Friday, April 19, 2013

Random Thoughts

by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Lib
erty -vs- Tyranny



A iconic American city under lock down. Images reminiscent of the Twilight Zone rushing in. Results of terror on display. Civilization itself on the brink. Respect for the individual and the natural rights associated with with human existence lost. Respect for human life seemingly an afterthought. Right -vs- left and the need for affirmation more important than solving problems.Ideology reigns supreme. Firearm violence, gay rights, reproductive rights, religious doctrine -vs - rational secularism, hyperbole over truth and logic. Mysticism crowding out science and reason. Background checks and the insanity of the NRA. Forms of tyranny. On and on it goes.

A nation stands lost as to the cause. As the lights slowly dim. Perhaps there is hope. Time running out...


Is the above to be our future? Sometimes one cannot help but wonder.

10 comments:

  1. Calm down. You're over reacting. Civilization is NOT on the brink. The crisis is happening in one small section of the USA, which is NOT the entirety of civilization.

    "Firearm violence, gay rights, reproductive rights, religious doctrine -vs - rational secularism, hyperbole over truth and logic."

    You catagorize gay rights and reproductive rights in with firearm violence? Versus rationality?

    So gay rights and reproductive rights are contra to rationality?

    That in itself is not rational.

    Once law enforcement gets the second bomber, dead or alive, things will settle down and we'll get back to hating each other, which is what we do best.

    But rest assured. This is NOT the end of civilization, just the continuation of our stupidity.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Now where did I say it was the END of civilization. The world has been on the brink before, and it will again. My point was apparently not well made made. Oh well...

      Delete
  2. Your faith in science and reason as the way forward is a hallmark of Marxism.
    Just saying since you may want to keep in mind that Objectivists share a
    great deal with Marxists.

    What they both fail to understand is that evolution in the Marxian case or
    survival of the fittest in the Objectivist case merely indicate change not
    advancement.

    That's a tough one and dogma won't do to find even partial answers.

    Just sayin'

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Science is science. Reason is reason. Both Marx and Rand were intellegent people. They had vastly different views on economics and politics.

      Nice try though.

      And I am aware Marx thought capitalism was a huge step forward. Where he went wrong was when he strayed in the communist utopian vision. Marx would have approved of Henry Ford methinks.

      Delete
    2. "Your faith in science and reason as the way forward is a hallmark of Marxism."

      Marxism is purely faith-based, and if one counts it as religion (which I am not), it has been far and away the deadliest religion in human history. Since Marxism starts with assumptions and belief in completely discredited and incorrect principles, it has absolutely nothing to do with science and reason.

      Objectivism is admirable in that it is NOT about survival of the fittest at all. This, however, is maximized in Marxism, with its obsession with the material and how, when applied, it turns society into the most savage feeding-frenzy of a jungle imaginable.

      RN said: "Marx would have approved of Henry Ford methinks."

      Yes, like Marx, Henry Ford wanted to maximize his ugly base prejudices and ignorance. Especially when it came to a common target of those who lack any benefit of science and reason, Jewish people. Marx, an adherent for form of master-race ideology, once stated "The Jews of Poland are the smeariest of all races." This fits in with Ford's later writings.

      Delete
  3. I find it amusing, rewarding actually when the libbies can't come up with sensible response to reasoned thought. Hmm.......... Seems they aren't really all that different than the socon fundie conservatives and the neocons..

    ReplyDelete
  4. I have tipped more toward Objectivism, Rand, etc. I guess one thing that did it was a Democratic/left campaign ad I saw before November last year, that showed pictures of Somalia and held it up as an example of what happens when we cut government services too much. As part of a point to bash Republicans.

    So, if Somalia is the worst you can get by having too little tyranny, and is the supposed worst case scenario of Objectivism, it's rather mild.

    The elephant in the room for the ad is what happens if you have too much government? No, they didn't contrast the too-little government picture of Somalia with pictures of the mass graves of Nazi Germany, 1990s Serbia, North Korea, the refugee camps now of people fleeing socialism in Syria, Pol Pot's skull pyramids, and the list goes on.

    It's clear that human beings are far far more in danger from too much government than from too little.

    Even the worst situation in Somalia (when tens of thousands died in the 2011 famine) is far lsss serious than comparable situations on "the other side": the hundreds of thousands who died of starvation in Ethiopia when it went socialist and a very strong government put Marxist principles to work to work.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It all depends on what citizens are willing to pay for. In the last few generations and multiple decades Americans were willing to pay for a much bigger government and safety net for its citizens, taxing ourselves accordingly. Recently we have not been willing to pay those taxes, yet, we did not end the programs. Kinda of dumb to leave ourselves bankrupt. I predict that Americans will find they want the programs of the last 80 years and will come to grips with the idea that they cost more than we are paying. We do not have true capitalism and the capitalism we have is failing to provide for our people. Taxes will have to go up just to provide for defense and infrastructure; and I don't think Americans will settle for just that. So we needlessly punish ourselves just to debate the inevitable.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tommy: I've seen this claim of yours before and from others, but it doesn't hold water or match reality. As a matter of fact, we are paying more and more, and are getting much less than what we pay for (due to corruption, matters like paying teachers in Chicago $100,000 a year to do a very bad job, soaring numbers of millionaire government workers, waste on corporate welfare and welfare for the rich, massive pension handouts to government employees and the like). We are and have been willing to pay much much more in taxes than is necessary to provide for services and a safety net.

    Taxes don't need to go up for defense and infrastructure. There's plenty there now. There are such basic reforms such as repealing "prevailing wage" which demands massive corruption, which would free up 10% of infrastructure spending to be used on meaningful projects instead of graft.

    We are paying close to a record high amount in taxes. Just cut the waste. There's no need to rob us even more excessively.

    ReplyDelete

As this site encourages free speech and expression any and all honest political commentary is acceptable. Comments with cursing or vulgar language will not be posted.

Effective 8/12/13 Anonymous commenting has been disabled. This unfortunate action was made necessary due to the volume of Anonymous comments that are either off topic or serve only to disrupt honest discourse..

I apologizes for any inconvenience this necessary action may cause the honest Anonymous who would comment here, respect proper decorum and leave comments of value. However, The multitude of trollish attack comments from both the left and right has necessitated this action.

Thank you for your understanding... The management.