tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post5203244116700546061..comments2024-03-19T07:48:54.021-06:00Comments on Gus Van Horn: Quick Roundup 456Gus Van Hornhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-395261614264427842009-08-13T21:21:39.409-06:002009-08-13T21:21:39.409-06:00"What they don't get..."
Oh, many o..."<i>What they don't get</i>..."<br /><br />Oh, many of them DO get it. These are not nice people.<br /><br />Altruism is anything BUT benevolent.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-17507671235277402512009-08-13T20:51:38.738-06:002009-08-13T20:51:38.738-06:00It is amazing how those people on the left have in...It is amazing how those people on the left have in the past made an equation between the rights of man (which cannot be provided by others) and products and services which can only be provided by man. What they don't get is that when you confuse them, you destroy both.Stop obamacarehttp://www.stopobamacare.blogspot.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-51554861100385139932009-08-11T20:06:07.705-06:002009-08-11T20:06:07.705-06:00Thank you, Anon.
Agreed on that point, Burgess. ...Thank you, Anon. <br /><br />Agreed on that point, Burgess. Thanks for making that explicit.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-67391364708178511892009-08-11T16:51:39.991-06:002009-08-11T16:51:39.991-06:00Excellent insight Mr. Gus Van Horn, regarding the ...Excellent insight Mr. Gus Van Horn, regarding the dangerous precedent of blurring the line between protecting the PUSA and monitoring free political speech. This article needs to be spread throughout the WWW. Great work and great website.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-63588487646665068632009-08-11T16:01:34.509-06:002009-08-11T16:01:34.509-06:00The mystical notion of "the people" is ...The mystical notion of "the people" is to secular statists what the mystical notion of "God" is to religious statists: the wellspring of all facts worthy of attention and all values worth pursuing. <br /><br />In this sense, the metaphysics underlying both ideologies is supernaturalism. Conservatives and progressives differ only in the particulars, not in the principles.Burgess Laughlinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13865479709475171678noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-7081322027589569482009-08-11T15:57:23.174-06:002009-08-11T15:57:23.174-06:00"I think you said once that the right doesn&#..."<i>I think you said once that the right doesn't see themselves as exponents of ideology because they see ideology as a man-made phenomenon and they believe in supernatural (non-man-made) 'realities'.</i>"<br /><br />So I did, and thanks for reminding me of that.<br /><br />I think your analysis ties together much of what I was fumbling for here.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-40771914602068279462009-08-11T15:44:21.556-06:002009-08-11T15:44:21.556-06:00I noticed that too. If say a particular piece of p...I noticed that too. If say a particular piece of paper comes from a think tank with a right leaning flavour, they accuse it of "bias" with or without reading it.Monoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-63071609100242550022009-08-11T14:29:30.261-06:002009-08-11T14:29:30.261-06:00"Leftists generally seem blind to many of the..."Leftists generally seem blind to many of their views AS leftism...I think that what you have is a sort of culture-wide package-dealing of reason with leftist ideology."<br /><br />This phenomenon is definitely true and it is one that can drive me mad. The leftists I know all assume that they are the spokesman for rationality and that their views are not ideology but just good, common sense. Its the right that are "ideologues" not them.<br /><br />The right, in turn, views the left as the spokesmen of "materialist" reason; ie a reason which only accepts material things and rejects the divine and spiritual "realities" that "reason points to". And the right shares with the left the belief that everyone but them is an advocate of ideology because, as they see it, the left is an exponent of "pure reason" or the left is a champion of the "unaided intellect". And of course, every true conservative knows that the "unaided intellect" could never arrive at "truth". That would require "non-materialist" thinking that recognized "supernatural reality". I think you said once that the right doesn't see themselves as exponents of ideology because they see ideology as a man-made phenomenon and they believe in supernatural (non-man-made) "realities". I have seen this over and over with all types of conservatives; from basically noble ones like Thomas Sowell to real bastards like Larry Auster. To a conservative, reason must be supplemented with either faith, traditions or genetics (as with the racialists).<br /><br />So what it comes down to is that leftists think they are superior because they are skeptics and subjectivists and the conservatives think they are superior because they blend reason with mysticism. And both of them think Objectivists are part of the evil "other"; ie leftists see us as absolutist conservatives and conservatives see us as godless, soulless, subjectivist, utopian liberals.madmaxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14375140131881725965noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-84894042040021991532009-08-11T14:18:28.254-06:002009-08-11T14:18:28.254-06:00True.
Examples on the right are not as easy to id...True.<br /><br />Examples on the right are not as easy to identify, but they are not exactly in short supply.<br /><br />Just point out to some conservative the similarity between what Bush was doing to the economy and Obama's bailouts -- and then duck. Many conservatives take "whatever the GOP wants to do in the economy" as capitalism. Often, that is simply not the case.<br /><br />Having said that, I suspect that it's easier to find people on the right who will admit that some Republicans are not exactly capitalists...Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-794622993418008422009-08-11T13:14:58.969-06:002009-08-11T13:14:58.969-06:00I just wanted to point out one other manifestation...I just wanted to point out one other manifestation of this kind of thinking.<br /><br />The word "bias" is also associated with ideology and is used as a smear whenever it doesn't suit the accusers views. For example, leftists will often dismiss informational sources out of hand if it appears they advocate any right leaning ideas. Whether or not the information they contain is true or false is irrelevant (or whether or not the source *acted* in favor of their bias as against the truth). Only sources that agree with leftist ideals are valid and unbiased.Richardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-37387663362356635572009-08-11T08:53:04.632-06:002009-08-11T08:53:04.632-06:00Excellent comment, and it brings to my mind anothe...Excellent comment, and it brings to my mind another aspect of Leftism: Leftists generally seem blind to many of their views AS leftism (e.g., Dan Rather's "middle of the road" self-description). <br /><br />They (and many previously leftist libertarians) seem to equate their views with rationality, and to have an almost deterministic view of what being rational entails (i.e., that you will agree with them if you are a "thinking man"). Conversely, if you don't toe the left-wing party line, you're just not rational (or, as in the "astroturf" accusation, insincere).<br /><br />This is an interesting parallel to the many Christians who evade the fact that religion is, in fact, a type of ideology. THEY, too are often equating the use of reason with leftism (or at least its faults or what they might call its "excesses") when they do this.<br /><br />I think that what you have is a sort of culture-wide <a href="http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/package-dealing--fallacy_of.html" rel="nofollow">package-dealing</a> of reason with leftist ideology. <br /><br />There can be many reasons each side would want to maintain the status quo, but I think that pragmatism helps it along by making people unaware of the nature of principles.<br /><br />This is an incomplete thought on my part, but your comment has brought an interesting issue/set of issues to my attention or caused me to think about them from a slightly different angle, anyway.Gus Van Hornhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05126749051688217781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8839412.post-141810182264003502009-08-11T08:33:23.269-06:002009-08-11T08:33:23.269-06:00That political cartoon reminds me of an ongoing pe...That political cartoon reminds me of an ongoing pet peeve of mine regarding the Left and their view of protests and "mass movements."<br /><br />It seems that leftists try to distinguish between "authentic" versus "manufactured" (or "astroturf") movements. Now, much of this rhetoric is transparently self-serving (that is, only leftist movements are judged to be authentic), but there is a deeper error here.<br /><br />The problem is that all successful political movements are "manufactured" to some degree. That's what intellectual and political leadership <i>does</i>. The notion that political movements ought to be a spontaneous outpouring from the masses is completely anti-historical.Andrew Daltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11001665674703307354noreply@blogger.com