals.
Liberals elected Harry Reid as their top man in the Senate. This is a man who railed against immigration in the 90s and now claims that immigration reform is the only decent thing to do. This is a man who champions homosexual marriage, after he helped put the prohibition on it into place himself in the 90s. This is a man who champions getting big money from the Koch brothers out of elections, while his own campaign fund is overflowing with union campaign contributions. But there Reid sits in the Senate, term after term.
So pardon me if I don't take your diatribe against Rand followers very seriously. I mean, I haven't seen you advocating for throwing Reid out lately. There is nothing that liberals complain about conservatives doing that they don't do themselves and simply cover it up with loud proclamations of how moral and compassionate they are.
One of Ayn Rand's biggest fans was Allen Greenspan and look how well that turned out...NOT. In the end in front of a congressional committee on the financial mess his response was a big ooopppsss. Presidents both R and D followed his every word for decades thinking his economic knowledge was the end all to be all......NOT
For more info watch the documentary about Brooksley Born called The Warning. She warned congress about the Derivatives Market among other things and what would happen, she was run out on a rail by Greenspan and his thugs....She was right and sadly even today derivatives are still un-regulated.
Individuals should always try to care for themselves, even, and especially, when others care for them.
Course, if you are not an individual, this advice is pointless.
When you are not an individual, you are less than an individual, no matter how large your group is. (There is a proportional aspect to this equation)
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
