About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 10, No Sanction: 0
Post 20

Tuesday, November 15, 2005 - 2:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Jason, what you suggest was the entire thrust of my original post, which serves as the title of this thread. Ed and I are well aware of the crucial need to distinguish ourselves from the "conservative" camp -- for all the reasons Rand laid out in her seminal essay, "Conservatism: An Obituary."

It's one thing to maintain open lines of communication with groups representing such ideological factions: We believe that open debate works to the advantage of the rational side. It's another thing to pretend we're all pushing the same premises; we aren't, and we make that clear. If they invite us onto their platforms, allowing us to preach OUR messages to THEIR audiences, great. But whenever I invite some of them onto one of OUR platforms -- in this case, The New Individualist -- it's only if their specific message du jour is consonant with Objectivism.

In any event, wait until you see Ed Hudgins's lead-off piece in the forthcoming issue of The New Individualist, taking on the "creationists." I think you'll be cheered. Religious conservatives certainly won't be.


Post 21

Wednesday, November 16, 2005 - 8:04amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Great article Robert!  Speaking of which, in your article you rhetorically ask the following question:

But this leaves the glaring problem of where people like me -- the lonely advocates of rational, principled individualism -- are supposed to turn, politically.

I wanted to bring to your attention the recently penned article by Nathan Smith, which I linked to here on SOLO a while back,

http://solohq.com/inc/Galleries/News/905_t.shtml

and which I thought offered an interesting answer/perspective to the dilemma you correctly identify.  I'd be curious to know what you or others think regarding Mr. Smith's arguments.

Matt


Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 5, No Sanction: 0
Post 22

Thursday, July 27, 2006 - 3:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The problem is that in past decades there has been two Republican Parties, the one of folks like Dick Armey and Ron Paul who were more libertarian and the kinder, gentler, compassionate statists.
Actually, this isn't the case with Armey at all. Armey was a major supporter of the Wright Amendment throughout his tenure in the House. You may not have heard of it. But if you have ever flow in or out of DFW, you have paid for it. It is the main reason why that market has the second-highest air fares in the nation.

As a result of the Wright Amendment, the DFW Airport is probably the biggest corporate-welfare project in the country. The main beneficiary is American Airlines.

Chris

(Edited by Chris Baker on 7/27, 3:28pm)


Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 23

Saturday, July 29, 2006 - 7:36amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

 

Jason, you wrote:

Much like Ayn Rand waged an all out war against the left and its intellectuals I think that a similar sustained war ought to be waged against the religious conservatives.   We certainly shouldn't try to make common cause with them.  There is very little common cause remaining.   All attempts should be made to eliminate them (and their religion) from the main stream of politics so that a more rational alternative to the left can take their place.

 

I just wanted to mention that Ayn Rand argued steadfastly also against political conservatism in America. We find that opposition, for example, in her fine essay "Censorship: Local and Express."

 

In 1976 she publicly declared her support for the Democratic challenger Patrick Moynihan against the Republican incumbent Senator James Buckley. She was opposed to Buckley in large part because he did not support the woman's right to procure an abortion, which had lately become a right recognized in the law the land by Roe v. Wade. That issue was a very important ideological issue of individual rights to Rand.

 

In all the years since then, I always voted Pro-Choice, which almost always meant voting against a Republican. Unfortunately, with the reelection of President Bush and the Republican Congress, they have finally gotten enough of their people on the Supreme Court to do their dastardly deed. Rand and I finally lost that long struggle for the Court. For a while.

 

These social conservatives are wrong in their thinking of a conceptus, a blastomere, or a fetus not yet capable of survival independently of its natural mother, as an individual. These are only precursors of individual humans. The ideological and political fight for the right of the woman, a genuine individual, to procure an abortion of these precursors from her body will continue.

 

Stephen


Post 24

Wednesday, October 22, 2008 - 4:25pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
These social conservatives are wrong in their thinking of a conceptus, a blastomere, or a fetus not yet capable of survival independently of its natural mother, as an individual. These are only precursors of individual humans. The ideological and political fight for the right of the woman, a genuine individual, to procure an abortion of theseprecursors from her body will continue.


 

In the light of this, am surprised the Colorado amendment has not made its way across these pages...

 


Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1


User ID Password or create a free account.