The Last Capitalist

A site dedicated to restoring individualism in the United States of America

Posts Tagged ‘ayn rand’

Some Good Stuff

Posted by jemartynowski on June 2, 2009

I had mentioned before about IMAO posting some awesome capitalist propaganda, but this one was so good that I’m still turned on.  I haven’t read the book The Adventures of Jonathan Gullible, but I certainly want to do so now.

A great example of a hired man in a hat (from the video) taking stuff from us is going on right now.  As of yesterday, we, the taxpayer, are 60% owners of General Motors.  Why are we buying this company?  Because they are crappy, miserable, and run like a bunch of drunken monkeys are in charge.  That’s no reason for charity.  By the way, that’s all this is.  It’s welfare, but on a much larger scale.  Rather than a person who screwed up a small business or can’t hold a job, it’s a gigantic company who, despite millions of dollars into R & D, couldn’t determine their ass from a hole in the ground. 

Don’t trash us capitalists for knocking charity, though.  Giving to those in need is fine if it is to someone or some organization that is actually trying to do better.  Just don’t force us to do it using personal guilt via the government.  This quote from Ayn Rand’s The Objectivist says it best:

The fact that a man has no claim on others (i.e., that it is not their moral duty to help him and that he cannot demand their help as his right) does not preclude or prohibit good will among men and does not make it immoral to offer or to accept voluntary, non-sacrificial assistance.

It is altruism that has corrupted and perverted human benevolence by regarding the giver as an object of immolation, and the receiver as a helplessly miserable object of pity who holds a mortgage on the lives of others—a doctrine which is extremely offensive to both parties, leaving men no choice but the roles of sacrificial victim or moral cannibal . . . .

Which brings us back to the video.  People force you to give up freedoms in the name of many good things.  That doesn’t make it right.

Advertisements

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote

Posted by jemartynowski on May 15, 2009

You know what, screw it. I’m still so jacked about the last quote that I’m not going to try to top it. It’s exactly so awesomely right on. We retain a fake system, one that is not really a system but a pretend right of those in power to rule with an iron fist. There is nothing to stop their power but a set of “rules” which they don’t really care about. All you get from another sham of an election and new tyrant or group of dictators is someone else willing to pretend they got there legally and using their power to expand an agenda.

Posted in 1 | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

The Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote is Back!

Posted by jemartynowski on April 20, 2009

Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: “Your money or your life,” or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum: “Your children’s education or your life,” the meaning of that ultimatum is: “Your mind or your life”—and neither is possible to man without the other.

-From For the New Intellectual by Ayn Rand

This is one of my favorite quotes because it points out the complete nonsense that is our government today.  Those in power say to you, “we need this or that, because it is obviously good.”  The problem is that the things they say are needed aren’t necessarily best done by the government.  Plus, by forcing us to accept their opinion of the matter, they are not allowing us to use our own mind by threat of force against our body.  Without one, there cannot be the other. 

Also what I like about it is the use of education as the “obvious” good.  It’s commonly used as a reason to force us to give something up.  Obviously, we all want our kids to be smarter.  How can something trying to achieve that be bad?  Well, when it can only be accomplished by threatening force against individuals for not paying for it, that’s how.

If we logically thought about it, without government forcing education on us, would our kids all be dumb?  No, of course not.  We would find a way to privately fund and push for our kids to be smarter, or at least better prepared to enter the world as a productive individual.  Stop using education as a reason to steal from me,  or I’ll kick your ass.  (See what I did there?)

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, laissaz-faire capitalism | Tagged: , , , , , | 2 Comments »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote

Posted by jemartynowski on March 30, 2009

The main characteristic of this mentality (anti-conceptual mentality) is a special kind of passivity: not passivity as such and not across-the-board, but passivity beyond a certain limit—i.e., passivity in regard to the process of conceptualization and, therefore, in regard to fundamental principles. It is a mentality which decided, at a certain point of development, that it knows enough and does not care to look further. What does it accept as “enough”? The immediately given, directly perceivable concretes of its background . . .

To grasp and deal with such concretes, a human being needs a certain degree of conceptual development, a process which the brain of an animal cannot perform. But after the initial feat of learning to speak, a child can counterfeit this process, by memorization and imitation. The anti-conceptual mentality stops on this level of development—on the first levels of abstractions, which identify perceptual material consisting predominantly of physical objects—and does not choose to take the next, crucial, fully volitional step: the higher levels of abstraction from abstractions, which cannot be learned by imitation. (See my book Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology.) . . .

The anti-conceptual mentality takes most things as irreducible primaries and regards them as “self-evident.” It treats concepts as if they were (memorized) percepts; it treats abstractions as if they were perceptual concretes. To such a mentality, everything is the given: the passage of time, the four seasons, the institution of marriage, the weather, the breeding of children, a flood, a fire, an earthquake, a revolution, a book are phenomena of the same order. The distinction between the metaphysical and the man-made is not merely unknown to this mentality, it is incommunicable.

-From Philosophy:  Who Needs It? by Ayn Rand

OK, so this is more of an excerpt, but it’s very relevant to a drunk argument I had the other day.  The person with whom I was loudly discussing economic systems has an attitude toward things that is most certainly there without his own thought process.  His “puppet mentality” as I call it is better described by Ayn Rand’s anti-conceptual mentality description. 

