Meanwhile, in Jerusalem...

[F250 28691]

6 hours ago, elfenix said:

this is incorrect.  it really is only about 80 years old.  historically speaking jews and muslims lived about as harmoniously together as two different groups ever have

More like 100 years. The fighting started shortly after the British issued the Balfour Declaration during WWI. The Ottomans were out and the British made it publicly known that the Jewish minority in Palestine would have their own nation as well as Jews from the Diaspora without any plans for the actual majority of the population in Palestine. I think the fighting started a couple of years after the Declaration was made in 1917.

European Imperialism, the gift that keeps on giving.

 

 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

1 hour ago, hpslugga said:

That’s because a ton of people read Ayn Rand. As John Oliver said, how is that still even a thing?

Can you cite an anti-Arab quote from Ayn Rand? I can’t. She was an atheist and was critical of all “mystics” but I don’t recall Arabs coming up in her writing at all. She was definitely, vocally anti-Christian and that’s always been an impediment to her gaining more traction in Republican circles. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by WhatTheBuck

[hpslugga 4044]

11 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Can you cite an anti-Arab quote from Ayn Rand? I can’t. She was an atheist and was critical of all “mystics” but I don’t recall Arabs coming up in her writing at all. She was definitely, vocally anti-Christian and that’s always been an impediment to her gaining more traction in Republican circles. 

She said she sided with the Israelis because the Arabs were “totally primitive savages.”

 

[Reynolds Woodcock 4669]

15 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

She said she sided with the Israelis because the Arabs were “totally primitive savages.”

 

Yeah, but other than that, can you?!

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

21 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

She said she sided with the Israelis because the Arabs were “totally primitive savages.”

 

So not reading Ayn Rand like you said. 

[hpslugga 4044]

5 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

So not reading Ayn Rand like you said. 

Oh I’ve done that too, but like that video, that was about two and a half minutes of nauseating drivel that I deeply regret exposing myself to.

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

1 minute ago, hpslugga said:

Oh I’ve done that too, but like that video, that was about two and a half minutes of nauseating drivel that I deeply regret exposing myself to.

If I thought it was worth my time I could quote a whole lot of anti-Christian stuff from her actual writing. You said too many people read Ayn Rand when apparently you meant too many people watched her on Phil Donahue. 

[Brian Fantana 6668]

Ayn Rand was a world class moron. I question anyone that reads Atlas Shrugged and doesn't immediately write her off as a total idiot. Her writing was awful, objectivism is literally philosophy for chimps and the reason no one takes "libertarians" seriously.

[Onboard 2.0 9083]

13 hours ago, elfenix said:

it's amazing how much shit winston churchill fucked up.  he's arguably responsible for the soviet union and the great depression.

Uhh lets see your work here on that one. The soviet Unions future was baked in with the formation of Rus.

[hpslugga 4044]

6 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

If I thought it was worth my time I could quote a whole lot of anti-Christian stuff from her actual writing. You said too many people read Ayn Rand when apparently you meant too many people watched her on Phil Donahue. 

No, I literally mean too many people read her insipid drivel. 

When you consider the utter nonsense that objectivism is (btw, I would encourage those curious about it to juxtapose its tenets with the tenets of LaVeyan Satanism and try telling me they’re not identical), even that handful of characters in that video who admit to reading her verbal effluvia constitute “too many people” who read her.

As for anti-Christian and anti-religion works, there are far better authors and intellectuals who’ve opined on that topic than her. 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

4 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Ayn Rand was a world class moron. I question anyone that reads Atlas Shrugged and doesn't immediately write her off as a total idiot. Her writing was awful, objectivism is literally philosophy for chimps and the reason no one takes "libertarians" seriously.

I question whether you actually ever read it. Especially whether you ever did more than skim John Galt’s monologue. It’s idealistic but I don’t have a problem with it. The problem is that no one who calls themselves a “Libertarian” abides by it.

It’s a work of fiction. If you read her books on objectivist philosophy, that’s where she really comes across as a fraud. But it’s weird how her fictional works receive such an intense negative reaction from certain people on the left and such an intense positive reaction from certain people on the right. It always makes me wonder if they’ve really ever read the books.

Ironically, the government and propagandists that she describes in The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged much more closely resemble those on the right in the real world in recent memory.

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

6 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

No, I literally mean too many people read her insipid drivel. 

When you consider the utter nonsense that objectivism is (btw, I would encourage those curious about it to juxtapose its tenets with the tenets of LaVeyan Satanism and try telling me they’re not identical), even that handful of characters in that video who admit to reading her verbal effluvia constitute “too many people” who read her.

As for anti-Christian and anti-religion works, there are far better authors and intellectuals who’ve opined on that topic than her. 

Watching some videos aren’t the same thing as reading. 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

Also, what’s your problem with Anthem?

[hpslugga 4044]

29 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Watching some videos aren’t the same thing as reading. 

You’re missing the point. Let me try it another way:

I. Did. Read. Atlas. Shrugged

if it were made out of a cloth, I wouldn’t use it to dust my furniture. Why there are people who praise that silliness is beyond me. I cannot fathom why a single person would find it terribly useful to their lives, let alone as many in that video...and those are just major public personalities. 

[WhatTheBuck 28713]

12 minutes ago, hpslugga said:

I. Did. Read. Atlas. Shrugged

Is your copy in hardcover or paperback and how many pages long is John Galt’s monologue in it? Did you read it all at once? I’d be interested in hearing your critique about it.

[MoJames 8241]

[Reynolds Woodcock 4669]

If you fucks start analyzing Ayn Rand’s pseudo-intellectual drivel I swear to fucking god. 

[Js1 85110]

Start??

[hpslugga 4044]

35 minutes ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

If you fucks start analyzing Ayn Rand’s pseudo-intellectual drivel I swear to fucking god. 

I'll be brief and this is the only thing I'll say about it because it merits even less and I'm being extremely generous to @WhatTheBuck to even consider recalling it.

 

1 hour ago, WhatTheBuck said:

Is your copy in hardcover or paperback

Wasn't mine. Borrowed it from a relative (cousin who's a big fan).

Quote

and how many pages long is John Galt’s monologue in it?

I didn't measure that but I distinctly remember having a birthday go past while reading it.

In seriousness, I'd venture roughly 50-60 pages. 

Quote

Did you read it all at once? I’d be interested in hearing your critique about it.

The speech? It was perplexing in its preposterosity compounded by its verbosity. I do remember a small sliver of a passage that describes mystics and dictators being intertwined and that was the only thing I agreed with (to the extent that "mystics" is synonymous with "religious," which was my impression).

What I objected to was her insipid insistence on this false dichotomy of anarcho-capitalism vs. state socialism, which is in a nutshell what he was talking about when she wrote of "brother-love morality" and a host of other garbage denouncing the concept of sacrifice and caring for others. I have seen many awful takes on socialism over the years, and hers were just about the worst. Or to put it another way, to the extent I did see anything worse than that, it at least had to have been someone else's awful takeaway from one of Rand's works, namely this one. The reason? That woman made absolutely no room for the possibility that we are a naturally social species and that being communitarian is a completely voluntary concept. She always made communitarianism to be synonymous with totalitarianism imposed by a powerful state, which is just infinite in its stupidity.

“I swear—by my life and my love of it—that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”

Like Hitchens said in his critique of Rand, such an attitude requires no further reinforcement. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by hpslugga

[wildcat09 29258]

We're going to have to nuke the whole board if this Rand talk continues.

[hpslugga 4044]

^
I agree, and I'll offer no further comment to it.

Back to the original subject, I would urge anyone interested to head to democracynow.org and examine the material they have on the subject, which by now is all over the place. There are interviews with Angela Davis, Noura Erekat and Gideon Levy in particular that allow for us to see the real world consequences of the IDF's actions rather than listening to US talking heads pontificate about "Israel has the right to defend itself" as a way to offer apologetics for the occupation.

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

7 hours ago, Brian Fantana said:

Ayn Rand was a world class moron. I question anyone that reads Atlas Shrugged and doesn't immediately write her off as a total idiot. Her writing was awful, objectivism is literally philosophy for chimps and the reason no one takes "libertarians" seriously.

I think most normal red-blooded American boys go through a phase-- around 16-21 let us call it-- where we can get caught up in Ayn Rand and really enjoy Atlas Shrugged (or The Fountainhead, in my case) and it scratches that post-pubescent itch. It is folly, of course, but it helps us to try and make sense of what is going on with ourselves.

Our bodies are grown to look like a full grown man, but our brains are not all that well developed at all.

We have brawn without any wisdom.

We are coursing with hormones and aspirations and ambitions-- aspirations and ambitions which society is encouraging us to grab as rightful heirs-- and we aren't sure how to exactly be masters of the universe yet. Ayn Rand's fiction helps to gird us from ourselves in the comfort or a library or bedroom, before we have to go out onto Wall Street or wherever and actually get our nose bloodied.

That was the old world of the 90's and 00's though, when being "Pale, Yale and Male" was the way. The world has changed though and I'm not sure that Ayn Rand's pacifiers are needed. Maybe or maybe not it's Joe Rogan's podcast or some influencer's TikTok page has filled the void, but rest assured, something has.

Edited May 20, 2021 by DonkeyCigars

[F250 28691]

54 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

I think most normal red-blooded American boys go through a phase-- around 16-21 let us call it-- where we can get caught up in Ayn Rand and really enjoy Atlas Shrugged (or The Fountainhead, in my case) and it scratches that post-pubescent itch. It is folly, of course, but it helps us to try and make sense of what is going on with ourselves.

Our bodies are grown to look like a full grown man, but our brains are not all that well developed at all.

We have brawn without any wisdom.

We are coursing with hormones and aspirations and ambitions-- aspirations and ambitions which society is encouraging us to grab as rightful heirs-- and we aren't sure how to exactly be masters of the universe yet. Ayn Rand's fiction helps to gird us from ourselves in the comfort or a library or bedroom, before we have to go out onto Wall Street or wherever and actually get our nose bloodied.

That was the old world of the 90's and 00's though, when being "Pale, Yale and Male" was the way. The world has changed though and I'm not sure that Ayn Rand's pacifiers are needed. Maybe or maybe not it's Joe Rogan's podcast or some influencer's TikTok page has filled the void, but rest assured, something has.

Sounds fairly accurate. During that period it was common for young dudes to be obsessed with some combination of Rand, Fight Club, American Psycho, The Prince, Art of War and a dash of Nietzsche. Testosterone fueled young males over indulging on what they mistook for manliness. It was the literature equivalent of Polo cologne.

 

 

[MoJames 8241]

4 minutes ago, F250 said:

Sounds fairly accurate. During that period it was common for young dudes to be obsessed with some combination of Rand, Fight Club, American Psycho, The Prince, Art of War and a dash of Nietzsche. Testosterone fueled young males over indulging on what they mistook for manliness. It was the literature equivalent of Polo cologne.

 

 

Don't you talk shit about Fight Club or American Psycho.

[HornOnTheBayou 8881]

18 hours ago, elfenix said:

this is incorrect.  it really is only about 80 years old.  historically speaking jews and muslims lived about as harmoniously together as two different groups ever have

I apologize for interrupting the Ayn Rand talk, but I just want to say thank you for this post. I'm sick and tired of the people who throw up their hands and say "Well Jews and Muslims have been fighting for thousands of years. Nothing we can do about it." Bullshit. This is a modern problem with modern causes.

[Brian Fantana 6668]

4 hours ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I question whether you actually ever read it. Especially whether you ever did more than skim John Galt’s monologue. It’s idealistic but I don’t have a problem with it. The problem is that no one who calls themselves a “Libertarian” abides by it.

It’s a work of fiction. If you read her books on objectivist philosophy, that’s where she really comes across as a fraud. But it’s weird how her fictional works receive such an intense negative reaction from certain people on the left and such an intense positive reaction from certain people on the right. It always makes me wonder if they’ve really ever read the books.

Ironically, the government and propagandists that she describes in The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged much more closely resemble those on the right in the real world in recent memory.

I have read it twice, as a teenager and as an adult. It certainly appealed to me a little bit as a teenager. I don't have a "problem" with it, so to speak, her writing is just terrible.

The strong negative reaction I have to her is mostly about objectivism. The libertarian comment has little to do with book. It's interesting how defensive you're being about it, though.

Edited May 20, 2021 by Brian Fantana

[Doc Sam Beckett 5784]

I'm going to need a few Ayn Rand YouTube videos from the Seedman before I comment 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

37 minutes ago, F250 said:

Sounds fairly accurate. During that period it was common for young dudes to be obsessed with some combination of Rand, Fight Club, American Psycho, The Prince, Art of War and a dash of Nietzsche. Testosterone fueled young males over indulging on what they mistook for manliness. It was the literature equivalent of Polo cologne.

 

 

Embarrassingly enough, you've just deduced my late teenage years by describing me perfectly, down to the Blue Polo Sport bottle. I think Gen Z has a word for this feeling: Cringe.

[Reynolds Woodcock 4669]

2 minutes ago, DonkeyCigars said:

Embarrassingly enough, you've just deduced my late teenage years by describing me perfectly, down to the Blue Polo Sport bottle. I think Gen Z has a word for this feeling: Cringe.

Yep, I liked virtually all of those things sans the cologne. Hell I think (ok I know) I still have my 1957 hard cover Atlas Shrugged because my grandfather gave it to me as a young teen.  But then I grew the fuck up, which is what I suggest any Ayn Rand acolyte do.

[F250 28691]

28 minutes ago, HornOnTheBayou said:

I apologize for interrupting the Ayn Rand talk, but I just want to say thank you for this post. I'm sick and tired of the people who throw up their hands and say "Well Jews and Muslims have been fighting for thousands of years. Nothing we can do about it." Bullshit. This is a modern problem with modern causes.

Yes, this is a problem created in the 20th century not something that has been boiling for thousands of years. The biggest obstacle to resolving this modern problem with modern solutions is U.S. foreign policy. Unfortunately U.S. policy towards the Palestinian issue heavily leans towards Pro-Zionism with bipartisan support.

The GOP has a huge part of the base that is Zionist for religious reasons and they will not be changing anytime soon. The Democratic party doesn't have that base but still the leader of the party recently echoed the "Israel has the right to defend itself" canard. If both major political parties look the other way regarding Israel's crimes against humanity while funding said crimes, what is the solution? Obviously breaking up the bipartisan support but that would require a significant number of Democratic voters holding Dem politician's feet to the fire. Not really feasible in General elections when the alternative is Trumpism. It has to become a reason to Primary a Dem incumbent.

 

 

[DonkeyCigars 144]

18 minutes ago, Reynolds Woodcock said:

Yep, I liked virtually all of those things sans the cologne. Hell I think (ok I know) I still have my 1957 hard cover Atlas Shrugged because my grandfather gave it to me as a young teen.  But then I grew the fuck up, which is what I suggest any Ayn Rand acolyte do.

Oh you are grown now? How many times have you been to Carbone?

[956 Worldwide 34444]

21 hours ago, elfenix said:

this is incorrect.  it really is only about 80 years old.  historically speaking jews and muslims lived about as harmoniously together as two different groups ever have

Really? There used to be a large Jewish population in what is now Saudi Arabia, it lasted basically until the advent of Islam.  These were some of the first major wars and victories fought by the new religion.  The result was two large communities being expelled, and third had all adult men executed. The era of the caliphates and Spain is really being reexamined recently, the image of an interfaith utopia is mostly propaganda.  That's not to say Islamic rule was notably worse, unusual, or especially cruel.  Just that it wasn't really an exception from the norm of how human power relations tend to shake out. 

[956 Worldwide 34444]

Ayn Rand sucks.  Her writing sucks mostly because her prose is soporific and stilted and she uses 30 pages of contrived dialogue or speechmaking while a talented writer could do with a few pages of activity.  

I've mentioned it before on this forum (which is why I like this forum), but a fantastic alternative to The Fountainhead is Somerset Maugham's The Moon and Sixpence. A single-minded man pursues his vision at the expense of everything around him and all naysayers who don't recognize his genius.  He is a complete asshole to everyone who comes in his orbit and tells society to eat shit. Unlike Ran, Maugham respects you enough not to club you over the head about where your sympathies should lie and uses something called "ambiguity."  Also, it's less than 200 pages. 

Edited May 20, 2021 by 956 Worldwide

[elfenix 34171]

21 minutes ago, 956 Worldwide said:

There used to be a large Jewish population in what is now Saudi Arabia, it lasted basically until the advent of Islam.

the big one was himyar, but it was destroyed by ethiopian christians in 525.  which left a vacuum in which islam could be founded. 

[bad_teammate 13132]

1 hour ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Unlike Ran, Maugham respects you enough not to club you over the head about where your sympathies should lie and uses something called "ambiguity."

 

[InkaUtexas 25523]

The Israeli cabinet has confirmed the decision to approve a ceasefire but its statement says the time for it to come into effect has not yet been agreed.

The statement says the truce was proposed by Egypt and will be "mutual and unconditional".

Earlier a Hamas official said it was due to start at 02:00 local time (23:00 GMT).

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-middle-east-57183127

[Satchel 6908]

The latest reporting indicates the cease fire should begin today at 6p. CT.

[InkaUtexas 25523]

Yep, waiting to see what Midnight their time brings. Seems like both groups enjoy shooting off whatever they have loaded right before a ceasefire goes into effect. 

 

 

[bad_teammate 13132]

"You may have seen and heard it, but you didn't read it so it doesn't count" is one of the most amazing moves I've ever seen. After decades of shitting around online, that might actually be something new.

Great to know that's still possible.

[Mrs Whiggins 13049]

4 hours ago, 956 Worldwide said:

Ayn Rand sucks.  Her writing sucks mostly because her prose is soporific and stilted and she uses 30 pages of contrived dialogue or speechmaking while a talented writer could do with a few pages of activity.  

I've mentioned it before on this forum (which is why I like this forum), but a fantastic alternative to The Fountainhead is Somerset Maugham's The Moon and Sixpence. A single-minded man pursues his vision at the expense of everything around him and all naysayers who don't recognize his genius.  He is a complete asshole to everyone who comes in his orbit and tells society to eat shit. Unlike Ran, Maugham respects you enough not to club you over the head about where your sympathies should lie and uses something called "ambiguity."  Also, it's less than 200 pages. 

I gave you rep for this but it's qualified. I enjoyed Maugham but sometimes I want to kill his characters.

Also:  The Painted Veil  is one of my favorite Ed Norton movies. Splendid splendid acting.

[Bullneck 18987]

On 5/11/2021 at 2:39 PM, Post Oak said:

Was hoping they were gonna sing Wonderwall

I don't believe anybody feels the way I do about you now.  

[Satchel 6908]

Can opponents of the welfare state accept government benefits without hypocrisy? Ayn Rand thought so.

[bad_teammate 13132]

Fuck this

[hpslugga 4044]

38 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Fuck this
 

Fuh dee oh
Fuuuuuh dee oh

[InkaUtexas 25523]

46 minutes ago, bad_teammate said:

Fuck this
 

Here is an interesting article about how that funding was secured. Raytheon stock (Rafael International's) partner is gonna see a nice stock increase. 

https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/senior-defense-official-tells-jpost-how-he-convinced-white-house-to-fund-iron-dome-508254

I am a bit more worried about all the JDAM's and artillery we hook them up with. This is the CRS 2020 report on US Funding to Israel. Damn..... Pg 41. We provide almost 3x's the military aid than economic. 

[Anastasis 23394]

14 minutes ago, InkaUtexas said:

We provide almost 3x's the military aid than economic. 

We fund their domestic military production capabilities. In most cases wrt foreign "aid" we just funnel money from American taxpayers that gets turned around to buy arms from American producers. In the case of Israel, we give them money that they can spend on buying arms from their own domestic complex.  Not only do we dump arms into the region, we actually support the domestic production capabilities. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

Anthem is her best book. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23356]

The U.S. supports Hernán Cortés and his right to defend himself from the Aztec Empire.

[InkaUtexas 25523]

I did some reading into Iron Dome since I posted that and yeah, we do now, but it was not ours to start. 

I don't like it, but Iron Dome is not the system I am pissed about us giving them. Do they really need a ton of F35s? And let them make their own fucking artillery shells. 

[lmao 178]

 

2 hours ago, InkaUtexas said:

I did some reading into Iron Dome since I posted that and yeah, we do now, but it was not ours to start. 

I don't like it, but Iron Dome is not the system I am pissed about us giving them. Do they really need a ton of F35s? And let them make their own fucking artillery shells. 

So we funded the creation of it and they won't give us the source code?