Excellent post.

Thank you.

"The ultimate result of shielding men from folly is to fill the world with fools."

-Herbert Spencer 

But Joe's link didn't work and I didn't want to leave him standing there in his underwear so to speak.

Forgive the intrusion.

---Landon

Never mistake contempt for compassion, or power lust for ambition.

http://www.myspace.com/wickedlakes

Super Hero Babylon

Scott wrote:

"Not wanting to get shot, stabbed, gassed, tortured, or whatever, how many would pick up a gun and fight? Who has the will to stand up and make a difference for the common good, even if it means great personal risk? "Won't someone ELSE pick up a gun and fight while I compose a symphony or..." --whatever? "

This sentiment takes on even more poignancy in light of tomorrow's anniversary of 9.11. Tomorrow Landon and I will run our thoughts on this at Superhero Babylon , but I want to post part of mine in response to your comments, to explain why Todd Beamer is one of my heroes:

Beamer, of course, was a passenger on the fated Flight 93 hijacked by terrorists during the events of 9/11. Beamer was said to have led the passenger revolt on that plane, and though the plane did crash, it did not hit its intended target. (I want to add that I consider the other passengers involved with the plan no less heroic, and it is sad that their names aren't as well-known.) In a day and age where we are told not to fight back, to turn the other cheek, or to even let "the authorities" handle things, the passenger's actions were nothing less than truly heroic. They must have known fear; to them, the threat of terrorism was most likely a distant event not connected to their everyday lives...combined with the added terror of being thousands of feet in the air, with no "authorities" to intervene. Yet that did not stop them. They did not know if they would win, or live, but they did not leave it to fate; they took action. They knew their lives were in danger, but valued the freedom that makes life worth living. They did not give in to terror, did not negotiate with terrorists, they made a stand. They did not debate the meaning of heroism, they lived it. In a world that said heroes don't exist, they proved the opposite. Most importantly, they did not WAIT for someone else to do the "dirty work." They were not movie characters with stunt doubles, they were flesh-and-blood. 

Very astute observations, Robert.

I have often wondered how long the much-desired Objectivist Utopia would exist with many of the people on this very site making up exemplars of the average Utopian citizenry.

Not wanting to get shot, stabbed, gassed, tortured, or whatever, how many would pick up a gun and fight? Who has the will to stand up and make a difference for the common good, even if it means great personal risk? "Won't someone ELSE pick up a gun and fight while I compose a symphony or..." --whatever?

A rational mind understands that violence is a tool--perhaps not a tool of first recourse, but a tool one must have access to nonetheless.

I see a touch of apathy, of lacking the will necessary to preserve one's life, in those who throw their hands up and equate McCain and Obama. I share the frustration of those who hardly find McCain/Pallin a dream ticket. But there is a very clear choice here--namby-pamby commitment to some of the right values with mixed premises rounding out the balance, versus 100% commitment to Soviet values.

I'd call it a no brainer, but you must cast apathy aside and at least ~minimally~ use your brain to see that an Obama presidency will result in Germany and France and other ineffectual, dying Western powers patting our back and shaking our hands due to the new Obama willingness to "go along to get along", whilst our enemies sharpen their knifes and take aim at our back. And domestically, a slower growing government is still preferable to a quickly and vastly growing government, right?

Scott DeSalvo

www.desalvolaw.com
FREE Injury Report and CD Reveal the Secrets You Need to Know to Protect Your RIGHTS!

I wouldn't be so hasty as to dismiss all 'isms' as evil.

Activism is not always equal to botulism for instance.

I think that words like patriot and libertarian have been corrupted in the modern era by those who seek to borrow their original meaning and use it to camouflage their true intentions.

I do think that there is a place for patriotism in the Objectivist Utopia. And I think that the founding fathers had a right to be proud of that which they wrought: the first country in human history that codified liberty and the rights of individuals. And since then, many citizens have recognized that their creation wasn't perfect and worked as hard as they could from within to fix the problems.

To me that is true patriotism: Supporting your country when it is right and working to correct it when it is wrong. Nothing wrong with being proud of something you can rightly be proud of and then working to make it even better (home improvement in effect). What is anti life about that?

As to the form of 'patriotism' that you rightly decry, I think a better word for it exists: Nationalism. Wherein the country is to be supported whether it is in the right or in the wrong. And it is that attitude that has set many 20th Century nations upon a course to war and ruin. Nationalism, in effect, requires one to turn off your brain and let someone else think for you.

Patriotism at its very heart is nothing less that collectivisation on a grand scale. The individual crushed for the sake of some person(s) grand 'vision'; humans are sacrificed like lambs to the slaughter, where the individual lives do not matter as the 'common good' and 'ends' are worth more.

This goes for any other 'ism. Be it under the guise of a ideology, religion or affinity to a given piece of land. When ever the rights of the individual is sacrificed for the sake of the collective - we see the true face of evil in the world.

Reed, can I have some of what you are smoking please?

Patriotism: Love of and devotion to one's country.

webhost101.net - Websites made easy.

Define patriotism.

Wm

This press release is unpatriotic.

webhost101.net - Websites made easy.

Exactly, this platonic attitude about voting is exactly what helps get a Carter elected, it's what helps get the world to a far worse place than it is. And those who think we can survive an Obama presidency have to fully understand that we're still paying for that Carter presidency. And some of those who say they aren't going to vote say so in a petulant way, as if they're going to make the candidates better by Not doing their part. The world is as it is, a strike against voting's not going to change that. And when better people run for office, they will be voted for.
The truth is, if Obama has political power behind his toxic ideas and psychological weaknesses, those who pretend that Obama and McCain are the same will find out the hard way that they aren't. Yes, they're both politicians, and McCain's a weak candidate, but this is the reality, this is the choice, there is no other until there is. There are no better men to vote for today than what we have, and McCain/Palin is where we are and we have to accept that reality and stop dreaming of ideal candidates and do our part in making sure this country doesn't go to hell. The Founding Fathers were so great, their creation so powerful, that we can survive a Carter, and we may survive an Obama, but why one would not do his part to avoid putting this country through that does not make sense to me and never will. I can go on and will later.

http://fawstin.blogspot.com/

... this is an improvement on "Vote Dem-scum across the board," but to imply that whether Obama or McCain wins is inconsequential is irresponsible and irrational. I commend Objectivists' attention to SOLO's press release on this subject, "The Bane of McCain."