Thursday, May 26, 2016

The Day The World Ended

It's the end of the world as we know it, and I feel fine ~ Lyric from the REM 1987 song with the same title.

You probably aren't aware of it, but the end of the world has come and gone. The world ended on 3/6/1982. It was a Sunday. The significance of this day is that this is date on which a mentally ill lunatic named Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum (AKA Ayn Rand) died.

Tom Snyder: I kind of think of this as ongoing, that there is an eternity, and that we are going to be a part of that eternity, that we aren't just corpses in graves when we die.

Ayn Rand: But we are not corpses in graves. We are not there. Don't you understand that when this life is finished, you're not there to say "Oh how terrible that I'm a corpse". What I've always thought is a sentence from a Greek philosopher, I don't remember, unfortunately, who it was, that I read at 16, and it's affected me all my life. "I will not die. It's the world that will end". (Interview is from the 7/02/1979 broadcast of Tomorrow with Tom Snyder. As per Wikipedia, "unique one-on-one exchanges were common to the program").

Rand is clearly talking about the END of the world and not just the end of the world "as she knows it" (to paraphrase REM). And, I don't know about you, but I'm pretty sure the world continued on after 3/6/1982. 34 years (plus 2 months and 21 days) have passed since Rand kicked the bucket. Longer since the day her most loyal acolyte Alan Greenspan (one of the primary architects of the bush recession) placed a "floral arrangement in the shape of a dollar sign" near her casket [1]. Which was strange, given the fact that Rand wasn't there. Seeing as she WASN'T a corpse in a box buried under the earth, it surely was a pointless gesture.

Also pointless was the fact that Rand left a will. Wikipedia says Rand's will "named Leonard Peikoff the heir to her estate", but I'm thinking this info must be erroneous and she did NOT leave a will. Given the fact that Leonard Peikoff ceased to exist the second Rand bit it. Why the hell would Rand leave a will if she knew the world was going to end when she died?

Obviously Rand was nuts. One of the manifestations of her mental illness being her sociopathic belief that the universe revolved around her and that when she died that was the end. Not just for her, but for everybody. A fact Liberal Talker Thom Hartmann commented on during the 5/24/2016 broadcast of his program.

Thom Hartmann: This [Snyder/Rand interview] gives you a glimpse into the mind of a sociopath. Sociopaths genuinely believe that when they die the world ends. That the only life that matters in the world is their life. [The sociopath believes that] in my life, I have no obligation to future generations.

This is why Objectivism, the philosophy devised by Rand, is (as George Monbiot put it) "a manifesto for psychopaths". Under this brain-diseased ideology greed and selfishness are virtues, and poor people are parasites and moochers that should be exterminated. Or, as Rand put it, "nature will take it's course". By which she meant that the parasites will die when the social safety net is completely eliminated (as Rand strongly believed it should be).

George Monbiot, a British writer, known for his environmental and political activism, expressed his thoughts on Objectivism in a 2012 article.

[Objectivism] has a fair claim to be the ugliest philosophy the post-war world has produced. Selfishness, it contends, is good, altruism evil, empathy and compassion are irrational and destructive. The poor deserve to die; the rich deserve unmediated power. ... Objectivism... holds that the only moral course is pure self-interest. We owe nothing, she insists, to anyone, even to members of our own families. She described the poor and weak as "refuse" and "parasites", and excoriated anyone seeking to assist them.

Apart from the police, the courts and the armed forces, there should be no role for government: no social security, no public health or education, no public infrastructure or transport, no fire service, no regulations, no income tax. ... Rand's is the philosophy of the psychopath, a misanthropic fantasy of cruelty, revenge and greed. (A Manifesto for Psychopaths by George Monbiot. 3/5/2012).

Obviously the world would end for a LOT of people if Rand's philosophy were instituted at a governmental level. In that they would die. Alan Greenspan, when he instituted Randian ideology in his capacity as chairman of the Fed (laissez faire capitalism/deregulation), almost killed our economy. Although what he did afterward (going along with bailouts) is where he parted with Randian ideology (or Libertarians will tell you, at least). Rand would have said our economy should be allowed to crash and burn.

