10

So What To Do?

Posted by $ sjatkins 10 years, 10 months ago to Politics
61 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Most objectivists I have known say we have a long slog of educating people ahead of us and that we can't expect much to improve until this is accomplished. But Ayn Rand herself experienced that most people are very strongly resistant to this kind of education. They belittle and deny it from the beginning tossing out ad hominem and other logical fallacies with abandon.

We also experience a Government that is far far away from what objectivist minarchist legitimate government would be. On the order of 99% of all the regulatory and enforcement agencies writing and enforcing the rules on all of us are not elected or even very directly subject to control by anyone who is. So it is very unlikely that even an objectivist educated reasonably large chunk of the population could change much by voting or even running for political office.

So what is left? Violent revolution? We have said for so long that it isn't "time to shoot the bastards" that it looks to me like we lost the means and most importantly the will for such measures long ago. And we likely missed the window where that would have made much difference as well. However, in the face of a lawless and evil government resistance and even violent resistance seems quite rational.

So what else? Shrugging and just surviving in what happiness can be found with a few like minded people but with much our productive capacity not on offer and not making the world over as wondrously as it could? Being sort of hunkered down and staying smaller than we really are in protest?

Or perhaps swallowing our ideals and anger and just soldiering own thinking that if only that next invention gets done and out there and integrated that perhaps all these persons, ideologies and forces in the way will not ultimately matter?

Or perhaps it is time to build a real Gulch. A country of our own based on sound ethics and politics growing out of those ethics. I am reading with interest about artificial island creation, some as big as Manhattan. An objectivist city-state or eventual chain of them in international waters may be the only way to a fully alive and rational world that we have left.

Thoughts?

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 2.
  • Posted by Eyecu2 10 years, 10 months ago
    At the moment I am shrugging and just biding my time until the opportunity for either a revolution or a real gulch.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree it would require the fall of our current government so it could be set up on our terms. Until then, shrugging.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by johnpe1 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    isn't that why Rand had the barrier above the valley --
    to prevent others from knowing what was down there?
    we would have to disguise the island as a wasteland
    to prevent knowledge of the actual facts.

    of course, this is an immense challenge, these days.
    another chance for innovation -- and let's leave out
    the idea of permanent clouds, ok? maybe if we
    could pretend that it was a leper colony? some
    smart gulcher will have ideas here -- things go in
    and nothing leaves?

    but we might want to travel. well, there are those of
    us who could pose a strong defense. -- j

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by desimarie23 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree, it's a beautiful thought, but I believe 'we' would need to wait for the fall of the government to really build a community as we would want it. It has to be on our terms, not theirs.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by BradA 10 years, 10 months ago
    Unfortunately I think the United States has passed the point of no return. During our last election cycle we were presented with no clearer choice between the producers and the moochers. And yet the moochers prevailed. We now live in a society where the majority feels a moral right to take what they want/need from the minority without compensation. It's a slippery slope from which I cannot see a recovery. But unfortunately we do not live in Galt's world. Our decline will be more gradual, playing out over multiple generations. There might be small victories, as I anticipate in the upcoming elections. But make no mistake, the scales have tipped and the decline has begun.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 10 years, 10 months ago
    I am waaay too old for any Objectivist organizing but organizing there needs to be. Learn from the enemy. Create small enclaves, put them together to form larger groups, make it a national movement. Perhaps eventually international. You'll need determined leadership. Aim at recruiting members of other groups such as the Tea Party, where some of the more rational members want more than what is being offered. Just about every movement started this way. I'm not putting down the island idea, but why build a coupe when there's a party limo waiting to be renovated? Even then, wouldn't a million people on an island be better than a few thousand? You've got one terrific communication vehicle in the Gulch, but no one impresses me as being really serious. By that I mean, full-on dedication. It wouldn't be self-sacrifice, but a joyous creation of a dream that started centuries ago and is running out of steam. It needs a breath of new life and we have the blueprint for the respirator.
    Or am I just an old geezer fantasizing about an old dream?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by conscious1978 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I would not be surprised if there is an actual secession plan in the halls of Texas state government, and as a Texan, I've had the same thoughts many times.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by H6163741 10 years, 10 months ago
    My thoughts exactly. Creating a new country seems incredibly daunting, but I agree that the US may be too far gone at this point to save. I have also considered the possibility that Texas may eventually secede from the union. If so, my family and I will be there before they close the borders!
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Actually, I've been designing my own version of "Atlantis" for some years now, in my head. Only problem is, its population would vary from one to a max population of six...

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago
    A couple of years ago I proposed an idea, the New Atlantis, where individuals that want to create a new world could do a virtual design of it. With current and emerging technologies, the creation of a nation outside of the physical and political bounds and controls of current tyrannies is a possibility. Seasteading projects are showing us the technical feasibility, but they all remain attached to some country politically and they do not seem to grasp (or publically admit) that they need political and economic independence and a physical defense system to make them truly viable. To create the new world, the philosophical foundation and the technical design must first be laid down. Not unlike a constitutional convention, but with a technical side as well.
    I proposed a virtual collaborative effort where people of various skills would discuss the details, each area being compartmentalized, just like the Gulch website. Political structure, law, the mechanics of life support, etc., would be discussed by experts in those fields and codified as the constitution and the technical blueprints of the eventual new nation. In order to avoid any Ponzi schemes, there are monetary payments, collections or bonds involved in this project. Instead, based on the individual contribution to the project, electronic ownership certificates can be issued, redeemable for ownership in the new nation when and if it materializes, as the blueprints will be the intellectual property of the people participating in the project. Thus, one can become rich only if we make it work and then we all gain. Even if such nation does not materialize in our lifetime, I still think that the mental exercise is to our benefit. Anyone interested?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by radical 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    If anyone could accomplish this, John Allison can.
    He built his bank following Ayn Rand principles, as he explained in a letter to me.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I disagree only slightly. The Constitution was written for a people that supported and cherished honor. When the majority of the people (who vote) choose dishonor and graft, the representative government soon devolves into tyranny, and the Founders recognized the possibility from the outset. While they hoped that the Constitution would provide principles upon which to build a successful nation, as soon as those elected to power attempt to narrowly tailor those principles so as to apply in certain cases and not apply in others, you have the beginning of the end.

    In today's government, the vast majority of our elected officials see their position as a means to their own ends and have manipulated and twisted the system into exactly that. All one has to do is look at the lobbying firms infesting DC to see that our government has ceased being "of the people, for the people" except in facade only. I fear that the only way to get things back to what they should be is a collapse and rebuilding of society - a Constitution 2.0 if you will. Living through those days will not be fun.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Solver 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Unfortunately electing the best politicians is becoming more and more about picking those that have the best plans of earned wealth redistribution. In the race to the bottom, the most loot gets handed out to those who have learned how to best mooch political favors or those who appear the best of the needy
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes, of course. The term is used as you described it, with no gender connotation. But if such a person were to even attempt to run for an office today, chances are that he’ll never get through the narrowly focused special interests that control the primaries, let alone survive in the shark infested waters beyond.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by conscious1978 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I agree, Rich. Besides, I'm not confident that any island "Gulch" would survive the 'envious' actions of the nearest looter nation (as alluded to by others). They would find a way to suck the life from an upstart little 'nation'. Either by harassing its 'citizens' via their connections with other countries, or by direct 'annexation', they could not let a group like that exist. The cost of the precedent would be too great to let it thrive.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    By "gentlemanly" I believe you mean honest, trustworthy, having integrity and fidelity to the underlying intent and purpose of the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution. But when you have those in power that exhibit none of those traits, you end up with what we have now.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by edweaver 10 years, 10 months ago
    I love the idea but question how it could happen. If it were a town in America and it proved to be successful which I fully expect it would be, people would flock to it and then try to force change on it very similar to what happens now. And there are so many state & federal mandates that already force cities to do things they may not agree with that it would be a major battle to keep the established principals. But I am all ears.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Swett is right next to the Badlands National Park. There would be plenty of good places to hide nearby.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by IndianaGary 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Don't forget that Ayn Rand supported a minimalist government that enforced objective law. Such law is designed exclusively for the purpose of protecting individuals and their property. In such a society, there is a place for police, judges, and a military. What we have now so taints the proper concept of government that many people shy away from having any government at all.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by strugatsky 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The US Constitution had a fundamental flaw when it was written and, at this point, I don't think that there is a chance in hell that it would be voluntarily corrected by the people in power. The people writing the Constitution, an incredibly well thought out and progressive (in a positive sense) document, assumed that only Gentlemen will be at the helm and, therefore, gentlemanly language was used. The Constitution is very specific as to what the government and the people with the power of the government behind them can and cannot do. It limited the powers of the State, for the first time in history. But the Constitution never mentions what punishment is to be levied upon those that simply fail to abide by it, except for the impeachment of the president. Thus, successive presidents and members of Congress pushed the envelope and usurped more and more power with impunity, based on insolence and precedent. Today, clearly treasonous acts like the Fast and Furious or releasing terrorists are viewed as nothing more than a news blip for a few days. There are no more Gentlemen in the government and they are not coming back, nor will the criminals that replaced them will ever sign up for their own punishment.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    The island nation idea is described at
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_Utopia
    However, its founder never raised the necessary
    capital and then died in 2012.

    The great thing about the New Utopia idea is that
    it is about 100 miles from the nearest land
    (roughly equidistant from the Cayman Islands and
    Honduras) with a
    sizable reef only about 20 meters down on which to build.

    It is a reasonable concept if we can put together
    a critical mass of people from within the Gulch
    and have a Midas Mulligan to help get things started.
    Perhaps we could ask John Allison, the former ARI
    board member and BB&T CEO and now Cato Institute CEO.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 10 years, 10 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Rocky, you are absolutely correct. the disintegration of the nation is visible on a daily basis. And there is no place to go because once the nation dies the rest of the world will follow. the difference is that most of the rest of the world will not have changed. they still live in year one.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo