@casualdissent I still believe basing your opinion on whatever works best for everyone is a moral stance. If authoritarian rule, or anarchy proved that it worked better, it would be the morally superior choice. They just don't, and they're just not.
If an authoritarian police state led to the best results and the most food, I'd still be against it because it conflicts with my own personal desire to remain autonomous. If you are willing to accept any system, authoritarian or anarchistic, on the grounds of "whatever works," then you are not a moralist, and have separated your cause from morality to focus instead of aggregate productivity.
@casualdissent I think the whole things about whether free markets are morally superior. Idealistically, I believe they are because they work better, you don't believe anyone is qualified to say it's morally superior even though it works better. The bottom line is that a free market is the best system to implement
... This is how the market got started. When people come together and trade resources, it became rather easy to use your resources in a way beneficial to the collective: do whatever makes the most profit. But this doesn't mean that we should abandon the socialist mode of production on the community level, which is exactly where it is ideal.
I don't believe in the state forcing people to practice socialism. I believe that people will choose to do so in the absence of a state.
This woman has one of the most beautiful intellects in human history. If Ron Paul could speak with Ayn's eloquence this message could not be ignored.
ronpaulrevered 1 week ago
@endwelfare how do you know?
TarzanArmani007 1 month ago
@BelieversinThings it is the least imperfect system out there
brotherscoobs 1 month ago
the young turds disliked this video
endwelfare 1 month ago
The fabian socialist really wants all power in the hands of a few at the top.
dd00hli 1 month ago
@casualdissent I still believe basing your opinion on whatever works best for everyone is a moral stance. If authoritarian rule, or anarchy proved that it worked better, it would be the morally superior choice. They just don't, and they're just not.
BelieversinThings 2 months ago
@BelieversinThings
If an authoritarian police state led to the best results and the most food, I'd still be against it because it conflicts with my own personal desire to remain autonomous. If you are willing to accept any system, authoritarian or anarchistic, on the grounds of "whatever works," then you are not a moralist, and have separated your cause from morality to focus instead of aggregate productivity.
That said, I'm still a free-marketeer.
casualdissent 2 months ago
@casualdissent I think the whole things about whether free markets are morally superior. Idealistically, I believe they are because they work better, you don't believe anyone is qualified to say it's morally superior even though it works better. The bottom line is that a free market is the best system to implement
BelieversinThings 2 months ago
@BelieversinThings I'm an advocate of the free market, so I don't see what this comment has to do with me.
casualdissent 2 months ago
... This is how the market got started. When people come together and trade resources, it became rather easy to use your resources in a way beneficial to the collective: do whatever makes the most profit. But this doesn't mean that we should abandon the socialist mode of production on the community level, which is exactly where it is ideal.
I don't believe in the state forcing people to practice socialism. I believe that people will choose to do so in the absence of a state.
casualdissent 2 months ago