Ok, why not. It sounds like you guys think I am missing out on something important.

So I take Mark Hubbards suggestion and get some fiction from the library to get started on. Never too old to learn.

that's exactly my point. It is dummies who keep making these stupid regulations because they think everyone else are dummies too - too dumb to run their own lives. Perhaps they may be right....

If Rand can write so crisply with English as her second language, you can surely read it. Don't be such a dummy!

Do what Mark suggests and start with her fiction, for then you will be entertained at the same time as being educated. Go for the Fountainhead.

Paul, a Dummies Guide to, or a computer manual of, is not going to give you a comprehensive philosophical base, it's just going to give you a list but not the critical thought or reasoning process which would allow you to think through the full range of issues that you come across in your life.

From another angle, it appears you've perhaps only tried to read Rand's essays? What about her fiction? (If you like literature). If brevity is important, then you could start with Anthem.

Just a thought.

[Edit: what Claudia said below, vis a vis, thinking philosophically. Sorry. I've got this bad habit of posting to a thread, and 'then' reading the thread. Not rational at all.

 Though I still think the fiction may be a better way into Rand for you.]

Don't worry Elijah, I am lauging my head off reading Matty's comment. Maybe I should go into politics after all. I can be really lazy when I try hard.

Meet up and meet some of the chaps, Yeah that sounds like fun. 

Thanks for your comment Claudia, I have here Ayn Rand "The virtue of Selfishness" in my hand. The reason I have one of her boos is because it is referred to on this site so often. I tried to read a few pages but not a single paragraph gets through.

I feel like a regular Homer Simpson while reading .... "mmmmm donuts"  The writing is that compelling. Mind you, I am not trying to discredit the ideas from Rand.

I scanned the rest of the book but it is jam packed with idea and impenetrable to me. I consider myself educated, well informed and yes English is my second language but a less interlectual tinted "Objectivism for dummies" would go down well.

As with computer software (I am obviously an IT dude) good programs are short and to the point. If Objectivism is worth it's salt I am sure a comprehensive but still usable summary can be written in just a few pages of normal everyday language.

splendid observation, Peter.

The Libertarianz have a leaf out of Lord Palmerston's book when it comes to Government... "Must we do anything at all?"

Dinther, the replies to your original post have been of a jokesy nature...so...no need to get all serious

As was suggested earlier, being a new chum you should pop along and meet some of the chaps, rather than drawing conclusions from a distance.

It's pretty hard to be an incompetent Libertarian. If I were in charge of this country I probably wouldn't run it any differently than you would despite the fact that your undoubtedly more informed than I am. Our working days would be identical:

9 30: Repeal pretty much all laws and regulations

12 30: Lunch

1 30: Do not propose or pass any new laws or regulations

Go home (early?)

Even if we were utterly incompetent, unlike the other clowns, Libz have no intention of running the country.

We'll just get the bastards out of your way so you can.

PC

Indeed to be fair you'd have to compare the clowns in parliament now with the guys running the Liberterianz.

Choice between people who have proven to be incompetent and people I don't know that might me incompetent.

Sounds like an easy choice but strangely enough it isn't. As if it is not easy for me as a Solo reader, just imagine how little chance the Liberterianz have of even being voted in.

But I would love to see a strong contingent of Libertarianz populating the back benches in opposition. 

"I like what they say but it seems they are too busy to use my fees for smokes."

Or maybe for paying fines, issuing press releases, printing newsletters, organising marches on parliament, writing submissions, suing the Prime Minister ...

If you didn't get a newsletter, than that's a stuff up we can fix. If you did, then head along to the Drinking Room on the last Friday every month, and we can talk about what you can do to protect your liberty with the one party who can't afford to be lazy.

;^)

Cheers, Peter Cresswell

* * * *

'NOT PC.'
**Setting Brushfires In People's Minds**

ORGANON ARCHITECTURE
**Integrating Architecture With Your Site**

what an amusing comment... The guys running it don't seem mature enough

Probably quite true in many cases, but there is always room for improvement.

Certainly having third rate school teachers and barely cogent drug abusers in Parliament does not inspire confidence...but on the other hand, it would hardly be unique in our Parliament, would it?

The thing is, all these issues have a philosophical base. Actions follow from Ideas. I notice on your profile that you haven't read Rand and get frustrated with people who just tell you to "read Rand."

To correct the kind of overly regulated society that you seem to be at odds with, you must understand it philosophically. All this problem solving nonsense often comes about because people (politicians, communities) try to fix things from sheerly an immediate and pragmatic POV - without thinking through the wider consequences of the issues. Eg, anti smacking bill and the new parental profiling bullshit.

You see something wrong but WHY is it wrong? HOW can it be corrected? WHAT would be better?

You make an interesting point here: We are a privileged generation. I was born in 1964 and never knew hunger, never suffered the threat of violence and never really have been forced to do things and certainly never suffered the hardship of a war. I believe that because of this we take things for granted. Even think these are our rights. So as a generation we fail to celebrate every day without war, we fail to appreciate our daily meals and we certainly expect things to be pretty much perfect. This is exactly where we go wrong.

It is not a lack of war that causes the complacency, it is a lack of understanding what a life is and who directs it. Western civilization has not shaken off the shackles of religious errors like altruism and superstitious thinking - when the Puritans got off the Mayflower in the New World, the first thing they did was fall on their knees, kiss the ground and thank God for delivering them safely on the other side of the ocean. But it was not God who got them there, it was themselves and the captain of the ship.

Today, socialism operates from the same error: that a life does not really belong to the one living it. God has been taken out of the equation, but two thousand years of altruistic ideology has not.

So, dare I say it to you, read Rand. If you're going to fight for your rights you need to be coming at it from the correct philosophical perspective - and that, like anything of value, takes effort, and it's worth it!

Last year I actually signed up with them, paid my fees and never heard from them again. I like what they say but it seems they are too busy to use my fees for smokes.

To be honest, although I like what the Libertarianz have to say, I would hate to actually see them in parliamen. The guys running it don't seem mature enough to survive the sleazy environment in which politics are conducted.

So that leaves what? I agree with you, I am sick hearing about policies because that suggests that one blanket rule will apply to all. Do we want that? Is it back to fights with my little brother about who has more pudding? 

My opinion is that if you're not going to vote for a libertarian at least find a candidate who has basically no plans or proposals. My position on policies: I'm against them.