Reminder and pointer

Bruno's picture
Submitted by Bruno on Mon, 2020-06-22 15:29

Dear Objectivists,

There existed a time when I listened to the YB show regularly.

I distinctly recall an episode where YB talked about whether public monuments and public squares should exist in a "pure laissez-faire capitalist" society.

The answer was a distinct NO, there should be no such thing as public monuments.

Antifa & BLM may have listened to that very same episode, because it looks like they are acting upon that very sentiment.

-------------------------

"just Ayn Rand's philosophy with ceremony and ritual added"- Anton Lavey on his satanist cult


I

Mr_Lineberry's picture

Think the delays are all to do with the election - let middle America take a good look at the alternative. Once they see the soyboy goblins and horrible females, and were sickened by it, enough was enough.

I think the President is serious about protecting historical things - using troops if required. Apparently he can.

I was discussing this on another site yesterday saying the trap the left wingers always fall into is they are all so odious - and "look" horrible.

There's not a parent in America who wants their child to look like the filth in CHAZ - scruffy, unkempt, oafish, defecating in the street, taking drugs, loser.

Therefore instead of middle America listening to anything they have to say - they've seen enough and turn off.

But imagine if they wore suits, and frumpy dresses for the womenfolk; suddenly their appearance wouldn't scare people, they might listen to what they have to say.

But as usual the left wingers are so stupid and arrogant they never do that ....and so they lose.

Politically it was right not to debate, but let the visuals speak; frustrating yes, but in the end the best thing to do. You don't try and reason with a 3 year old throwing a tantrum.

Much more discussion to come, I hope

Lindsay Perigo's picture

On Bruno's pro-Catholicism post. I certainly shall be posting soon.

More Like It from Orange Man Bad

Lindsay Perigo's picture

https://twitter.com/realDonald...

Scroll down to Address to Young Americans. It was on YouTube but seems to have gone down the memory hole already.

I was in despair last night, looking at my TV as Andrew Jackson almost got toppled by The Filth.

It's touch and go whether Western Civilisation—Christendom, as Bruno rightly notes—can survive these current convulsions. As Bruno observes, our own apparent death- wish is not helping. Neither is the cowardice of jellyfish like Johnson in Britonistan.

Brook's comments on monuments

Jmaurone's picture

Found Brook's comments. From 2017, at the 35-minute mark.

He addresses it briefly as part of a Q&A. His comments are:

Understands the disgust towards pro-slavery/confederate monuments. You have the right to have them in your own private space. Regarding public monuments: does not believe in public property in a free society in general, and is sympathetic to the idea that pro-slavery monuments should instead go to museums. Does NOT think there should be a federal law to say get rid of them. Should be should be up to local communities to decide if they want them, and people can decide to live there or not. Says he CERTAINLY does NOT advocate for the "anarchy of mobs going around pulling statues down. I mean, that's ridiculous, that's violence, and they have no right to do it. Generally, I'm opposed to mobs."

https://www.blogtalkradio.com/...

What are public monuments

Bruno's picture

Public monuments are a reflection of a nation's historical legacy.

Public monuments tell us "this is who we are".

Clearly, if there is no "we" there can be no "who we are", and since there is no "we" allowed in Rand, it is obvious the monuments have got to go. A "government" to a libertarian is just an impartial judge punishing criminals, it is not a governing body at all and it certainly should not put one group over the other, certainly not an ethnic group, hence taking down Columbus makes perfect sense because it offends the minorities, and a government should represent every single individual.

Both are wrong

Bruno's picture

Rand was against public monuments, and so is YB.

I think the reasons are slightly different, but the bottom line is the same, i.e. there should exist no such thing as a "nation-state" properly understood (a state representative of a nation).

However, even an empire (a state governing over multiple nations) has its public monuments, and if it is a smart empire, it will allow "local" (i.e. national) monuments to remain or be built accordingly - such as the Confederate monuments of the South.

Dissing the Roman empire is classic Rand, but very anachronistic today. One cannot but marvel at the advanced Classical civilizations, compared to the modern civilizations which are marching PURPOSEFULLY into self-oblivion.

The ethno-masochist and self-hating impulse of our own civilization goes beyond anything ever recorded in history.

We PURPOSEFULLY deface and repudiate our own civilization's achievements, we plead guilty of "colonizing" the world with our "oppressive" system, and will gladly dismantle it ourselves.

We go beyond anything ever seen, not only do we repudiate our own history, we repudiate "ourselves" and our "systemic white privilige", we condemn ourselves not simply for what we have done but for who and what we are. I challenge anyone to find such an example as this in the two to three thousand years of recorded European history.

Regardless, the fact is that any civilization or nation needs a government, and that government cannot be a simple "night-watchman".

It makes little difference if "the Government" recognizes free speech, or property rights, but these rights are de facto negated by the financial powers that be.

Ever since Plato and Aristotle, we have had illustrious development in political theory, and the "laissez-faire" model is a deadly modern invention with catastrophic consequences everywhere it is timidly attempted.

It is abundantly clear that if Trump had MORE power, not less, he would be able to do so much more to put the USA back into some semblance of proper shape.

It is simply unacceptable, the amount of power that "private" interests have on the governing of the contemporary world. From the media to the mega-corporations, they are all wielding an unseemly amount of control over the world population. It's time to end this charade.

Beyond this pro-Classical rant, the reality is that "the West" is NOT a "renaissance" of Classical civilization, the West is a Christian civilization with Classical substrata.

The barbaric tendencies of the classicals were curbed and remediated by the Catholic Church, the greatest civilizing force to have ever existed (a force which now itself has been severely corrupted). This is particularly true for all the Teutonic nations which were at a pre-civilized stage before they were converted.

The evolutionist/materialistic worldview has severely wrecked Western civilization, and without a return to proper Catholic Christianity I doubt there will be any salvaging it. A Christian (preferably Catholic) + nationalist government will prove to be the best formula, as we see Hungary and Poland being the best resisting forces to the "awokening" cultural devolution of the Anglo-Americans.

One could argue that neither Poland nor Hungary are properly "Western", but the pattern is clear. The Continental Europeans, particularly the Catholics (such as Austria and Italy) are in a better shape than the protestant continentals such as the Scandinavians.

With neither an ethnic link nor a religious one, the post-Anglo, post-Christian, Anglo-Americans will lose everything their ancestors had built.

The new "religion" of Anglo-Americans is the religion of "progress" and "wokeness", both satanist pin-ups, and they will condemn all of the British empire of old to a sad and bloody end.

Anglo-Americans refused to listen to Enoch Powell, they refused to listen to Pat Buchanan, now they can enjoy the result of their virtue-signaling against those ewil wacists.

I fear not

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Trump has retreated into cowardice. No one is protecting the statues. Trump made no move against CHOP. He didn't defend the cops who defended themselves, and instead came up with this Reform bullshit.

Seems

Mr_Lineberry's picture

The President has had enough. Out to protect statues, people will be going to federal prison.

About bloody time, too!

It Is Inexcusable ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... that monuments to the Founding Fathers are being torn down with impunity by The Filth. It is not a time to have arcane debates about whether there should be a public square—a proposition Woke Yawon would no doubt wish to negate—but a time to get behind America's founding ideals, since they are in clear and present danger of being overturned imminently and permanently. That which Obamarx promised in 2008—the "fundamental transformation of America"—is about to happen, actually and irrevocably, in a way that that vicious fuck couldn't have imagined in his wildest wet dreams. Wake the fuck up you dumb Americans!! Of course, the Woke Obleftivists will be saying, "Vote Dem across the board." Well, you were warned about this back in 2006, but took no notice.

Leonard Peikoff, Yawon Bwook and the ARI have blood on their hands. OrgOism is indeed a satanic cult. Just LOOK at the evil Yawon. Reeks of Satan almost as much as his pin-up Soros. And that diabolical speech. The hideous, pre-civilisation squawking and ranting!!

"The Monument Builders"

Jmaurone's picture

"Any reason given for no statuary in such a society?"

I didn't listen to Brooks' answer, but I'm guessing it's based on Rand's essay "The Monument Builders" from THE VIRTUE OF SELFISHNESS, which argued against authoritarian public monuments, and that the virtue of "public" monuments in America is that they aren't "public". Basically, it's a question of taxpayer dollars, but also of the productive vs. parasitic nature of free enterprise monuments vs. socialist ones.

It's been a while since I've read it, and I've been meaning to anyway, with all that's going on, so here are some prominent quotes that get to the core of it:

Comparing Rand's reasoning to Antifa, it's night and day. (She starts off by trashing socialism, so, there's that...)

Here's the core of Rand's objection, contra Antifa:

"Of the two, the material parasite is psychologically healthier and closer to reality: at least, he eats or wears his loot. But the only source of satisfaction open to the spiritual parasite, his only means to gain 'prestige' (apart from giving orders and spreading terror), is the most wasteful, useless and meaningless activity of all: the building of public monuments."

"Rome fell, bankrupted by statist controls and taxation, while its emperors were building coliseums. Louis XIV of France taxed his people into a state of indigence, while he built the palace of Versailles, for his contemporary monarchs to envy and for modern tourists to visit. The marble-lined Moscow subway, built by the unpaid 'volunteer' labor of Russian workers, including women, is a public monument, and so is the Czarist-like luxury of the champagne-and-caviar receptions at the Soviet embassies, which is needed—while the people stand in line for inadequate food rations—to 'maintain the prestige of the Soviet Union.'”

Rand goes on to contrast socialist monuments with American ones:

"The great distinction of the United States of America, up to the last few decades, was the modesty of its public monuments. Such monuments as did exist were genuine: they were not erected for 'prestige,' but were functional structures that had housed events of great historical importance. If you have seen the austere simplicity of Independence Hall, you have seen the difference between authentic grandeur and the pyramids of 'public-spirited' prestige-seekers."

"In America, human effort and material resources were not expropriated for public monuments and public projects, but were spent on the progress of the private, personal, individual well-being of individual citizens. America’s greatness lies in the fact that her actual monuments are not public."

Ayn Rand; Nathaniel Branden. The virtue of selfishness: a new concept of egoism.Signet/New American Library.

Was

Mr_Lineberry's picture

Any reason given for no statuary in such a society?

It sounds yet another example of complete ignorance by these people. If they had the faintest idea what they were talking about they would have looked at societies which were very much like that - Victorian Britain during Gladstone's first term in office, for instance - and know such folk absolutely loved building statues and monuments.

(I would lay an odds on bet at 14/13 that YB and co have never heard of, let alone read about, Victorian Britain, or Gladstone haha!)

Comment viewing options

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