Say what you mean, and mean what you say
Who's Online
There are currently 1 user and 17 guests online.
Online users
Who's New
Linz's Mario Book—Updated!PollCan Trump Redeem Himself Following His Disgusting Capitulation to the Swamp on the Budget?
No (please elaborate)
0%
Yes (please elaborate)
50%
Maybe (please elaborate)
50%
Who cares? (My blood doesn't boil and I'm a waste of space)
0%
Total votes: 8
 Basic Economics by Thomas Sowell
 Economics In One Lesson by Henry Hazlitt
|
#MOGA! Open Letter to Objectivists—Make Objectivism Great Again! Repudiate Obleftivism! Submitted by Lindsay Perigo on Mon, 2017-02-06 02:44
[This is an expanded version of the opening statement I had prepared for my aborted debate with Yaron Brook on Amy Peikoff's BlogTalkRadio show, "Don't Let It Go." I withdrew from the debate when I realised I could not in all conscience comply with her last-minute request that I refrain from making "sweeping statements" critical of Yaron. Warning: the following contains a number of sweeping statements critical of Yaron.]
In Yaron Brook’s BlogTalkRadio show of November 12 last year, the Ayn Rand Institute head said he was "horrified" at what 57 million Americans had just done. Yaron called Trump “the villain of our time,” “this creature, this vulgar creature,” an “authoritarian,” more anti-American than Obama, someone who might well abolish freedom of speech, someone whose proposal to build a wall on the Southern border was "stupid," someone whose election was far more dangerous than that of Hillary Clinton who would have been merely “an extension of the Obama status quo.” Yaron's sentiments were echoed by his ARI colleague, Canadian Onkar Ghate, who wrote, "On November 8, 2016, the United States took its first step towards dictatorship." Further on, Ghate said: “ … the Republican control of the presidency, the House and the Senate should give anyone pause who is concerned about, say, the campaign’s demonization of immigrants and of trade or the attempt to impose a Christian variant of Sharia law.” On his BlogTalkRadio show just finished as I write (the morning of Feb 6, NZ time) Yaron asserted that Trump is “paving the way to fascism.” This, we are told, is the voice of reason. I contend it is the voice of Trump Derangement Syndrome. More than that, it is the resurgent voice of Leonard Peikoff’s 2006 fatwa to the effect that Objectivists should vote Democrat across the board, even in the presence of “good Republicans,” because the Republicans were about to usher in a Christian theocracy. Sheer lunacy. Leonard briefly came right in 2013 ...
... before reverting to form. I contend the current Trump Derangement Syndrome within OrgOism (Organised Objectivism), most prominently displayed by Yaron Brook, is a manifestation of what I call Obleftivism, i.e., Objectivism hijacked by Islamo-Marxism. In what follows, “Yaron” and “Obleftivism” should be treated as interchangeable. Yaron implies "the Obama status quo" that Hillary would have preserved is somehow innocuous and tolerable, to be preferred over a President who has promised to lower taxes hugely, to lessen regulations by 75% and who has already moved to roll back Dodd-Frank; over a President who will allow the energy sector to function and flourish again and has already green-lighted the Dakota and Keystone pipeline projects blocked by Comrade Obama (“no big deal,” said Yaron this morning); over a President who will nix Obamacare; over a President whose appointments to the Supreme Court will be based on adherence to the Constitution rather than legislating from the bench; over a President who will stop the inflow of terrorist savages and other Third World low-lifes in its tracks; over a President who can bring himself not just to say “Radical Islamic terrorism” (in my view, “Islam” would suffice) but also to go after it. Obleftivism seems blind to the cultural ravages of unfettered immigration by ideological aliens; indifferent to, possibly even unaware of (from the smug safety of walled, white, well-guarded gated communities) the robberies, assaults, rapes and beheadings perpetrated by them. (MS—13: more prolific beheaders than ISIS!) Obleftivism says “Let 'em in, let ‘em in, let ‘em in”; the more the merrier; they'll soon get the hang of freedom and become like us—and anyone who opposes this suicidal, sacrifistic policy is a racist, a xenophobe, a bigot and all the rest of the standard leftist epithets. Trump’s wall is “stupid,” says Yaron—from behind a wall. I say, build a wall along the Northern border as well. Someone has to keep Onkar Ghate and Justin Trudeau out, not to mention all the Muslims Trudeau is letting in to Canada. I say, relocate the Somalis who have wrought havoc in Minnesota to tents pitched on the golf courses inside Yaron’s gated community; assuredly he'll give them a warm welcome?! Obleftivism refuses to acknowledge, let alone proudly proclaim, that Western Culture is The Best; that it’s entitled to protect and preserve itself qua Western culture, manifested in a plenitude of ways in specific Western nations; to say such a thing, according to Obleftivists, is “nationalism,” or even worse, “patriotism”—both odious signs of [gasp] “collectivism.” Obleftivism seems not to have absorbed the significance of Ayn Rand’s appropriately negative appraisal of pre-humans elsewhere in the world:
Obleftivists claim that attacking the Clinton News Network, National Putin Radio and other mainstream media for their stinking dishonesty, Fake News and bias is an assault on freedom of speech, when in fact the real assaults on free speech are coming from the self-same media, along with academia—students and staff—moronnials, Social Justice Warriors, Ugly Wimmin, Black Lives Matter, Hollywood, and sundry other garbage, under the rubric of Political Correctness—to whose vicious depravity Obleftivists seem oblivious or indifferent. How about a call to arms on behalf of Milo Yiannopoulis, whom Yaron Brook derides (oh, to have one Objectivist with Milo’s star quality!!), recently silenced by Islamo-Marxist thugs at Berkeley University; on behalf of Gavin McInnes, pepper-sprayed by Islamo-Marxist thugs at New York University?! How about a call to arms against one of the principal organisers of the Ugly Wimmin’s March, Linda Sarsour, who once tweeted of Brigitte Gabriel and Ayaan Hirsi Ali: “I wish I could take their vaginas away—they don’t deserve to be women”?! (Ms Ali, of course, is one of hundreds of millions of genitally mutilated Muslim women. She is now a prominent, heroic former Muslim.) All the while, in fact, Yaron minimises the enormity of the Muslim threat within America, saying, “The United States has zero potential to end up like Europe,” and, “Everyday Muslims are no threat.” How exactly does this "useful idiot" propose to differentiate the perpetrators of the killings of 145 Americans by Muslims in the United States since 9/11 from “everyday" Muslims? Blankout! “Everyday Muslims” are required to believe in Jihad, Sharia Law and a worldwide caliphate. They are stiffened in their resolve by such jolly verses from the Koran as, “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.” They’re also enjoined to lie (Taqiyya) about their agenda. So again, how does Useful Yaron propose to distinguish everyday Muslims from actual Muslims: i.e., Muslims who take their religion seriously? (Agenda alert: Yaron makes the exact same argument minimising the threat from Muslims as did a Cato Institute representative on the Martha McCallum Fox News Special a few days ago: the chances of being struck down by a Muslim terrorist are three trillion times lower than of being mugged or struck by lightning or a car, or some such. Hmmmmm. Cato. ARI. Pro-open borders Koch Bros. Funding.) Then again, from the smug security of a gated community, what difference does it make whether it’s Muslims or Mexicans doing the beheadings? Yaron said this morning that Trump’s description of the activist judge in Seattle who up-ended his temporary travel ban as a “so-called judge” was “despicable.” I’d say it’s the judge—a Black Lives Matter cheerleader—who’s despicable. I say, may the ban be quickly reinstated; may it revert to the President’s original proposal: Not One Muslim! I’d like to offer a helpful philosophical observation to Obleftivists at this point. Objectivism does not contend that “all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Objectivism views that as an intrinsicist view of rights. Objectivists, if asked, would eschew such a view. Yet when a prominent Objectivist (Binswanger) ends up saying, “Freedom of travel is a right. It is a right possessed by every human being, not just by Americans. The Mexican government or the French government has no right to stop you from entering Mexico or France, and our government has no right to stop a Mexican or Frenchman from entering America”; or, “The principle of individual rights demands open immigration. Implementing that would mean phasing out all limitations on immigration. Entry into the United States should ultimately be free for any foreigner, absent objective evidence of criminal intent or infectious disease”; or, “Amnesty for illegal immigrants is not enough, they deserve an apology” ... then you know you’re dealing with intrinsicism on steroids, and that the good ol’-time “rationalism” so well exposed by Leonard Peikoff has still not been weeded out. There are no “intrinsic” rights implanted in us by a mystical creator or nature; “rights” is a concept arrived at after tortuous millennia of excruciating cogitation by advanced human beings at the forefront of Western thought. Those whom Ayn Rand called “dinky little savages” do not have an automatic, inbuilt right, just because they look like humans, to travel to, much less remain in, Western countries. Civilised countries have the right to be selective as to whom they admit—as selective as Galt’s Gulch if necessary. Obleftivists think that the type of people to whom Ayn Rand pleaded, "Don't let it go," have, in electing Donald Trump, let it go: "it" being the uniquely American sense of life of which she wrote so eloquently. I contend that in electing Donald Trump, they, in the nick of time, reaffirmed it, and reassured us that they are still around. (Beyond miraculous, when you think about it, given all the professors and Obleftivist “intellectuals” like Binswanger who have held sway since Rand wrote that. Makes you think that “sense of life” must be in Americans’ DNA! Horreurs! Determinism!!) Ayn Rand said, of judging political candidates, “A voter’s choice does not commit him to a total agreement with a candidate—and certainly cannot commit a candidate to an agreement with every voter who supports him. Under a two-party system, a voter’s choice is and has to be merely an approximation—a choice of the candidate whom he regards as closer to his own views; often, particularly in recent times, a voter chooses merely between the lesser of two evils.” Yaron Brook would have you believe that Rand, who chose Nixon over McGovern, would have preferred Hillary over Trump. Hillary is easily more evil than McGovern, and arguably the most evil person ever to have run for the presidency. Yaron proudly says he doesn’t care! Trump is not the lesser of two evils, however; he is outrageously good—even though he is not the card-carrying Objectivist Obleftivists seem to demand! The very words “President Trump” are music to my ears, equal to Rachmaninoff. President Trump, President Trump, President Trump! This is even better than hearing (and as a broadcaster, reading) the words “President Reagan,” to whom OrgOists were equally asininely opposed (except for one of their leaders who voted for Reagan without telling anyone, Ayn Rand included). I am ecstatic at the spectacle of America’s ascension back to greatness. Every day, President Trump, in full view of the world he defies, relentlessly advances his audacious agenda; every week, Obleftivist Brook, in full view of a few lemming-like acolytes on Faecesbook and in parochial parts of the world, trashes it, because it might include tariffs and does include Twitter attacks on the smelly Islamo-Marxists at CNN and NPR, Yaron’s favourite sources of Fake News and Politically Correct commentary. I am a Deplorable, irredeemably. And I deplore Obleftivism. Obleftivism is Fake Objectivism! It's party time in America! Yaron Brook is a party-pooper! Make Objectivism Great Again!
|
User loginNavigation
More SOLO Store  The Fountainhead by Ayn Rand
 Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand
Syndicate |
Soros, of course...
The same George Soros behind ROBIN HOOD RESPONDS...
http://www.solopassion.com/nod...
Binswanker's and Bwook's Open Borders Policy ...
... now being advocated by Dem-Scum Castro, Harris, Booker, Pocahontas, Occasional Cortex and others. "The decriminalisation of illegal immigration." Has anyone noticed? It's Soros, of course.
Invasion of "Dinky Little Savages"
ICE has just reported the apprehension of 500 entities from Somalia, the Congo, Sudan, Eritrea and Ethiopia on America's southern border.
I venture to suggest their trip was paid for by Soros, and was not intended for one second to promote the inalienable rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, even though Binswanker and Bwook would claim they're "self-selected for virtue" and have a priori rights simply by dint of the fact of having human biology. The intrinsicist view of rights. Will any Obleftivist ever address this??!!
