Dil Demonique

May 24, 2007 youtubemovie

Youtube Commments:
you are right on your point that smart people are not RUNNING the country…
they RULE and CONTROL your country.
george bush is NOTHING.
anyone who holds any REAL POWER, none of us are aware of; and if we are, then they ain’t them!
like with a magic show: you cannot look at what they’re showing you and hope to see and understand.
to understand, you must look where do not want you to.
that is where the true magic happens.
that is where the illusion meets reality.

Redundancy from last video’s comment section, but…
In Atlas shrugged, socity was doomed by the government, withdrawl only hastened the destruction while saving those that withdrew.

Better paralell: Rand with a button that will delay the six million dying for five years, but if she pushes it, she will be killed.

The fact is, Ayn created a reality where that decision would be made. She wanted to make a book where the “parasitic”–as Xomniverse calls them–poor get what’s coming to them (namely, death). Of course she makes the situation seem as justifiable as possible in the book itself–that why good people can read it and not find it immediately reprehensible. It’s only when you strip it down to it’s naked message that you see what an evil piece of shit it is.

In AS, the people die because they support government masters that promise them the socialist dream. Not because they are not smart enough to run the country, because their greed (in the non Randian sense) pushes them to support evil, hoping that it wil not devour them… but of course it does.

The society in Atlas Shrugged collapsed because the masses espoused state socialism, and the industrialists withdrew so as to not contribute to their own demise. I’m not a Rand apologist by any means, but if people can’t withdraw from a system that they disagree with, for any reason, the alternative is to secure their participation via violent force.

The point here isn’t even so much the issue of the right to withdraw participation–because really, how could they be forced to participate? The real issue is that Ayn Rand created the literary conditions for all of these things to unfold, and basically believed that socialists (not just the major promoters of socialism, but the common people who are enamored by it) deserve to die. Her description of the train crash in Atlas Shrugged bears that out without any doubt.

Possibly. I never took the book that way. Yeah, the whole plot was contrived to suit her ideological aims as opposed to telling a story, but I viewed the calamity as a natural consequence of coercive collectivism. Didn’t strike me as suggesting those people “deserved” to die. But to each his own. I see how it can be taken differently.

everyone in the government are nothing but good salespeople , they sell us shit and we eat it .

we need to stop eating shit and put people in governing seats that are very intelligent and capable of running this country the right way. its WE THE PEOPLE, who are fucking up this country.

by that i mean they pass bills and laws and we just sit back and let them do it. yes sure there are alot who stand for We the people but the numbers are too small.

I don’t know why people are always comparing her to dangerous insects and arachnids! She’s always come across as being very sweet in what I’ve seen. I mean, her ego is the size of a small planet and she seems to have a few fascist tendencies–but the same could be said of me.

The hitler button thing turned up in Dr.Who when he had the opportunity to exterminate the daleks (stay with me on this, don’t get scared of the geek) despite having the opportunity to wipe out a group of individuals who are a genuine menace, and will always be as daleks are effectively space-naizs, he didn’t. Read into that what you will.

I saw that and thought Dr Who was being totally selfish and irresponsible. By avoiding shame and guilt for himself, he is indirectly responsible for all the deaths the daleks would cause. Does he have the right to kill them all? Does he have the right to refuse to do it? His inaction resulted in countless deaths. That doesn’t seem like the right deicision to me.

This is a really weird thing to be having a philosophical discussion on giving that it’s a sci-fantasy show but I agree. Would I wipe out a race of genetically engineered soldiers who have the urge to kill and subjugate hardwired into them from conception? Undoubtably, but that’s a pretty strange hypothetical, I think the point of the ep was what would you do in a real-life situation, is genocide EVER right outside of destroying irreconcilable evil?

Well as a trekkie, I believe that mythology whether modern or ancient has meaningful truths in their fiction. By making it about aliens, you remove at least some of the cultural assumptions and bullshit that goes with our culture. It is a special case with Dr Who since he is a time traveller, meaning he can go back and change it if he made the wrong choice. Then again Dr Who never seems to exploit this incredible power.

No I mean the modern one. It’s really good. It may be a bit slow starting, but it’s the epic storytelling style that I really like. Movies are too short, I prefer to be able to see the same characters develop over a long time. Babylon 5 is also a really great epic storyline, and probably much more accessible and visually interesting than BSG.

interesting viewpoint. People who run the country they might be smart they might be stupid. The thing is that their intention is to make money, feel powerful and in charge and then make some more money. They do not have the intentions to change the wrongs in the world or make it a better place with the power they achive.

