Here is an idea. Why dont the capitalist import millions of illegals to grind down everyone wages so they can max out their profits and export all the other jobs to china to max out their profits. fuck brilliant huh??? look what they did for them.
well at least we can now understand the insanity of the wealthy - it's easy to spot an insane person now - they would be supporters of this concept and the sane would be the one's against it - I like it when things get simple - takes the guess work out of it - thanks for saving me from reading this bs - I couldn't justify reading it because those who support it all appear to be insane - now I know why
1. Literal Gods, since the laws of neither physics nor society apply to them (so much for Objectivism's self-purported objectivity & atheism)
2. Evil communists who have zero redeeming qualities or skill sets to speak of, and who are far more resolute in their laziness than in their own well-being
3. Everyman objectivist suckers who get zero appreciation from the Gods, only allowed to live in absolute desperation and dependency on the gover- I mean, Gods.
I have a sneaking suspicion that this lazy, unreasonable, unproductive, whiney, hypocritical, communist, physically repugnant, grammatically challenged book reviewer (who is desperate to kill my children and pets) has a secret crush on John Galt.
I think I might be a good capitalist and print the words "Attractive, hard working, creative, well-spoken, somewhat aloof hypercapitalist", on T-shirts and bumper stickers etc., and sell them at a ridiculous profit to all my hypercapitalist friends.
@KevinSolway ehh Kevin that is not true despite that I know you like to bring down women every chance you get. Anyway a selection of female philosopher include other than Ayn rand
Aristoclea,Arete of Cyrene, Simone de Beauvoir, Hypatia, Melissa, Alenka Zupančič, Mary Wollstonecraft , Emma Goldman, Ban Zhao, Baroness Warnock, Ruth Barcan Marcus, Martha Nussbaum Héloïse d’Argenteuil etc etc So the next Kevin maybe just check your claim before posting it.
The female protaganist in "The Fountainhead" was raped by the guy who she is also in love with. Ayn Rand had a strange understanding of rape. Kind of makes you wonder...
This video does what I thought was almost impossible - it summarizes the plot of (and the problems with) one of the most long-winded wastes of ink and paper ever written in the history of mankind at a rate of about 100 pages a minute...
@GodofVengence Actually, the only thing you forgot to mention is that the book is at least somewhat racist, since it goes to great pains to point out that every single protagonist it describes is caucasian.
@WhiteKnitter It does. Second worst book I ever read, in fact, after The Fountainhead, only because the latter really exposes Rand's own internal contradictions and hypocrisy.
Yeah, that pretty much sums up everything I've heard. It's amazing how people can worship this book when all it teaches is to be selfish and consider anybody who isn't like you to be a sub-human.
@silver6kraid people like it because it appeal's to one's sense of narcissism. Most people that like Atlas Shrugged don't realize that it is pathetically unlikely that they're members of the class of people the book idolizes.
Wild ride dude! *GRIN* an atheist ripping the crap out of another athiests' work. . .c.s. Lewis described this well. . .the screwtape letters. . .consuming each other. . .in a entertaining manner of course. . .
@GodsStyleGirl He's been "coming soon" for almost two millennia. It's such a strong selling point that if he actually DID come, you would probably politely ask that he go away.
@GodsStyleGirl people who can't solve their own problems always need Jesus, a lord or an alien to save them lol - billions and billions have been waiting and every one of them have been disappointed - but hey maybe you are the one who can make it all happen lol something tells me you will be just as disappointed as all the billions before you lol might want to save yourself - news flash straight from God - God helps those who help themselves IN AN UNSELFISH WAY
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
This...person is apparently unaware that: 1) the novel was written in 1957, and 2) that Rand, as unable to foretell the future as anyone else, intended to feature motifs that would appear futuristic in that era. But he's so obviously determined to trash the work of a more imaginative and principled mind than himself that further commentary is rendered unnecessary.
@fporretto Everyone notice how this commenter put periods before the word "person?" Either he's calling the fact into doubt, which is typical of the randroid mindset that anyone who does not acknowledge the nigh-divinity of Saint Ayn is subhuman, or he decided to say "person" instead of saying what was *really* in his mind, which makes him a coward.
Good job addressing the crux of his comment. Don't get me wrong, I find your commentary amusing David, and I'm in no way Randian, but it does seem you did attack parts which seemed irrelevant, and that you projected your own prejudices upon the story itself. The word "hyper-capitalist" is a good example: you are either capitalist or you are not, hyper seems to just indicate that you, David, dislike capitalism. This is alright, but doesn't mean anything about the book.
@jaykgrey To imply he dislikes capitalism simply because he uses the term, 'hypercapitalism" is little more than a straw man of his position. He was clearly being satirical and I can't help, but think you are being overly defensive.
1) Good job attacking the crux of my comment. I see a trend here.
2) Identify what I could possibly be defending. fporretto? Ayn Rand? Capitalism? You'll find I have no such associations.
3) Yes, he was satirical. Being satirical implies criticism, scorn, insult, etc. Oh dear, how can I ever get the impression someone dislikes something that they're insulting?
@jaykgrey Keep it up, you are actually helping my point. The short answer is yes, you do sound like a reactionary Rand fanboy. It's obvious he dislikes the book, but you are attempting to spin his distaste for Rand's works into a hatred of capitalism, which is just stupid.
@jaykgrey Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are a godless liberals. I don't think anybody could deny that they are also incredibly successful capitalists, so I reject the idea that "capitalism" is a black-or-white proposition, with no middle ground, and no extremes of ideology.
Incorrect. Capitalism is "An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state." A capitalist is a person who adheres to this philosophy, not merely an entrepreneur, as you seem to think. As you can see, we either have public control of trade (statist/communist), a mixed economy (socialist), or private (capitalist). I use no term negatively, for your information.
@fporretto Preeeeety sure they had planes and automobiles in 1957. And that train travel was already on the decline because of the national highway system. Also, lol that you think this piece of shit is "imaginative and principled."
Very well spoken, I commend your bravery to read through that awful book. I think I must have gotten about 30 pages in until I realized that the disconnect between me and the writing, the characters, the setting, the unrealistic everything... point is, in 30 pages Ayn managed to convince me her book wasn't worth reading.
@DavidJohnWellman Oh I see. Incidentally, companies today have practically bought the government which is exactly how they fight those dirty baby-killing socialists who think government should work for the people.
Anyway thanks for the summary. Been hearing a lot about Rand lately so I was wondering what the big deal is. I assumed it's just another hyper-capitalist fantasy but never thought it was that ridiculous.
having never read ayn rands work, i have always judged it by her fans and her detractors. now i have to decide if i want to dive in and equip myself to debate with the fans of a complete cunt. 1100 pages.... fuuuuuuck
ill get around to it one day i guess but, my question is... "do i need to?" are there any glaring contractions in her work that, in a debate, would not be exposed by a little common sense... realism... reason... etc.
Okay, wait; how can they continue to be hyper-capitalists in a tiny community with no working force to produce their products and no consumer force to buy anything from them? All they can do is make things for themselves, and although they may use gold, they'd essentially be bartering since no one isn't producing. What actually happened in that book was they ran away and formed a commune in the mountains. It was a commune of the obscenely rich, but it was still a fucking commune. What a joke.
LOOK AT ME I'M HOT AS SHIT AND WHEN ME AND MY RACE ARE GONE SOCIETY WILL BEG FOR ME TO COME BACK IN MY UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS OF THEM AND MY SPESHUL POWERS
It sounds like some retarded teenager writing a bad fanfic/mary sue. Replace capitalist with some super natural entity (example: werewolf/vampire) and you'll see what I mean.
There's no way I'm gonna manage to finish the book after watching this. I'm only a tenth of the way in (well, perhaps "only" isn't giving myself enough credit for a book about as long as the Bible), and I'm already wanting to gag.
As one who sympathizes and agrees with Rand on some of her philosophy, I honestly hope that that's not how the book reads. I hope it isn't, because that sounds downright repulsive. I have yet to read it myself, although I plan on doing so someday. Rand's philosophy, although flawed and very imperfect, has its gems. Rand's ethics are incomplete, but are solid, and are often incorrectly maligned.
I've heard your interpretation before, so there is probably merit to it. I'll have to read it myself.
No, you're having a laugh, that cannot be how it ends...Jesus. I've got to give you props for reading, though. The ability to take that much punishment is not present in all of us. ;)
I have read it before. It is one of my family member's favorite book, so I figured I'd give it a try. I was the first person one of my English prof's knew to make it past "The Speech".
I tried to follow it up by reading Walden by Thoreau. I don't recommend doing that. The mind jump is just too much.
I disagree, I find this review to be really odd. I thought the book was a great read. I'll agree the end speech ran way longer than it had to, it seemed more like a reflection of a debating team background of the author, but other than that I thought it was an impressive, well thought out, well written book. It certainly held my interest to the end, and I read it of my own volition, not as a required reading task or anything of that nature. I'll have to throw in with the pirates on this one.
I've no doubt this summary will appear uncharitable to someone who hasn't read the book, but trust me. It's spot on. The book is that fucking terrible.
They have already made a pretty good video game about this called BioShock. I think DavidJohnWellman would of been a lot more happier playing Bioshock then reading this book.
@treesmoke Even if I to be honest have not played BioShock from all I know The Ayn rand like society collapses in Bio Shock ? Correct me if I am wrong but if yeah I think David would have liked it more :)
LOL, thank you for this, I thought I was all alone in seeing Dagny starting out oh so noble and ending up a ceiling inspector.
A=A, what the hell is that supposed to mean? I know it's the first of Aristotle's four necessary assumptions, but..... I'll give you 12.50 for every libertarian you can get that knows the other three.
I read Atlas Shrugged in college and then checked out some of Rand's philosophy writing. All that it did for me was inform me of the type of person I didn't want to be. I guess it's good to have negative examples in life.
you got it bro, tax slaves revolt! Revolt against people who put a gun to your head and enslave you i.e. government and do not give a damn about their fellow men and killed 200 million subjects in the past century (democide, death by government) Who hand each other nobel peace prizes while conducting wars all over the planet. Who torture people in their jails. Amazing how AR predicted bailouts like GM and gvt torture. You go and defend the AH and see where it gets you.taxation=theft,war=murder
@modelmark Tax slave ? Lol. And no taxation does not equall theft and in theft you gain nothing back in mutual benifet in recipriocal relation. Also theft is not supported by any democratic principle. Number two it is the law as defined by the juridictary as defined by the state that defines what ''propety'' is. Propety does not exist in the real world it soley defined by values and goverment and protected by the goverment trough tax. So no tax and no goverment no propety rights.
@Eopyk " in theft you gain nothing back in mutual benifet in recipriocal relation". So if I coerce you to buy an apple for 20k$ you gain something back and it is not theft? Let me come over right away.
"Also theft is not supported by any democratic principle"
Yes it is, majority votes and takes property from the minority. Democracy is like gang rape. Raping a woman is bad, but if you vote with a bunch of people on it, it becomes good. Ministry of truth stuff. Truth is not determined by numbers
@modelmark I don't have time at the moment to expalin the why to tax because I would to go back to pre-history to history to explain it. But can i add that there is no culture in the world where you do not have obligation for the society you live in. In no culture do you soley work for your own. In a hunter gather society the food you collected where for the group not for a sole individual who find them, If you where selfish you would not be respected by the group.
@Eopyk That all countries are tax farms, does not prove it ought to be that way. 'The group' does not exist in reality. It does not eat, individuals eat.Take the individuals out of a group and no residue remains. You can not sacrifice you labor to the group, just in an priest or president who claims to represent it.
You can give food away, but if you claim others ought to give you their food under threat of force, YOU are the selfish one. YOU are the exploiter.
That representation fails to take into account the benefits of living in a group. All the cogs of the group are important. Taxes are just a way to sustain the organization of that group. The extremes of the argument are both blind.
@mrbluesky323 I love living in a group, you misinterpret me. You would not say at a woman that was group raped, she should consider the benefits of a group. Coercion does not benefit you in the a priory sense: by definition.
People working in a shoe factory also form a group. It is organized without coercion or taxes. You do not need to coercion and the threat of violence to cooperate in a group, it is the absence of solidarity.Saying that opposing extortion is opposing coorporation is so flawed
No; By living in the group you build up a debt. The taxes represent your debt to the group. In principle, there's nothing wrong with that idea. The threat of force comes in when you criminally fail to pay your debt to the group. If you don't want to pay that debt, you can leave.
It's unreasonable to expect that a superstructure, like a government, would survive on "charitable donations" from its citizens.
@mrbluesky323 no you build up a debt by borrowing, not by living in a group. Otherwise everyone would have a debt with everyone in the group, it would cancel out. You are not a sacrificial animal
You ARE borrowing. You're receiving many many many benefits from being part of this group. If you don't believe me, go try living outside of a civilization.
Outside of the civilization, you ARE just an animal. Nobody's going to care about what "belongs" to you. It's completely absurd. Property only has meaning while a government is enforcing it!! You're not willing to support the entity that gives your rights meaning in the first place.
@mrbluesky323 no borrowing is a voluntary action. What you are describing is a coerced action. Certainly for the unborn, they did not choose to bail out wall street. I never claim that someone will care about what belongs to you. IF no one does, no one in gvt also cares what belongs to you. The gvt is just a group of people as well, evil, but a group of people. People do not start to care about what belongs to you by giving them power over you. It is completely absurd
@modelmark ''no borrowing is a voluntary action.'' So acording to you a voluntary action can never include borrowing.. So if I borrow you 7 Euros your not in debt to me ? Your not borrowing from me.
Please let your quasi religous dogma without test in reality stop speaking for you and use reasoning.
I agree. People should be repaid everything they gave to the government before they were born.
"voluntary action"
You're not forced to stay. You can voluntarily leave. If you don't like the benefits you're getting, leave (or deal with it and become a politician). It's simple.
"..care about what belongs to you.."
If you give them power over you in a particular way, then they do. That's the beauty of it.
@mrbluesky323 oh no, not the 'you can go to Somalia if you don't like being stolen from by my politicians, so it's not theft' argument. I come to you house with ten friends, we define an arbitrary territory, vote, decide that all your stuff is ours (the rules). When you complain we say:"hey you can always leave"
or
With this zip code you have to shop at XYZ, it's not coercion, because if you don't like it, you can always move to a different zip code..... it's simple
@modelmark Not that simple. If you want a a certain product but any of the versions available in your area or nearby your forced to get something you do not want.
You anarcho-capitalists.. fail on so many levels.. I can no longer take your likes seriously. Despite how extreme Ayn rand was even she rejected your like.
@modelmark If you refuse to give to civilization and your society you deserve no benifet from civilization. In any tribe and culture your obligated to work for that society be it state or none state the same is true. If your selfish ass refuses to be part of civilization then you do not deserve it.
Also being against something does not mean one should refuse being part of it in any way. If a school boy does not like raising his hand it does not mean he quit school.
@Eopyk I give to others voluntarily and they give to me. You civilization is a group of armed thugs.
Do you support the initiation of force against me if I refuse to pay your thugs? If they want to throw me in their jails for not giving them money, do you cheer? If I try to defend myself against them and they shoot me, do you cheer them on?
We say that I take something from your shop and you ask mne to pay and I counter and say I do not belive in paying you thus I wont and if you insist I should it is forced. Do you think it is right to use force against me to stop my crime do you call the police that you do not belive in to help you.
Force is not alwasy negative. Force can very well be positiev against criminals and selfish bastard who refuse to pay for civilization.
@Eopyk Sure a shop keeper is in his right to force you to pay IF you voluntarily chose to buy his product. IF you take it without paying you are the thief and YOU are the first one to make the relation ship involuntary.
The gvt thugs do not wait until their products and services are of such quality that you purchase them voluntarily. They bite with stolen teeth.THEY initiate violence.You can sit in your garden breaking no agreements you made and they attack. Do you support their attack on me?
I will just say one last thing to you . In your plutocratic dream. Where all freedoms, protections and even non existing rights will be determined soley of your income. The dictatorship of money the tyranee of the rich. The state is the sole factor we have rights and freedoms and democracy and rule of law. Your plutocratic(rule of wealth) is a dystopic joke.And that you can call that freedom is even more of a joke.
Freedom for the wolfes are not freedom for the sheeps.
P 2 I would lose in your society as a Swede my law protected freedom to roam the wilds that go counter the ''free market economics''
How can you call plutocracy freedom ? The truth is it is not freedom it is tyranee but if selfishnes is the only value then why am I am not surpiced don't get pissed when gay people get beaten in the bibel belt and do not have money for protection because yes the state gives does gay men protection.
@modelmark Oh that leads to a question from me. So when a gay man or anyone get's beaten up but canät aford protection and as such have no rights nor freedom.. and contuines to get beaten up and harresd even by the economic elite that runs society and even them hurt and even puts in jail. How is it freedom in plutocracy where money rules and dictates everything.
How is it freedom for the gay men to not have police to protect and rule of law that gives rights. YES THE STATE gives rights
"I come to you house with ten friends, we define an arbitrary territory, vote, decide that all your stuff is ours (the rules). "
Yea you can try that, but thankfully I live in a land where we have a government that collects taxes and so I can call the police, and they'll ensure that you and your 10 friends are kicked the hell out.
This is a U.S. territory. It's property of the united states first and foremost. Why? Because the united states has the guns to enforce such claims.
@mrbluesky323 The US does not exist in reality, it is the name of a piece of land and can not hold any guns, because a piece of land has no hands.
I come at you with a lot of guns, cut your phone lines and then the territory belongs to me, right? You now live in Modelmarkia, you will not resist, you think this is how things ought to be. Your claim is: who manages to grab something, owns it rightfully. Your morality is force.
