A bit of concern about recent discussions on the Gulch.
As a Conservative who appreciates and frequents this site I often look at the postings and wonder where they apply to Objectivism. I post my fair share of politically charged items here for discussion. But when I do there is a firm Conservative reason that applies to each article which offers the possibility for me to present my belief that Conservatism and Objectivism are very nearly one in the same.
I've noticed that recent postings on the Gulch have been related to world events that have somewhat blurred the focus of the objectivist discussion, in my opinion this is a travesty. I've resolved the matter by concluding that "world events" or even "national events" really can't be properly discussed as objectivist topics because Objectivism relates to the individual and the individuals pursuit of his/her own satisfaction in his/her own life. Rightly so, in Objectivism the individual is paramount and individuals pursuing their own interests are the only way a truly prosperous and free society can emerge. FYI, this in my life-philosophy is American Conservatism, nothing less.
I can see where local and national topics can be directly relevant to Objectivists. Global politics can only be pointed to as a harbinger of what could be if we, the American people, allow our nation to slip into the same decrepit mire that has enslaved so many nations over the centuries. But neither subject, national or global, has any direct (immediate) impact on ones day-to-day personal pursuits so how does it apply? Why should it be discussed on the Gulch?
For my own edification, I've rationalized that the United States of America, or any country or state for that matter, are in themselves pseudo-entities in a global/national society. The foundation of this thought stems from the understanding that the foundation of any society, be it a village or a town, a city or a county, or a state or a country, is nothing more than a collection of relatively like minded people who have agreed (or been born into) a set of laws they willfully agree to abide by. In doing so, their individual satisfaction and prosperity are now tied to the environment in which they live. In such societies, and all societies are all like this, the collectivist decisions of the group can destroy individual freedoms if the body of individuals not careful.
Our Founding Fathers were "that careful" in establishing the charter for this Nation. Objectively, should we not be focusing our efforts introducing discussion topics that ALWAYS cultivate the Objectivist viewpoint to those who visit this site? Is not the only way to restore this country by appealing to the profound truths that Objectivism offers to the individual? Will not the addition of millions of THINKING human beings in American society negate and even reverse the active munching of our liberties by the moochers cultivated by the Great Orifice and his miniOns?
Galt's Gulch is far more significant than any current events website - there are literally millions of them where people can flame all they like. Objectivism, regardless of the topic being posted, should ultimately be the core of any discussion in any thread on the Gulch. After all, Objectivism is the reason why all of us came to this website (even the freedom hating trolls, those desiring to proselytize, or those, like me, hoping to find an audience for his/her novels).
My 2 bits.
I've noticed that recent postings on the Gulch have been related to world events that have somewhat blurred the focus of the objectivist discussion, in my opinion this is a travesty. I've resolved the matter by concluding that "world events" or even "national events" really can't be properly discussed as objectivist topics because Objectivism relates to the individual and the individuals pursuit of his/her own satisfaction in his/her own life. Rightly so, in Objectivism the individual is paramount and individuals pursuing their own interests are the only way a truly prosperous and free society can emerge. FYI, this in my life-philosophy is American Conservatism, nothing less.
I can see where local and national topics can be directly relevant to Objectivists. Global politics can only be pointed to as a harbinger of what could be if we, the American people, allow our nation to slip into the same decrepit mire that has enslaved so many nations over the centuries. But neither subject, national or global, has any direct (immediate) impact on ones day-to-day personal pursuits so how does it apply? Why should it be discussed on the Gulch?
For my own edification, I've rationalized that the United States of America, or any country or state for that matter, are in themselves pseudo-entities in a global/national society. The foundation of this thought stems from the understanding that the foundation of any society, be it a village or a town, a city or a county, or a state or a country, is nothing more than a collection of relatively like minded people who have agreed (or been born into) a set of laws they willfully agree to abide by. In doing so, their individual satisfaction and prosperity are now tied to the environment in which they live. In such societies, and all societies are all like this, the collectivist decisions of the group can destroy individual freedoms if the body of individuals not careful.
Our Founding Fathers were "that careful" in establishing the charter for this Nation. Objectively, should we not be focusing our efforts introducing discussion topics that ALWAYS cultivate the Objectivist viewpoint to those who visit this site? Is not the only way to restore this country by appealing to the profound truths that Objectivism offers to the individual? Will not the addition of millions of THINKING human beings in American society negate and even reverse the active munching of our liberties by the moochers cultivated by the Great Orifice and his miniOns?
Galt's Gulch is far more significant than any current events website - there are literally millions of them where people can flame all they like. Objectivism, regardless of the topic being posted, should ultimately be the core of any discussion in any thread on the Gulch. After all, Objectivism is the reason why all of us came to this website (even the freedom hating trolls, those desiring to proselytize, or those, like me, hoping to find an audience for his/her novels).
My 2 bits.
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
Predicting my emotions would be easier for you if you knew that, when it comes to films, It doesn't matter to me in the least what the producers or the director or the actors intended or their stated purpose in making the film (if any), and neither do I care enough what anyone thinks about me to be embarrassed by something that is irrelevant to whether or not I enjoy a film.
Film makers can have great motives and still make a mess of a film, especially when bringing a book that has been read by millions to the screen.
How many times have you liked a book better than a movie that was based on it?
The first one that comes to mind for me is "The Fountainhead" based on the novel by Ayn Rand.
Like this website, I hope the Atlas Shugged audience is heavily populated by those who are not familiar with Objectivism and may want to learn more about it as a result of seeing the films, especially Atlas Shrrugged:Who is John Galt."
This is the film in which (at least some of the) principles of Objectivism will finally be articulated.
Unfortunately, no matter how well Galt's speech is presented, it will also be "a movie which will be described by some critics as the story of the "richest and smartest" people turning their backs on society and letting ity crumble into ruin" and this may have the opposite of the desired effect, aka: the "purpose of the producers of the film.
I hope they make a nice profit for their efforts in any case.
And I think a film about individuals living by the principles of Objectivism and "Going Galt" in today's world would make a good story and perhaps a profitable film as well ;-).
And if the definitions you're using are somehow different from what I've listed above, then I'm afraid I don't know what your definitions are, and they're likely not in line with the commonly used definitions.
Think about it like this... who's the number 1 baseball team? Or, the number 1 ranked tennis player?
It's like that. We're ranked #1 (first) in Objectivism. Even though the number 1 is the lowest number, it's better than being ranked 131. See?
(And I'm confused about that ranking system..'lower is better'...? But excited to hear we have so many members and that we're most visited. I've been waiting to hear how many members we have since.... a year ago.. I think I've asked for like half a dozen times. Good to know. Thanks Scott.)
civil should include reason, logic and evidence.
wow. pep talk from the admin. I'm all pumped up!
Propagating Ayn Rand's ideas is absolutely a priority for us, but the means by which we help in that propagation is a little different than one might expect. Galt's Gulch Online was never meant to be an echo chamber.
We have members of all levels of experience and knowledge here in the valley. And, we're fully aware that there are fewer with knowledge than without. The question is, how do we get those who have little experience with Objectivism to engage in a meaningful way, leave the conversation having learned something without feeling condescended to, and... come back. The answer is to let them start the conversation and let them talk about something that matters to them. Once they are fully committed, it's time to engage... with a gentle hand.
Most Objectivism web sites can be very intimidating with everyone sounding "smart" and well read. Jumping straight to the hardcore stuff, and staying there, leaves many on the outskirts afraid to prod. Here in the Gulch though, whatever your thing is, we're interested. Obama? Got it. Religion? No problem. Anti-Objectivism? Bring it. As long as everyone's keeping it civil, we're good to go.
It's then up to you, jrberts, to find your opportunities... and engage... fully. To seek out those diamonds-in-the-rough and coax them into asking more questions about Objectivism and ultimately, about their own beliefs.
You've heard it all before jr. - we're nasty, condescending, know-it-alls who are devoid of emotion and act as though we have all the answers. We never want to hear opposing positions and turn our back at any "real" challenge.
What they don't understand, is that they don't understand. Their "real" challenges are "real" alright... really funny.
Here's the thing... the problem isn't them jr. The problem is us.
They're right.
Now, we need you here jr. And, we need you to take it, get over it, and engage. They want to post anti-objectivist links? OK. "Irrelevant" news? No problem. Political slants? Got it. Good. Bring it. We're ready.
This is a marathon. Not a sprint.
You want to affect change? This is the place to do it. Those most ready to "get it" are here. http://GaltsGulchOnline.com has 15,000+ members and is currently the most visited Objectivist forum online (by a LONG shot).
Alexa Ranks (lower is better)
4aynrandfans.com: 2,459,477
ObjectivistLiving.com: 1,223,694
ObjectivismOnline.com: 728,534
GaltsGulchOnline.com: 70,709 !!!
You're in the right place jr. We have work to do. Now, brush yourself off and get back in there.
Classical Liberalism: social & economic freedom
Modern Liberalism: social freedom
Modern Conservatism: economic freedom
Modern Libertarianism: social & economic freedom
Objectivism: social & economic freedom
But your view of Objectivism as strictly concerned with the individual and his/her own happiness - I don't see it as something that can be separated from the individual's life in society or society's impact on the individual, which can sometimes be epitomized by current events. In matter of fact, many of today's current events can be analogized back to AS and their impacts to the key roles. So I see an opportunity for a rich field of Objectivist discussion in many postings. I can't agree at all with the thought that national and global events have no immediate impact on one's day-to-day personal pursuits. If one is an Objectivist, then of necessity, one is interested in what is reality, what is true, and discussing such in the 'Gulch' is the perfect place to do it since there seems to be such a broad reach of viewpoints and opinions.
I also find some disagreement with your description of a nation/state as a pseudo-entity in a global/national society. I can't find any necessity for a nation/state to be a part of a global/national society either for it's establishment or continued existence. Nor can I agree with the definition of a society being a collection of like minded people that willfully agree to anything. Rather, I believe it to be a power projection by those that have attained a level of control of the property of that locale, by being the first there with ownership, by wealth and the application of influence of that wealth, by majority consensus, or by imposition of force. I believe that any identifiable society is composed of a wide range of agreement/disagreement with the controlling basis or power structure of the society that are in a continuing struggle for influence and control.
As to how to best or significantly spread the philosophy of Objectivism, I don't know that there is a best, but I fully agree that the Gulch is far more significant than any current events site. i just don't think imposing any kind of strict purity test for participation helps to increase that significance. I rather enjoy interacting with all of the wide variety of opinion and discussion, and if I find one that repulses me for some reason, oh well, I find the same in my day-to-day existence. But I find no argument with your desire to introduce topics that cultivate the Objectivist viewpoint.
Although I can see some areas of general agreement between the statements of Conservative and Objectivist, I also see a large amount of disagreement, particularly with the actions of Conservatives and I can't agree with any of the cultural conservation goals of a Conservative. In my view, Conservatives are as far way from the enlightenment principles of natural individual rights and rights protection as are progressives. I contend that particularly in the private writings of the most influential Founders, that you find very little interest or belief in a country based on cultural structures, but almost solely on the rights and achievements of the individual and the de-centralization of any power base.
Load more comments...