As an american you’ve been spared the horror of having Atwood’s horrificly dry and unorginal writting forced down your throat by neo-feminist english prof under the banner of “canadian content”. If you ever feel like getting a tast of what bases for literature north of the boarder read “a handmaids tail”.

TAA hits it on the head here. We are social animals. Period. All this Ayn Rand nonsense that we’re responsible to no one but ourselves would lead in a world far more chaotic even than we live in now. But indeed it is the wealthy who act very much that they are responsible to no one but themselves. WE ARE SOCIAL BEINGS.

Cooperation is the way we advance. Ayn wasn’t overtly against cooperation, but her philosophy would, if adhered too, make cooperation more difficult. The truth that free-market capitalists don’t want to hear is that everyone does have to sacrifice a little for the greater good. It’s like they somehow incapable of making a distinction between cooperation in the pursuit of a similar goal and Communism. They think in extremely black and white terms–and most of them proudly admit it.

Her book should have been called “How to justify being a selfish evil fuck”

If smart people really are sitting by and letting idiots make decisions for them that could destroy the way of life that actually allows them to philosophise and do research, then how smart are they really? Are the stupid people who run businesses and religions really so stupid for doing what they do? Depends on your subjective perspective. A truly objective perspective is not something we have access to.

A world full of these so called objectivists would mean no-one would do anything about global warming and pollution because their effects may have no serious consequences for people of this generation. Fortunately we evolved some compassion, apparently with the exception of mutant psychopaths like Rand.

Oh! The environment would be supremely fucked. I saw an objectivist interviewed on TV a while back asked about environmental regulations and he sneered like a normal person would when asked if they’d please cut open a rotting pig carcass. These people believe in 0 oversight.

Don’t you think, at its heart, Atlas Shrugged is all about self-reliance and self preservation? You can’t count on anyone else to have a productive life. Intelligent people shouldn’t be ashamed of their intelligence. Doesn’t it piss you off when people try to hold you back because others can’t keep up?

Yes. That’s EXACTLY the point. This kind of philosophy appeals to intellectuals. It appealed to me. When I read “For the New Intellectual” and “The Virtue of Selfishness” for the first time, I was spouting Objectivism for months afterwards. It has appeal. That’s why it’s so important that it be intensely scrutinized.

But Atlas Shrugged isn’t a book just for the intelluctual. It’s for everyone. Rise to your potential (whoever you may be). Do your best and don’t apologize for it. Since when did it become okay to be mediocre? It sickens me, because I know many people who’ve been made to feel bad because they are intelligent or have a gift of some sort that others covet. Also, did you get my PM?

i was saying your parents are a member of that income bracket. Not you. Please do not take it as a slap to you i was just pointing that out. Hence why your have your socialistic ideas and things cause your rich parents pay for everything. Anyways. More power to ya bro. 😀

um.. um.. um..
why dont you wait until you know what to say.. why stick a small um in there like you would be ashamed if anyone noticed that you could not speak fluent as some kind of scholar, its ok to be silent until you have figured out what you want to say, or maybe it youst comes natural to say um so often



Entry Filed under: interesting, video, videos, youtube

1 Comment Add your own

  • 1. AbrahamBrutus&hellip  | 

    Nice post; I agree with almost all of it. However, I take complete and total issue with the following:

    The truth that free-market capitalists don’t want to hear is that everyone does have to sacrifice a little for the greater good.

    You’re simply wrong. You must separate free-market capitalists from corporations, as they are certainly not the same. The only exception are state-run corporations which you have adequately addressed to some extent.

    Corporations are not people and they exist and operate for one purpose: to generate profits. They have but one duty: to their shareholders. They are required by law advance their one purpose and fulfill their one duty.

    They have no alliances, no allegiances, and no citizenship. They fly not the stars and stripes, hammers, sickles, crescents, stars, or any other thing associated with national identity; rather, they solely fly their corporate logo. They have no blood, no heart, no religion, no God, no humanitarian purpose. They are not charged with building roads, feeding the destitute, putting roofs over people’s heads, or saving the planet. Further, public relations is no substitute for the aforementioned and only valued for its necessary ability to advance a corporation’s stated purpose and fulfill its stated duty.

    You will always find a corporation wherever its ink is the blackest. That is the first truth that “We the People” must understand about what free market capitalists advocate.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

Trackback this post  |  Subscribe to comments via RSS Feed




May 2007
« Apr   Jun »
%d bloggers like this: