Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:26:38 -0400 To: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> From: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> Subject: Comments On What's Wrong With Objectivism? Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 21:49:56 -0700 To: freematt@coil.com From: "Richard B. Boddie" <rboddie@earthlink.net> Subject: Re: LIBERTYLOOP: What's Wrong With Objectivism?
[Note from Matt: Liberty-Loop is an Australian/New Zealand libertarian oriented mailing list.]
>From: "Gayle" <gwdean2@home.com>
>To: <libertyloop-list@free-market.net>
>Subject: Re: LIBERTYLOOP: What's Wrong With Objectivism?
>Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:54:38 -0400
>
>I think Binswanger and Peikoff were just echoing Rand's position
>on gun control: In the taped "Raymond Newman Journal," Newman
>asks Rand about gun-control. The dialogue follows:
>
>Newman: "You have stated that the government ought to be the
>exclusive agent for the use of force under Objective rules of law
>and justice and yet at the same time today we see an alarming
>rise in violent crimes in this country and more and more people
>applying for gun permits and wanting to protect themselves. Do
>you see this as a dangerous time, number one and do you favor
>any form of gun control laws?
>
>Rand replied: "I have given it no thought at all and off-hand I
>would say no the government shouldn't control guns except in
>very marginal forms, I don't think its very important because I
>don't think it is in physical terms that the decisions and the fate
>of this country will be determined. If this country falls altogether,
>if the government collapses bankrupt, your having a handgun
>in your pocket isn't going to save your life. What you would
>need is ideas and other people who share those those ideas
>and fighting towards a proper civilized government and not
>handguns for personal protection."
>
>Gayle Dean
### From: "L. Neil Smith" <lneil@ezlink.com> Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 03:20:56 -0600 Reply-To: smith2004-discuss@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [smith2004-discuss] What's Wrong With Objectivism?
I used to have vehement arguments in the late 60s or early 70s with an Orthodox Objectivist here in Fort Collins named Paul Vanderveen. He maintained that since it had been decreed that government was to have a monopoly on the use of force, gun control -- even outright confiscation -- was "a legitimate police function". How that squared with the Non-Aggression Principle (which Rand endorsed -- I know, because she was the first source I heard of it from) he didn't explain.
He went off to grad school or something in California and wrote for cult publications for a while. I haven't heard anything about him for a decade or more. I, of course, went on to spread my own version of the freedom philosophy, in my own charming and inimitable way.
Understand that my philosophical backbone was and remains as Randite as his was (we met at one of those famous old Ayn's Greatest Hits record-listening sessions), but I was a heretic from the beginning because I had a sense of humor -- and used it. I also read Roy Childs' "Open Letter to Ayn Rand" carefully and decided he was right that she was wrong -- and completely self-contradictory -- about the very existence of government.
She was completely correct about a whole lot of other things, of course, but she never did quite seem to get the knack of _living_. Oddly enough, I understand and sympathize with that to some degree.
I would suggest that we (whoever the hell "we" are) simply ignore the tiny and insignificant groups of Orthodox (Peikoffian) and Reform (Kelleyite) Randites, adhere to the NAP, and get on with being what we are.
Aunt Alice used to call us "heepies of ze rrright".
N. -- ...................................................................... L. NEIL SMITH is the award-winning author of more than 20 novels about individual liberty and the right to own and carry weapons. Read more than 80 articles and speeches: buy _LEVER ACTION: ESSAYS ON LIBERTY_, for $21.95+$6 S&H from <http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/leveraction.html>
Order _HOPE_ (with Aaron Zelman), get free stuff and a special offer: click on: <<http://www.jpfo.org/hope.htm> or read about MAKING A MOVIE of _The Mitzvah_ the action-adventure thriller by Aaron Zelman and L. Neil Smith -- and maybe even help get it done! -- click on <<http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/mitzvahmovie.html>
PRE-ORDER L. Neil Smith's long-awaited _THE AMERICAN ZONE_ plus a new _trade_ paperback edition of _The Probability Broach_ from Tor Books, coming in November and December, 2001, respectively, by clicking on: <http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/americanzone.html> <http://www.webleyweb.com/lneil/lns_tpb-3.html>
AUTOGRAPHED COPIES of _Lever Action_, _Hope_, _Forge of the Elders_, _Henry Martyn_, _The Mitzvah_, and a few others are available from the author. For details, write to him at <mailto:lneil@ezlink.com>.
### From: RBE <rbe@flash.net> Reply-To: rbe@flash.net Organization: Desert Silver To: Matthew Gaylor <freematt@coil.com> Subject: Re: What's Wrong With Objectivism? Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 19:53:49 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 14 October 2001 7:04 pm, Matthew Gaylor wrote: > [Note from Matthew Gaylor: I'm not really asking what's wrong
> with the philosophy founded by novelist Ayn Rand- But I've
> noticed for many years that many of the adherents of
> Objectivism somehow manage to hold beliefs contrary to
> freedom. In the mid 80's I attended a talk given by Dr. Harry
> Binswager, a leading Objectivist scholar, where I posed a
> question on gun control to him during the Q&A: His answer was
> that he thought semi-automatic firearms should be banned as
> nobody should have any use for such weapons. Then shortly
> after the Oklahoma City bombing Dr. Leonard Peikoff, perhaps
> the leading disciple of Ayn Rand, mentioned that every militia
> unit should be infiltrated from top to bottom by the FBI and
> he voiced similar calls for gun control. He also advocated
> that Objectivists vote for Bill Clinton. My friend's at the
> time referred to him as Police State Peikoff. Now we have The
> Objectivist Center, founded by David Kelley, calling for a
> national ID card. I'm at a loss to determine what is the
> moral philosophical basis for requiring US citizens to have a
> national ID?]
Perhaps I'm a bit odd, but I have long believed that Objectivism, as practiced by the followers of Ayn Rand, embody that philosophy that she fled the Soviet Union to escape.
- -- Robert Black Eagle Bus. Site: http://www.desertsilver.com Protect your email with PGP or GNUPG -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org
iD8DBQE7yjOdtjSYKkYJrmcRAuqeAJwLNjuiRgvugX/Oa+NKJW5VGkPjZgCfe5XX ND3+fIVtBxAN3FFGs13e5x8= =miQ9 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
###
From: "Brett Allen" <bsalists@yahoo.com> To: "Matthew Gaylor" <freematt@coil.com> Subject: RE: What's Wrong With Objectivism? Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 21:58:28 -0400
Matt -
In reference to Leonard Piekoff, he has appeared a couple of times on "The O'Reilly Factor" lately arguing that we would be morally justified to use Nuclear weapons on any country that harbors terrorists. The point, apparently, is that if you nuke everyone in the middle east there will be no one left to attack Americans. Also, he says our only concern should be Americans; the number of foreign casualites is irrelevant.
Kind of scary, if you ask me.
### From: WalkerBill@aol.com Date: Sun, 14 Oct 2001 22:22:03 EDT Subject: Re: What's Wrong With Objectivism? To: freematt@coil.com
> > In the mid 80's I attended a
>talk given by Dr. Harry Binswager, a leading Objectivist scholar,
>where I posed a question on gun control to him during the Q&A: His
>answer was that he thought semi-automatic firearms should be banned
>as nobody should have any use for such weapons.
I remember Binswanger, probably from the same talk. I asked him about property rights in the asteroid belt and he said that he didn't know whether there should be private property off Earth. (Wasn't Galt rescued by Dagny et. al. with semiauto pistols?)
###
From: GkLtft@aol.com Date: Mon, 15 Oct 2001 13:09:20 EDT Subject: Re: What's Wrong With Objectivism? To: freematt@coil.com
Dear Matt,
No matter how reasonable an individuals philosophy of living may be, they will still succumb to emotionalism from time to time.
For instance, Libertarians (many of whom - like me - consider themselves to be Objectivists) oppose the use of force for political ends, yet we may recognize the need to use force to append individuals who advocate the use of such force. In fact, a Libertarian government has the sole responsibility to use force against those who would use force for their own gain.
In the face of the horrific events of Sept 11, 2001, it is not really very surprising to hear normally rational people speak out with emotion instead of reason. The key is will they give up their reason for emotion over time. Check back with the individual as time passes and see what they say then.
I am somewhat encouraged to note it was not David Kelley who wrote words of encouragement to those who think an ID card is an effective way to stem any illegal activity. If such a card could, the wisest move would be to give them to criminals not the rest of us. Maybe a tattoo on the forehead. :)
Perhaps some satire and silly ideas on the subject of ID cards will bring Robbins to his senses.
Liberty, gail lightfoot California Libertarian
###
Subscribe to Freematt's Alerts: Pro-Individual Rights Issues Send a blank message to: freematt@coil.com with the words subscribe FA on the subject line. List is private and moderated (7-30 messages per week) Matthew Gaylor, (614) 313-5722 ICQ: 106212065 Archived at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fa/