Ayn Rand museum coming to Austin?

It didn’t.

But the LATEST round of it did, and Israel was pretty clearly the victim/defender and NOT the first aggressor in this latest round.

Ya know, regardless of whatever issues you and your neighbor may have had in the past, when things are calm, and you jump over your neighbor’s fence and attack your neighbor’s home or family, it doesn’t matter what may have happened between you years before…because at that point…YOU are the aggressor and more importantly, the FIRST aggressor. Any consequences that flow from that are largely the result of the first aggressor’s actions, and violence in self-defense is authorized at that point.

Let me paint you in analogy

Let’s say you adopted a puppy, but instead of letting the puppy grow freely like normal people would, you choose to keep it locked in a confined cage. Let’s say you feed the dog once a day, only enough to where it’s not fully satiated but it’s just enough to not die from hunger/thirst.

As the puppy gets older and eventually becomes a full-grown dog, it starts to get angrier and angrier because it’s existence in this small confined space is causing mental anguish. Not only does the dog not have any way to relieve it’s natural instincts, but it hardly gets fed to where it has to constantly think about food.

When you combine the mental anguish of being confined without an exit, and you aren’t fed adequality, you start getting desperate which leads to considering violence if there is even a small chance that it my improve your circumstances (attempting to kill the owner).

If the dog fails to break out the cage, the dog gets punished until it starts behaving in a way that the owner wants it to, leading back to the status quo of confinement and never feeling truly satiated.

That is essentially what Israel-Palestine is. The same cycle, over and over.

I’m afraid that isn’t an excuse in human law.

To the extent that that’s even a valid analogy (and I don’t concede that; that’s a mischaracterization of what’s going on in the region, in my mind)…

A person bitter about being locked behind bars won’t get any sympathy if he goes on a rampage once released to take out his frustrations on society.

He can’t blame anyone but himself for his outrage, and can’t pass off the blame for what he did on anyone else, much less society, or any person/group with whom he has any grievance, real or imagined.

Ultimately, if he does lash out in such a way…then those lashed out against can use violence to defend themselves, their friends/neighbors, and their property…and the person lashing out is solely responsible and deserving of punishment for doing so.

The lashing out will stop as soon as Israel gives Palestine complete autonomy over its own economy, government and military.

But as I’ve stated before, giving Palestine its own autonomy, even if it’s just within the Gaza Strip, would be a threat to Israel → Therefore, it’s in Israel’s interest to contain Palestinians by also giving them the bare minimum where the world can ignore it (though I would say that 10/7 only gave Palestinians even more global notoriety which makes Israel look evil)

Again, they were given autonomy, and what did they do with it?

Elect an Islamist terror group as their government, and then use aid money, not for development, but instead, to build command tunnels and bombs, and train to commit terrorist atrocities.

Sorry, but there’s no historical revisionism around that.

If you don’t have complete access to your own imports, exports, and electricity, then you do not have autonomy.

I don’t know where your definition of autonomy comes from, but based on Webster’s, that’s not autonomy.

I think that being able to elect the government of your own choosing is autonomy in most people’s mind.

When you have it…and you exercise it in the way that the did…then it’s tough to blame anyone else for what happens as a result.

Let me paint you in analogy

Let’s say you adopted a puppy, but instead of letting the puppy grow freely like normal people would, you choose to keep it locked in a confined cage. Let’s say you feed the dog once a day, only enough to where it’s not fully satiated but it’s just enough to not die from hunger/thirst.

As the puppy gets older and eventually becomes a full-grown dog, it starts to get angrier and angrier because it’s existence in this small confined space is causing mental anguish. Not only does the dog not have any way to relieve it’s natural instincts, but it hardly gets fed to where it has to constantly think about food.

When you combine the mental anguish of being confined without an exit, and you aren’t fed adequality, you start getting desperate which leads to considering violence if there is even a small chance that it my improve your circumstances (attempting to kill the owner).

If the dog fails to break out the cage, the dog gets punished until it starts behaving in a way that the owner wants it to, leading back to the status quo of confinement and never feeling truly satiated.

That is essentially what Israel-Palestine is. The same cycle, over and over.

Yawn. Hard to sympathize with the anti-Israel side for all the reasons stated.

Anyway, @FunkMasterMilluns , since your kids are all being raised on Rand books, what is your take on this? See the Rand Donahue videos I posted.

you brought it up not me

Because you said you agreed with Rand. I just wanted to see/test just how far said “agreement” ran.

Same for Funk.

Again, i emphasized i agreed with most of her views when disregarding American history and politics

I didn’t bring up anything about Israel/Gaza, you did.

Just wanted to see what the parameters/limits of your agreement with Rand were.

I think you took it a bit further than what I was looking for, but I guess I should have expected that.

Anyway, if you don’t mind me asking, what about human cloning? Rand’s official organization has expressed support for that as well. Do you agree with that? And you don’t need to go into detail. Just say yes or no.

I don’t think it’s possible but sure, I’ll support the research that goes into it

1 Like

Interesting.

I remember Clinton pushing to ban it back in the day, and there seems to be a bi-partisan consensus on that.

Depends on the application

If it’s used to affect population demographics then I could see the problem

But to merely achieve cloning and ending it there would still be a scientific breakthrough

We really don’t need to go to mars or search for extraterrestrial life, yet we consider spending billions on it

I think the main concern is people wanting a “mini-me” child, you know, like Jango and Boba Fett.

…spare parts…

OK, for people that are hardcore fans of Alice O’Connor (Ayn Rand).

Has anyone here seen the movie version of “Atlas Shrugged?” The book is over 1,100 pages; I’ve read it, that was a marathon read, so they had to break it up into three films.

I never saw the trilogy, so if anyone here has, how faithful is it to the book?

Most importantly, do they dramatize and portray the entire John Galt “speech” at the end? For those of you that haven’t read the book, there’s a 100+ page “speech” at the end given by the book’s main character where Ayn Rand basically sums up everything she has tried to explain in the prior 800+ pages.

Do they actually show the whole speech? Somebody let me know!

I never said I agreed with anyone, Moronis. I implied her works were important, especially in the context the aftermath of WWII and the Cold War.

Btw, have you every owned a Ford? NAZI!!!

1 Like