From: matus@matus1976.com
Date: Sat Jun 14 2003 - 02:26:15 MDT
Samatha commented:
>
> On Friday 13 June 2003 21:01, Damien Broderick wrote:
> > At 08:30 PM 6/13/03 -0400, Michael Dickey wrote:
> > >I feel Rand makes compelling arguments for an
> > >objective basis for ethics, but I admit I am not yet
> intelligent enough to
> > >fully defend or even comprehend them.
> >
> > Ahem. Well, I have been wondering about this (idly, you
> understand), since
> > I assumed that you'd be a fan of Randian ethics. As I recall,
> John Galt and
> > all the other supermen of reason abandoned the suffering people of the
> > world and beat their retreat to a high mountaintop, leaving the world to
>
> Inaccurate. They realized that the system as it was would never
> ever help
> "the suffering people of the world" and would make it impossible
> for them to
> do any real good. So they redrew that it might collapse under
> its own weight
> quickly. This arguably gave less net suffering and cleared the
> ground for
> something different faster than other possible courses of action.
>
> You are correct that no decent objectivist would support the
> invasion of Iraq
> imho. But that is a good thing. Most objectivist believe that
> real change
> will only come from change minds. I am not so sure that is a good thing.
>
>
No decent objectivist? Interesting qualifier, I dont know what objectivists
or Ayn Rand readers you follow, but reading articles on Aynrand.org and
objectivistcenter.com reveal no opinions similiar to yours. Most of the
articles I have found reprimend the bush administration for not taking a
more formal moral stand against Iraq and Iran, insist on invading Iran as
quickly as possible next, criticize the 'road map to peace' as nothing less
than terrorist appeasement, and find both the Afghan war and Iraq war
morally just, but I guess they arent 'decent' objectivists.
Weighing War: How to Think About Iraq and North Korea
"This author supports the U.S. invasion of Iraq and the long-term commitment
to rebuild that country that must follow. "
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/articles/wthomas_what-warrants-war.asp
Israel’s right to self-defense
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/articles/tbenshahar_israel-right-self-defen
se.asp
Treating like as like, Arafat and The Axis of Evil
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/articles/sklein_arafat-axis-evil.asp
The Justice of War
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/articles/pstephens_justice-war.asp
The Roots of Peace
"But the argument against non-intervention goes deeper. A free nation has
but one charge when it conducts foreign policy: To act in its own national
interests. And just as it is not in an individual's interest to ignore the
oppression of his friends and neighbors at the hands of governments and
criminals, so it is not in a nation's best interests to ignore the suffering
and oppression of freedom-seekers at the hands of tyrannies and terrorists."
http://www.objectivistcenter.org/articles/pstephens_roots-peace.asp
Ayn Rand on the deaths of Innocents in War
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/arwarquotes.html
The Road to Victory Goes Through Tehran
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/roadtovictory.shtml
Liberty, not democracy in Iraq
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/libertynotdemocracyiniraq.shtml
They hate us too
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/theyhateustoo.shtml
etc. etc.
Michael Dickey
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 14 2003 - 02:22:32 MDT