Why is the Constitution important to objectivists?

Posted by coaldigger 6 years, 6 months ago to Ask the Gulch
62 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

"I can say—not as a patriotic bromide, but with full knowledge of the necessary metaphysical, epistemological, ethical, political and esthetic roots—that the United States of America is the greatest, the noblest and, in its original founding principles, the only moral country in the history of the world." Ayn Rand

With all the concern about protecting this document it seems to me to be the basis of law and the definition of the organization to which we elect to follow the laws thereof. those of us that were born in the US should not accept that we have to be ruled by its government without reason. We should examine it's principles and make a determination whether to leave or stay. the principles, not just the implementation should be the guiding factor. If implementation is a problem then we must fight for the principles.


I don't like being thrown with Conservatives because they are statist of a different stripe, they have too many mystical beliefs and their dedication to preservation of individual rights is suspect. The problem with not doing so is to allow Progressives to discard the Constitution and creating a dictatorship of whatever feels good at the moment. While watching the questioning of Kavanaugh, before it became a circus, I was relieved that someone of his intellect and dedication to founding principles would be joining others of a like mind on the court. For about one evening I felt better about the future of America. After being routed in terms of reason, the other side resorted to some of the most reprehensible behavior possible and killed my buzz. It is now even more apparent how important it is to defeat those that would abandon the principles that have provided an organized society that has done more to elevate mankind than any previous system. I think it makes it worthwhile to hold my nose and support Conservatives and perhaps the radical left will lose their grip on the opposition party and we can become a functioning representative democracy again.


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 3.
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    His premise is off. 10th Amendment. And, because 8 states broke away doesn't mean all others would over any disagreement. Even if that were the case you have a federal goverment usurping State authority for self determination.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by EgoPriest 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I thought so. Prepare to be in disagreement with Mr. Tew (or at least at first).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    prior to watching, and I will, my feeling on the "Civil War" paint a very poor picture of Lincoln. Primarily because of his desire to prevent States from leaving the Union to the extent he would force them to stay (and only used the matter of slavery to keep his Norther militias from going home)..

    Film: about 4 minute in, the primary matter for secession wasn't slavery it was the north imposing heavy taxes on southern goods heading to norther mills- agricultural products. Slavery at that time was how the south planted, grew, harvested and delivered their products. This was the reason southern states maintained slavery (and a very small portion of the populace at that). By heavily taxing the south it impacted their profits which took money away from maintaining their plantations and lifestyles.

    Aside, one must wonder if in time automation would have removed slavery without the bloodshed or the egregious expansion of the federal government.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by EgoPriest 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Fair enough. Your answer's possible implications brought an insightful Youtube video to mind titled...

    "The Meaning of the American Civil War: Freedom vs. Anarchy":

    https://youtu.be/DF25RSDiGhI (~35 min).

    Don't feel obligated, but if you watch it I'll be interested to know your opinion.

    Cheers! B^)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I seldom down vote.

    My Conservatism (condensed)
    The preservation of the US Constitution as the Framers intended. This would mean an almost non-extistant federal government that would adhere to the few responsibility given it it by the States. Any social decisions would be concluded locally in each state without federal interference or input.

    The individual is paramount and has sole authority to himself, his efforts and his decisions. The constitution provides the social framework for a "free" society to exist and nothing more. How people in each State choose to live is entirely up to them and their local governments.

    Naturally it's a large topic and there are any more points.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I am far from nothing. I am a Conservative, more so than an Objectivist, but I do enjoy common ground. In my view, many Objectivists are all or nothing (I've been here long enough to name names too). Incidentally, I didn't vote you down.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 6 years, 6 months ago
    I am a Conservative. I am disappointed regularly by others calling themselves Conservative who appear to have no idea what it is they are trying to conserve. That said, as anyone who has been here a while knows,I am not entirely consistent with all of Objectivism. For my own reasons the "mysticism" Objectisists smirk at is something I believe in that coincides with the my helping of Objectivism and my understanding, and walk as a Conservative. I won't belabor the details of what and why I believe as I do (I've done it a dozen times on this site in the part) but suffice it to say I have a reason that is not emotionally centered.

    As a Conservative Kavanaugh is not a great pick. he is okay to, at best good. His vehement support of the Patriot acts and desire to allow for government intrusion into individual lives goes against the 4th Amendment and has me, a Conservative, concerned. Hopefully the rest of the SCOTUS judges will have the numbers to keep Kavanaugh's options in check and prevent the further expansion of the fedgov into private lives.

    https://reason.com/blog/2018/07/10/sc...

    Judge Napolitano's case against Kavanaugh
    https://youtu.be/lD7qzH4ob3Y

    All that said, there was no way to not take Kavanaugh once the left started their hysteria. To reject Kavanaugh as a result of that farcical display would validate the tactic and we'd ben sure to see more if it in the future. It does make me wonder if the whole thing was a deliberate sham to obscure his 4th Amendment transgressions (the legitimate reason to deny his appointment).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by DeangalvinFL 6 years, 6 months ago
    There are more than two choices.
    Yet, given the two primary choices the Republicans are usually the more "reasonable" ones. That does not make them high quality or something to cheer for.

    Rand Paul excepted - if I am allowed an exception. :)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -5
    Posted by EgoPriest 6 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Most conservatives (and all conspiracy-theorists) are nothing, or less than nothing (i.e., skeptics).
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -5
    Posted by EgoPriest 6 years, 6 months ago
    Voted down for failing to capitalize the name Ayn Rand gave to her philosophy.

    [All "arguments" will be ignored.]
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by mminnick 6 years, 6 months ago
    Not all Conservatives are Statists. I would estimate that about 75% aren't based on a relative small sample size of my friends and acquittances. Those that are statists came over from the dark side and have not yet awoken to the true reality of the world. (Pardon the hyperbole).Most conservatives realized that statism eventually will dominate if the philosophy gains even a large minority of the population. They will obtain positions within the power stricture and have influence far beyond their mere numbers..
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo