Objectivism and Anarchism

Ditto on the audio - nothing but white noise now, and I was hoping to hear your thoughts on this if the is title accurate.

When I tried to watch this video, I got nothing but static feed in the audio... Is there something wrong with the video or youtube or my computer? Most other videos seem to have perfectly fine audio... Weird. It seems like the audio should be working correctly based on all the comments you're getting here. But not for me :(

It's Youtube. Evidently this video got corrupted later on or something.

upload it again plz! corrupted audio

If I follow objective thought to the end, then, of course, I shall certainly have the truth, but the truth for whom? Certainly to be objective as possible is to be non-subjective as possible. Think along the lines of Grammar. What does the object relate to in a sentence? I am not attacking Rand, but perhaps Objectivists might want to ask why David Hume(that rationalist of all rationalists) opined that "Reason is the hand-maiden of passion." Passion is, after all, a subjective issue

Soooooo because the term is inflexible, it is a cult?

not necessarily but it does behave as such.

the thing is, it implicitly denies any progression or evolution because it would require to deny one aspect or another of it's starting point and since no philosophy hitherto known is infalible, to be an objectivist you are required not to question objectivism in any way.

I take it more as, "to be an Objectivist, you must have come to the conclusion that you logically agree with all aspects of it."
If, for whatever reason, you decide you do not completely agree with it, then you're not an Objectivist, you're something else.
And to be honest, I doubt Objectivists would call any blind follower one of them.

it's possible. i just find the idea of agreeing with one philosopher on absolutely everything a bit strange.

"I doubt Objectivists would call any blind follower one of them."

i dunno. those ARI fuckers are out of their minds.

As do I, but that's the requirement put forth by the maker of the term.

Well, according to what I know, a blind follower, by definition, is not Objectivist, as they rely on faith, rather than reason. I'm actually fairly new to the whole subject, so my knowledge is probably incomplete.