Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Hitler tried to do that for a whole nation in opposition to lesser nations, ergo, he was a good man.
Its "apathy" that is attempting to destroy this republic (there are to many 30 somethings still living with their parents under the false premise that they are owed their existence from the State, their neighbors through income redistribution, all they need do is vote correctly, we as parents by majority, apparently have failed our children greatly).......evil has existed since time immemorial. Edmund Burke provided the answer in 1795 (truth never evolves.....what was true 1 year ago or 2000 years ago is just as true today or it was never truth in the beginning). Quote -- "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil.........is for good men to do nothing." -- Edmund Burke"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good.
Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral.
Do not expect them to produce , when production is punished and looting rewarded.
Do not ask, “Who is destroying the world?” You are."
-- Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged)
It might be entertaining to see how you derived that out of Rand's quote. Irrationality always has entertainment value.
But, it wouldn't be conducive to others who might be attempting to actually discuss the quote.
Hitler, Stalin, Mao and others are perfect examples of "upper echelon sociopaths" who seize power for their own ends. What excuses they may use matter not at all. Ideology, religion and ethnicity are merely manipulative devices for them.Why is Hitler the "go-to" personification of evil. Many have killed many more for less noble reasons.
You say that everytime her name comes up. No one has cared yet...
What about if it is done not for the welfare of the state but for the welfare of the individual? In other words, if Hitler had done those things for his own good, wouldn't what he did be defined as good under Rand's philosophy?If you were at all familiar with Rand's work, you would know she abhors collective statism above all things.
The welfare of the state is always subordinate to the welfare of the individual.
To destroy one, or millions, to ensure the welfare of a collective is precisely the opposite of Ms. Rand's philosophy.
What about if it is done not for the welfare of the state but for the welfare of the individual? In other words, if Hitler had done those things for his own good, wouldn't what he did be defined as good under Rand's philosophy?
Still not seeing how if Hitler did those things for his own good and not the good of the state that that wouldn't be defined as good under Rand's philosophy.No. The sacrifice of one person (physical or economic) to benefit or even save another is evil in Ms Rand's philosophy.
The state has no right to a person's life or their property in an Objectivist view.
No person is entitled to the work, the ideas, the property, or the life of another.
That doesn't eliminate altruism. A person is perfectly justified in giving to another as a voluntary act. Because that act, if truly voluntary, benefits the giver as well as the recipient (perhaps even more).
But, a coerced or forced sacrifice is evil in the Objectivist view.
Still not seeing how if Hitler did those things for his own good and not the good of the state that that wouldn't be defined as good under Rand's philosophy.
I've read several of her books but I put them in the genre of Fantasy. Classic tales of good vs. evil in a world that does not reflect the real world with people that have been projected into 2 dimensions.If you were at all familiar with Rand's work, you would know she abhors collective statism above all things.
The welfare of the state is always subordinate to the welfare of the individual.
To destroy one, or millions, to ensure the welfare of a collective is precisely the opposite of Ms. Rand's philosophy.
Then you're being obtuse.
"No person is entitled to the work, the ideas, the property, or the life of another."
No person could interpret, imprisoning and killing millions of people, looting most of Europe, and causing more death and destruction than any other single person in History as not violating that very simple precept.
I'm not being obtuse. You aren't being objective. If Hitler did those things for his own good (i.e. selfishness) according to Rand's philosophy that would be defined as good.Then you're being obtuse.
"No person is entitled to the work, the ideas, the property, or the life of another."
No person could interpret, imprisoning and killing millions of people, looting most of Europe, and causing more death and destruction than any other single person in History as not violating that very simple precept.
It is less than clear that "religious people" have more than the most tenuous connection with "God".God is destroying the world. Just look at all the messed up religious people.
The "World" does not belong to the people......its belongs to God and is subject to the natural laws of physics that He put in place to regulate His creation. Its more than arrogant to suggest the "remainder" is greater than the whole from which it came. The math simply does not add up. Man was created for the "glory" of God not the inverse.God is destroying the world. Just look at all the messed up religious people.
The different bibles and korans... have messed people up and you still quote it. We're made in god's image, so he must be a real asshole.The "World" does not belong to the people......its belongs to God and is subject to the natural laws of physics that He put in place to regulate His creation. Its more than arrogant to suggest the "remainder" is greater than the whole from which it came. The math simply does not add up. Man was created for the "glory" of God not the inverse.
The reason that societies around the world are falling...........not the world, but the inhabitants therof are failing is once again.........a matter of apathy and self centeredness. There is something missing.......the innate need for God to which we are all born, crying Abba, Abba! Its man that needs God..........God does not need man. (Acts 17:24-25)
Failure comes when God is removed from the equation. Plain and Simple. Why? "I know O Lord, that a man's way is not in himself, nor is it in man who walks to direct his own steps." -- Jer. 10:23
The fact that God does not need man is also reflected with the Psalsms, "For every beast of the forest is Mine........and the cattle on a thousand hills. I know all the birds of the mountains, and the wild beasts of the fields are Mine......for the world is mine and all its fulness...." -- Ps. 50:10-12.
Example: When man abides by the founding principles of this nation.........he finds success and happiness, when he strays from those founding roots.......chaos always insues. This nation was constructed upon a philosophy grounded in the Judeo/Christian principles of Gloryifing the God of Creation and the attempt to walk in the path as directed through His revelations to mankind. Its reflected in our legal system, our government structures, and the faith that once existed in this republic.
This nation needs guidance, a guidance that can come only by a restoration of our founding principles.
