Objectivism beats libertarianism
- Home
- Board: /pol/ - Politically Incorrect
- Reading: Objectivism beats libertarianism
Libertarianism has failed. Why aren't you a based objectivist?
Reminder that objectivists oppose multiculturalism and the desegregation of public schools:
https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/culture-and-society/education--multiculturalism/Multiculturalism-War-on-Education
Reminder that objectivists identified the Leftist takeover of academia, and indoctrination in public education, decades ago. Notice the parallel to Yuri Bezmenov, but greater detail:
http://www.stephenhicks.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/RandAyn-The-Comprachicos.pdf
Reminder that objectivists oppose open immigration, and see the European crisis as a literal invasion:
http://www.peikoff.com/2015/09/21/to-yb-what-do-you-think-about-the-immigration-crisis-in-europe/
Reminder that objectivists opposed the U.S. entering WW2, and thought that Pearl Harbor would have been better prevented by a more rational foreign policy (i.e., never giving aid to the Japs in the first place).
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/war.html
>b-but Ayn Rand was a Jew!
She bucked all Jewish stereotypes, and even identified the basic philsophic principles of the West-destroying Jews. If you haven't read her work, particularly her non-fiction, you are missing out.
What you will find is that, overwhelmingly, those that are the most belligerent critics of objectivism are those who haven't read a single word that objectivist thinkers have written. When you press them to point out what they think is wrong about objectivist ideas, they will invariably spew out some kind of poorly-understood mischaracterization and immediately betray that they have no idea what the fuck they're talking about. They literally regurgitate anti-Rand talking points from Jezebel and Slate.
If you want a good run-down of the whole system of ideas, check out pic related.
>>70462878
>Reminder that objectivists opposed the U.S. entering WW2
I did not know that, hrm.
I don't see libertarianism as anything opposed to objectivism, at all
ayn rand is based
>>70462878
True. Objectivism is the ultimate red pill. Read this book:
https://www.google.es/url?q=http://www.ajjg.co/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Ayn-Rand-Atlas-Shrugged.pdf&sa=U&ved=0ahUKEwi21vLVxYLMAhWLPBQKHTnhB5wQFggLMAA&usg=AFQjCNFZDiAF0lluaSAlXLmo39NZRuodjA
>>70462878
>What you will find is that, overwhelmingly, those that are the most belligerent critics of objectivism are those who haven't read a single word that objectivist thinkers have written.
I noticed that people always do that. But that is a far cry from making the case for objectivism. I will read those things but we will see. I do not like the idea of letting corporations rule over people.
>>70462878
I'm an older than average anon here that has always seen myself adopting a more logical, objective thought process over the years.
I have exactly agreed with everything listed from a disdain for multiculturalism and desegregation, having family literally steer me from "higher learning" and seeing how feminism has destroyed everything and everyonbe it touches. And I am a Trump supporter first and foremost for protecting US sovereignty.
I even had my had my doubts about the US caving to pressure to enter the war, and it caved enough to make a provocative action as prevoking Japan for atleast the reason of freezing Japan's financial assets in the US banking system.
I appreciate your drawing a thread to the numerous examples of objective thinking, OP. It personally allowed me to reflect that this thought process has put me on the correct path.
>>70464202
rule over their property, from where do you bring that idea of a corporation ruling people? top kek
>>70463782
>I don't see libertarianism as anything opposed to objectivism, at all
She wrote about it.
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/libertarians.html
She thought of Libertarians as moral subjectivists, the kind of people that would eventually let sworn enemies openly immigrate into the West in the name of "muh open borders." She was right.
>>70462878
Can someone explain differences between Objectivism and Libertarianism? I don't want to read 6 million pages of her books.
>>70464850
>I don't want to read 6 million pages of her books.
Well fuck you, then. Go suck some more muslim cock.
>>70464850
Sure, anon. The face-value similarity is that both Libertarians and objectivists support free markets. The difference is in the "why" and the "how."
From the objectivist point of view, libertarians promote the idea of free markets above the reality of outcomes. The most consistent libertarian view is "anarcho-capitalism," for example, which denounces the idea that government has any valid role in promoting social order. They would rather support the idea of "free markets," as they see it, than defend individual rights.
A good example is letting Muslims invade Europe. All things being equal, immigrants that want to come into your country to work for a living are all well and good. But those that *openly advocate* your society's destruction should be identified as enemies and not allowed into your country.
Objectivists say that government has a valid role in defending individual rights. Block immigration to immigrants, block bad trade deals with nations that *should* be regarded as enemies, and let people trade freely inside their own countries. From an objectivist perspective, our current trade deals with China and Europe's current immigration policies are *anti*-free market.
>>70464620
But it wouldn't matter if the freedom has been there enough time to develop the social institutions (constructs) to soak crimes and conflicts without state
It only would be inapropiate if the liberty project was still assembling, as there wouldn't be resources to fight them back, once these necessitys niche on the market grow and are solved with sanctions, security, justice and ostracism there wouldn't be any problem.
More over, to get someone in, as everything would be private property, first the inmigrant would need consent from someone else from inside, who would be part responsible of his behaviour.
Rand was probably missing what isn't allowed to happen due to the states monopolicing these issues.
>>70462878
What's up axper?
>>70465814
Substituting capitalism for anarchy would be a disaster. Read "Libertarianism: the perversion of liberty" by Peter Schwartz.
>>70465814
So a clearer example of what I mean would be how the Middle East got control of oil wealth. If you go back to see where the oil production came from, it was all from Western investment with contracts that were explicit about deals the Western investors should get.
What did these nations do? They nationalized the oilfields in defiance of those contracts, and screwed Western investors out of billions. And yet what did the West do in response?
An objectivist would say send gunboats and destroy them, and not let them violate contracts they made with you in good faith. A Libertarian would say, let them get away with it because it's their country and they have a right to do whatever they want with "their own" resources.
Note that oil wealth from a series of nationalizations in the ME was responsible for funding anti-Western Jihadist movements, including those that are currently invading Europe under the guise of "refugee" status.
>>70465761
Thanks family. Objectivism does sound far less larpy and autistic than Libertarianism.
>>70462878
An objective person would point out that everything is subjective.
I am really starting to hate any sociological terms and labels. Fucking new age...
>>70462878
>why don't you worship a dead female kike???
>>70465761
oh, it seems that rand just failed to solve that issue
It's more simple, the principle of non agresion would be enforced, and if some conflict happens, it would be pursued with an iron fist
As the order is up to human creativity it could be possible to choose living in countries or citys closed to anyone of x characteristics, and not just criminal history but focusing on their ideology, so people with toxic ideas could be completly banned
You don't need the state to reach those concerns of objectivism
If anything remains from the state, it will grow up again as it's now. You should read Huerta de Soto, he has a theory about the imposibility of liberalism (clasical)
>>70465761
>From an objectivist perspective, our current trade deals with China and Europe's (...) are *anti*-free market
No
>>70466710
>An objective person would point out that everything is subjective.
Objectivists actually go over this particular kind of misnomer. The idea that "no ideas are truly valid, everything is subjective, and all social systems are equal to each other" is a lie that objectivists explode very easily.
Objectivists are ultimately anti-egalitarian and pro-merit.
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/subjectivism.html
>>70463782
She was wet for a child raping killer.
>>70466875
>It's more simple, the principle of non agresion would be enforced, and if some conflict happens, it would be pursued with an iron fist
Where objectivists and Libertarians disagree is on the standard of that enforcement. What defines the initiation of force, and by what set of underlying principles? Libertarians fall short there.
Oh look, it's the daily Ayn Rand Institute shill thread
>>70462878
Can you read these kinds of books and actually get something out of them without being.. well, smart? I just restrict myself to fantasy because I am afraid I won't be able to get anything out of books that might actually make me think.
>>70466315
>A Libertarian would say, let them get away with it because it's their country and they have a right to do whatever they want with "their own" resources
no, a libertarian wouldn't say that lmao
that would be a libertarian approving the violation of the principle of non agresion when it happens out of his neighbourhood, well, if that libertarian really exists, he's confused as fuck and has nothing of libertarian, as it's completly inconsisten and inmoral
I can't accept that definition.
>>70467087
ALL I KNOW IS WHAT YOU SAID SOUNDS FUCKING GAY
YOU ARE A CONSERVATIVE OR PRACTICAL PERSON MAY OR MAY NOT BE RELIGIOUS FUCK ALL THESE BULLSHIT NEW AGE CRAP
>>70465761
> The most consistent libertarian view is "anarcho-capitalism," for example, which denounces the idea that government has any valid role in promoting social order.
[citation needed]
>>70466242
Libertarians are not interested in anarchy. You can't make blanket statements like that.
>>70467252
What defines the initiation of force?
really?
I can only imagine a nigga asking that.
It's damn obvious who and when someone innitiate a agresion no matter what kind, scale or how abstract it is.
Had he any rights to do that? No?
Did he do that against other's rights? Yes?
Simple. Fuck him.
>>70467252
Can you post more nothingness please?
Your posts are nebulous and vague with no meaningful content.
>>70462878
You need to be 18 to post here, gtfo
>>70467618
citation:
if the state remains there's no roof to control it's growth, bureaucracy only aims to fed itself and there's no way to put a limit to that, because it lacks the incentives and natural laws of any other kind of human organization, because it's based on force and not on deals
>>70467484
>that would be a libertarian approving the violation of the principle of non agresion when it happens out of his neighbourhood, well, if that libertarian really exists, he's confused as fuck and has nothing of libertarian, as it's completly inconsisten and inmoral
Then you're probably more in line with objectivist thought, because the end result of Rothbardian anarcho-capitalism is what I described.
>>70467892
Lurk moar.
>>70465761
>>70462878
>Ayn Rand
yes, but what I pointed out is that no one can be really a libertarian with that oxymoron
>being a libertarian when the social contract exists
why don't you ayn rand apes fuck off to somalia?
>>70468315
magical definition of contract invented after the social phoenomenon happening with no contract at all
>exists
top kekkery
>Her whole life was a cult to the ego, all for the ego, only the ego
>attacks public services, defend capitalism in its most radical form, praised the jews, defend feminism, compared having kids with slavery and other degenerate things
>Get old and poor, she wasn't this smart at all.
>In fear of death, she go to a PUBLIC HOSPITAL destroying all her philosophy
There is no such thing as the "self" or the "ego". I know this is too abstract, and that saying 'I' or 'ME' is essential to comunicate our thoughs and such, but it is just an illusion. An existence based on feeding the ego ends in an empty carcass full or fear to death. And all people die.
>>70468315
>muh somalia
Capitalism doesn't mean having "no governemnt," nor does it mean that "might makes right." It means a government that defends individual rights. While the Left might uphold nations like Somalia as "capitalist utopias," actual capitalist laugh at you and point out how stupid that is. They don't defend individual rights.
>>70464620
>She thought of Libertarians as moral subjectivists
Isn't that what Rand is, though? Doesn't she think morality and altruism are BS?
Lmao, you're such a shit to make that toxic statements so proudly
nothing wrong to have cult to the ego in the first place, loving yourself and guess what, not harming anyone else
nothing wrong to critic all these mafias or the parenting values treating children as a property and even as a resource (a tool towards another goal)
She was a philosopher for the gods' shake, what do you expect lol
Success and wealth are not in hand, she won't be forgoten, unlike you.
Going to a public hospital is not a contradiction, ti's not up to oneself to choose its circumstances, nitpick the fact there's a monopoly of sanitary services
>>70464620
>She thought of Libertarians as moral subjectivists,
I can think that of classic liberals, but not libertarians.
As a nationalist that has read all of the Austrians, ancaps, and objectivists. Rand is by far better than the lolbergtards.
Libertarians/objectivists should consider themselves as something different, more valuable and superior than humanity
Bible magical stories are fucking based, before knowledge there was no evil nor good as all that shit came from disparity as soon as knowing objectively was a thing.
now even moral is objective, praise the sun
>>70462878
They are exact same thing
>>70462878
>Rand beats Lolbertarianism
And Nietzsche beats Rand.
Stop being a pleb.
> http://philosophy.lander.edu/ethics/notes-nietzsche.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZ1Nz-w58Yk
>>70470379
>As a nationalist that has read all of the Austrians, ancaps, and objectivists. Rand is by far better than the lolbergtards.
Why do you say that though?
>>70470920
>And Nietzsche beats Rand.
Rand admired Nietzsche but disagreed with him severely on fundamentals. I mean, for starters, he never defined any of his damned ideas. You're left wondering what he meant by everything he said.
Where he is clear, he's opposed to anything Rand argued.
He supported sacrificing the individual to the "greater good" of the virtue he envisioned. Objectivists see man as an end unto himself.
He supported the idea that virtue itself couldn't be defined and was an "instinct," much like Kantian "categorical imperatives." Objectivists, my contrast, define morality in terms of the necessities of human life and what is required for humans to thrive as individuals and societies.
He didn't think that objectivity was possible. Objectivists, by contrast, understand that reality exists independently of the observer, and that in order to understand any system--including human ones--we must observe reality and accurately induce principles according to those observations.
Nietzsche is very different, but not all of his ideas were bad.
>>70471026
About as accurate as pic related.
>>70471026
>2016
>considering post-ironic shitposting to be above enlightened teir
If you aren't a neo-anarcho-theistic-post-post-ironic shitposter, you have achieved the true red pill.
>>70464493
>older than average
>mentions "the war"
>means WWII
Just how much of an oldfag are you?
>>70462878
objectivists believe that "proper moral purpose of one's life is the pursuit of one's own happiness"
they're degenerates.
>>70472822
Caring for yourself is degenerate? Really? Don't you have a bull to prep, leaf? Don't be such an egoist and let him fuck your wife, cuck.
>>70462878
*Alisa Rosenberg
Why did she change her name? What is she hiding? If she isn't even honest about her own name then how can we trust her work?
>>70472822
Objectivists also point out that there is a difference between short-term gains and long-term happiness.
What about long-term considerations do you find degenerate over short-term hedonism?
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/hedonism.html
>I am profoundly opposed to the philosophy of hedonism. Hedonism is the doctrine which holds that the good is whatever gives you pleasure and, therefore, pleasure is the standard of morality. Objectivism holds that the good must be defined by a rational standard of value, that pleasure is not a first cause, but only a consequence, that only the pleasure which proceeds from a rational value judgment can be regarded as moral, that pleasure, as such, is not a guide to action nor a standard of morality. To say that pleasure should be the standard of morality simply means that whichever values you happen to have chosen, consciously or subconsciously, rationally or irrationally, are right and moral.
>>70473206
If you were writing against the Soviets, you might want to change your name to protect your family, too.
>>70472174
>Why do you say that though?
Well look at all the examples in the op. Those are stances a nationalist might make. I fall under the category of a nationalist that supports free markets as long as it doesn't harm your own nation's citizens. Hell, maybe that makes me an objectivist.
Reminder that objectivists oppose multiculturalism and the desegregation of public schools:
https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/culture-and-society/education--multiculturalism/Multiculturalism-War-on-Education
Here is an actual interview with Rand on the question of multiculturalism in education. She gets into desegregation at the end but the whole thing is worth listening to.
https://ari.aynrand.org/issues/culture-and-society/education--multiculturalism/POV-Ayn-Rand-Interviewed-on-the-Value-of-Education#filter-bar
![[fedora intensifies].gif](https://i.imgur.com/2Ip0aYg.gif "[fedora intensifies]")
