Yaron Brook

Neil Parille's picture
Submitted by Neil Parille on Thu, 2016-11-03 00:32

As you all know, Yaron supports open immigration of Muslims into Europe even though it would turn Europe Islamic.

Yaron recently was shouted down at a speaking event in the UK. Muslims weren't happy with him.



Doug Bandler The Second's picture

Its been years since I was there. But I never saw it as American either. Its only 24% white. How on earth would it be anything else but Leftist? The Japanese are hard working as they are everywhere. But not so the Polynesians (although some of the girls are really sexy). I am not well read on the history of Hawaii but I too think it was a mistake to make them a state, although I think alot of that had to do with military strategy which raises the issue that libertarians always make that America's expansion had imperial elements to it. I just don't know enough to say.

But Jesus is Grant right about Hayashi. He represents the worst of Objectivist youth; this generation's version of the 80s Randroid.

The Usual Suspects, Detached from Reality

Grant Jones's picture

Both Stuart Hayashi and B. Hussein Obama illustrates why Hawaii is a Socialist-Democrat stronghold. Both chambers of the Hawaiian statehouse contain not a single Republican. Most of the people who live here have never lived in the United States. Culturally, Hawaii is a combination of Polynesian, East Asian, and hard Left American libtards from the mainland culture. Culture is downstream of politics. As much as I love Hawaii, it's not culturally part of the United States. Maybe, it should have remained a territory or been changed into a commonwealth. Unlike Americans, the people here are either completely passive or left of center and view the government as the source of support. They believe that the government should be the center of economic life. For example, the life ambition of many people here is to get a government job and spend the rest of their days as a parasite. Why those who don't benefit from and pay for the corrupt one-party state still support it would require volumes to address. Another example, by a margin of 65% to 24% the voters of Hawaii County passed a measure to "expand the scope of the Hawaii County plan." Because the County government had been so completely incompetent with everything else they've ever touched. Leftists don't learn from experience. And, they certainly won't learn from unread books written by the likes of Hayashi.

Even the non-liberal Democrats on the Islands are completely clueless, with rare exception. The Republican Party of Hawaii is a collection of place holders whose purpose is not to win elections, but to keep their positions. The Grassroot Institute of Hawaii has done some fine work. But, it is overly wonkish. Like Hayashi, they believe people can be reasoned out of ideas they were never reasoned into in the first place. Hayashi is a doctrinaire libertarian on many issues. But, his devotion to no-borders, obliviousness to culture and Political Correctness guarantees his complete marginal status in the real world. Also, I don't think Hayashi has ever lived anywhere besides Oahu. He lacks experience and bases his daft positions on pure rationalistic deduction. Although he's lived in Hawaii his entire life, he is also too thick to understand the importance of racial politics in the state. Apparently, he believes that just one more book or paper on "individual rights" and Austrian economics that nobody - and I mean nobody - in Hawaii will read will somehow paper over the tribal nature of Island life and politics.

On a positive note, I believe race relations are getting better in Hawaii. But, it's a slow process. And, how it will affect Hawaii's politics is unknown to me.


Aloha Greg

Grant Jones's picture

There are other real Objectivists who understand the stakes involved for this election. I don't feel at liberty to publicly name them. But, some have been commenting on my Wall.

A short list of sanity

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

There are only a few exceptions such as Paul Blair, Glenn Jameson, Olivia and Michael Hurd, and others, who have not been scared to voice their opinions. Oh and Grant Jones too. Edit: I want to add Prodos Marinakis and Rogan Hazard to the list of good guys.

Prodos! I haven't heard his name in a while. I didn't even think he had an internet presence anymore. But that's a really short list for the entire internet O'ist movement. Fighting for liberty has no clearly lined out pathway. Maturity would demand that you recognize that legitimate debates are necessary with a project so huge. Maturity would also require looking at Trump with a wide lens. Grant Jones post on him was one such example. Calling him "authoritarian" or "Hitler" or "fascist" is not rational and just plain stupid.

And the nonsense I have seen on the Twitter feeds of Brook, Tracinski, Armstrong, Jim May, Stewart Hayashi, Amy Peikoff, and other O'ists that I occasionally check up on is eye opening. To me there are flaws either in Rand's philosophy or in its understanding that account for such pathetic, and leftist, ideas circulation among O'ists. I've said that I think the O'ist view of rights is flawed which leads to the open immigration nonsense. Also, Rand's blank slate view of emotions is a problem. But I come away from this election with an even more negative view of the O'ist movement. I don't see it gaining in popularity.

Haha Doug II

gregster's picture

He can even take is Mexican gardener if it makes him happy. Smiling

I was over at F***book yesterday evening and there was palpable disappointment from many Objectivists. Apparent cry babies such as Dwayne Davies 'unfriended' me for pointing out that his faith in ARI was misplaced, and equating ARI with the braindead (and then my suggestion that his compartmentalisation was causing him not to be able to think for himself). Oh, I shouldn't forget my linking to my comment here at SOLO drew out his anger at Hillary's loss. Harry Binswanger's mate Klaus Nordby was on an 'unfriending' tirade--such is his tolerance for ideas. His major complaint is of incivility, the coarse speech of some, of which Rand and Peikoff would disapprove, he says.

There are only a few exceptions such as Paul Blair, Glenn Jameson, Olivia and Michael Hurd, and others, who have not been scared to voice their opinions. Oh and Grant Jones too. Edit: I want to add Prodos Marinakis and Rogan Hazard to the list of good guys.

Ron Paul's Take

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

Much more informed and likable than any OrgOist out there. He is pro-liberty yet he does not resort to calling Trump a fascist. Whatever flaws he may have, he's worth 100 OrgOists (if not more). I regret not voting / supporting him in 2008 / 2012. But I was a stupid Pekovian on Ron Paul. Dumb.


Lindsay Perigo's picture

Yawon is an advocate of cultuwal equivalence. That's tweason. We must "pivot" to cultural chauvinism.

"Time to talk more about the value of fwee twade, immigwation etc"? ARISIS has banged on about nothing else, even when the so-called free trade was just cronyism on stilts manipulated by tyrants.

Dwain the swamp of Yawon! Down with Obleftivists!

Yaron's Tweets

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

Yaron Brook ‏@yaronbrook 15m15 minutes ago
Trump is going to win big (WI, MI, PA). Rust belt - this is the anti-trade, anti-immigration, ignorant, nationalist vote.

Yaron Brook ‏@yaronbrook 21m21 minutes ago
We must now pivot: time to talk more about the value of free trade, immigration, etc. Fight against nationalism instead of socialismm

There is no depth of analysis here. We do not have free trade under these trade deals. Immigratrion is a government program run by the left with the aim of racial disposession of whites. Under Brook, Objectivism is going to be militantly anti-nationalism. Expect the Objectivist movement to dwindle away to nothing as it understands *nothing about the world in which it lives*.

Brook himself is an intellectual lightweight who should not be the head of the ARI. He should step down. Get Ed Cline or Ed Powell in there. Let Brook move himself back to Israel. He can even take is Mexican gardener if it makes him happy.


Neil Parille's picture

For people in Third World kleptocracies, the choice is either to immigrate to a freer country or die. In the cases of impoverished people in Ecuador and Syria, they are in an emergency situation.

I can't blame people from 3d world countries wanting to leave, but Hayashi and open immigration Objectivists never consider that part of the reason why the "kleptocracies" are the way they are is because of the people who live there.


Grant Jones's picture

Hayashi is one of Clueless Amy's favorite White Knights. Funny how he doesn't mention a third option: that the barbarians learn from their betters and fix their own shitholes. Instead, he thinks they have a right to invade and destroy civilization. He must be confident that it won't be Stuart in Honolulu that has to deal with the consequences of his insane altruism.

Neil, Stuart doesn't allow comments on his blogs. He also blocks anyone who criticizes his views. He even wrote some 5,000 word screed on why he blocks people. I didn't read it. But, he does think we should be very interested in his every endless pontification for every inane thought he generates.

Koch Brothers. ARI is now CATO's little brother.

Hayashi is a menace

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

For people in Third World kleptocracies, the choice is either to immigrate to a freer country or die. In the cases of impoverished people in Ecuador and Syria, they are in an emergency situation

I read the Hyashi post. If he is the future of Objectivism then it is indistinguishable from left-libertarianism; and it is thoroughly altruist. What he is trying to use to defend open immigration for Syrians is the old Common Law principle of Necessity. The Common Law recognized that life comes before property. The classic case is that if you are in the middle of a storm and you need to break into a piece of property to save your life, you can. But you pay compensation for the damage after the storm has passed. Its a legitimate principle usually associated with "acts of god". But it in NO way applies to the Syria problem or immigration at all for that matter. The Syrians are responsible for their societies. Even broader, Muslims are responsible for their societies. Hayashi would put America at the mercy of the world's most irrational and anti-freedom people; and all in the name of "freedom".

That kid is a menace. If he is considered an Objectivist, I don't want to be.

Koch Brothers?

Doug Bandler The Second's picture

as well as by the support of the Charles Koch Foundation,

Isn't that all we need to know right there?


Neil Parille's picture

Stuart supports binswanger style open borders. He doesn't allow comments on his blog so I can only assume that he believes Israel should have open borders.

More on "Free Borders"

Grant Jones's picture

When is private property not private property? According to Stuart Hayashi, when your property is on an Mexican invasion route:

"In the case of private homes on the U.S.-Mexican border, those border crossings have already been numerous since 1965; this has already been recognized throughout the 1980s. were it the case that I moved to one of those plots in the year 2004 and only then started to notice the border crossing, I would be coming to the nuisance, and it would be silly for me to demand State action only now."

But, there's more. Stuart clearly supports the mass importation of "Syrian" refugees. He's attempting to apply the ethics of emergencies to foreign demographic invasion.

"For people in Third World kleptocracies, the choice is either to immigrate to a freer country or die. In the cases of impoverished people in Ecuador and Syria, they are in an emergency situation."


The Stupid, It Burns

Grant Jones's picture

Meanwhile, the ARISISians seek to persuade people on the importance of and practical need for philosophy. How, you may ask. By stating that advocating for national borders and a genuine policy of national self-interest is denying free will. According to Objectivism's self-appointed brain trust, advocating "Free Borders" (WTF?) is NOT an example of ivory tower intellectual elitism that is detached from all reality. And, you're raaaaaycist if you don't believe bombing Iran will result in "Freedom in the Middle East."

"Free Will, Free Speech, Free Borders, Freedom in the Middle East

Philosophy is often disparaged as an ivory tower pursuit that makes no difference in the real world. But if you know how to look, you can see its influence everywhere. Speakers from ARI will explore how today’s widespread acceptance of determinism has made many people suspicious of free speech and of immigration, and unable to grasp what a truly self-interested foreign policy in the Middle East would consist in. In contrast, the controversial positions ARI takes on these issues reflect its philosophical understanding of free will.

Yaron Brook,
Elan Journo,
Steve Simpson"


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.