Monday, May 31, 2010

Partials

1. Randians are Statist Dupes:
On the same Belmont Club thread that prompted my post of yesterday, a fan of Ayn Rand opined less than gratefully about those we commemorate on Memorial Day.
"For some, this 'sacrifice' is no sacrifice at all, if it means preserving what they most value in life." 
That struck me as a bit too much like:
"I agree. It's important we fight them. Here: let me hold your coat."

It compelled me to write down this explanation that I've long had stewing about Ayn Rand's philosophy, Objectivism. Even she gave fair warning that it may not be all that pleasing for the common man.

In my comment I support the claim
What Marx provided the Leftists, Rand provided the Statists: a nifty false flag behind which they hide their true intentions from the gullible.
In fact Rand's philosophy aids Statists to both hide their true intentions with talk of freedom's blessings while at the same time legitimizing their gains over our liberties. Here's is what got my Spidey-sense tingling:
So what first alerted me to the deceitful side of Rand? The actions and words of her most lauded acolyte, Alan Greenspan. 

When Greenspan said “who in their right mind would buy a 4.5% fixed mortgage when a 3.75% variable is available?” I knew he either was intentionally deceitful, or someone had something terrible they used — and he succumbed — to get Greenspan to abandon those who trusted him. Like Rand did Willers.
(Comments inspired me to write more on this.)

2. The Problem with Conservatism.
The label Conservative is a conflicted banner under which to fight tyranny. The reason should be obvious. In a word: Inertia. Last week's outrageous collectivist demand has become today's status quo. Conservatives, as a whole, feel comfortable with the status quo. "Wake me when they really do something."

We got to today's status quo because "Progressives" understood that conservatives will not fight a simple request in light of far more unsettling demands.
"What's a penny to you? A nickel? A quarter?
What's incremental? LOL You slippery-slopers make me laugh."
They know that there are plenty in the conservative community who may be relied upon to relinquish a little ground just so long nobody lets the boat be rocked too violently (as the radicals, the Progressives' ally, threaten). And especially if it is only another conservative who has to pay. How much evil advances this way?

Ironic isn't it? The lines attributed to the godfather of conservative philosophy, Edmund Burke, states the paradox we face simply:
"All it takes for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

A chief problem of conservatives is that we tend not to want to move unless forced to do so. When the Progressives of the nineteenth century started labeling their adversaries as reactionaries, they weren’t far off. It still takes a palpable threat to get us off the dime. Please: find some way to demonstrate how I’m wrong about this.

3. Bookends to the Age of Reason:
I have often thought of Blaise Pascal (d 1662) and Clive Staples Lewis (d 1963) as these bookends.

When Pascal developed the mode of satire with which he undermined the scoundrels who used the Counter Reformation for their own elevation to power, he helped tumble the old order. Reason and rationality were used to great effect in The Provincial Letters and the public grew fond of it. By the time of Thomas Paine. it showed commoners to be the equal of kings in standing before the Lord, and ushered in the era that proved that human advancement would be the better for it.

But by the time of Lewis, the Fabians had brought England to the brink, and the postmodern era was about to embark shortly after the end of WW II. My favorite of his writings, perhaps because they were dry and to the point even as he needed to say what he did discretely, was The Abolition of Man. Simply contemplating that title, I pray you can see why I call him the other bookend to the Age of Reason.

A man's most effective weapon is his brain. "Progressives" have long aimed to gain control, and indeed have gained control of education. How well do you read and figure? How well does the up and coming generation? The trend is telling.

45 comments:

  1. Hey Pasc, long time no see. Quick quote, knocking your penny,nickel,quarter analogy. From NYTimes the worlds greatest news source:

    "French workers took to the streets on Thursday to protest their government’s plan to raise the retirement age from 60 — yes, 60 — to 61 or 62. In Spain, the International Monetary Fund has recommended that the government raise the official retirement age from 65 to 67 and then tie it to increases in longevity rates."

    See Pasc, it goes both ways. And its all RELATIVE, as our retirement age is what, 67? Just like we are paying far fewer taxes now than back in your idol RayGuns day. It can change Pasc. In other words a quarter today and only a dime tomorrow. That's whats so great about progressives. We are not mired in the past like cons are. We adapt, we change. Look up the definition of progressive.

    ReplyDelete
  2. By the way, I actually think I understand 98 percent of what you wrote. Keep up the good work.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Thank you Rep. I find it fascinating that while your attention was drawn to my criticism of conservatives and their inertia, you felt compelled to defend "Progressives."

    Being reactionary describes "Progressives" now.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Yes, Rep is Reaper -- haven't I told you I prefer that particular name you've used?

    Rep also is short for representative.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Representative of the "Duh" generation.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Og, That was uncalled for.

    Rep is less than, er; more than, er; well, not Duh anyway. At your site maybe he was intolerable, and that's your call. He's been more entertaining here.

    ReplyDelete
  7. JHC, you already cut my comment about the Og?

    ReplyDelete
  8. No. Both on the site and in my email, this is your first post as Reaper.

    ReplyDelete
  9. But I will remove ad hominems. You're not gonna go gah gah over Og's endearment to you, are ya?

    ReplyDelete
  10. Comon Pasc, regarding ""Progressives" have long aimed to gain control" you think we should just let everyone run free, do their own thing, not regulate anything? Isn't lack of regulations, to even the staunchest con, the reasons for all our recent misery? ie the economic crash, oil spill, etc? Or is it God paying us back for the homos?

    ReplyDelete
  11. Ok, I understand, Og has thin skin. So Og is a gansta? That's what I come up with when I google it.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The "Progressives" in both parties live to make it seem it's all or none, like you formed your question.

    We have a constitution that is supposed to limit what government is authorized to do. Because it can select its highest judges, the system is becoming too much like an aristocracy. That is wrong. Our nation, in principle, is a constitutional republic. Not a republic of elites, self-assessed (oligarchic) or really earned (Platonic). But it's becoming more an Oligarchy where much of it answers to foreign moneyed interests, much of that tyrannical, than ever it was imagined to be.

    I don't believe you are one of them Rep. One of them wouldn't bother to talk to me. I'm too low for them to bother with, same as you.

    But in fact, I know less of you than you do of me, so I'm going purely on gut instinct.

    I'd have to hear more out of you than sarcasm to understand you and what you think is important and why. I'd like to hear it, but I've not seen any as I recall.

    ReplyDelete
  13. "We have a constitution that is supposed to limit what government is authorized to do"

    This world is a little more complicated than it was 300 years ago.

    And everything revolves around almighty money. The ultimate purveyor of pleasure. The enemy of God and the cons favorite entity.

    You ever read Kafka? Not great writing literally, in my opinion and his also, but he was often on the right track.

    ReplyDelete
  14. PF:"We have a constitution that is supposed to limit what government is authorized to do"

    Rep:This world is a little more complicated than it was 300 years ago.

    The way to alter the limits is by amendment. Those who want power deem that too hard. Yep. It is supposed to be hard.

    Speaking of false flag operations, nobody who is rational can see the "Progressives" as anything but regressive with respect to an individual. There is no right you can claim as an individual that the "Progressives" will respect. That includes your very life.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Those who want power deem that too hard. Yep. It is supposed to be hard.

    And the courts are supposed to decide when the government steps outside its bounds, not closet lawyers.

    nobody who is rational can see the "Progressives" as anything but regressive with respect to an individual"...

    –adjective
    1.
    favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
    2.
    making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.
    3.
    characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

    Who in there right mind does not want to be a progressive according to the above definition?

    As I have said before, many many times, Cons do not understand words. They can't even read the bible and come away with its core meaning.

    ReplyDelete
  16. con·serv·a·tive –adjective

    1. disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

    2.cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.

    3.traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

    4.(often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

    Cons want to live in the past. This is not the past. Grow up cons.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Rep, It is you who don't understand words. What part of the false flag metaphor is hard for you to fathom?

    You want us to simplemindedly look at a word's definition and from that assess what "Progressives" are really up to?

    Philosophy's task is to get to the heart of what it is people mean when they use subtle words. You are gonna discover that to be hard to find in any dictionary.

    You are not that trusting Rep, so who are you kidding? Is it yourself?

    I fully understand what progress is. That's why I called out "Progressives" for flying under a false flag.

    You failed to respond. Speaking of not understanding WORDS.

    You continue to ignore the false flag operations that are in play at your peril. Help me expose them, and you'll like yourself better.

    ReplyDelete
  18. "You continue to ignore the false flag operations that are in play at your peril. Help me expose them, and you'll like yourself better. "

    Pasc, a false mythical being (God) is mankind's greatest peril in this day and age.

    Pasc, life is what it is, life. There is no ultimate truth. I can face the real truth, so I don't need to delude myself, convince myself that there is anything after life. After life is death, and death is the same as it was before your were born.

    Pasc, do you remember what it was like before you were born?

    ReplyDelete
  19. Radio Head:

    "You used to be alright
    What happened?
    Did the cat get your tongue
    Did your string come undone
    One by one
    One by one
    It comes to us all
    It's as soft as your pillow
    "

    Comon Pasc, its not that hard.

    "I'm just an insect" (Kafka).....

    ReplyDelete
  20. You just changed the subject Rep.

    Be a man when you concede.

    IF you discover it is not all entertainment,
    while all others shirk to just get bent,
    then you'll be a man my son.

    ReplyDelete
  21. "Be a man when you concede. "

    JHC, have you read "The Road"? Not the movie, the book...

    Carmac McCarthy. (The Horses Trilogy, No Country for Old Men, The Road, Blood Meridian, etc, etc, etc.)

    Read em my good man. Words. He is a great one.

    Faulkner...

    Carmac and Faulkner. I like McCarthy and Hemingway versus Faulkner. Have you read them?

    ReplyDelete
  22. Comon Pasc, Faulkner, no one knows what he was talking about.

    McCarthy and Hemingway, simple and sweet.

    ReplyDelete
  23. "The mist is lifting slowly
    I can see the way ahead
    And I've left behind the empty streets
    That once inspired my life
    And the strength of the emotion
    Is like thunder in the air"

    Thunder in the air

    ReplyDelete
  24. Wow, I sound a lot better at night than I do the next day.

    ReplyDelete
  25. Pasc, you really believe there's a group, aka progressives, that aim to enslave us all or ??? And Obama is one of them?

    ReplyDelete
  26. Rep, you're already under their influence.

    Your unwillingness to assess the evidence of your own experiences demonstrates this. You've been trained to scoff at any notion of the sort, as displayed by your question. I'd say it is as reflexive in you as Pavlov's dogs slavered to the ringing of a bell.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Pasc, the evidence points to the religious right trying to enslave the masses. The list of evidence is a mile long. They oppose birth control (the Catholic church and others) and are against abortion, but when the children are born, they make everyone pay for their education and pay extra taxes because of the deductions. At 12k per year per kid for school, and quite a few paying 0 federal income tax, that adds up. The right wants to create a huge army of Gods children to do what? The anointed leaders bidding?

    ReplyDelete
  28. You just changed the subject again Rep.

    Show us you have a valid counter argument or concede my point.

    Be a man.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Whats your point again? Progressives are trying to enslave the world and I should look at my experiences? I have no experiences that indicate that.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Speaking of false flag operations, nobody who is rational can see the "Progressives" as anything but regressive with respect to an individual. There is no right you can claim as an individual that the "Progressives" will respect. That includes your very life.

    Progressive have no problem with the following, rights, and the cons do:

    1) Right to die with dignity.
    2) Prostitution.
    3) Drug usage.
    4) Abortion.
    5) Birth Control.
    6) Homosexuality

    And many more.

    ReplyDelete
  31. You can be proud of this last comment. I think you're misguided, but now you making an effort.
    Bravo Rep.

    In each of the things you list:

    1) Right to die with dignity.
    2) Prostitution.
    3) Drug usage.
    4) Abortion.
    5) Birth Control.
    6) Homosexuality

    "Progressives" do indeed have a problem. They've addressed that problem by working subversively, using PC, to suppress open discussion as to why an individual would want to not make those choices.

    IOW, they actively engage in promoting each of the above behaviors rather than take a classical liberal position that most libertarians and many conservatives take. That position is inform the individual fully so they can make a smart decision.

    How is PC used to suppress the Right side of the argument? By claiming, often hysterically, of needing to "prevent hurt feelings" when someone argues substantively how such the choices may lead to the destruction of the chooser.

    It's a common example. It is where "Progressives" act about as illiberal and controlling as they ever dare act openly.

    For you to tell anybody that you have not witnessed such actions doesn't pass the laugh test.

    They behave like a cop who arrests you for interfering with a pimp attempting to steal your wife for his harem.

    I hope to finish soon a new thread about PC that was prompted by this thread. I began it simultaneously with "Reflex," which grew out of a comment from this thread.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Maybe we should define progressive. I am a progressive according to the below definition:

    pro·gres·sive

    1.favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.

    2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.

    3.characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.

    4.(initial capital letter) of or pertaining to any of the Progressive parties in politics.

    Who in their right mind is not a progressive? Excluding cons that is. Pasc, do you consider yourself a progressive according to the above definition? Where is a web site detailing the evil progressives agenda?

    ReplyDelete
  33. Again?

    Missing from that definition, perhaps a subset of 4, let's call it 4b.

    Any people who've gained control of the progressive party or movement quite frankly to advance, or progress, their personal power.

    And then there really is a 5. Progressive Movement of the late 19th Century who were fond of misanthropic ideas such as eugenics. They recognized that the advancement of their goals would not be accomplished overnight. So they became resigned to view any advancements toward their goals, even given the expected occasional setback, as progressive -- hence their chosen proper name.

    They viewed two steps forward and one step back as a victory.

    Would you be happy to admit you are an acolyte of the early "Progressives" Rep? It's my guess they'd not so readily admit you.

    ReplyDelete
  34. "Would you be happy to admit you are an acolyte of the early "Progressives" Rep? "

    I don't know much about the early progressives nor care. I am not a huge history fan, like most cons.

    Again, I am a progressive in accordance to the above definition. Who in their right mind does not want to live and learn as described by the above dictionary definition?

    On the other hand, the definition of conservative is as follows:

    con·serv·a·tive 

    –adjective
    1.disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change.

    2.cautiously moderate or purposefully low: a conservative estimate.

    3.traditional in style or manner; avoiding novelty or showiness: conservative suit.

    4.(often initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Conservative party.

    Why would anyone want to live in the past and limit change? Isn't the future much more exciting? From the two definitions what are you closest to, progressive or conservative, Pasc?

    ReplyDelete
  35. Your failure to address or even care what the goals are of those who run the Progressive movement make you a Conservative Rep.

    Rep defines Con:"disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change."

    If you don't know what your backing, but choose to back it because they claim -- FALSE FLAG ALERT, Rep -- they CLAIM to do the things you are fond of, means you wish to preserve what the "Progressives" are doing.
    You won't even permit them to change let alone limit it, cuz you don't know what it is.
    And you couldn't restore it to it's previous goals because you don't care.

    Rep: "I don't know much about the early progressives nor care."

    Do you know what they call your kind of Con, Rep? A Know-Nothing.

    ReplyDelete
  36. "Your failure to address or even care what the goals are of those who run the Progressive movement make you a Conservative Rep."

    Show me their goals Pasc, on a web site. Lets try someone else s words. Are you the only one that sees the progressives true goals?

    "Do you know what they call your kind of Con, Rep? A Know-Nothing."

    Uh a know nothing like, Palin, BeckerHead, w, RayGun, Bachmann, on and on. They all want to live in the past and quote history at every turn. They want control...

    ReplyDelete
  37. You keep changing the subject.


    You're still defending a group, for which you know are capable of subterfuge, but that you claim to trust because they are not another group which you claim not to trust, that I claim are filled with false flaggers too. The Statists hide in plain sight amongst Republicans.

    Oh how you prove the 3rd point of my nutshells, Rep. You were clearly educated outside the Age of Reason.

    ReplyDelete
  38. "You're still defending a group,"

    Yes, the group "progressive" as defined above. What is wrong with a progressive as defined above? Show me a site that details the progressives nefarious activities. Is it all a secret? Are their activities only known to you?

    "You were clearly educated outside the Age of Reason. "

    I know the past is not a predictor of the future.

    Communism is dead. RayGun is dead. Those times are gone and unlikely to return. Lets move on.

    ReplyDelete
  39. I gave you the PC ploy that is primarily used by "Progressive" up at 10:55 AM.

    You deny the truth as you continue to ask a question as if the evidence is not there in front of you both today and, I imagine, throughout in your own life.

    Your continued denial of the PC ploy to coerce submission is laughable.

    ReplyDelete
  40. What is PC ploy? And again, what is your definition of progressive? Where is there a site detailing progressive activities?

    Pasc, are you on medication? There is no need to be ashamed. Who knows what business has put into our environment and therefore into our bodies in the name of making a buck. You ever read "White Noise" by Don DeLillo?

    ReplyDelete
  41. You can stop repeating now Rep. It reads like your stuttering.

    The PC ploy is only one trick of "Progressives" to compel submission to their whims. Pretending not to understand English is another.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Here you go Ray. Something humorous for us to end this discussion with.

    Christian Groups: Biblical Armageddon Must Be Taught Alongside Global Warming

    Laugh yourself silly.

    ReplyDelete
  43. "The label Conservative is a conflicted banner under which to fight tyranny. The reason should be obvious. In a word: Inertia. Last week's outrageous collectivist demand has become today's status quo."

    See Hayek (1960) "Why I am not a Conservative".

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have. Our biggest difference is that he was predicting and I'm surveying the damage. His job was harder. I don't need to be a genius to arrive at my conclusions.

      Delete