Bwook Weturns to Irvine to Gweet Omar?
"Omar's visit to Southern California is expected to continue Sunday, as she is scheduled to attend a private meet-and-greet in Irvine, according to a flyer for the event."
https://www.foxnews.com/politi...
Bwook Admits It!
2' 40" in:
My comment on YT:
"Bingo! Obleftivist Yawon admits to finding it easier to hook up with those politically on the Left than the Right if the former profess to be committed to 'weason.' E.g. George Soros, no doubt. Yawon's eschewing of libertarian subjectivists would be more convincing if the Anti-Rand Institute weren't being funded by the libertarian Cato Institute Koch Bros and were not promoting their open borders policy and the unimpeded importation of Third World savages who will unfailingly vote Democrat."
Bwook the Snowflake
I repeat: I'll debate him. No widiculous last-minute pwe-conditions, though. And not the nose-ring SJW as moderator. Someone non-partisan we can both agree on.
The moot I propose: That Yaron Brook has sold out the Ayn Rand Institute to the Left, and in so doing betrayed Objectivism.
Bwook the Liar
Bwook snivels that "no one else will debate me." Seriously.
Superior sharpness from Rand...
in this interview. She demonstrates how razor-sharp she was and well versed in the subject matter. She was absolutely incomparable in her insights and reasoning, totally worthy of the term ‘Philosopher' (unlike those today who just pose at being one)!
Campus Reform Interviews Obleftivist Wimmin ARI Supporters
Leonard Peikoff Defects to SOLO
OK, my subject-header is "click-bait," but it states a blinding truth: Leonard Peikoff quite clearly belongs here on SOLO, on any level one cares to identify ... and most emphatically not with ARISIS—
Altruism vs Benevolence
Magnificent by Ayn. But I still think we should call altruism "sacrifism." As Ayn herself acknowledges here, the overwhelming majority think altruism is benevolence, and we'll never get the word back, even though the man who coined it meant exactly what he said he meant and Ayn identified it with 100% accuracy. Similarly with "selfishness" and "liberal." Part of the problem is that Obleftivist OrgOism is expressly malevolent.
Keith Weiner Predicting Trump Economic Disaster
Keith Weiner predicts:
"[Trump] will bring economic disaster, but ... this disaster will be inflicted in the name of business, American greatness, profits, and capitalism."
I would be very curious to see anyone predicting this to show us how and in what form this "disaster" will take place.
Grant Wins the Prize!
And Greg goes to Hell, where he clearly already is!
What human could ever get to 28' 30"? I tuned out after 30". Sense of life, I think.
Possibly an aversion to being lectured on logic by an intrinsicist who thinks dinky little savages from shithole countries have inalienable rights to migrate to America has something else to do with it.
No! Not That!
Hell is listening to Binnie drone on for hours. Just can't do it.
Harry and Selfishness
Binswanger answered a question at 28:10. Lindsay you have the go-ahead to use whichever term you wish as long as it means the same thing, and you revert to the classic Rand term eventually.
Introducing Keith Weiner--obleftivist and proud of it
This guy is from the same bloodline as Stuart Hayashi and assorted reprobate shills of the Anti-Rand Institute. Weiner (well-named) repeats the trope they've been saying for some time. At least this time he is specific. I would have thought that these shrill shills would have quietened down seeing as that the economy of the USA has never seen better days. No, they won't because they are utter brainwashed leftists. As with Yaron Brook--nothing less than Galt will do, and in the meantime they will support DemocRats.
Fuckwit. There is slim chance that free markets will ever actually exist. He'll be whinging like a cunt for the rest of his life. Meanwhile Trump will protect his citizens' living standards by rejecting the European socialist agenda and supporting freedom.
Binnie
Not in order of appearance.
He quotes Rand: “our minds cannot have contradictory ideas.” But he appears to hold several.
“The thing that’s distinctive to the objectivist understanding of logic is the role of context and hierarchy..”
Good.
“Don’t say “we need freedom and tariffs,” “make America great again—and put on controls.” “Altruism is different from egoism.”
He doesn't identify the implicit contradiction between his no "controls" versus "egoism." He grants rights to those who would kill him.
He ignores the context of the inability of government to rightfully protect its citizens’ rights against purposeful invaders continuing their hijra. His conceptual hierarchy is jumbled. He places the rights of invaders above the rights of citizens.
He practises altruism with respect to those invaders.
Testing ...
Right here is what's wrong with OrgOism and Obleftivism. See if you can identify. If you can't, you're going to Hell! In fact, I've no doubt, you're already there!
Against my better judgement ...
... I've posted on Faecesbook—hideous repository of The Filth—where Obleftivist Andrew Bernstein has suddenly demanded "civility" from those who deviate from ARISIS orthodoxy. Reminiscent of the Brandroids.
Here is what I posted:
https://www.facebook.com/andre...
It Breaks Your Heart
Anyone who's followed Yawon's twists and turns on immigwation will be sceptical about his latter-day claim, repeated here, to be opposed to "mass migration," especially when he still refuses to specify mass Muslim migration. Islam, after all, is a mere mosquito-bite. He's still itching to make Chwistianity the villain of the piece in the 21st century. And of course, Trump, "crass" and "ugly" is still the arch-enemy of Western Civilisation—which, all of a sudden, Yawon is as eager to proclaim superior to all others as any SOLOist. !!!???
Sad is the ongoing reason/emotion dichotomy reiterated at the end. It's either/or, according to Yawon. C/f Rand: "A perfect, clear understanding also means a feeling. It isn't enough to realize a thing is true. The realization must be so clear that one feels this truth. For men act on feelings, not on thoughts. Every thought should be part of yourself, your body, your nature, and every part of your nature should be a thought. Every feeling a thought, every thought a feeling."
Douglas Murray is right to insist that the religious impulse will never go away. Thank God, so to speak! Yawon is wight to insist that we need to secularise it—but setting reason and emotion asunder will have the opposite effect; it will render reason bloodless. I'm encouraged that Yawon (finally) seems to have grasped the role of aesthetics in triggering a sense of the sacred and the worship thereof, and again, am wondering if he's been reading SOLO?!
I applaud ARI for initiatives like this and will even refrain from calling them ARISIS for the duration of this post. But I'm disappointed at the way both parties, Murray in particular, tip-toe around on egg-shells. This is Western Civilisation we're talking about, and its enemies are not simply good-faith dissidents; they are evil. I don't believe I heard that word once!
Obleftivists in the Catholic Church?
A retired Cardinal writes to the Pope asking him to resign for covering up sexual abuse by another Cardinal. The Pope says he'll have nothing to say on the matter, but yet another Cardinal says the Pope has better things to worry about, such as the environment, "migrants" (meaning Islamofa, MS-13 and other "dinky little savages" from shit-hole countries) etc ... he didn't mention "racism" but has done so in the past. Gramscification infected the Catholic Church every bit as much as it has, more recently, OrgOism. OrgOism is irrelevant to anything, so doesn't matter so much. The Church remains powerful in spite of its scandals and could be a force for good in spite of its goblinism. The last thing it should be doing is capitulating to Islamo-Marxism. Were I a Catholic, I'd be writing a piece called Make Catholicism Great Again—Repudiate Catholefticism!
Oh to have Objectivists ...
... as classy as these two. Instead we have Obleftivist SJW Islamo-Marxists Yawon and Nose-Wing, busy selling out Western Civilisation:
We still don't know ...
... what went on behind the scenes to explain ARISIS's joining the forces of evil. How did it happen that Leonard indulged in a moment of honesty, quoted in my primary post ...
... only to cravenly capitulate to Yawon and Amy in a subsequent broadcast? What was the memo that went out? From whom? Kochs? Soros? The Scientology guy? When? As I recall Leonard's fatwa to vote Dem-Scum across the board occurred in the lead-up to the 2008 elections. The above outbreak of honesty and humanity occurred in 2013, and, as noted, was quickly retracted.
Now I read here that the local ARISIS shills are routinely dismissing and deleting opposing views to theirs as "white supremacism" and all the rest, from the safe, white, mosqueless haven of a swank suburb in Auckland.
It doesn't get more Orwellian than this. The very organisation that is supposed to be the ultimate, most invincible, philosophically-grounded bulwark against the twins of tyranny and unreason clearly flipped some years ago. Probably just another sordid case of "follow the money," but we don't know for sure. Whatever the reason, it's a salutary reminder that Mallory was more accurate than Roark in his view of what passes for humanity.
If Bernstein were serious in his opposition to Obleftivism he'd make a much bigger song and dance about it, since it is vicious and evil through and through. He's in a much better position than I to draw attention to it. Why doesn't he?! Why is almost everyone who knows better so fucking passive in the face of this evil?!
Linz
Yes, there are further reasons why we see Obleftivists, for sure.
I've just caught a post on F*c*book by an ally Richard Ruggiero. Here we have Andrew Bernstein disagreeing with Peikoff's fatwa (it is 5 minutes from the end). By implication, he too disagrees with the Obleftivists on this subject ever since.
I backed Bernstein's approach here on the question of Islamic Totalitarianism. It has legitimately been pointed out that that term isn't 100% helpful. Islam is accurate.
Bosch says ...
Notice that those who ask, “Who am I to say what Islam means?” have a Lot to say about what Christianity, Judaism and All religions mean. And when pushed on Islam, they say that “Christianity is just as bad”. That’s rich, as they never even admit that Islam is bad. And of course they don’t, since Who are they to say what Islam means? Who am I NOT to say what Islam means? You know why I’ve never asked that question? Because I studied Islam as if my life depended on it, in order to understand what Islam means. In order to be able to challenge it and discuss it honestly. And in the context of an enemy ideology, Ayn Rand never asked “Who am I to say what Communism means?” Leonard Peikoff never asked “Who am I to say what Nazism means?” And No Objectivist should ever ask “Who am I to say what Islam means?” Instead of asking that embarrassing question, find out what the hell Islam means before you continue to discuss it. And it’s not only me who notices this intellectual dereliction. We’re at war. It’s time to get serious, Objectivists.
Hear that, ARISIS Obleftivists? We're at war. With Islam. They declared it. And you're on their side! Mosqueito bite indeed!
https://www.facebook.com/bosch...
Greg
I know that to espouse a policy of containment of these muslime is called racism by any leftist, as Cresswell demonstrates, and is the reason why the Anti-Rand Institute's writers are derogated as Obleftivists.
It's a reason, not the reason. ARISIS Obleftivists oppose containment of Islamosavage migration, to be sure. But they also oppose any containment of migration by any "dinky little savage" (Muslims don't have a monopoly on dinky little savagery) on the basis of an intrinsicist view of rights, so horribly expressed by Binswanker as quoted by me in my Open Letter. I repeat: no Obleftivist has made the slightest attempt to debate this point. Obleftivists just repair to the mindless bromides of Social Justice Warriors about "white supremacism," "white privilege" etc. End of argument as far as Obleftivists and SJWs are concerned. Obleftivists are part of The Filth.
In other news, VeryPC has upgraded to a safer, whiter suburb of Auckland, according to reliable reports. Curious minds want to know why VeryPC has not downgraded to Muslim Mt. Roskill? Who cares about the negligible risk of mosqueito bites, after all?! Gosh, this is so reminiscent of Bwook and Binswanker in their white, Ghated communities. MS-13? What's that?! Jihad in the mosques? Who's Tommy Wobinson?!
Ed
The column in question is here.
Ed...
They're referring to Peter Cresswell. He runs a blog called "notPC" that is very popular with the Obleftivists traitors to Western Civilization.
https://pc.blogspot.com/
What are you talking about?
What site? What article? Who's Cresswell? Who sent you the all-caps email? Etc.
Mollie Tibbetts
The latest victim of a "self-selected for virtue" illegal sub-human to whom not just amnesty but an apology is owed.
Would that some open borders Obleftivist will be the next!
Obleftivist Virtue-Signallers
How pure of one to delete links by posters on one's very PC site to "white supremacist" sites. And to truncate "white supremacist" posts. How virtuous to be against "white supremacism" in the first place! Actually, when was virtue ever so easy?!
The ARISIS Obleftivist cultists have been especially exercised of late. I got a private e-mail from one of the five of them saying, in exactly this form:
Polite investigation revealed that this referred to a post here by someone other than myself 13 months ago. I pointed out to my admirer that the party in question was not me, that there is a disclaimer here on every page saying that no one's posts necessarily align with Objectivism or each other's, and my admirer was welcome to post publicly on the thread in question. Of course, the notion of a free and open marketplace of ideas is alien to Obleftivists—as VeryPC, it would seem, is currently demonstrating anew.
ARIwatch classed as a white supremacist site by Not PC
Cresswell wouldn't host the last third of my post, saying it contained links to a white supremacist website. I at first thought he meant SOLO (and laughed) though now it appears he means, or also means, ARIwatch. Cresswell labelled my quoted ARIwatch commentary "rambling" and plagiarising despite hyperlinks to its source. Author Mark Hunter who posts well researched articles then posted at Not PC to say that ARIwatch welcomed use of any of its material. Cresswell has now deleted Mark's supportive comment there, disingenuously labelling ARIwatch as "white supremacist." I'd like to see any evidence for this, but of course there is none.
To rationalist libertarians, anyone who posts in support of the good things Trump would do and is doing and contrasts this with the malignancy of the Anti-Rand Institute is a white supremacist. The Anti-Rand Institute which, in lockstep, recommends bombing the sponsors of terrorism while complaining that sensible self-defensive policies of keeping the enemy out are "racist" and "nationalist." They would wholesale slaughter, and simultaneously support the enemy hijrah, thereby further endangering the West.
I know that to espouse a policy of containment of these muslime is called racism by any leftist, as Cresswell demonstrates, and is the reason why the Anti-Rand Institute's writers are derogated as Obleftivists.
Jeepers...
followed around on his holiday by journalist scum not worth his spit.
Nice turn of the tables though putting scum in the hot spot. Don't mess with Tommy!
Sensational!
Tommy, out on bail, risks everything to strike back against The Filth. Cowardly, beyond-despicable "mosqueito-bite"-touters such as Obleftivist Yawon Bwook, please note: this is what heroism looks like, as opposed to the grotesque deformities that are you:
Nazi-Loving Soros-Filth Leaves Hungary
Lucky Hungary!
Now will he please abandon OrgOism too?!
https://gellerreport.com/2018/...
Redundant
All anyone needs to do to answer the question, "What is Obleftivism?" is scroll down to my Open Letter to Objectivists: Make Objectivism Great Again—Repudiate Obleftivism! That's where I introduce the term—well, maybe not the first time I used it, but used it with the greatest intent of developing it. I'm gratified to see it has caught hold.
Obleftivism is there defined and debunked. Mr Burroughes, a mealy-mouthed weasel-worder from way back, would be well aware of that, and was just grandstanding in posing the question. No Obleftivist has answered a single point in that article, most notably on the intrinsicist view of rights. That's because no Obleftivist proceeds in good faith. For example, VERYPC claims in what Gregster quotes here that I call all Objectivism "Obleftivism." Nope. I call fake Objectivism of the Yawon Bwook vawiety, funded by the open borders Koch Bros, "Obleftivism." Straight-out lie there from the same component of The Filth, VERYPC, who claimed he once spoke out against the Peikoff fatwa to vote Dem-Scum across the board. VERYPC never did that, never would. Robotic ARISIS cultist. This is no good for Objectivism, and is part of the impetus for my upcoming Authenticism, where no lying or inauthenticity is allowed.
Authenticism is not anti-Objectivism; it is anti-Obleftivism ! Not just in doctrine, but in personal behaviour, where the Obleftivists are notably dishonest and treasonous.
So, what's an 'Obleftivist'?
On Peter Cresswell’s blog today:
No–one cared to answer for 5 or 6 hours so I posted:
I contend that the word originates precisely because prominent Objectivists were once again implying that voting Democrat was preferable to the lesser of the two evils. Leonard Peikoff tried that once, and since then has recanted. The Anti-Rand Institute has since been up to the same tricks. Some of us won't get fooled again.
Here Not PC 31st August 2016 you wrote “Furthermore, Mr Perigo has explicitly repudiated Objectivism, which he now calls "Obleftivism" (whatever that means).”
In a referendum on 23 June 2016, 51.9% of the participating UK electorate voted to leave the EU; the turnout was 72.2%. The voters were tired of Europe’s unelected commissars deciding their fate to the benefit of supremacist invaders.
Leonard Peikoff in 2013:
When faced with Peikoff’s misdirected philosophy, and Brook’s “I’m no philosopher” non-cerebral squirtings, Perigo had no choice but to call it honestly as he sees it:
More recently Yaron Brook has played down the leftwing black takeover and murder of white South African landowners. “According to Brook, the ethnic cleansing of whites in South Africa .. is an issue made up by the "alt-right." The only examples he cites are Breitbart News (!) and Lauren Southern.”
Yaron Brook is incorrect most of his waking hours and to all intents and purposes he is a leftard. Hence “obleftivist.”
Defund ARISIS!!
The ARI support has been dwindling according to news on donations. This will continue at a quickening pace. I see no rehabilitation possible for ARI and especially Yawn “mosquito bite” Bwook.
If there's any decency in the world, donations will dwindle to zero. ARISIS are an unconscionable betrayal of Ayn Rand's unwavering war for reason and against The Filth. They are part of The Filth.
Yawn "I'm no philosopher" Bwook falsities further exposed
Grant Jones called bullshit again on Yaron Brook about four months ago:
Now we see Grant was entirely correct, as has been Lauren Southern in her video from South Africa.
The ARI support has been dwindling according to news on donations. This will continue at a quickening pace. I see no rehabilitation possible for ARI and especially Yawn “mosquito bite” Bwook.
Poster Boy for Obleftivism in Torontistan
"Islam is just a mosquito bite. The weal thweat to Western Civilisation is Donald Twump."
—Yawon Bwook, Obleftivist and Twaitor
https://gellerreport.com/2018/...
Perfect Obleftivist Dem-Scum Pin-Up
They don't come much stupider, more fry-quacking or more evil than this:
"If your blood doesn't boil ...
... you're a waste of space."
Magnificent boiling of blood, with utterly appropriate target: Dem-Scum dirtbag Schumer, one of the lowest sub-humans on the planet:
Lindsey
Secret Societies of Objectivists/Obleftivists?
Anti-White Genocide in South Africa
Edit: I have removed my earlier comment since I couldn't find what I thought led to it.
Airhead Fryquacking IslamoMarxist Moronnial ...
... wins something over establishment Dem-Scum:
Rational Anger from Mark Levin
I commend this to the cowardly slobs who join secret societies to tut-tut about Obleftivism but attack me for getting angry about it, and never dare show their craven heads above the parapets:
ARISIS' Spiritual Father
ARISIS in Sicily Now?!
“Mayor of the Sicilian city of Palermo Leoluca Orlando has declared that Italy should ban residency permits altogether and allow migrants to flood into the country, comparing the permits as morally equivalent to the death penalty.
"The 70-year-old mayor, who recently offered to take in the 629 illegals from the Aquarius migrant transport ship after Interior Minister Matteo Salvini banned it from Italian ports, wants to make his city the 'capital of tolerance', French magazine L’Obs reports. 'We are convinced that migrants are a resource and not a problem,' Orlando told the magazine and added: 'This situation is an opportunity to defend the rights of all human beings to move and live in the place that suits them.'"
http://www.breitbart.com/londo...
Cf:
“Freedom of travel is a right. It is a right possessed by every human being, not just by Americans. The Mexican government or the French government has no right to stop you from entering Mexico or France, and our government has no right to stop a Mexican or Frenchman from entering America."
“The principle of individual rights demands open immigration. Implementing that would mean phasing out all limitations on immigration. Entry into the United States should ultimately be free for any foreigner, absent objective evidence of criminal intent or infectious disease."
—Obleftivist Binswanker
Yaron Again Discusses The Debate With Brook
It's all about getting eyeballs because it will be on Dave Rubin's channel.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?...
Brook and Peikoff defend Peterson's OCON invitation
Staring around the 1:13 mark, towards the end, Brook and Peikoff defend the decision to invite Peterson to OCON. I actually agree with their rationale; they're not giving Peterson a platform to present his ideas, as much as they're debating ideas. Not trying to convert him, but answering and responding. And Peterson is willing to discuss ideas in a civil matter. (Yes, Peterson does say that Rand is "not a great philosopher, and that her fiction is not great." But he does so in a civil manner, so he's welcome. I'm guessing he won't be asked not to make "sweeping denunciations" as a precondition for debate...) They also explain why someone like Peterson, "who is merely wrong", makes the cut, but not the Pope, "who is evil."
Ok, all well and good, in itself. And it's not a knock at Peterson; he's upfront about how he feels about Rand, yet is still willing to go do discuss ideas, good for him. That said, it's a bit rich for them to get defensive, given the history of O'ism towards orthodoxy, in the past, and excommunicating those who spoke to libertarians, etc. That's not addressed in the video, it's the elephant in the room that goes unnoticed, so their offense is disingenuous.
And there is ANOTHER elephant in that room...(geez, we're gonna need a bigger room...) Not only is Peterson quasi-religious, he's a >gasp< Kantian. KANTIAN! Rand called Kant "The Most Evil Man In History." EVIL!
Seriously, though, are they just going to pretend that never happened? Granted, there are even those among the objectivish who argue that maybe she went a step too far, with that. Maybe not, but maybe...and maybe Peterson is not full-blown Kantian, but maybe...but putting aside the rightness or wrongness of her view, the FACT that she made the argument remains, so to invite a Kantian advocate to OCON, while calling the Pope evil...well, that's bound to raise a few eyebrows. It's in the Objectivist DNA...Lobster dominance hierarchies demand it...it beggars belief that they wouldn't at least see the irony in it...
This one is the announcement video. In both, Brook makes clear where O'ism and Peterson are different, and Brook DOES present the differences pretty well. BUT, Brook does admit that he's not up to the task of challenging Peterson on psychology, and will try to avoid those topics.
The idea about riding coat-tails did cross my mind, as well. Brook himself says, at some point, that an appearance on Tucker Carlson does little to boost his ratings, and mentions Peterson's audience and appeal. Some think that this will be a chance for O'ism to come to the forefront as an alternative to Peterson, to the common enemy of postmodernism and PC culture authoritarianism rum amok.
"Hope floats..."
It will be interesting to see how this plays out.
Hmmmm...Nah.
I heard the announcement, but...hah, no, not attending. But I can't deny it, I will be interested to see how it plays out. I started and stopped my Jungian Objectivist project, what, 13 years ago? So to see this happening is a bit surreal.
(Also surprising that Ellen Stuttle hasn't emerged to discuss Peterson, given her interest in Jung. Then again, she's been pretty quiet for some time, now.)
Peterson was actually here in Philly, for his book tour, and I considered going, but decided not to, after reading his book. Anything good I get from Peterson I already find with Rand, but without the contradictions and religious talk. I still find the whole phenomenon fascinating, though.
"The villain of our time ..."
Evil Obleftivist Yawon calls him "this cweature—this vulgar cweature."
The more I see ...
... of this Jordan Petersen, the less impressed I am. Yawon and he are a match made in Heaven! Smart move by Yawon to ride Jordan's coat-tails, and possibly even get the better of the encounter, since JP can't seem to make up his mind about anything. I imagine they'll both be virtue-signalling to the Left, so it will be instructive to see who gets the upper hand in that contest!
Joe, may we assume you'll be attending your first OCON and will have eye-witness accounts for us?
Fake Objectivism meets Fake Right
Jordan Peterson, a member of the Fake Right (a Left-Liberal), is meeting Yaron Brook, a member of Fake Objectivism (an ObLeftivist) at OCON in Newport Beach, UglyCal, this July.
The event will be livestreamed by Left-Liberal Dave Rubin for his Rubin Report.
The event will be viewed by hundreds of thousands, in effect putting up ObLeftivism as a very well visible public target, if you get my drift. An opportunity not to be lost.
#MOGA!
to earn their livelihoods
in Mexico?
--Brant
can't imagine why not
Leftists and Obleftivists
"We are going to be on the alert in these days, so this repressive, racist and inhumane action stops,” said Andrés Manuel López Obrador, the left-wing candidate who leads all polls for Mexico’s July 1 presidential election. “After our movement wins, we are going to defend migrants from Mexico, from Central America, from all the American continent ... who have to abandon their homes to earn their livelihoods in the United States. It’s a human right that we are going to defend.”
https://www.wgrz.com/article/n...
Cf:
“Freedom of travel is a right. It is a right possessed by every human being, not just by Americans. The Mexican government or the French government has no right to stop you from entering Mexico or France, and our government has no right to stop a Mexican or Frenchman from entering America."
“The principle of individual rights demands open immigration. Implementing that would mean phasing out all limitations on immigration. Entry into the United States should ultimately be free for any foreigner, absent objective evidence of criminal intent or infectious disease."
—Obleftivist Binswanker
Freedom to tavel is a right?
You are not free to travel onto my property.
I might even have the freedom--right--to shoot you if you do.
That's called the freedom to get shot.
Maybe if this guy studied Objectivism--that is the philosophy of Ayn Rand--for the next hundred years he might handle the underlying logic, at least when it comes to rights. Leonard Peikoff only needed several decades, not that it did him much good--not when he lets himself be brain buried by this and the other tyro.
Remember what Rand thought about the rights of "savages."
--Brant
ARISIS Intrinsicism Is Winning
Much faux outrage from The Filth, including the reptiles Schumer and Pelosi, about children being separated from parents who've crossed the border illegally bringing their children with them. Trump signs order ending separation but continuing to prosecute those who cross the border illegally. The Filth suddenly "pivots" to faux outrage about "indefinite detention," thus revealing their true agenda: open borders, unimpeded migration. Same as ARISIS:
#MOGA!!!!!!!!!! Repudiate Obleftivism!
#To Iwan With Schumer Pelosi Bwook and Ghate!
#Build Those Walls On Canadian And Mexican Borders!!
Curiouser and Curiouser
Yawon speaks of significant downsizing and the loss of a major donor in his video; he also acknowledges some doubt as to whether ARI will be funding his trips and other ventures. He says it'll be over to ARI how it explains all of this to its supporters. Well, here's the first communication from the new guy. No mention of Yawon or of any difficulties, just a lot of fashionable bromides about "leveraging," "cutting edge" and the like:
End of Obleftivism?
Don't worry, I haven't lost my sanity and begun listening to all of Yawon's videos. The moronnial-type upward-inflecting that he's adopted would be enough to drive me insane quite apart from the Obleftivist content. But someone who does monitor Yawon reports that at 1 hour 2 minutes into the following vid he acknowledges ARISIS is facing "particularly acute financial challenges" right now, that there's been a "significant downsizing" and they've lost a "significant donor." Question: is this related to their descent into Obleftivism or independent of it? If the latter are they so deluded as to think Obleftivism will save them?
In any event, #MOGA!!!!!!!!!!!!
Linz
The other day I saw your response. Then I read your initial post on this thread again. You're correct, and a great post it is.. The Obleftivists are just as dangerous as May's Tommy Robinson-jailing pigs. Don't forget, Yawn Bwook advised against Bwexit so that the English could be wuled by those faceless unelected cunts in Bwussels.
zero chance?
Because we won't stand for it?
--Brant
Send these Somali Mosquitoes ...
... to Yawon's Ghated community:
"Islam is a mere mosquito bite. Stop being afwaid of Muslims. Thewe is zewo chance of what's happened in Euwope happening in Amewica. The weal thweat to Western Civilization is Donald Twump."
—Evil Obleftivist Yawon Bwook, speech- and morality-impeded.
How explicit can you get?
"Donald Trump needs to lose heavily." That's what Bwook the Cwook tweeted last time. If that's not saying "Vote Hillary" I don't know what is. Next time it'll be Cory Booker or Michelle Obama or Elisabeth Warren or Andrew Cuomo or some other sub-human, and he'll say the same thing. Not that his advice makes the slightest difference to the outcome, but it's evil, and is not what should be proffered in the name of Ayn Rand.
Yawn Bwook
He won’t specifically say vote for them; he’ll find a way to say it so his Anti–Rand Institute retains its tax status.
Animal Rights Institute
Donaldo Il Magnifico just called MS-13 "animals." The Left, including MS13NBC, went berserk. Dem-Scum Pelosi said even MS-13 members had the "spark of divinity" within. (Note the similarity with the Binswankerian intrinsicist view of rights.) I don't imagine Obleftivist Yawon in his Ghated community had even heard of MS-13 before I raised it in my Open Letter; now I imagine he'll leap to the defence of these animals just because Twump, "the weal thweat to Western Civilisation," has called them such. Yawon will no doubt claim that MS-13 are mere "mosquito bites" and urge folk to vote for Pelosi/Schumer. So we have yet another name for ARI. Bruno calls them the Anti-Rand Institute; I call them ARISIS (for being Islamenablers); now we have the Animal Rights Institute. Take your pick—all are valid.
Yawon the Shapeshifter
Shapeshifter Yawon in the interview now claims that inequalities are partially caused by our different "genes" and "abilities". Unbelievable. This is the same person who just a few months ago called the entire field of IQ research "evil".
There is such enormous cultural pushback against IQ denialism that even Mainstweam Yawon has to adjust himself, just like any good little Peter Keating knows he must in order to appease and please the crowd.
Obleftivist Twaitor Yawon Attacks Hungawy
Yawon gets apoplectic about Hungary's moves—none of which is totalitarian, let alone "authowitawian" as Yawon claims—to clamp down on the traitor Soros, whose tool Yawon is, while playing down the truly totalitarian evil of the government of China. 18' 00" or so in:
http://writewithcourage.libsyn...
Weal Thweat to Western Civilisation 1980
Faces of Evil
Separated at birth?
Making Hungary Great Again
Hungary cracks down on Open Borders Soros-Filth, causing him to flounce; the one-time Nazi informant says he'll put yet more money into promoting free entry for dinky little savages into UK and US:
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2...
Keith Ellison of The Filth Wears Bwook of The Filth T-Shirt
Dem-Muslim Keith Ellison Wears Yawon Bwook T-Shirt:
"I don't believe in borders."
http://www.breitbart.com/2018-...
Mr Bwook Goes to Washington
Islamofilth and their fellow-travellers will be swarming all over Washington this week for Muslim Advocacy Day. No doubt Yawon will be there telling lawmakers Islam is a mere mosquito-bite and the weal thweat to Western Civilisation is Donald Twump:
https://gellerreport.com/2018/...
PhD
PhD nowadays is a guarantee of moronry. Degrees generally are now worthless, so dumbed down and PC has the curriculum become.
I laugh when I think of one of my heroes, Mario Lanza, who for ten years was the most popular tenor in the world and would have gone on being that had he not done a pre-Elvis Elvis (he was Elvis's favourite singer as it happens). He would have been placed last in a conventional singing competition judged by PhD musicologists—arid fuckwits that they are. He was the Donald Trump of opera: a "vulgarian" genius whom everyone with a beating heart, functioning ears and animate receptors adored. Now it's a "credentialled world," in the words to me of someone who committed the most egregious moral treason I was ever personally privy to—and the world has never been so homogenised in its mediocrity.
Twit-Witter has gone quiet. No response from Yawon or his gwoupies to my challenge. So I've tweeted another one, an easier one for him:
Enemy Invasion -- and Corruption and Infection
"Open immigration" still means one thing and one thing only today: enemy invasion immigration. Canada and Australia admit immigrants mostly based upon merit. So should all high-quality nations. The savages and enemies of the West have no right to invade.
But, MWibbensPHD....
But, MWibbensPHD has a PhD! She way smarter than you meany waycists who demand Israeli style immigration policy for your nation.
P.S. I bet that this "Price is Primary" person is Yawon Bwook.
Yawon and Shapeero
They deserve each other. Two fake-Right fake-Objectivist Californian squeakers who need to go find a veeeeery good speech coach to perform a miracle on them.
Both are mainstream façade distractions impeding truth seekers to enter a real right wing and individualist home of thought.
Two anti-Twump cuckservatives/obleftivists, neo-con warmongers, lovers of immigwation of illiterate parasites, fake-America California aficionados.
#CalExit #Now!
Dunning-Kruger effect
Yawon's minions are morons and too stupid to know they are dealing with a superior intellect in the man whose name is Danger. They think Yawon is a worthwhile philosophical thinker, what more needs to be said?
All heating up ...
... on Twit-Witter. Yawon has taken to "liking" tweets critical of me, in lieu of fronting up to debate me:
https://twitter.com/MRibbensPh...
At the border
1) "The principle of individual rights demands open immigration . . . ."
How? And what is that principle?
2) "Implementing that would mean . . . ."
3) "Entry into the United States . . . ."
The third sentence contradicts the second sentence. If it's the second sentence that's valid the third isn't. If the third is valid then toss the second.
Re the last sentence, you can add in more stipulations, make a personal list, rationalizations to follow.
"Asylum is a right." And welfare isn't?
Etc.
--Brant
this is too easy--Rand was never easy, except to the honest folk who already knew something
(written under the influence of hard liquor)
Hilawious Hystewia!
We're not privy to the apoplexy that must have gone down on election night in the well-guarded Ghated communities of Obleftivists, but if it were anything like this apoplexy from their fellow-Filth The Young Turks it's extremely gratifying and thigh-slappingly funny to contemplate:
Binswankers at the Border
Note the dinky little savages from shithole countries at America's southern border right now are touting signs saying "Asylum is a right." C/f Binswanker:
But ...
... it's your DUTY!
I refuse !!!
I can bring myself to listen Yawon if there is absolute necessity, but Shapeero? Please, no!!
Good Lord!
This came up on my YT channel. Is this what Yawon sounds like these days? A poor man's Alex Jones, scweaming and wasping? What a disgusting noise! And is he set to debate with Ben? Will he demand that Ben wefwain fwom making "sweeping cwiticisms" of him?
As theatrically compelling as it might promise to be, I fear an encounter between a quacker and a shrieker would be altogther too much for my aesthetic sensibilities. Neil and Bruno: you're on notice—if this happens, I'll be relying on you to listen to it and report!
Home of ARISIS HQ Defies Sanctuary California ... Bwook Flounces
Home of ARISIS HQ Defies Sanctuary California ... Bwook Flounces To Puerto Wico
http://www.foxnews.com/politic...
If your blood doesn't boil you're a waste of space.
Amazing ...
... that Obleftivists, professed adherents to Objeftivism, which vehemently opposes the ethics of sacrifism, are so eager to self-immolate at the behest of Muslims, MS13 and other members of The Filth. Let's have some ethical cleansing. MOGA!!
The Anomaly
The anomaly is Open Borders and Mass Immigration. The need to defend national borders is a constant and eternal necessity. We are experiencing the results of deviating from normalcy.
The Founding Fathers knew better than this bunch of Obleftivist useful idiots at the Anti-Rand Institute & friends advocating for national self-annihilation. Open immigration was never part of the deal. The idea of Open immigration is some form of post-modern mental virus. All the "classical liberals" who advocated for it were mistaken. The farther back you go the more they are excused. Those who still advocate for cultural suicide in 2018 are inexcusable.
America and ARI
Brant writes:
"The United States is now Israel."
Exactly.
Brant also writes:
"Ayn Rand would chop off ARI's head and drive a stake through its rotten heart."
Exactly.
self defense
Ayn Rand would defer to the necessity of self defense in the context of a war threatening the very existence of civilization.
There is a reason she never advocated "open borders" for Israel.
Times change.
The United States is now Israel.
--Brant