Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

MSNBC: We Collectively Impinge Your Freedom

GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
MSNBC, Melissa Harris-Perry: "This isn"t about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn"t even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years."

http://www.breitbart.com...

Ayn Rand destroys collectivists: Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good."

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing "the common good." Napoleon "served the common good" of France. Hitler is "serving the common good" of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by "altruists" who justify themselves by-the common good.

http://fare.tunes.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 12:06:07 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Napoleon "served the common good" of France.

Since when was Napoleon a bad leader?
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
RocketEngineer
Posts: 553
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 12:08:03 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
MSNBC, Melissa Harris-Perry: "This isn"t about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn"t even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years."

http://www.breitbart.com...

Ayn Rand destroys collectivists: Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good."

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing "the common good." Napoleon "served the common good" of France. Hitler is "serving the common good" of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by "altruists" who justify themselves by-the common good.

http://fare.tunes.org...

Lol @ the Common Good. Who defines what that is anyway? Someone elses Common good may be very different from mine.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 12:17:39 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 12:06:07 PM, drhead wrote:
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Napoleon "served the common good" of France.

Since when was Napoleon a bad leader?

Global hegemony = bad.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
glassplotful
Posts: 52
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 12:29:20 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Totalitarianism is collectivism.

A community comes together to build a park in which children can play. those dirty communists...

I don't agree with everything MSNBC pinheads say, but Harris-Perry wasn't suggesting anything extreme at all. She states in her response video that society needs to find a balance between what is right for the individual and what is right for the community. A purely community-driven society would be one with no competition, whereas a purely individualistic society would be one without regard or care for others. Why is it such an extreme viewpoint according to conservatives and libertarians to try to find the right balance between the two?
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 1:04:00 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 12:29:20 PM, glassplotful wrote:
Totalitarianism is collectivism.

A community comes together to build a park in which children can play. those dirty communists...

That isn't Rand's argument--collectivism is the idea that there is a justification for pronouncing either a legal or moral obligation to assist in the construction of the park. Individualism is not incompatible with cooperative endeavors provided that each contributes freely and according to his interest (even if that interest is as simple as the pleasure derived from furnishing enjoyment for kids).

I don't agree with everything MSNBC pinheads say, but Harris-Perry wasn't suggesting anything extreme at all. She states in her response video that society needs to find a balance between what is right for the individual and what is right for the community. A purely community-driven society would be one with no competition, whereas a purely individualistic society would be one without regard or care for others. Why is it such an extreme viewpoint according to conservatives and libertarians to try to find the right balance between the two?

One, I take issue with your generalization about conservatives and libertarians, as if entire groups (the membership of which is probably heterogeneous anyway) can be dismissed by associating them with something pejorative (which is what you do when you pose the question of why these groups find something, intimated to be common sense, to be "extreme").

Two, "we need a balance between X and Y" is not only a platitude, because it appeals to some undefined sense of diplomacy and fairness, but it's also trying to establish a golden mean so ill-defined that it's both meaningless and open to weaponization to the extent that it can be invoked, given its lack of appropriate thresholds, in defense of just about anything. The reason nobody can (or would) disagree with it is because it sits at a level of abstraction so high that it only acquires meaning with the addition of heavy interpretive license. So, it's just a political tool that sounds reasonable because it uses the word "balance".
OMGJustinBieber
Posts: 3,484
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 1:43:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Two, "we need a balance between X and Y" is not only a platitude, because it appeals to some undefined sense of diplomacy and fairness, but it's also trying to establish a golden mean so ill-defined that it's both meaningless and open to weaponization to the extent that it can be invoked, given its lack of appropriate thresholds, in defense of just about anything. The reason nobody can (or would) disagree with it is because it sits at a level of abstraction so high that it only acquires meaning with the addition of heavy interpretive license. So, it's just a political tool that sounds reasonable because it uses the word "balance".

I disagree that an appeal to balance is meaningless. Vague? Certainly. Meaningless? No. I have never heard of someone asking for balance between a society's desire to molest children versus its desire to raise a healthy stock. I'd also say we likely have a few on DDO who would disagree with the balance idea.
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:13:48 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

^
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:30:59 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

Does that invalidate his argument?
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:37:30 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 1:43:01 PM, OMGJustinBieber wrote:
Two, "we need a balance between X and Y" is not only a platitude, because it appeals to some undefined sense of diplomacy and fairness, but it's also trying to establish a golden mean so ill-defined that it's both meaningless and open to weaponization to the extent that it can be invoked, given its lack of appropriate thresholds, in defense of just about anything. The reason nobody can (or would) disagree with it is because it sits at a level of abstraction so high that it only acquires meaning with the addition of heavy interpretive license. So, it's just a political tool that sounds reasonable because it uses the word "balance".

I disagree that an appeal to balance is meaningless. Vague? Certainly. Meaningless? No. I have never heard of someone asking for balance between a society's desire to molest children versus its desire to raise a healthy stock.

I'd say that's disputable in certain ways--between factions like NAMBLA and the historical precedent for cultural sexualization of children, I think there's definitely a question of balance, even if it's not a public conversation. Plus, with the advent of shows like Toddlers and Tiaras, there's at least some question of where to draw the line on glamouring up young children--particularly young girls.

I'd also say we likely have a few on DDO who would disagree with the balance idea.

Sure; I was being hyperbolic. The point is that arguments for balance between two "extremes" are supposed to sound reasonable because of how accustomed we are, particularly in politics, to compromise and satisficing, even if compromise isn't favorable in its own right. Further, it's incredibly common (and admittedly good strategy) to feign wisdom by suggesting [undefined] mediation between two proposals.

Also, while we agree that the balance is vague, I should be clearer about what "meaningless" denotes: I was talking specifically about establishing a golden mean between "individualism" and "community" because a) the fundamental question is one of what the "right" balance is, or, in terms of the guy I was responding to, what's "right for the community" vs. what's "right for the individual"--the reason I suggest no one would really disagree with it is that it's trivially true--nobody tries deliberately to find what they think is the "wrong" ratio, because rightness is defined as what we're trying to find. So, saying "we need to find the right balance" is true, but it's meaningless because it's structured to sound like a policy recommendation while saying nothing; b) the game is rigged because the two poles are arbitrarily defined, which, given the vacuity of the object ("the right balance"), allows it to be weaponized for whatever political goal. Both an individualist and a collectivist want "the right balance", but this question is mediated by ideological and connotative concerns. For instance, the dude I responded to defines each pole this way:

A purely community-driven society would be one with no competition, whereas a purely individualistic society would be one without regard or care for others.

That's not only completely arbitrary, but, given that there's no prefigured balance, it's just a negotiating tool used to push policy in the desired direction. If I was a collectivist, of course I would call for balance and define individualism as a society where people are atomistic and care about no one--it helps my cause, and it gives me wiggling room if I don't specify where I want the equilibrium to be. But then, even if these extremes were accurate definitions, that means the space in between the two poles represents every possible social configuration. With no determination of where to establish an equilibrium, anyone could literally propose almost any agenda and claim to be establishing a better balance relative to where we are on the scale (which, given the lack of gradation and the need for political strategy, would be arbitrarily specified according to whatever's most convenient--the individualist will say that we're too far the one way, and vice versa for the collectivist. Others will just make vague calls for mediation with no direction or sense of place, and in no case do we actually know where we are on the scale, particularly given that every understanding of the scale, where we are, how it's measured, and where we need to go is subjectively determined).
Cody_Franklin
Posts: 9,483
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:38:24 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:30:59 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

Does that invalidate his argument?

It isn't an argument. It's a heavily-connotated assertion coupled with Rand's commentary (I call it that because she's also making assertions; Rand makes actual arguments elsewhere, and Geo does not use them here).
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 2:45:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:13:48 PM, imabench wrote:
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

^

Those who have been destroyed will seek to demean the methods used to destroy their ideology.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:08:40 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:45:50 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/15/2013 2:13:48 PM, imabench wrote:
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

^

Those who have been destroyed will seek to demean the methods used to destroy their ideology.

You're really obnoxious.

