Re: Re: Chomsky refutes "libertarian" "anarcho"- capitalism

[phrimburger]

If lying was out of the question I would say that the correct thing to do would be to let the the guy go since murder is worse than taking hostages.

[justvisiting1]

normally the life of the hostage would take precedent, but since you mention the hostage is a journalist - well, that changes things a bit

[kittiest34]

For what reason do people do what their told under socialism. We have no landlords or bosses like in capitalism. Do some research before you just assume.

[Intellisecular]

You lie to the bastard. "We'll let you go!" And then you bust in, beat the shit out of him, and throw his ass in jail, that's the objectivist answer.

[kittiest34]

anarcho-capitalists want the poverty and slavery to continue. Capitalism is for a minority class. Good Luck fuckers!

[HarryBallbag]

"Capitalism is for a minority class". Socialism is for a majority class - the majority do what the hell they're told!!!

[JohnIGalt]

Hey Mr.chocobofish, Its not a conflict that you're witnessing since its among persons of common Values. Think of it more in terms of us living on different levels or Orbitals with Reason @ the cORe.

If you look carefully at the AynRandIdeology in its Ideal form ie)Her fiction, you'll notice that the non-aggression principle means just that & is consistent (HankRearden ultimately sees the evil, his part in it & just walks away as the glow of his mills passes a soothing beam across his forehead)

$

[JohnIGalt]

Reality however, shows that we live in a state of 'mixed-premises' - one that has not yet awakened to Rationality as a primary. In this environment you'll inevitably have apparent inconsistencies which cause misunderstandings and misinterpretations (deliberate and otherwise - even within faculty and aficionados)

The best notation that I can leave here is this: It is being practiced consistently "Here" in Atlantis and yes, "Living" becomes as the world 'could be and should be'

Judge for y'Self

$

[Aynology]

You could probably Reason the proper answer to this scenario for yourself by re-reading AtlasShrugged and seeing that JohnGalt is, in effect, taken hostage by the state at the climax of the novel. The value of the hostage and the hostage-takers is fully taken into account and demonstrated by the rescuers. Note also that this value is not 'unconditional' ie)there is a priority\heirarchy in Objectivist situations; the scenario and collateral damage would not be the same if it was EddieW.

(A $ A)