Not that I agree with how the bailout were constructed. Instead of rescuing the fatcat banksters, I believe the banks should have been nationalized and the homeowners bailed out. But the way it was done benefited the rich and powerful while many others (members of the middle and lower classes) suffered. Which is one aspect of this crisis that surely would have made Rand smile.

According to the British Journal of Psychiatry "a dramatic spike in suicides between 2008 and 2010 can be linked with the economic crisis" (More Than 10,000 Suicides Tied To Economic Crisis, Study Says). So maybe Rand wouldn't have smiled. Not because people died, but because NOT ENOUGH people died (given how much she hated poor people and wished them dead).

In any case, the world clearly goes on, despite Ayn Rand's departure. Although the world is surely a worse place due to the fact that her sociopathic ideology is "sorely needed right now"... or so Republican politicians like Speaker Paul Ryan believe.

And the Randian goal of maximizing income inequality would surely lead to the world ending for a LOT more people. As, in addition to the 2008 economic crisis driving 10k people to take their own lives, Republican economic policies in general have this effect (Conservative Policies are Driving Americans to Suicide).

Unfortunately for us all Ayn Rand, while she did die and most assuredly is a corpse in the grave, the sociopathic Objectivism lives on. Given that it spawned the political ideology Libertarianism [2], as well as infecting the Republican Party (OST #61).

Which is why I say it's time to make Objectivism/Libertarianism a figurative corpse in the grave. By sending it to the the trash heap of history where it belongs.

Footnotes
[1] Once in government, Greenspan applied his guru's philosophy to the letter, lobbying to cut taxes for the rich and repeal the laws constraining the banks, refusing to regulate the predatory lending and the derivatives trading which eventually brought the system down. ...as Adam Curtis's documentary showed last year, the most devoted member of her inner circle was Alan Greenspan. Among the essays he wrote for Ayn Rand were those published in a book he co-edited with her called Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal. Here, starkly explained, you'll find the philosophy he brought into government. There is no need for the regulation of business... as the greed of the businessman or, more appropriately, his profit-seeking ...is the unexcelled protector of the consumer. (Excerpted from A Manifesto for Psychopaths by George Monbiot).
[2] Even though "Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism has been and continues to be a major influence on the libertarian movement, particularly in the United States and many libertarians justify their political views using aspects of Objectivism", Ayn Rand said (of Libertarianism) "I do not join or endorse any political group or movement. More specifically, I disapprove of, disagree with and have no connection with, the latest aberration of some conservatives". (Libertarianism and Objectivism & The Ayn Rand Lexicon: What was Ayn Rand's view of the libertarian movement?).

Video: Part 2 (on YouTube) of the 7/02/1979 Tom Snyder interview with Ayn Rand (9:55). Quote above begins at 2:53. See all 3 parts here: Part 1, Part 2, Part 3.

SWTD #335, ARHP #3.

33 comments:

  1. We remember you - an American traitor and hate filled bigot - on this American holiday.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Legally speaking I don't believe you can call Rand a traitor. Her views were certainly antithetical to American, however. And she clearly hated most people. The poor especially (who I think you absolutely could say she was bigoted against). So I'll agree with you there, TOM.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was talking about YOU asshole. What a dip shit!

    ReplyDelete
  4. I gave TOM the benefit of the doubt (that he wasn't saying something THAT stupid). Obviously I was wrong to do so. So, dipshit, exactly how am I "an American traitor"?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TOM keeps slithering back up from the sewer he inhabits to drop his hateful tidbits of BS daily. Perhaps one day TOM will find peace within himself. But I doubt it.

      Delete
    2. There surely is SOMETHING wrong with TOM. I keep telling him I agree with him (not about me being gay, admitting to criminality, hating Jews, or me being a traitor to America) but on political issues. Issues such as those he wrote about on his blog Stay A While. What kind of brain disease is it that causes TOM to have nothing but hate for someone who keeps telling him that they agree? Idiot (in an unpublished comment) suggested that I'm going to vote for Trump the bigot because I'm a Jew hater. When the truth is I voted for Bernie Sanders (a Jewish man) in the primary and plan on voting for Hillary Clinton in the General.

      BTW, any thoughts on the post, RN? I'll guess "Zzzzzz". I was wondering if RN, as an admirer of Rand, agreed with her that the world ended on 3/6/1982.

      Delete
    3. Note to TOM: regarding your anger over me not publishing your homophobia (as noted in my comment above)... thanks for reading :)

      Delete
    4. Note to TOM regarding his most recent UNPUBLISHED comment. Eff off. YOU advocated comment moderation so your whines about me not publishing your homophobia are total BS.

      TOM: You can choose comment moderation, invited readers only, or no comments allowed at all. (advice given to the Republican blogger Pamela D. Hart here).

      BTW, thanks for proving once again you are nothing but a dipshit homophobic Jew hater. Your continued accusations of antisemitism against me being 100 percent unfounded. Surely it is antisemitic to throw around this term and apply it when inapplicable, as it devalues REAL anti-semitism. TOM = homophobic Jew hater.

      Delete
    5. Re the UNPUBLISHED TOM comment in which he says I lie about what he says (in unpublished comments)... that's what Steve said. Further proof (not that any is needed) that TOM was the one behind the Steve ID. As for being a coward... As I already pointed out, TOM himself advocated comment moderation. The PROOF is here. Also there (if you check the link) is proof that TOM is a moron. He thinks he can deny that the TOM commenting here is a different TOM from the one commenting on Pamela's blog, even though the unique Blogger ID# matches. Ha ha ha ha ha. What an idiot.

      Delete
    6. TOM is completely and utterly dumbfounded regarding how I figured out he is the same TOM who set up the blog "Stay A While". He also doesn't understand how I could possible have deduced that two homophobes (TOM and Steve) using practically identical language are actually the same person (using two different blogger accounts). It's beyond his understanding because he is unbelievably stupid. Unless it's an act. Hard to believe ANYONE could be as dumb as TOM.

      Thanks for reading, btw. :)

      Delete
    7. Write whatever you like TOM/Steve. Just exclude the homophobic hate and slurs - and I'll publish you. My dishonesty and/or cowardice are NOT what is getting your comments sent to the Spam folder. I will NOT allow my blog to be filled up with your homophobic hate.

      Delete
    8. Sorry TOM/Steve, but I'm going to keep telling the truth about you. Thanks for reading, btw.

      Delete
  5. I was wondering if RN, as an admirer of Rand, agreed with her that the world ended on 3/6/1982..

    No. But it might in 2016.

    You can check out my response to BB Idaho over at RN USA today. It touched on Piekoff and indirectly Rand.

    I'm sure TOM is a nice person BTW, When he is not being a dickhead. Which of late is NEVER.

    Oh, I get the same exact flavor of comments left in my comment box as well. Original TOM is not.

    ReplyDelete
  6. And by the way butt fucking faggot, I never had a blog. I never wrote "Stay A While" but thanks again for proving what a lying faggot you are.

    ReplyDelete
  7. You already got booted from one blog for your lying shit, so go ahead butt fucking lying idiot keep lying and getting booted from other blogs HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, TOM, you're wrong. I'm currently banned from two blogs. Both bannings have to do with me telling the truth. The blog proprietors in question couldn't handle it. And the proprietor of one (the first blog I was banned from) recently banned everyone (zero comments for months now due to him restricting comments to "team members"). So that one doesn't really count anymore, IMO.

      Delete
    2. Telling the truth? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
      Like the lies you are telling about me? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
      You deserve to be banned asshole. Add Pam's blog making it 3.
      By now you butt fucking fag boy!!

      Delete
    3. TOM: Telling the truth? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
      Like the lies you are telling about me? HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA. You deserve to be banned asshole. Add Pam's blog making it 3. By now you [homophobic slur]!!


      A reference to Pamela's blog that concerns a discussion with a blogger using the ID "TOM" (but who INSISTED he is not you)? I'll take that as an admission that it was you commenting on Pamela's blog (and that you lied to Pamela). Not that there was EVER any doubt, mind you (given that the blogger IDs match). And Pamela did not ban me. She removed one comment and I decided I'd had enough. Should I comment again to prove I'm not banned? In any case, TOM is the one who has been banned from several blogs for lying. Also for his homophobia.

      Delete
    4. BTW, a number of times Steve concluded his comments with "by" instead of "bye". "Lies" in TOM's brain-diseased mind are facts he THINKS nobody should be able to figure out. Even when they're incredibly obvious. Ha ha ha. What a dope!

      Delete
  8. WD, do you see a conspiracy behind every tree? Give it a rest dufuss.
    For goodness sake, two years ago you were calling RN an anti-Semite....are you a hypocrite or just a liar?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What is the conspiracy? What do you think I'm lying about? What are you asking if I'm a hypocrite regarding? Also, TOM is the one obsessed with calling RN an anti-Semite. Did you mean to address your comment to him?

      Delete
  9. You think I don't get around and see the comments you make idiot? It was easy, especially since you have her blog listed and could see you visited her blog that day, so yes, I checked it out. And I find it super funny she booted you. HA HA HA HA
    Yes, RN is an anti-Semite according to his own writings. I don't have to make the case against him, he made the case against himself. So the rest of you can be called supporters of an anti-Semite. Live with it fag boy!!

    ReplyDelete
  10. He's saying you have conspiracy theories coming out of your ass, and you do. You are obsessed! You write multiple blogs of hate. You are banned from multiple because of your WACKO behavior. You want to claim I'm somebody I'm not because I use the word by. There's a closed case theory HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. TOM: He's saying you have conspiracy theories coming out of your ass, and you do. You are obsessed!

      Obsessed with what? Cite ONE "conspiracy theory". This should be easy if they're "coming out of my ass".

      Delete
  11. TOM, you think I don't get around and see the comments YOU make? Comments in which you use the same Blogger account? It doesn't matter that you've set your profile to "not available" because the unique Blogger ID# is a part of the URL. You used the same account on Pamela's blog that you're using here. It seems you are too STUPID to understand this. I'm claiming that you are someone you ARE. And that you're Steve is not a case built on your use of one word (although I think the case is strong enough based on you both using "by" instead of "bye" to conclude you are Steve).

    However, you are both obsessed with a stupid comment RN wrote about Jews being able to prevent the Holocaust if only they had guns. You both use homophobic slurs. You both type "HA HA HA HA HA" many times (making you appear seriously demented), etc. (Although I should say that you exhibit these same behaviors no matter the account you use. Using the word "both" implies I'm referring to two different people. I'm not. The "TOM" and "Steve" accounts both belong to the same person).

    BTW, the "according to his own writings" RN comment was stupid. I said so at the time and continue to say so. RN was wrong. I don't "support" anti-semitism. I strongly oppose it.

    For the record it is TOM who is banned from multiple blogs for HIS wacko behavior (homophobia, obsession with the blogger Rational Nation, delusions regarding anyone allowing RN to comment on their blogs being "supporters of anti-semitism", idiocy of denying comments made using the same blogger not all being made by him, etc). All SERIOUSLY wacko.

    Also, Pamela did not ban me. Deleting one comment is not a ban.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Banned? You post my comments, RN posts my comments, I am not banned anywhere you butt fucking faggot.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I reserve the right to publish any comment I choose. A few of your's make it though. You're still banned.

      Delete
  13. Finally, you have proven it is you going around pretending to be me. I knew it, but I wanted you to prove it, Thanks, I will send anyone who questions it to this comment thread.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Where have I pretended to be you TOM? On Pamela's blog? Was that me pretending to be you? The only thing proven is that TOM is a wacko liar who goes around posting on blogs and then denying it was him. Even though he used the "TOM" account and the Blogger ID#s match. BTW, the majority of comments you submit to many blogs (this blog, RNUSA, Progressive Eruptions, The Swash Zone) are NOT published. Some get through (on PE because Shaw accepts anonymous comments), but for you to say this means you aren't banned is total BS.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Notice that you commented again on Pamela's blog, TOM. Proof that you lied when you said that TOM was not you.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Wow! TOM is brilliant! Don't you agree Dervish? :-

      Delete
    2. Maybe. But (if he is), I think he's doing a decent job of impersonating a high-functioning moron.

      Delete
  16. Looks like we're on the same page on thid one.

    ReplyDelete

Unfortunately comment moderation is necessary in order to screen out insanity from an idiot calling himself "Luke" of the "Words And Music" blog (a liar who has made bogus accusations that many others are stealing his posts) as well as homophobic hate from TOM of the blog "Stay A While" (actually the same person).