It's not just the fact that you use the word "destroy" prolifically that gets annoying; it's the quality of evidence on which this verdict is founded. Getting a random quote that agrees with your opinion destroys, annuls, refutes, and addresses nothing. So it's a dumb and obnoxious way to argue. If you're going to talk like an ignorant teenager, at least bring some maturity to your argument itself.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:09:43 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Appppppeeeeaaaaalllll toooooo AUTHORITY!!!!
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Citrakayah
Posts: 1,500
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:14:52 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Ayn Rand destroys collectivists: Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good."

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing "the common good." Napoleon "served the common good" of France. Hitler is "serving the common good" of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by "altruists" who justify themselves by-the common good.

Of course, the thing is that anyone with a functioning pair of eyeballs and two neurons to rub together would notice that, say, Pol Pot's reign was not serving the common good.

Congratulations, Rand, you've made an argument against idiocy. Not against serving the common good.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:21:54 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:09:43 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Appppppeeeeaaaaalllll toooooo AUTHORITY!!!!

Appeal to expert.

Idiots don't understand logical fallacies. I'm not even going to bother explaining how "appeal to authority" works for the hundredth time.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:23:17 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:21:54 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/15/2013 3:09:43 PM, OberHerr wrote:
Appppppeeeeaaaaalllll toooooo AUTHORITY!!!!

Appeal to expert.

Idiots don't understand logical fallacies. I'm not even going to bother explaining how "appeal to authority" works for the hundredth time.

Appeal to authority is saying basically that because this person said it, and their all like important and stuff, its right. Ayn Rand is no expert.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:23:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:08:40 PM, 000ike wrote:
You're really obnoxious.

It's not just the fact that you use the word "destroy" prolifically that gets annoying; it's the quality of evidence on which this verdict is founded. Getting a random quote that agrees with your opinion destroys, annuls, refutes, and addresses nothing. So it's a dumb and obnoxious way to argue. If you're going to talk like an ignorant teenager, at least bring some maturity to your argument itself.

This post is obnoxious. I cringed through every word.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:36:12 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 2:30:59 PM, bossyburrito wrote:
At 4/15/2013 2:03:58 PM, 000ike wrote:
"Ayn Rand destroys collectivists"

How old are you that you insist on speaking like an uppity teenage libertarian?

Does that invalidate his argument?

Effectively...
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:37:33 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:23:17 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 4/15/2013 3:21:54 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
Appeal to expert.

Idiots don't understand logical fallacies. I'm not even going to bother explaining how "appeal to authority" works for the hundredth time.

Appeal to authority is saying basically that because this person said it, and their all like important and stuff, its right. Ayn Rand is no expert.

1. I never said that "because Ayn Rand said it, it is therefore true." You made that up.

2. Not all appeals to authority are fallacious. That is a novice mistake on your behalf. An appeal to authority is fallacious for these reasons: a. The authority is not an expert on the relevant field I.e. citing Elvis to prove God exists. b. The arguer presumes that said authoritative claims MUST be true by virtue of who said it.

"Since not all arguments from expert opinion are fallacious, some authorities on logic have taken to labelling this fallacy as "appeal to inappropriate or irrelevant or questionable authority", rather than the traditional name "appeal to authority". For the same reason, I use the name "appeal to misleading authority" to distinguish fallacious from non-fallacious arguments from authority."

http://www.fallacyfiles.org...
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:39:01 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:23:42 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/15/2013 3:08:40 PM, 000ike wrote:
You're really obnoxious.

It's not just the fact that you use the word "destroy" prolifically that gets annoying; it's the quality of evidence on which this verdict is founded. Getting a random quote that agrees with your opinion destroys, annuls, refutes, and addresses nothing. So it's a dumb and obnoxious way to argue. If you're going to talk like an ignorant teenager, at least bring some maturity to your argument itself.

This post is obnoxious. I cringed through every word.

Then drop the assertions and get actual evidence before you come back. Preferably sourcing your information from more than one person.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:45:31 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
@Geo

Ok, you implied her assertions were true. There was a huge implication, which of course you will BS away, but it was there.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
R0b1Billion
Posts: 3,720
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 3:46:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
I don't disagree with the OP at all, but I do think that the reasoning presented "destroys" any type of government. I mean, I use the same types phrases to condemn individualism... for example, look at all the roads around your house. These roads are for individuals to drive on, which destroys the environment. So, we have individuals who all want to drive themselves around (as opposed to collectivist building buses, trains, etc.) imposing their will on the environment and its people, collectively, through government forces.
Beliefs in a nutshell:
- The Ends never justify the Means.
- Objectivity is secondary to subjectivity.
- The War on Drugs is the worst policy in the U.S.
- Most people worship technology as a religion.
- Computers will never become sentient.
AlbinoBunny
Posts: 3,781
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 4:09:21 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
MSNBC, Melissa Harris-Perry: "This isn"t about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn"t even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years."

http://www.breitbart.com...

Ayn Rand destroys collectivists: Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good."

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing "the common good." Napoleon "served the common good" of France. Hitler is "serving the common good" of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by "altruists" who justify themselves by-the common good.

http://fare.tunes.org...

P1 - Some bad people abused the idea of a common good.

C1 - The common good is actually bad.

I'd prefer to be in a group, alone we are weak.
bladerunner060 | bsh1 , 2014! Presidency campaign!

http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org... - Running for president.
http://www.debate.org... - Running as his vice president.

May the best man win!
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 4:13:35 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 3:45:31 PM, OberHerr wrote:
@Geo

Ok, you implied her assertions were true. There was a huge implication, which of course you will BS away, but it was there.

Her assertions are true yes. But you don't understand the nuances. I never said "x is true BECAUSE Ayn Rand said it." I'm saying that "x is true and Ayn Rand said it."
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
drhead
Posts: 1,475
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 4:15:56 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 4:13:35 PM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 4/15/2013 3:45:31 PM, OberHerr wrote:
@Geo

Ok, you implied her assertions were true. There was a huge implication, which of course you will BS away, but it was there.

Her assertions are true yes. But you don't understand the nuances. I never said "x is true BECAUSE Ayn Rand said it." I'm saying that "x is true and Ayn Rand said it."

Alright, you have a bunch of assertions which you say are true and which Ayn Rand also said. You still have nothing but a bunch of assertions.
Wall of Fail

"You reject religion... calling it a sickness, to what ends??? Are you a Homosexual??" - Dogknox
"For me, Evolution is a zombie theory. I mean imaginary cartoons and wishful thinking support it?" - Dragonfang
"There are no mental health benefits of atheism. It is devoid of rational thinking and mental protection." - Gabrian
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 4:25:34 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 4/15/2013 11:49:10 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
MSNBC, Melissa Harris-Perry: "This isn"t about me wanting to take your kids, and this isn"t even about whether children are property. This is about whether we as a society, expressing our collective will through our public institutions, including our government, have a right to impinge on individual freedoms in order to advance a common good. And that is exactly the fight that we have been having for a couple hundred years."

http://www.breitbart.com...

Ayn Rand destroys collectivists: Totalitarianism is collectivism. Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called "the common good."

Throughout history, no tyrant ever rose to power except on the claim of representing "the common good." Napoleon "served the common good" of France. Hitler is "serving the common good" of Germany. Horrors which no man would dare consider for his own selfish sake are perpetrated with a clear conscience by "altruists" who justify themselves by-the common good.

http://fare.tunes.org...

1. "Bad people talked their way into power by promising to do things for the people that would put them into power"

2. "Therefore, the political infrastructure behind claiming to want power by promising to do things for the people that would put them into power is evil."

This is why it's hard to take Rand seriously.
Izayah003
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 5:29:50 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
My first question is, did you actually see the whole video? or did you just see it on the sight and thought "OMG no way! I must post this on DDO because MSNBC says that they will take our rights!" the the later is true, then my response is just... LMFAO!!!!
"When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest." - Abraham Lincoln
Izayah003
Posts: 369
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/15/2013 5:34:08 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
*Site* not *sight*..lmao damn this auto fill..lmao
"When a man who is honestly mistaken hears the truth, he will either quit being mistaken or cease to be honest." - Abraham Lincoln