@modelmark Emm yes it does it has states and law and juridictiory and federall goverment and regognised borders both internationaly and by it's own people. You can easly define it . Private propety does not exist either by your standards cause it fits your discription much more that grabbing land claiming it to be yours. Private propety is also an ilusion in the strict since. And besides if you did that Mr Bluskey would be glad to have the american poilice and military fighting you of.
A nation is defined by the people and cultures living in an area that wants indipendents from other people. What you discribe is imperalism. Blueskey and the others in the terriitory is happy living in USA. Then you would be seen as an small invader and they would fight back.
States ever since it's beginging have hade the task to defend a terriotory from invanders. Like in Suemr from nomads and others who tried to take that terriotory.
@mrbluesky323 do you own your own body or not? If you do, I do as well, if you don't, who owns it? Why would I be arguing with someone who doesn't own his own body? You arguments are not yours as well. If you do own your own body, you own the labor done with that body. So what is it?
@modelmark "You do not need to coercion and the threat of violence to cooperate in a group,"
You arguing against having to pay Taxes shows that such measures are necessary in order to get some individuals to cooperate, I suspect that your failure to see that cooperating in this way benefits you is a product of your own short sighted greed and inflated sense of self worth and self reliance.
@TheHolySTD the shut up slave argument. Voluntary coorperation proves people do not have to be coerced. Subjugation is not equal to coorperation. Gvt is short sighted, they will go bankrupt and enslave and kill you. You are projecting. You are greedy when you claim others should be coerced to give you money and must be forced to coorperate with you. You probably have nothing to offer to your fellow man at least in your own eyes.
@modelmark So who are you subjugated too ? If people was values in society in there civilization decide to pay tax for common goals and common goods then it is not a subjugation it is a systematcly form of a reciprocity point of view.
The goverment has not killed anyone I know, second of all private buisnees are not short sighted when the only thing they end caring about is the current economic win. Not the long term health of the planet or peoples health.
@modelmark Your born inti a human culture you have no chooice to be ''forced to coorperate'' we are pack animals and that is the prize of living in a human culture and have allways been so. Selfishnes hade no birtue for our survival. It was us working together and forming system to do it efficaly. A society is a body whom we are all bound to . In expension yoru where forcoed to be born such bound to tokill yourself ? Your life is nothing more then cohersion.
@TheHolySTD do you own your own body or not? If you do, I do as well, if you don't, who owns it? Why would I be arguing with someone who doesn't own his own body? You arguments are not yours as well. If you do own your own body, you own the labor done with that body. So what is it?
@modelmark The body is the only thing one truly owns despite law. Because when you die you take your body with you. It is bound to you. The closest to ownership is artistic things like litrature, and art and music etc Buisnees and land and houses and tv's and etc are more possesions your ego claim to own them. But they are not bound to you and the possesions can change hands long when your gone.
Like it or not private propety is protected and maintaned by law of the state.
@Eopyk so if I own my body, I own the labor I chose to do with it and I see no reason why some gvt dickwad has a higher claim to it.
The sense of property exists without the state, if my cat catches a mouse, she claims ownership over it. If you try to take it she becomes angry. It was her labor catching it. You can not indoctrinate that out of the cat.
In the end the question is:If I do not pay money to the elite, will you support the initiation of violence against me, to make me pay?
@modelmark Again slefishnes is the virture for you.
No it does not exist. Early humanity did not have sense of private propety People lived in vilages an the world belonged to all or to some divine cause. People often hade gift economy among themsleves and the water and the land belonged to no one in the tribe. You also back then hade more controll in general of you time and there was no surpluse. You collected food for the group not for yourself. Leaders where tribal and sometimes shamanistic
@modelmark So the group does not eat ? So if I collected food for my tribe so we could all eat I only collected food for my overlord ? You no how much contradictions you show ?
No I do not support violance against you. But I do think that selfish ego-centric bastard who belives he only works for himself have no respect in my eyes a small amount of what you make belongs to civlization. If you refuse to pay for civlization you should not gain any benifet of it either.
In reality, your parents are the ones who forced you into whatever contract they're under. In my society, you may use the benefits of the group for free until you are taxable & representable age (20?). This is where you can either opt in, or opt out. Should you opt out, you will not be allowed to gain employment or property in this community to deter you from stealing. You are completely free to seek out alternatives or create your own society.
@ReignbowSmite So no schooling obligation? Please explain the sentence:"you are not allowed to gain employment or property to deter you from stealing"
If everything is owned by someone, can you trade your labor for their property on a voluntary basis? If your trading partner agrees, is someone initiating violence against you or him, for doing so? Do you have to give a portion of this trade to certain people who think they act in the name of something else, or face their aggression?
If you opt out of the social contract, you will not be able to work or obtain property/rent - to prevent you from stealing tax payers resources.
It was an answer to "Do you support violence against me if I do not become a subject of YOUR overlords in YOUR system?"
The answers to the rest of the questions you asked are up to the society, who would elect a counsel by voluntary name draw with no figurehead leader. Just a random sample of the people, with a constitution.
@ReignbowSmite So you do support violence against me, when I voluntarily engage in a labor relation ship with someone. 'Society' does not 'answer' questions. I do not care is some people get together and elect someone to use violence against me. It is as idiotic as if a few people came together to elected a wife for me and enforce the marriage upon me. It is nonsense on stilts and pure evil. In principle it does not differ from gang rape. The might of a group by force of their violence.
@modelmark My point was, none of this is force, and you can be ostracized from the community with out force by not being able to work or have/rent property.
@ReignbowSmite 'Society' does not ostracize. Only evil megalomaniac douchebags who claim to speak for society can do so. I found and individual (you know, with two arms and legs, who can actually talk) that wants to trade my labor for his won property. (not some ass claiming property rights over someone else's property). Your dick head shows up with a gun to ostracize me in the name of everyone except the guy who I actually want to do business with.
@modelmark blah blah blah, show me where the force is. Every group has a social contract, families have a social contract. If you don't treat others with respect, you get ostracized. The state can act as an extension of family if it's representative of the people who make up government.
"shows up with a gun to ostracize me" you don't know what ostracize means. There is NO force in ostracizing. Show me in a concise form where the "force" is
@ReignbowSmite I said "you will not be allowed to gain employment or property in this community to deter you from stealing." This does not involve violence. The law of the land is that no business can hire a citizen who opts out of the social contract. Why? Because you can't just take the resources paid for collectively by people who CHOOSE to pay taxes. If you really want to get to the root of "Force" see - antinatalism.
@ReignbowSmite I have signed no such contract. My partner in business wants to do business with me. Who is going to stop us without force and how is he going to do that? I don't care if some other douchebag ostracizes me as long as he does not use force against the people who DO want to deal with me. How is the douchebag going to stop people that want to from dealing with me?
@modelmark Your partner in business can opt out of the contract and join you in business in your anarchist commune, or you can opt in and pay taxes. Who is going to stop you? The people will repossess their shared property. The minute your partner breaks the contract to allow you to commit theft, he/she too is also committing theft by enabling you to steal tax payers resources. No violence needed, unless you or you partner become violent.
@ReignbowSmite Sorry to break it to you, but there is a cost to ANY group living, and that is you have to participate in and benefit the group, unless there is an exemption the group agrees upon.
If you want pure unbridled liberty, you will literally have to isolate your self. Even you and your business partner enter into a social contract in order to run a fair business together.
@ReignbowSmite "Your partner in business can opt out of the contract" Can you now prove your point without the aid of invisible unsigned contracts ?
I know a good deal. You can have your gang rape system, in your own piece of soil somewhere far away, where you can confirm for the umpteenth time it leads to war and plunder and you leave peace loving people not haunted by indoctrinated youth enslavement thoughts of invisible contracts alone to enter into their voluntary mutual agreements.
@modelmark " Can you now prove your point without the aid of invisible unsigned contracts ?" I was unaware that you needed a physical contract to make an agreement.
"I know a good deal. You can have your gang rape system, in your own piece of soil." We will! But you have no right to take what already exists as tax paid infrastructures, you must build your own. Unless you want to use theft by force. (cont)
@ReignbowSmite If the people like the protection of random citizen selected government have the right to form such cooperatives to keep away people who don't want to cooperate. You either accept the citizenship card, or reject it, there is no force involved. I am unaffected by your petty attempt to personally attack me. It just shows that you can't rely on your own argument. Good luck living in a group with out any agreed upon rules.
@ReignbowSmite Their is no verbal contract either. Key is off course the voluntary agreement of all contractants. SO you can not agree on a contract for the unborn. Not even the contract that they have to sign a contract at 18. They never agreed to that either.
The roads were build with stolen/involuntary taken money.
@modelmark It's not possible to have ANY exchange with out agreeing. To agree you must form a contract. "I pay/trade for your good, you give me said good for my exchange" That's a contract!
"have to sign a contract at 18. " You are a liar, I never said anyone HAS to sign anything. You can opt into the group, or not.
"stolen/involuntary taken money." That's only your opinion. So that means the FEW who didn't want to pay taxes but benefit from the groups resources get to take everything?
@ReignbowSmite You said that your system "you either sign a contract at 18 with some ruler who claims to speak in the name off, or you will be prevented from doing business with anyone", is a contract in itself. This contract is not signed by the baby and not voluntary agreed upon. This is the contract you impose, the unchoses system you impose on unwilling exploited tax slaves.
theft:unvoluntary taken property => taxation=theft, not opinion, fact
@modelmark Where did I mention a fucking ruler? Don't be dishonest. Do you know what radical democracy is? THERE IS NO CONTRACT AT BIRTH! THE SERVICES ARE FREE FOR THE CHILDREN OF PARENTS WHO OPT IN!
WHERE IS THE FORCE? Where is YOUR property as a baby? You only own your body, and labour. Land can only be a possession, as you cant take it with you when you die.
"This is the contract you impose" Is an agreement a contract? Yes or no?
@ReignbowSmite you can not sign or agree a contract with 'the social', so it has to be a ruler.
the contract at birth is not about services. The contract at birth is about the 18 year magic date. The contract that he/she has to chose to sign a contract with 'the social', since you object to ruler.
@modelmark What do you do when ALL of the people are equal rulers? The governing panel is randomly drawn. It's a completely random sample of the people that form a committee with OUT a central figurehead. The committee honours the constitution is decided by vote by the majority. There is no way for the elite to get in, and there's no more politicians, or lobbying. No one is being held in the community against their will unless they break agreed upon laws. There is no single ruler.
2) People can volunteer to be a part of the government, say 16 people or so... These people will be paid compensation for any missed work, plus as incentive, perhaps everyone gets a paid vacation. Like a lottery. This way anyone can play a role.
I don't mind being governed if it assures me that someone who molests children is prohibited by that same governance that the PEOPLE CHOOSE!
@ReignbowSmite In my country the government is chosen and the highest civil 'servant' of the justice department is a pedophile. You chose with your money and you get a better deal. You can say no and withdraw that money, you get an even better deal. There is no reason in reality why some people should have different rights from others, just like there is no reason why different masses are treated differently in a gravitational field. no cause in objective reality for the difference.
@modelmark I am talking about government reform. I gave you an example that works with out coercion. You agreed that if you opt in and are paying taxes, it's not theft.
And yes, it is TAX - "A compulsory contribution to state revenue" It's still compulsory, in that you voluntarily end your your "opt-in" should you refuse to pay, while stealing the peoples resources. Compulsory tax, is NOT compulsory citizenship.
@ReignbowSmite If I buy a product in exchange for money and I take the product, paying the money is compulsory. If I would not pay, I would violate the agreement and become the thieve. The state starts coercing before you broke a contract. They force you into it. If you call something a state, but you can voluntarily buy it's services, you do not understand what a state is. If you call a bill=tax, you do not understand the difference between voluntary and coerced.
@ReignbowSmite You admitted you do not want to wait for my voluntary choice to buy. Then you started name calling, all discussion ended there. You have to proceed with your biker gang looting plan. I'll be on the look out. Skip the debate when you get here, it is boring and unnecessary, if force is all what determines a just claim to property.
@modelmark The society has stipulated their rules for citizenship, not me individually. If you don't like the food, or service, then don't dine here. Are you trying to blame a collective people for your existence? Any group you're in will have a social contract, that you can accept, or not.
Your parents don't wait for your voluntary choice to be born either.
@ReignbowSmite the society is just a replacement for god. For people who can not say:"you have to obey MY rules". They want you to obey gods rules or societies rules. All manipulative bullshit. I believe it when god says it to me and when the society talks to me. But that will never happen, I'll only see their megalomaniacal representatives who talk like blow fish with their pants too big. Stop talking, start coercing me, I have passed 18 and have not 'opted out' your services yet.
@modelmark Is family a replacement for god? When people with the same values decide to form a community is that god? Last I checked, "God" was unchanging.
Please list the similarities of an all powerful all knowing creator of life, and a community contract. "You have to obey MY rules" Lying again, when did I say MY RULES? I said the rules that are decided by the collective.
@ReignbowSmite You are 18 and have not opted out, then you are paying the social obligation. If you are at "adulthood" and you choose to opt out, then you won't receive the card/document that allows you to use the roads, lights, sidewalks, etc. But because people's movement can't be restricted you will be prohibited from working in the community, or maintaining residence.
@ReignbowSmite The collective can not decide rules, like it can not collectively digest a hamburger. In the first case because their brains are separate and in the second case because their bowels are separate. I will not repeat that again. These are just biological facts. So only individuals digest and only individuals decide. Everyone who claims to know the collective decision is a fraud.
I wish you had said 'obey MY rules', that would have been honest. Never claimed you did, btw:read
You are amazing....A Very funny and insightful critique.
weddingsandwire 1 month ago
Glorious.
dtegg91 2 months ago
This was one of the best and funniest reviews I have ever heard, XD
gulbirk 2 months ago
Dude. this was awesome I was laughing my ass off. dude your goign to have a future
MrAppleseed88 3 months ago
Here is an idea. Why dont the capitalist import millions of illegals to grind down everyone wages so they can max out their profits and export all the other jobs to china to max out their profits. fuck brilliant huh??? look what they did for them.
MrAppleseed88 3 months ago
well at least we can now understand the insanity of the wealthy - it's easy to spot an insane person now - they would be supporters of this concept and the sane would be the one's against it - I like it when things get simple - takes the guess work out of it - thanks for saving me from reading this bs - I couldn't justify reading it because those who support it all appear to be insane - now I know why
Judy101101 6 months ago
At least Ayn Rand had one thing correct.
If you are over the age of eight and still have an invisible friend, then you have issues with sanity.
judoyodan 7 months ago 4
So the book only has 3 characters:
1. Literal Gods, since the laws of neither physics nor society apply to them (so much for Objectivism's self-purported objectivity & atheism)
2. Evil communists who have zero redeeming qualities or skill sets to speak of, and who are far more resolute in their laziness than in their own well-being
3. Everyman objectivist suckers who get zero appreciation from the Gods, only allowed to live in absolute desperation and dependency on the gover- I mean, Gods.
ProfMike789 8 months ago
Great summary! I only wish I could have watched this before I put myself through the pain of reading this rubbish.
lathouxaris 8 months ago
*giggles* Something tells me Rand would hate the Zeitgeist Project. Great video!
MilesRose2 8 months ago
a=a, therefore if you are not a capitalists you deserve to die... roflao
this was much better than actually reading the book as I did last year finally.
pyrrho314 8 months ago
roflmao
pyrrho314 8 months ago
The anarcho-capitalist community is going to be a little angry. I like to see them rage.
LongHairedLoser 8 months ago
This book sounds like a pretty average thunderf00t video, just replace 'Capitalist' with 'Atheist' and 'Communist' with 'Muslim'.
jeevesbond 9 months ago
I have a sneaking suspicion that this lazy, unreasonable, unproductive, whiney, hypocritical, communist, physically repugnant, grammatically challenged book reviewer (who is desperate to kill my children and pets) has a secret crush on John Galt.
I think I might be a good capitalist and print the words "Attractive, hard working, creative, well-spoken, somewhat aloof hypercapitalist", on T-shirts and bumper stickers etc., and sell them at a ridiculous profit to all my hypercapitalist friends.
Maat922 9 months ago
Ayn Rand, the woman who is held up as one of the greatest female philosophers in all history - if not the only one.
KevinSolway 9 months ago
@KevinSolway ehh Kevin that is not true despite that I know you like to bring down women every chance you get. Anyway a selection of female philosopher include other than Ayn rand
Aristoclea,Arete of Cyrene, Simone de Beauvoir, Hypatia, Melissa, Alenka Zupančič, Mary Wollstonecraft , Emma Goldman, Ban Zhao, Baroness Warnock, Ruth Barcan Marcus, Martha Nussbaum Héloïse d’Argenteuil etc etc So the next Kevin maybe just check your claim before posting it.
Eopyk 8 months ago
I got a few minutes in and felt like I was listening to my children telling me about a playground argument.
TheRationalizer 9 months ago
The female protaganist in "The Fountainhead" was raped by the guy who she is also in love with. Ayn Rand had a strange understanding of rape. Kind of makes you wonder...
Eaglesfaninca 9 months ago
This video does what I thought was almost impossible - it summarizes the plot of (and the problems with) one of the most long-winded wastes of ink and paper ever written in the history of mankind at a rate of about 100 pages a minute...
GodofVengence 9 months ago 6
@GodofVengence Actually, the only thing you forgot to mention is that the book is at least somewhat racist, since it goes to great pains to point out that every single protagonist it describes is caucasian.
GodofVengence 9 months ago
Wow, it sounds like that book fucking sucks.
WhiteKnitter 9 months ago 2
@WhiteKnitter It does. Second worst book I ever read, in fact, after The Fountainhead, only because the latter really exposes Rand's own internal contradictions and hypocrisy.
Bernstein1917 9 months ago
@Bernstein1917 Have you read Battlefield Earth? That's some stiff competition.
artgoat 8 months ago
@WhiteKnitter
Ayn Rand wrote it.
Of course it sucks.
geffel 9 months ago 2
@geffel lol
WhiteKnitter 9 months ago
Yeah, that pretty much sums up everything I've heard. It's amazing how people can worship this book when all it teaches is to be selfish and consider anybody who isn't like you to be a sub-human.
silver6kraid 9 months ago
@silver6kraid people like it because it appeal's to one's sense of narcissism. Most people that like Atlas Shrugged don't realize that it is pathetically unlikely that they're members of the class of people the book idolizes.
GodofVengence 9 months ago
Wild ride dude! *GRIN* an atheist ripping the crap out of another athiests' work. . .c.s. Lewis described this well. . .the screwtape letters. . .consuming each other. . .in a entertaining manner of course. . .
GriffinElliot 9 months ago
The book in one line:
Atlas: Meh.
CognosSquare 9 months ago
Wow, that sounds awful!
Which part you might ask?
Pretty much all of it. I see now why this is considered one of the most painful and boring books in history.
republicofsandles 9 months ago
Great Job, David!
savagechuck 9 months ago
You kids scare me. Good thing Jesus is the Lord and my Lord is coming soon.
GodsStyleGirl 9 months ago
@GodsStyleGirl He's been "coming soon" for almost two millennia. It's such a strong selling point that if he actually DID come, you would probably politely ask that he go away.
DavidJohnWellman 9 months ago 20
@GodsStyleGirl I get the feeling that you are unware that Ayn Rand was no admirer of your lord & saviour.
HolyCity2012 9 months ago
@GodsStyleGirl Jesus is coming - open wide!
solinoure 8 months ago
@GodsStyleGirl people who can't solve their own problems always need Jesus, a lord or an alien to save them lol - billions and billions have been waiting and every one of them have been disappointed - but hey maybe you are the one who can make it all happen lol something tells me you will be just as disappointed as all the billions before you lol might want to save yourself - news flash straight from God - God helps those who help themselves IN AN UNSELFISH WAY
Judy101101 6 months ago
Who is John Gualt and what is he doing here?
KeithMcElwain 10 months ago
Very well done sir, my hat off to you :D
niriop 10 months ago
This is funny.
benisturning30 10 months ago
8:54 says it all about this ridiculous story
tuffy321 10 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
This...person is apparently unaware that: 1) the novel was written in 1957, and 2) that Rand, as unable to foretell the future as anyone else, intended to feature motifs that would appear futuristic in that era. But he's so obviously determined to trash the work of a more imaginative and principled mind than himself that further commentary is rendered unnecessary.
fporretto 10 months ago
@fporretto Everyone notice how this commenter put periods before the word "person?" Either he's calling the fact into doubt, which is typical of the randroid mindset that anyone who does not acknowledge the nigh-divinity of Saint Ayn is subhuman, or he decided to say "person" instead of saying what was *really* in his mind, which makes him a coward.
DavidJohnWellman 10 months ago 12
@DavidJohnWellman
Good job addressing the crux of his comment. Don't get me wrong, I find your commentary amusing David, and I'm in no way Randian, but it does seem you did attack parts which seemed irrelevant, and that you projected your own prejudices upon the story itself. The word "hyper-capitalist" is a good example: you are either capitalist or you are not, hyper seems to just indicate that you, David, dislike capitalism. This is alright, but doesn't mean anything about the book.
jaykgrey 9 months ago
@jaykgrey To imply he dislikes capitalism simply because he uses the term, 'hypercapitalism" is little more than a straw man of his position. He was clearly being satirical and I can't help, but think you are being overly defensive.
iCalintz 9 months ago
@iCalintz
1) Good job attacking the crux of my comment. I see a trend here.
2) Identify what I could possibly be defending. fporretto? Ayn Rand? Capitalism? You'll find I have no such associations.
3) Yes, he was satirical. Being satirical implies criticism, scorn, insult, etc. Oh dear, how can I ever get the impression someone dislikes something that they're insulting?
jaykgrey 9 months ago
@jaykgrey Keep it up, you are actually helping my point. The short answer is yes, you do sound like a reactionary Rand fanboy. It's obvious he dislikes the book, but you are attempting to spin his distaste for Rand's works into a hatred of capitalism, which is just stupid.
iCalintz 9 months ago
@jaykgrey Warren Buffet and Bill Gates are a godless liberals. I don't think anybody could deny that they are also incredibly successful capitalists, so I reject the idea that "capitalism" is a black-or-white proposition, with no middle ground, and no extremes of ideology.
artgoat 8 months ago
@artgoat
Incorrect. Capitalism is "An economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit, rather than by the state." A capitalist is a person who adheres to this philosophy, not merely an entrepreneur, as you seem to think. As you can see, we either have public control of trade (statist/communist), a mixed economy (socialist), or private (capitalist). I use no term negatively, for your information.
jaykgrey 8 months ago
@fporretto Preeeeety sure they had planes and automobiles in 1957. And that train travel was already on the decline because of the national highway system. Also, lol that you think this piece of shit is "imaginative and principled."
cyranothe2nd 10 months ago
@fporretto So you have ESP?
solinoure 8 months ago
@fporretto So the laws of physics will someday be non-existent? Interesting thought.
lathouxaris 6 months ago 2
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I thought you were a girl until I heard your voice. faggot
socialismisgreat 10 months ago
@socialismisgreat Ah, the Ayn Rand institute at work.
DavidJohnWellman 10 months ago 21
Very well spoken, I commend your bravery to read through that awful book. I think I must have gotten about 30 pages in until I realized that the disconnect between me and the writing, the characters, the setting, the unrealistic everything... point is, in 30 pages Ayn managed to convince me her book wasn't worth reading.
Applause.
snipzor 10 months ago
That was brilliant. I actually read that book ages ago. I remember that it was ridiculous, but I forgot just how much.
BurntEngineOil 10 months ago
ROFL
Try E E Doc Smith for further masochistic pleasure...
beachcomber2008 10 months ago
Everything about this is perfect. I needed to laugh today.
gabiotta 10 months ago
Epic!
WayOfTheBastard 10 months ago
this book sounds absolutely ridiculous. should I still read it?
Steve2323ZX 11 months ago
So a company adopts Marxist policies? How exactly does that work?
Pylo01 11 months ago
@Pylo01 It was a company town; they provided both jobs and a form of local government.
DavidJohnWellman 11 months ago
@DavidJohnWellman Oh I see. Incidentally, companies today have practically bought the government which is exactly how they fight those dirty baby-killing socialists who think government should work for the people.
Anyway thanks for the summary. Been hearing a lot about Rand lately so I was wondering what the big deal is. I assumed it's just another hyper-capitalist fantasy but never thought it was that ridiculous.
Pylo01 11 months ago
having never read ayn rands work, i have always judged it by her fans and her detractors. now i have to decide if i want to dive in and equip myself to debate with the fans of a complete cunt. 1100 pages.... fuuuuuuck
ill get around to it one day i guess but, my question is... "do i need to?" are there any glaring contractions in her work that, in a debate, would not be exposed by a little common sense... realism... reason... etc.
MpowerdAPE 11 months ago
I listened to this while playing Bioshock, a video game loosely based on this novel. =D
SleepDeprivedMonkey 11 months ago
Okay, wait; how can they continue to be hyper-capitalists in a tiny community with no working force to produce their products and no consumer force to buy anything from them? All they can do is make things for themselves, and although they may use gold, they'd essentially be bartering since no one isn't producing. What actually happened in that book was they ran away and formed a commune in the mountains. It was a commune of the obscenely rich, but it was still a fucking commune. What a joke.
TheLizardLass 11 months ago
@TheLizardLass Well put!
DavidJohnWellman 11 months ago
LOOK AT ME I'M HOT AS SHIT AND WHEN ME AND MY RACE ARE GONE SOCIETY WILL BEG FOR ME TO COME BACK IN MY UNREALISTIC EXPECTATIONS OF THEM AND MY SPESHUL POWERS
I've seen better shit from wolfaboos! HOLY FUCK
HomoCyborgZombie 11 months ago
That sounds so hilarious.
Really.
It sounds like some retarded teenager writing a bad fanfic/mary sue. Replace capitalist with some super natural entity (example: werewolf/vampire) and you'll see what I mean.
HomoCyborgZombie 11 months ago
There's no way I'm gonna manage to finish the book after watching this. I'm only a tenth of the way in (well, perhaps "only" isn't giving myself enough credit for a book about as long as the Bible), and I'm already wanting to gag.
Thesterness 11 months ago
As one who sympathizes and agrees with Rand on some of her philosophy, I honestly hope that that's not how the book reads. I hope it isn't, because that sounds downright repulsive. I have yet to read it myself, although I plan on doing so someday. Rand's philosophy, although flawed and very imperfect, has its gems. Rand's ethics are incomplete, but are solid, and are often incorrectly maligned.
I've heard your interpretation before, so there is probably merit to it. I'll have to read it myself.
seanthedonconsidine 11 months ago
@thegillotine09
Who said anything about right? I'm simply talking about practical reality, not morality.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@thegillotine09 indeed, he dances around it, becomes too tired to answer, answers things I did not ask.
modelmark 11 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
*bangs head on table*
RAND LOGIC MAKES NO FUCKING SENSE!
DarkWolfStudio 11 months ago
No, you're having a laugh, that cannot be how it ends...Jesus. I've got to give you props for reading, though. The ability to take that much punishment is not present in all of us. ;)
SteelCityEcologist 11 months ago
@SteelCityEcologist
No, really. I've also read it and it truly ends that way. This was a faithful rendition of the book. Sad, isn't it?
discoverybg31 11 months ago
@discoverybg31
I think "sad" may fall a little short. By the way, you've read it as well? What, is masochism making a comeback? I kid, I kid.
SteelCityEcologist 11 months ago
@SteelCityEcologist
I have read it before. It is one of my family member's favorite book, so I figured I'd give it a try. I was the first person one of my English prof's knew to make it past "The Speech".
I tried to follow it up by reading Walden by Thoreau. I don't recommend doing that. The mind jump is just too much.
discoverybg31 11 months ago
@discoverybg31
Haha, I can imagine.
SteelCityEcologist 11 months ago
I disagree, I find this review to be really odd. I thought the book was a great read. I'll agree the end speech ran way longer than it had to, it seemed more like a reflection of a debating team background of the author, but other than that I thought it was an impressive, well thought out, well written book. It certainly held my interest to the end, and I read it of my own volition, not as a required reading task or anything of that nature. I'll have to throw in with the pirates on this one.
DiamondsSugar 11 months ago 3
This is so awesome because now I do not have to finish reading the book to understand why I do not like the book.
xNickTheBrickx 11 months ago
Fantastic.
I've no doubt this summary will appear uncharitable to someone who hasn't read the book, but trust me. It's spot on. The book is that fucking terrible.
Suitecake 11 months ago
They have already made a pretty good video game about this called BioShock. I think DavidJohnWellman would of been a lot more happier playing Bioshock then reading this book.
treesmoke 11 months ago
@treesmoke Even if I to be honest have not played BioShock from all I know The Ayn rand like society collapses in Bio Shock ? Correct me if I am wrong but if yeah I think David would have liked it more :)
Eopyk 11 months ago
When is THIS version of the story going to be made into a movie, that would be worth seeing............
karpetdawg123 11 months ago
This vid made me sub to you.
stormc1nd3r 11 months ago
LOL, thank you for this, I thought I was all alone in seeing Dagny starting out oh so noble and ending up a ceiling inspector.
A=A, what the hell is that supposed to mean? I know it's the first of Aristotle's four necessary assumptions, but..... I'll give you 12.50 for every libertarian you can get that knows the other three.
CitySolitare 11 months ago
I read Atlas Shrugged in college and then checked out some of Rand's philosophy writing. All that it did for me was inform me of the type of person I didn't want to be. I guess it's good to have negative examples in life.
MarmaladeINFP 11 months ago
you got it bro, tax slaves revolt! Revolt against people who put a gun to your head and enslave you i.e. government and do not give a damn about their fellow men and killed 200 million subjects in the past century (democide, death by government) Who hand each other nobel peace prizes while conducting wars all over the planet. Who torture people in their jails. Amazing how AR predicted bailouts like GM and gvt torture. You go and defend the AH and see where it gets you.taxation=theft,war=murder
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark Tax slave ? Lol. And no taxation does not equall theft and in theft you gain nothing back in mutual benifet in recipriocal relation. Also theft is not supported by any democratic principle. Number two it is the law as defined by the juridictary as defined by the state that defines what ''propety'' is. Propety does not exist in the real world it soley defined by values and goverment and protected by the goverment trough tax. So no tax and no goverment no propety rights.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk " in theft you gain nothing back in mutual benifet in recipriocal relation". So if I coerce you to buy an apple for 20k$ you gain something back and it is not theft? Let me come over right away.
"Also theft is not supported by any democratic principle"
Yes it is, majority votes and takes property from the minority. Democracy is like gang rape. Raping a woman is bad, but if you vote with a bunch of people on it, it becomes good. Ministry of truth stuff. Truth is not determined by numbers
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark I don't have time at the moment to expalin the why to tax because I would to go back to pre-history to history to explain it. But can i add that there is no culture in the world where you do not have obligation for the society you live in. In no culture do you soley work for your own. In a hunter gather society the food you collected where for the group not for a sole individual who find them, If you where selfish you would not be respected by the group.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk That all countries are tax farms, does not prove it ought to be that way. 'The group' does not exist in reality. It does not eat, individuals eat.Take the individuals out of a group and no residue remains. You can not sacrifice you labor to the group, just in an priest or president who claims to represent it.
You can give food away, but if you claim others ought to give you their food under threat of force, YOU are the selfish one. YOU are the exploiter.
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark
That representation fails to take into account the benefits of living in a group. All the cogs of the group are important. Taxes are just a way to sustain the organization of that group. The extremes of the argument are both blind.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@mrbluesky323 I love living in a group, you misinterpret me. You would not say at a woman that was group raped, she should consider the benefits of a group. Coercion does not benefit you in the a priory sense: by definition.
People working in a shoe factory also form a group. It is organized without coercion or taxes. You do not need to coercion and the threat of violence to cooperate in a group, it is the absence of solidarity.Saying that opposing extortion is opposing coorporation is so flawed
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark
No; By living in the group you build up a debt. The taxes represent your debt to the group. In principle, there's nothing wrong with that idea. The threat of force comes in when you criminally fail to pay your debt to the group. If you don't want to pay that debt, you can leave.
It's unreasonable to expect that a superstructure, like a government, would survive on "charitable donations" from its citizens.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@mrbluesky323 no you build up a debt by borrowing, not by living in a group. Otherwise everyone would have a debt with everyone in the group, it would cancel out. You are not a sacrificial animal
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelma
"no you build up a debt by borrowing, "
You ARE borrowing. You're receiving many many many benefits from being part of this group. If you don't believe me, go try living outside of a civilization.
Outside of the civilization, you ARE just an animal. Nobody's going to care about what "belongs" to you. It's completely absurd. Property only has meaning while a government is enforcing it!! You're not willing to support the entity that gives your rights meaning in the first place.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@mrbluesky323 no borrowing is a voluntary action. What you are describing is a coerced action. Certainly for the unborn, they did not choose to bail out wall street. I never claim that someone will care about what belongs to you. IF no one does, no one in gvt also cares what belongs to you. The gvt is just a group of people as well, evil, but a group of people. People do not start to care about what belongs to you by giving them power over you. It is completely absurd
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark ''no borrowing is a voluntary action.'' So acording to you a voluntary action can never include borrowing.. So if I borrow you 7 Euros your not in debt to me ? Your not borrowing from me.
Please let your quasi religous dogma without test in reality stop speaking for you and use reasoning.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark
"Certainly for the unborn...."
I agree. People should be repaid everything they gave to the government before they were born.
"voluntary action"
You're not forced to stay. You can voluntarily leave. If you don't like the benefits you're getting, leave (or deal with it and become a politician). It's simple.
"..care about what belongs to you.."
If you give them power over you in a particular way, then they do. That's the beauty of it.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@mrbluesky323 oh no, not the 'you can go to Somalia if you don't like being stolen from by my politicians, so it's not theft' argument. I come to you house with ten friends, we define an arbitrary territory, vote, decide that all your stuff is ours (the rules). When you complain we say:"hey you can always leave"
or
With this zip code you have to shop at XYZ, it's not coercion, because if you don't like it, you can always move to a different zip code..... it's simple
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark Not that simple. If you want a a certain product but any of the versions available in your area or nearby your forced to get something you do not want.
You anarcho-capitalists.. fail on so many levels.. I can no longer take your likes seriously. Despite how extreme Ayn rand was even she rejected your like.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk Do you support violence against me if I do not hand over my money to your thugs?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark What thugs. Going in circles again. I am tired now and don't have time to respond.
Run live alone in an island. Cause in all cultures state or not state you will experience what your running afrom.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk "Going in circles again. I am tired now and don't have time to respond."
You just have to say yes or no, what is the big deal, what is the tiring coming from? Can't get it out of your mouth?
Do you support violence against me if I do not fund your guys running your system?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark If you refuse to give to civilization and your society you deserve no benifet from civilization. In any tribe and culture your obligated to work for that society be it state or none state the same is true. If your selfish ass refuses to be part of civilization then you do not deserve it.
Also being against something does not mean one should refuse being part of it in any way. If a school boy does not like raising his hand it does not mean he quit school.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk I give to others voluntarily and they give to me. You civilization is a group of armed thugs.
Do you support the initiation of force against me if I refuse to pay your thugs? If they want to throw me in their jails for not giving them money, do you cheer? If I try to defend myself against them and they shoot me, do you cheer them on?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark May I counter the question.
We say that I take something from your shop and you ask mne to pay and I counter and say I do not belive in paying you thus I wont and if you insist I should it is forced. Do you think it is right to use force against me to stop my crime do you call the police that you do not belive in to help you.
Force is not alwasy negative. Force can very well be positiev against criminals and selfish bastard who refuse to pay for civilization.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk Sure a shop keeper is in his right to force you to pay IF you voluntarily chose to buy his product. IF you take it without paying you are the thief and YOU are the first one to make the relation ship involuntary.
The gvt thugs do not wait until their products and services are of such quality that you purchase them voluntarily. They bite with stolen teeth.THEY initiate violence.You can sit in your garden breaking no agreements you made and they attack. Do you support their attack on me?
modelmark 11 months ago
I will just say one last thing to you . In your plutocratic dream. Where all freedoms, protections and even non existing rights will be determined soley of your income. The dictatorship of money the tyranee of the rich. The state is the sole factor we have rights and freedoms and democracy and rule of law. Your plutocratic(rule of wealth) is a dystopic joke.And that you can call that freedom is even more of a joke.
Freedom for the wolfes are not freedom for the sheeps.
Eopyk 11 months ago
P 2 I would lose in your society as a Swede my law protected freedom to roam the wilds that go counter the ''free market economics''
How can you call plutocracy freedom ? The truth is it is not freedom it is tyranee but if selfishnes is the only value then why am I am not surpiced don't get pissed when gay people get beaten in the bibel belt and do not have money for protection because yes the state gives does gay men protection.
Fail fail fail. Plutocracy is flawed
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark Oh that leads to a question from me. So when a gay man or anyone get's beaten up but canät aford protection and as such have no rights nor freedom.. and contuines to get beaten up and harresd even by the economic elite that runs society and even them hurt and even puts in jail. How is it freedom in plutocracy where money rules and dictates everything.
How is it freedom for the gay men to not have police to protect and rule of law that gives rights. YES THE STATE gives rights
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark
"I come to you house with ten friends, we define an arbitrary territory, vote, decide that all your stuff is ours (the rules). "
Yea you can try that, but thankfully I live in a land where we have a government that collects taxes and so I can call the police, and they'll ensure that you and your 10 friends are kicked the hell out.
This is a U.S. territory. It's property of the united states first and foremost. Why? Because the united states has the guns to enforce such claims.
mrbluesky323 11 months ago
@mrbluesky323 The US does not exist in reality, it is the name of a piece of land and can not hold any guns, because a piece of land has no hands.
I come at you with a lot of guns, cut your phone lines and then the territory belongs to me, right? You now live in Modelmarkia, you will not resist, you think this is how things ought to be. Your claim is: who manages to grab something, owns it rightfully. Your morality is force.
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark Emm yes it does it has states and law and juridictiory and federall goverment and regognised borders both internationaly and by it's own people. You can easly define it . Private propety does not exist either by your standards cause it fits your discription much more that grabbing land claiming it to be yours. Private propety is also an ilusion in the strict since. And besides if you did that Mr Bluskey would be glad to have the american poilice and military fighting you of.
Eopyk 11 months ago
A nation is defined by the people and cultures living in an area that wants indipendents from other people. What you discribe is imperalism. Blueskey and the others in the terriitory is happy living in USA. Then you would be seen as an small invader and they would fight back.
States ever since it's beginging have hade the task to defend a terriotory from invanders. Like in Suemr from nomads and others who tried to take that terriotory.
But I do not think you understand that
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark And bottom line Model. your private propety only exist because of law as define by the state
Eopyk 11 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@mrbluesky323 do you own your own body or not? If you do, I do as well, if you don't, who owns it? Why would I be arguing with someone who doesn't own his own body? You arguments are not yours as well. If you do own your own body, you own the labor done with that body. So what is it?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark "You do not need to coercion and the threat of violence to cooperate in a group,"
You arguing against having to pay Taxes shows that such measures are necessary in order to get some individuals to cooperate, I suspect that your failure to see that cooperating in this way benefits you is a product of your own short sighted greed and inflated sense of self worth and self reliance.
TheHolySTD 11 months ago
@TheHolySTD the shut up slave argument. Voluntary coorperation proves people do not have to be coerced. Subjugation is not equal to coorperation. Gvt is short sighted, they will go bankrupt and enslave and kill you. You are projecting. You are greedy when you claim others should be coerced to give you money and must be forced to coorperate with you. You probably have nothing to offer to your fellow man at least in your own eyes.
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark So who are you subjugated too ? If people was values in society in there civilization decide to pay tax for common goals and common goods then it is not a subjugation it is a systematcly form of a reciprocity point of view.
The goverment has not killed anyone I know, second of all private buisnees are not short sighted when the only thing they end caring about is the current economic win. Not the long term health of the planet or peoples health.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark Your born inti a human culture you have no chooice to be ''forced to coorperate'' we are pack animals and that is the prize of living in a human culture and have allways been so. Selfishnes hade no birtue for our survival. It was us working together and forming system to do it efficaly. A society is a body whom we are all bound to . In expension yoru where forcoed to be born such bound to tokill yourself ? Your life is nothing more then cohersion.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@TheHolySTD do you own your own body or not? If you do, I do as well, if you don't, who owns it? Why would I be arguing with someone who doesn't own his own body? You arguments are not yours as well. If you do own your own body, you own the labor done with that body. So what is it?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark The body is the only thing one truly owns despite law. Because when you die you take your body with you. It is bound to you. The closest to ownership is artistic things like litrature, and art and music etc Buisnees and land and houses and tv's and etc are more possesions your ego claim to own them. But they are not bound to you and the possesions can change hands long when your gone.
Like it or not private propety is protected and maintaned by law of the state.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk so if I own my body, I own the labor I chose to do with it and I see no reason why some gvt dickwad has a higher claim to it.
The sense of property exists without the state, if my cat catches a mouse, she claims ownership over it. If you try to take it she becomes angry. It was her labor catching it. You can not indoctrinate that out of the cat.
In the end the question is:If I do not pay money to the elite, will you support the initiation of violence against me, to make me pay?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark Again slefishnes is the virture for you.
No it does not exist. Early humanity did not have sense of private propety People lived in vilages an the world belonged to all or to some divine cause. People often hade gift economy among themsleves and the water and the land belonged to no one in the tribe. You also back then hade more controll in general of you time and there was no surpluse. You collected food for the group not for yourself. Leaders where tribal and sometimes shamanistic
Eopyk 11 months ago
@Eopyk 'the group' does not exist in reality and does not eat. You collect food for your overlords, who do.
Do you support violence against me if I do not become a subject of YOUR overlords in YOUR system?
modelmark 11 months ago
@modelmark So the group does not eat ? So if I collected food for my tribe so we could all eat I only collected food for my overlord ? You no how much contradictions you show ?
No I do not support violance against you. But I do think that selfish ego-centric bastard who belives he only works for himself have no respect in my eyes a small amount of what you make belongs to civlization. If you refuse to pay for civlization you should not gain any benifet of it either.
Eopyk 11 months ago
@modelmark
In reality, your parents are the ones who forced you into whatever contract they're under. In my society, you may use the benefits of the group for free until you are taxable & representable age (20?). This is where you can either opt in, or opt out. Should you opt out, you will not be allowed to gain employment or property in this community to deter you from stealing. You are completely free to seek out alternatives or create your own society.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite So no schooling obligation? Please explain the sentence:"you are not allowed to gain employment or property to deter you from stealing"
If everything is owned by someone, can you trade your labor for their property on a voluntary basis? If your trading partner agrees, is someone initiating violence against you or him, for doing so? Do you have to give a portion of this trade to certain people who think they act in the name of something else, or face their aggression?
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark Clarification:
If you opt out of the social contract, you will not be able to work or obtain property/rent - to prevent you from stealing tax payers resources.
It was an answer to "Do you support violence against me if I do not become a subject of YOUR overlords in YOUR system?"
The answers to the rest of the questions you asked are up to the society, who would elect a counsel by voluntary name draw with no figurehead leader. Just a random sample of the people, with a constitution.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite So you do support violence against me, when I voluntarily engage in a labor relation ship with someone. 'Society' does not 'answer' questions. I do not care is some people get together and elect someone to use violence against me. It is as idiotic as if a few people came together to elected a wife for me and enforce the marriage upon me. It is nonsense on stilts and pure evil. In principle it does not differ from gang rape. The might of a group by force of their violence.
modelmark 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite I really love how Youtube collects all of the ignored responses at the bottom of the conversation. Threading - fail
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@modelmark My point was, none of this is force, and you can be ostracized from the community with out force by not being able to work or have/rent property.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite 'Society' does not ostracize. Only evil megalomaniac douchebags who claim to speak for society can do so. I found and individual (you know, with two arms and legs, who can actually talk) that wants to trade my labor for his won property. (not some ass claiming property rights over someone else's property). Your dick head shows up with a gun to ostracize me in the name of everyone except the guy who I actually want to do business with.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark blah blah blah, show me where the force is. Every group has a social contract, families have a social contract. If you don't treat others with respect, you get ostracized. The state can act as an extension of family if it's representative of the people who make up government.
"shows up with a gun to ostracize me" you don't know what ostracize means. There is NO force in ostracizing. Show me in a concise form where the "force" is
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite I said "you will not be allowed to gain employment or property in this community to deter you from stealing." This does not involve violence. The law of the land is that no business can hire a citizen who opts out of the social contract. Why? Because you can't just take the resources paid for collectively by people who CHOOSE to pay taxes. If you really want to get to the root of "Force" see - antinatalism.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite I have signed no such contract. My partner in business wants to do business with me. Who is going to stop us without force and how is he going to do that? I don't care if some other douchebag ostracizes me as long as he does not use force against the people who DO want to deal with me. How is the douchebag going to stop people that want to from dealing with me?
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark Your partner in business can opt out of the contract and join you in business in your anarchist commune, or you can opt in and pay taxes. Who is going to stop you? The people will repossess their shared property. The minute your partner breaks the contract to allow you to commit theft, he/she too is also committing theft by enabling you to steal tax payers resources. No violence needed, unless you or you partner become violent.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite Sorry to break it to you, but there is a cost to ANY group living, and that is you have to participate in and benefit the group, unless there is an exemption the group agrees upon.
If you want pure unbridled liberty, you will literally have to isolate your self. Even you and your business partner enter into a social contract in order to run a fair business together.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite "Your partner in business can opt out of the contract" Can you now prove your point without the aid of invisible unsigned contracts ?
I know a good deal. You can have your gang rape system, in your own piece of soil somewhere far away, where you can confirm for the umpteenth time it leads to war and plunder and you leave peace loving people not haunted by indoctrinated youth enslavement thoughts of invisible contracts alone to enter into their voluntary mutual agreements.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark " Can you now prove your point without the aid of invisible unsigned contracts ?" I was unaware that you needed a physical contract to make an agreement.
"I know a good deal. You can have your gang rape system, in your own piece of soil." We will! But you have no right to take what already exists as tax paid infrastructures, you must build your own. Unless you want to use theft by force. (cont)
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite If the people like the protection of random citizen selected government have the right to form such cooperatives to keep away people who don't want to cooperate. You either accept the citizenship card, or reject it, there is no force involved. I am unaffected by your petty attempt to personally attack me. It just shows that you can't rely on your own argument. Good luck living in a group with out any agreed upon rules.
You have yet to show me where this "force" is.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite Their is no verbal contract either. Key is off course the voluntary agreement of all contractants. SO you can not agree on a contract for the unborn. Not even the contract that they have to sign a contract at 18. They never agreed to that either.
The roads were build with stolen/involuntary taken money.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark It's not possible to have ANY exchange with out agreeing. To agree you must form a contract. "I pay/trade for your good, you give me said good for my exchange" That's a contract!
"have to sign a contract at 18. " You are a liar, I never said anyone HAS to sign anything. You can opt into the group, or not.
"stolen/involuntary taken money." That's only your opinion. So that means the FEW who didn't want to pay taxes but benefit from the groups resources get to take everything?
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite You said that your system "you either sign a contract at 18 with some ruler who claims to speak in the name off, or you will be prevented from doing business with anyone", is a contract in itself. This contract is not signed by the baby and not voluntary agreed upon. This is the contract you impose, the unchoses system you impose on unwilling exploited tax slaves.
theft:unvoluntary taken property => taxation=theft, not opinion, fact
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark Where did I mention a fucking ruler? Don't be dishonest. Do you know what radical democracy is? THERE IS NO CONTRACT AT BIRTH! THE SERVICES ARE FREE FOR THE CHILDREN OF PARENTS WHO OPT IN!
WHERE IS THE FORCE? Where is YOUR property as a baby? You only own your body, and labour. Land can only be a possession, as you cant take it with you when you die.
"This is the contract you impose" Is an agreement a contract? Yes or no?
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite you can not sign or agree a contract with 'the social', so it has to be a ruler.
the contract at birth is not about services. The contract at birth is about the 18 year magic date. The contract that he/she has to chose to sign a contract with 'the social', since you object to ruler.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark What do you do when ALL of the people are equal rulers? The governing panel is randomly drawn. It's a completely random sample of the people that form a committee with OUT a central figurehead. The committee honours the constitution is decided by vote by the majority. There is no way for the elite to get in, and there's no more politicians, or lobbying. No one is being held in the community against their will unless they break agreed upon laws. There is no single ruler.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite when all are equal, there is no 'governing' who would be the governed in such a situation. Governing means governers and governed.
Like you said before:it's not rocket science.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark 1) Not all are equal.
2) People can volunteer to be a part of the government, say 16 people or so... These people will be paid compensation for any missed work, plus as incentive, perhaps everyone gets a paid vacation. Like a lottery. This way anyone can play a role.
I don't mind being governed if it assures me that someone who molests children is prohibited by that same governance that the PEOPLE CHOOSE!
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite In my country the government is chosen and the highest civil 'servant' of the justice department is a pedophile. You chose with your money and you get a better deal. You can say no and withdraw that money, you get an even better deal. There is no reason in reality why some people should have different rights from others, just like there is no reason why different masses are treated differently in a gravitational field. no cause in objective reality for the difference.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark I am talking about government reform. I gave you an example that works with out coercion. You agreed that if you opt in and are paying taxes, it's not theft.
And yes, it is TAX - "A compulsory contribution to state revenue" It's still compulsory, in that you voluntarily end your your "opt-in" should you refuse to pay, while stealing the peoples resources. Compulsory tax, is NOT compulsory citizenship.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite If I buy a product in exchange for money and I take the product, paying the money is compulsory. If I would not pay, I would violate the agreement and become the thieve. The state starts coercing before you broke a contract. They force you into it. If you call something a state, but you can voluntarily buy it's services, you do not understand what a state is. If you call a bill=tax, you do not understand the difference between voluntary and coerced.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark If you buy a massage, do you keep the masseuse? You need to understand that there is a difference between goods, and service.
"The state starts coercing before you broke a contract." Not in my state reform. Pay attention to the conversation.
Stick to your libertarian jargon. It's what allows you to have your alternate reality. This is turning into a petty semantics game.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite You admitted you do not want to wait for my voluntary choice to buy. Then you started name calling, all discussion ended there. You have to proceed with your biker gang looting plan. I'll be on the look out. Skip the debate when you get here, it is boring and unnecessary, if force is all what determines a just claim to property.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark The society has stipulated their rules for citizenship, not me individually. If you don't like the food, or service, then don't dine here. Are you trying to blame a collective people for your existence? Any group you're in will have a social contract, that you can accept, or not.
Your parents don't wait for your voluntary choice to be born either.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite the society is just a replacement for god. For people who can not say:"you have to obey MY rules". They want you to obey gods rules or societies rules. All manipulative bullshit. I believe it when god says it to me and when the society talks to me. But that will never happen, I'll only see their megalomaniacal representatives who talk like blow fish with their pants too big. Stop talking, start coercing me, I have passed 18 and have not 'opted out' your services yet.
modelmark 6 months ago
@modelmark Is family a replacement for god? When people with the same values decide to form a community is that god? Last I checked, "God" was unchanging.
Please list the similarities of an all powerful all knowing creator of life, and a community contract. "You have to obey MY rules" Lying again, when did I say MY RULES? I said the rules that are decided by the collective.
(cont)
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite You are 18 and have not opted out, then you are paying the social obligation. If you are at "adulthood" and you choose to opt out, then you won't receive the card/document that allows you to use the roads, lights, sidewalks, etc. But because people's movement can't be restricted you will be prohibited from working in the community, or maintaining residence.
ReignbowSmite 6 months ago
@ReignbowSmite The collective can not decide rules, like it can not collectively digest a hamburger. In the first case because their brains are separate and in the second case because their bowels are separate. I will not repeat that again. These are just biological facts. So only individuals digest and only individuals decide. Everyone who claims to know the collective decision is a fraud.
I wish you had said 'obey MY rules', that would have been honest. Never claimed you did, btw:read
modelmark 6 months ago