Hello, everyone. Mosley will be on a trip celebrating his birthday this weekend so there will be no show this Sunday. The show will return on March 9th. Thanks for listening!! And happy birthday, Mosley!!
Archive for February, 2008
Show 049 was an excellent discussion about the coming U.S. presidential election. Arthur explained his views starting with this question: Which party will do the least damage to Objectivist ideals? (I will try to summarize what he said, but please listen to the show for his own words.)
The Republicans essentially stand for religion. They consistently try to mix faith with government, of which even small amounts can be disastrous, and will lead to a theocracy. Furthermore, their religious altruistic beliefs conflict with the self-interest morality necessitated by capitalism, which they claim to defend. Because of this, they’re misrepresenting capitalism, making it disreputable and therefore harder to realize.
The Democrats stand for a disintegrated attempt at socialism (or pieces of it). But since the fall of the Soviet Union, communism and socialism are no longer the threat they once were. It has been demonstrated that such systems are horrendous. Moreover, since the Democrats’ views are disintegrated, they can not achieve long term success. So, in order to give Objectivism time, it makes the most sense to throw out the bigger threat, the Religious Right, and vote for the Democrats.
Many Objectivists will bring up a third option. What about the Libertarians? The Libertarians say they stand for liberty, but they have an anti-philosophical approach. Their guiding “principle” is the non-initiation of force, but without a proper underlying philosophy, no one can say what initiating force consists of. Politics is a derivative of ethics and must be treated as such. Otherwise, capitalism will continue to be misrepresented, which is immensely destructive. (For those interested, there is also a discussion of Ron Paul on the show.)
It was a great show and I highly recommend you listen to it. You may want to read Diana Hsieh’s post on the election as well.
Listen to this show and more at Talkshoe.
Show 048 was about the true meaning and nature of romantic love, in light of the recent celebration of Valentine’s Day. Contrary to popular belief, love is not selfless, but instead, very selfish. Gary Hull puts the idea of a selfless love to rest in his article on romantic love, Love and Selfishness.
Love, we are repeatedly taught, consists of self-sacrifice. Love based on self-interest, we are admonished, is cheap and sordid. True love, we are told, is altruistic. But is it?
Imagine a Valentine’s Day card which takes this premise seriously. Imagine receiving a card with the following message: “I get no pleasure from your existence. I obtain no personal enjoyment from the way you look, dress, move, act or think. Our relationship profits me not. You satisfy no sexual, emotional or intellectual needs of mine. You’re a charity case, and I’m with you only out of pity. Love, XXX.”
Needless to say, you would be indignant to learn that you are being “loved,” not for anything positive you offer your lover, but–like any recipient of alms–for what you lack. Yet that is the perverse view of love entailed in the belief that it is self-sacrificial.
Mosley and Arthur elaborate this on the show and discuss other related issues. Check it out!! And we hope you had a happy, selfish Valentine’s Day!
Listen to this show and more at Talkshoe.
For show 047, Mosley discusses the potential economic recession and how more government intervention is not the solution. The stimulus package being considered in Congress, although it “may” produce some short-term results, will not end in long-term success. An artificial boost for the economy will not fix the underlying problems that have made the situation what it is. As Yaron Brook has said, “We don’t need the government to ’stimulate’ the economy with some new intervention; we need it to liberate us from all its destructive economic intervention that put us in this situation.”
And such “solutions” do not come without a price. Adding to the already huge deficit (because of other exorbitant government spending), we’ll end up having to pay it back in one form or another.
So what is the solution? Liberate the economy.
For the last few minutes of the show, Mosley briefly discussed nuclear power, how it can benefit our lives, and why environmentalists should leave it alone. He also indicates the likely topic for next week’s show, love, in celebration of Valentine’s Day. Hope to see you there!
Listen to this show and more at Talkshoe.
talkObjectivism would like to congratulate the Ayn Rand Institute on its achievements throughout 2007 including its recent distribution of its one millionth free copy of an Ayn Rand novel to schools this year.
Here is what ARI President Yaron Brook had to say:
[T]he Institute has reached yet another important milestone for our Free Books to Teachers program.
Within a very few weeks, ARI will ship—to a high school somewhere in America—the one millionth free copy of an Ayn Rand novel to an educator for use in his classroom.
As I mentioned last year, with regard to the continued growth of the books program, this is not only a significant milestone in and of itself—but more important, it bodes extraordinarily well for the future success of all of our other educational and academic programs.
If you would like to request free novels for your class, please look here.
Listen to this show and more at Talkshoe.
On show 046, Mosley and Arthur have an excellent discussion about immigration. They explain the Objectivist position on the issue, open borders, and demonstrate how it is the only moral, and consequently the only practical, position to have.
I think Dr. Harry Binswanger puts it very well,
“A foreigner has rights just as much as an American. To be a foreigner is not to be a criminal. Yet our government treats as criminals those foreigners not lucky enough to win the green-card lottery.
Seeking employment in this country is not a criminal act. It coerces no one and violates no one’s rights. There is no “right” to be exempt from competition in the labor market, or in any other market.”
For many, “open borders” is likely to trigger an emotion, a sense of vulnerability. But if one considers the issue seriously, it can be seen that these alleged insecurities and threats are superficial. Listen to the show for refutations on criticisms such as: terrorism, crime, disease, cultural damage and overpopulation.
Listen to this show and more at Talkshoe.