The topic of discussion was Wal Mart.  When capitalism is brought up, its “evils” are always “proven” by the existence of Wal Mart.  The terrible conditions of people working in some African country are proof that greed causes bad working conditions and these people are basically slaves.  Well, alright, not slaves by force, but since they have no other options, they are basically forced into it.  Hmm. 

The question is then asked what is the alternative?  If you win and Wal Mart and all other companies are disbanded, tell me what happens then.  The answer you get?  Angry yelling back at you and accusing you of being a “rapist” because you support evil corporations  (I swear to God that happened). 

Ayn Rand correctly asserts that if you make people think logically about non-concrete ideas that they were not previously conditioned with responses to, they have nothing.  The answer to my question above is that these people starve and live a life many times worse.  But, see to the anti-capitalist, this is no excuse.  Wal Mart must stay there for this reason and offer people “better” conditions.  Well, who decides this?  Who is the dictator of how much each person should have?  You?  Does everyone need to have a house with a two car garage and at least two TVs?

There are no answers to these questions because they would all be wrong.  Over the course of time, with a free market, capitalist society, things improve.  They improve because greed would cause someone else to come in and offer something a little better and put Wal Mart out of business.  Then, years later, perhaps, someone else will one-up that company.  The cycle of growth will continue. 

Now, there are most certainly issues here, such as the non-U.S. country not allowing competition, but then this is an anti-capitalist approach as well.  If they were a free market society, that wouldn’t even be an issue.  So, if anything, we should be pushing for more greed and capitalism in these third world countries.  But the anti-conceptual mentality would argue against that. 

That mentality tells you that since all we know over there is tyranny, only tyranny can be there.  It tells you that we can just have a better tyrant who is compassionate and caring, even though that is contradictory.  The anti-conceptualist mentality is all too common when arguing politics, because nobody is willing to dream of what could be.  Hopefully we can push past that some day

Posted in Capitalism and Politics | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote

Posted by jemartynowski on March 27, 2009

If concern with poverty and human suffering were the collectivists’ motive, they would have become champions of capitalism long ago; they would have discovered that it is the only political system capable of producing abundance. But they evaded the evidence as long as they could. When the issue became overwhelmingly clear to the whole world, the collectivists were faced with a choice: either turn to the right, in the name of humanity—or to the left, in the name of dictatorial power. They turned to the left—the New Left.

Instead of their old promises that collectivism would create universal abundance and their denunciations of capitalism for creating poverty, they are now denouncing capitalism for creating abundance. Instead of promising comfort and security for everyone, they are now denouncing people for being comfortable and secure.

-From Return of the Primitive:  The Anti-Industrial Revolution by Ayn Rand

For those of you who think that, at the very least, these left-wing crazies that have a vice grip on our collective junk have good intentions (feeding the poor, making things “equal”), I question your logic.  It is already obvious, historically, that collectivist systems inhibit growth and abundance.  The old left had illogical ideas that their methods would be the only way to keep advancements organized and regulated, therefore resulting in the betterment of society.  They were wrong. 

Now, though they might still try to make the same claims as old communists, President Obama, Speaker Pelosi, and others have to be smart enough to know that these things are not true.  It comes out sometimes, when they admit that much of their agenda would harm the economy, so they need to wait until after we recover.  Jim Cramer, from CNBC’s Mad Money, a proud leftist, admits that the administration needs to stop pushing the things forward that even Cramer himself likes, because they are bad for the economy.  How, then, would these things be good for society just because we have a strong economy?  Perhaps I’m missing a step in logic. 

I’m not.  They aren’t kidding themselves either.  What they all really want is a forced charity.  They want to be able to forcefully collect money from the people to use as they see fit.  That is it.  No more, no less.  They believe they are smarter than you, so that they know best what to do with your resources.  If they were so smart, they would have found a way to accomplish their goals in a free market, not a dictatorship.

Posted in Capitalism and Politics, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Daily(ish) Ayn Rand Quote

Posted by jemartynowski on March 24, 2009

So long as a concept such as “the public interest” (or the “social” or “national” or “international” interest) is regarded as a valid principle to guide legislation—lobbies and pressure groups will necessarily continue to exist. Since there is no such entity as “the public,” since the public is merely a number of individuals, the idea that “the public interest” supersedes private interests and rights, can have but one meaning: that the interests and rights of some individuals take precedence over the interests and rights of others.

-From Capitalism:  The Unknown Ideal by Ayn Rand

Since President Obama wants to push the limits of socialism by expanding his already extreme powers to taking over ANY financial business that might go under or need to declare bankruptcy as essential to the “public good,” I’m friggin outraged.  This is why the public good is not good.  It’s essentially saying that mob rule is good, and individual rights are worthless.  I’d never wish anything physically harmful on another human being, but if this keeps up, I wouldn’t feel bad if he took a football to the groin or something.  With most dudes, I’d laugh but feel bad, but not this asshole.  I’d just laugh.  Damn it.  Mostly, I’m just annoyed by his antics, but this is going too far.  It’s socialist policy.  A power grab.  Nothing more.

Posted in Barack Obama Communism, Socialism and Democrats | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »