11

Trump and Ojectivism

Posted by Tavolino 5 years, 8 months ago to Government
670 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Trump and Objectivism

I’m puzzled by the formal Objectivist movement (ARI, TOS) and their complete disdain for President Trump. From the beginning they have never missed a chance not only to distance themselves, but also follow with a pompous negative certainty, without having the necessary relevant facts. Ironic, considering our foundations are based on proper identification (metaphysics) and validation (epistemology) before passing judgment or taking action (ethics). While I agree principles should never be compromised, context and perspective need to be objectively evaluated and applied, rather than a blind intrinsic repetition. Regarding Trump, there some broad hierarchal recognitions that I believe are very consonant with our philosophy.

Our fundamental basis is metaphysics, which is the proper identification of the nature of something. More than any past politician, however brash, Trump calls it like he sees it within his known knowledge. Be it the emotional motivations of political correctness, the lies of the “fake news,” the imbedded corruption, the recognition of the good and bad on the world stage (Israel, China, North Korea, Iran), the parasitical nations that feed off our teat, etc., etc.. The transparency of his thoughts have been unmatched and not hidden behind political speak, spins, alternate agendas, backroom deals or deceit. It is what it is.

As Dr. Jerome Huyler noted, “Trump has the sense of life of an individualist. His common sense - born of decades of experience as a businessman and dealing with politicians - tells him that taxes and heavy-handed regulations destroy economies. It is true, as Rand said that common sense is the child's method of thinking. But it is born of empirical experience,” the basis of knowledge acquisition.

His “America First” mantra should be championed by us. Rand had always said America will never regain its greatness until it changes its altruist morality. America First is just that. It’s not some blind German nationalism, but an attitude that America’s interests need to be selfishly upheld. This is a necessary fundamental to our ethics. He has attempted to keep open discussions with all, based around trade and fair exchange. Rand had said, “The trader and the warrior have been fundamental antagonist throughout history.” His movement away from aggressive wars, political globalism and multi-lateral agreements keep our own self-interests as paramount. It’s the application of the trader principle.

Lastly, his counter-punch mindset and approach is completely in line with our moral rightness of retaliation. He may prod or poke, but does not pull the proverbial trigger until he’s attacked, either with words or actions.

There is a dire threat that’s facing our country today with the abuses and power of the ingrained bureaucracy utilized for political purposes. It's imperative that all Americans unite, led by the voices of reason to identify and expose this fundamental threat to freedom. It's not about the false alternative of Trump or never Trump, it's about the American system and the fundamental role, purpose and responsibilities of government, regardless ones political persuasion.

As Objectivists, we need to continually apply our principles in the real world of what is, slowly moving it to where it should be. We need to descend from the “ivory tower” to the first floor of reality. Trump may not be able to articulate the principles, but are not what’s mentioned above consistent with our most basic and fundamental beliefs as Objectivists?






All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 27.
  • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    IMHO, the key to this is either a reform or revocation of the Twelfth Amendment which puts the votes for President and Vice President on the same ballot. If it returned to being the runner-up vote getter in the Presidential Election, there would be an actual incentive to run viable third-party candidates.

    (I'd also support an Amendment to revoke voting privileges of retiring/forcibly-retired elected representatives following the certification of election results.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Russpilot 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I have been saying for decades now that the two party system is the biggest part of the problem. It amplifies the "us vs. them" mentality. If we had 5 or more true, viable candidates then we could have a true debate on the issues and the platforms and could vote accordingly.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ blarman 5 years, 8 months ago
    I think that much of the problem lies in the two-party system, to be honest. Just as the business world is more competitive and better for customers when there are multiple product/service offerings available to meet one's needs, the political world needs the same thing. For a long time, there really were only two ways of looking at the world and it fit the two-party mold rather well. But with the growth of this nation from a few millions of inhabitants to hundreds of millions we have also seen an expansion of ideologies. That is not to say that all ideologies are of equivalent value, but if there exists a sufficient number of people holding those ideas, they should be discussed in the political realm if for no other reason than to force the more traditional mindsets to defend themselves.

    Personally, I would love to see the demise of the two-party system. I would love to see alternative parties to the current Democrat v Republican paradigm - even if that means that along with the Constitution and Libertarian Parties we admit the Green and Communist parties.

    I don't really believe Trump is a Republican - which probably explains much of his differences with Party Leadership (remember the whole Reince Priebus brouhaha?). I don't think he's a Libertarian or a Constitution Party member and certainly not a Green Party member or Communist. He's his own party: the Business Party. And as most elections are actually economic referendums, this is actually quite a sound strategy in a Presidential candidate.

    Will there ever be an Objectivist candidate? I don't think so. But that doesn't mean that we shouldn't support the policies of politicians that seek for limited government, lower taxes, free trade (tied of course to property rights), and personal liberty. Trump may not be a 100% candidate, but I'd give him at least an 85% - and that's a whole sight better than anything the Democrats have offered which are closer to 0%. I didn't vote for Trump the first time around, but I will vote for him in 2020.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by coaldigger 5 years, 8 months ago
    I don't see a single Objectivist bone in Trump's body. His philosophy is pragmatism and inconsistent at that. Yet, he is not a professional politician, knows how to meet a payroll and understands that wealth is produced by men with ideas and ambition. It remains to be seen if his "art of making a deal" works in international diplomacy but just caving is worse.

    There probably will never be an Objectivist President because unbending principles and pure rationality doesn't fit a political system where leaders have to be elected by the people. Maybe we can do better than Trump but he is by far the lesser of the evils and without TDS would be a lot more successful.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Thoritsu 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Hopefully not all the Objectivists are so unrealistic to believe that Trump is not far better than Hillary, Lizzy or Bernie. That we do not have a continuum of choices, and too much negativity puts a real communist in office.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Snezzy 5 years, 8 months ago
    Howard Roark was not an Objectivist.

    Neither is Trump.

    Dynamite hidden in plain sight.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    None of us are going to live to see a totally rational society. All I can do is promote rationality and choose the options that let me enjoy whatever rationality is out there. If Hillary supporters would wear armbands to identify themselves, it would help me to avoid them.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Trump's best slogan so far is "promises made- promoses kept". That is unique for a politician and a very desirable indication of honesty. He is also less collectivist than the leftists, which is also a good thing.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Trump is LESS of a collectivist than most, and thats why I voted for him. He is slowing the advance of collectivism that the leftists are pushing. Trump is intellectually compromised for sure, and does many collectivist things (repeal and replace Obamacare and make us citizens pay for the tariffs on china that just go to the us government coffers). But the hatred the left has for him tells us all that he is also doing a lot of anti-collectivist things.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I like the fact that the leftists HATE Trump with a passion that shows how he is standing in the way of their policies.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Trump does less wrong than the democrats who oppose him. His lack of intellectual consistency leads him to stupid moves like the trade war. It wont work and china will never agree to it. They want to "Make China great again", and Trump is standing in the way of that. WE pay the tariffs, NOT China. His claim China is paying the tariffs is just a lie (similar to Obama with "you can keep your doctor...").
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I voted for Trump because I thought at least he would mostly stop collectivism from advancing at the rate it was with other politicians. From observation of the hatred the left has for Trump, I would say that he is doing just that.

    Is he consistent, NO. His so called tax cut was actually a tax increase for my small business. His "standing up to China" costs me thousands in tariffs, and will gain me nothing if China buckles and agrees to not steal intellectual property (since I dont sell anything to china and I dont have any intellectual property they would want)

    That said, he is a LOT better than crooked Hillary, and will be a LOT better than any of the democratic candidates in 2020. Given that I wont live to see a John Galt elected, I choose to pick the best of the lot that CAN be elected when it comes down to it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Abaco 5 years, 8 months ago
    In my view, the paradigm that we will elect people that we can depend upon for real leadership is dead. This fallacy is why politics has captured the collective psyche of the American people so firmly. I see couples about to break up because one watches CNN while the other watches FOX. Interesting phenomenon to watch from my perspective. Trump good...Trump bad...I couldn't care less anymore. The real answers, the real solutions, won't come from government. The real problems?...What do you think?...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Roland_Porter 5 years, 8 months ago
    I assess each of Trump's policies on an individual basis. I disagree with him fundamentally on the trade war, his ban on transgendered people serving in the armed forces, and his lax attitude on gun control. I agree with his message of putting one's own interests first and generally agree with his foreign policy.
    I can personally vouch for the collectivist mentality of both hardcore Trump supporters ("Trump has been blessed by God Himself") and the far left (My own brother is a democratic socialist and has called me some pretty nasty things for my support of capitalism.).
    Obama was a thesis and Trump was the antithesis. There is no synthesis yet and may not be for a long time.
    Every day I find myself agreeing more with libertarians than I do with conservatives for their consistency in defending liberty so I've largely avoided the Republican/Democratic dichotomy; I have a laundry list of issues with both parties. That said, I am committed to the grey and avoiding the black and white, all-or-nothing mentality. The notion that someone can do no wrong is a dangerous mentality to have regardless of who it is applied to.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 5 years, 8 months ago
    Exceller, I agree with all you say. The principles I refer to are from the perspective as a student of Objectivism and not some subjective whims. And you are correct that rational discussion re politics/economics has left the building, but it hasn't disappeared. It just need to be navigated through the right people that can implement, even if it's one small step at a time. My family has had personal experiences with influential people of both disciples, and I can tell you that rational ideas matter when applied properly to the muddled thoughts of the uninformed. As Rand concludes in her essay Don't Let It Go, "America's sense of life...requires the hardest intellectual battle. But isn't it a magnificent goal to fight for?"
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "We should be encouraging rational discussion and independent thinking to better understand the application of the principles."

    We all know that but rational discussion and independent thinking is not part of political and even economic reality.

    BTW, what "principles" are you referring to? Principles are banned from campus life these days, to start with. Not even mentioning social media where there is only one "principle": agree with me or you are history.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by exceller 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "We do not elect pious people and we certainly don't elect terribly moral people."

    Entirely correct.

    Anyone stepping into the political arena severed themselves from both.

    Trump is not a leftist.

    It is stated only by those who are compelled to compartmentalize. Wonder what does the poster think of Obama? Where does he fall on the scale?

    Problems are never solved by applying ONE set of rules. To argue that because someone is using methods that are anathema to a conservative makes that individual a feftist means short sightedness.

    The plethora of problems that Hussein left behind calls for someone who is able to absorb conflicting facts and find a path the country benefits from.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -4
    Posted by PeterSmith 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "I am a Conservative."
    That's not a good thing. They way I look at it Conservatives are just religious and much more confused arm of the left wing.
    They are certainly the biggest enemy of Objectivists and worked hard to bring Rand down because they knew her ideas meant the end for their movement.

    "I am quite disgusted with the caliber of most conservatives and ENTIRELY sick of the tea party."
    I'm not sure why. I mean you're still waiting to decide on Trump, so not sure how you could dislike anyone in the conservative or Tea Party movements. Let alone even many democrats...

    "We do not elect pious people and we certainly don't elect terribly moral people."
    What do you mean by pious people and why is that an issue?
    Our real issue is that we don't elect anyone with any understanding of political theory and certainly no one with any ideas with which to oppose the left.

    "Incidentally, any social structure or government is a collectivist entity..."
    No, that's not what's meant by "collectivist."
    Collectivist means: rights violating government policy. NO president should ever be a collectivist. If you support a collectivist president then you may as well be a socialist.

    "The slippery slope is respecting and adhering to the structure of the Constitution, made more difficult by the contortion of Constitutional original intent and the ladder of violations present government stands on as its foundation."
    If you support a collectivist president then you fundamentally oppose the constitution.

    "As said before, I hope he has a plan, and I hope that plan benefits us, because I do not sense he does anything without a profitable reason."
    I'm not sure what plan your waiting to be revealed from a statist like Trump that could possibly even remotely undo the disaster of his administration.
    Many seem to be almost in a fantasy world when it comes to Trump when he is basically running a more left wing government than Obama and should be opposed certainly by anyone who identifies as an Objectivist.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I think much of what is said by his actions has to play out before anyone can come to judgement. He has a habit, routine, way of doing things where people rush to judgement and then revealing a motive that no one considered and making his naysayers look rather foolish. I do hope that's the case with this horrendous budget deal.

    I am a Conservative. I wasn't in favor of Trump (preferred Cruz or Carson), but again there really wasn't a viable alternative in the general election.I am quite disgusted with the caliber of most conservatives and ENTIRELY sick of the tea party.

    We do not elect pious people and we certainly don't elect terribly moral people. I'll wait to see what he does before voicing more than my disappointment.

    Incidentally, any social structure or government is a collectivist entity. So any President, and any elected official, representing a expansive body of people, in our case 230M, must be collectivist minded in his/her decision making. The slippery slope is respecting and adhering to the structure of the Constitution, made more difficult by the contortion of Constitutional original intent and the ladder of violations present government stands on as its foundation. In that way the NY Moderate, as witnessed, is as dangerous as he is duplicitous. As said before, I hope he has a plan, and I hope that plan benefits us, because I do not sense he does anything without a profitable reason.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • -3
    Posted by PeterSmith 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "Just curious, as opposed to whom? I'm not a blind eyed Trump supporter by any means but I in no way see him as a leftist."
    If you don't think that someone who implements trillion dollar spending bills, regulates trade and immigration more than even Obama did, assaults the rights of tech companies more than even Obama did, etc, is not "leftist" then I'm not sure what you think that term even means.
    Trump personally has no ideology, but he is still implementing collectivist and therefore leftist government policy.
    As such it makes perfect sense for Objectivists to oppose Trump and his administration as much as any other collectivist and therefore leftist administration.

    EDIT: also just to add, the Democrats aren't opposing anything. They are getting all their policies through, while pretending to oppose and therefore getting to have their cake and eat it too.

    And we have conservatives to thank for this circus.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by 5 years, 8 months ago
    Not trying to fool anyone. Just trying to keep hierarchy and context on many of the examples you note rather than the opinions mentioned. I've been involved with Objectivism since the days I worked at NBI and I'm keenly aware that over the last 50+ years many (not all) wait for the "official position" to be declared. We should be encouraging rational discussion and independent thinking to better understand the application of the principles, rather than emotional retort that may not integrate the actual concretes properly. In life, we have to play the card we're dealt.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ AJAshinoff 5 years, 8 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Just curious, as opposed to whom? I'm not a blind eyed Trump supporter by any means but I in no way see him as a leftist. An argument could be made that you have to spend money to make money. An argument can also be made that Trump has to shore up and rebuild where O tore down, spent without value, and just plain gave away the nations wealth to hostiles (let's not mention the host if theft and fleecing that went on for 8 years or the secrets sold for profit).
    I agree Trump can hardly be called an Objectivist or a Conservative but I cannot say he's a leftist or remotely the ilk of the Ds ravenously opposing him at every turn.
    I don't know you so if I'm out of line I apologize in advance, but I think you have an axe to grind.

    Trump is an opportunistic NY moderate. Plain and simple. Not a great thing in my opinion but we could easily have done worse (and again, there was really no choice)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • -5
    Posted by PeterSmith 5 years, 8 months ago
    It's not clear who posts like this are designed to fool.
    Trump is a complete collectivist and his administration is responsible for continuing the trillion dollar spending fiasco's started by Bush, abolished the debt ceiling (pretty much the only achievement out of the hopeless Tea Party), pushing to regulate tech companies, imposed trade tariffs and further rights violating immigration regulations. Not to mention engaged in cowardly appeasement of the worst dictators on earth as we saw with Russia and most especially NK.
    No Objectivist should support this kind of appalling and leftist administration. In fact it's being so bad that it's not even clear that Hillary would've been a worse choice, so even that line of reasoning doesn't hold anymore.
    As to Trump personally, well he is a liar, a philanderer, intellectually bankrupt pragmatist who thinks he's on a reality TV show.
    Nothing to admire there from an Objectivist point of view either.
    So much as I think there is a lot to criticize in ARI and TOS, their condemnation of Trump is certainly not one of those things at all.
    It should be applauded. Trump and his administration are an unmitigated leftist disaster, pushing American politics into a very ugly Nationalist and Statist direction.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo