Could Galt's Gulch Have Open Borders?
No free society, let alone a libertarian one, can long survive if it actively welcomes those who would undermine its institution and culture. Such tolerance is the Achilles heel of open societies, and why they all eventually are undermined by nefarious forces, banksters, gangsters, communists, neocons, theocons, etc. Until a method is worked out for preserving freedom while maintaining openness and tolerance for diversity, open-border libertarians are never going to be taken seriously in politics. We are today, exactly in the situation we are in politically and financially, due to the mass importation of communists, anarchists, Trotskyites, Keynesians, Marxists, Maoists, monarchists, neo-feudalists, religious dogmatists, and so forth, as laborers for big business during the industrial revolution. None of these people had any respect nor commitment for the founding classical liberal or Unitarian values of the nation, and they promptly set about remaking America into the fouled up countries they had left behind.
We know the Gulch invited in new people who agreed with their philosophy. Did they oust people disagreed with it (and acted on that disagreement)?
I can picture one of them trying to force the door of the power plant just to destroy it.
Elsewhere I mention Dagny Taggart's opinion of the "common workers" whom she gathers to hold signal lanterns when the power goes out... which changes when she see John Galt among them.
Cherryl is a prime example of someone who "gets" it and comes from the lower classes.
However, I suspect Rand never imagined the lower classes becoming the animals they are becoming. It's my opinion that the vast majority of the lower classes, in real life, can't get the philosophy. That's why they're stuck in the lower classes. We'll find out if people in the lower classes like me can "get it" and subsequently dig themselves out of the lower classes.
The gulch "runners" are aware of anyone who recognizes value for value and living life for one's self because of their love of it. I was never under the idea that they were looking for only rich people. OMG I know so many "educated" "well-off" people who couldn't be more clueless. This has not a thing to do with a person's "station" it has to do with how they think...being principled can actually make you less wealthy, because you're not willing to sell yourself out for a nice paycheck (I include myself in this example)...I left behind good pay and benefits to work a job I love (or loved, but that's another story).
Rand TOTALLY knew that there were some in the 'lower classes" that 'got it' AND that the others would become ravenous for other peoples money. As for 'digging themselves out of the lower classes"...who are you to say that they aren't happy where they are...and still 'get it'?
I'm well aware of that, from personal experience.
However, I'm talking about the modern "lower classes". They aren't, in my experience, by and large, particularly principled.
An example; in the break room, there's a candy machine with a glitch. If you turn the handle back and forth, you can work yourself some M&Ms or peanuts out of it w/o paying. I've seen many different people do it many different times. Not one recognized that he was guilty of repeated petty theft. Forget the legal aspect of it.
About the time the protesters were demanding $15/hour at McDonald's, a co-worker was complaining that that's what he should be getting (I've stated elsewhere where I work, I don't want to give them too much opportunity to notice and fire me). He's doing the same job he's done for over 5 years, and he thinks that alone entitles him to more money *above the regular raises he's received each year*.
He's a nice guy, and fairly intelligent, too, but I argued with him and could not get through to him the connection between production and profit.
People I overhear talking in fast food places, at the store, co-workers... the vast majority seem clueless about value-for-value. Maybe some of them, maybe all of them, are rich as Midas... but I wouldn't bet on it.
My thought is that people who don't "get" value for value tend to stay poor because they don't have the... philosophical tools, for want of a better term, to create wealth for themselves.
Seriously, I believe there is a "class" that's been developed in the U.S. over the past century that has a cargo cult mentality. The gods of money (usually equated with the government) mean for them to have the money, but evil entities like Walmart and McDonald's interecept the cargo and keep it for themselves.
How can you become successful, either professionally or financially, when you think like that?
Carefully reread the section of the book dealing with life in the valley. There was just one person in the valley who had not been specifically invited to be there - Dagny. And she was only given 30 days to join or get out. :D When she left at the end of her time, she knew she had a invitation to return when she could agree to conform to their values and goals, but not until.
First, the account had not been opened with her knowledge, will or permission. In fact she did not know of the bank until she crashed into the valley.
Secondly, she agreed with every precept that formed the foundation, the underlying reasons for being that bound all of he valley's populace together. The only point she was not in total agreement with them was the idea that there was nothing that she could do to change the final outcome.
She left the valley to discover for herself that the people in charge of the government would not be changed and that the final outcome would be total collapse.
None of this affects the point I made that "those on the outside", as Ayn Rand referred to them, those who were not sought out and welcomed individually were NOT invited, and I suspect they would be repelled if they tried to show up. As indicated in the book, the population of the valley all had skills with weapons - they were ready to defend themselves if need be.
A man appears in the valley, bedraggled, half dead, and is confronted by the inhabitants... because he came there to kill Francisco D'Anconia.
It comes from part of the book I don't get. Francisco ruins all the people who invested in his company. But that would include thousands of innocents who invested in the company because they believed in *him*. I was always given to understand that people investing in stocks provide capital for companies to expand and grow. Why does this deserve punishment?
Anyway, so he's there, having been thwarted from killing Francisco, on his knees in the street because his strength fails him, surrounded by Galt, Ragnar, Midas and Francisco, tears streaming down his face in pain, anger and frustration, his world having been destroyed. He explains how hard he'd worked at his job, and at every attempt to earn promotion, to get ahead, he was thwarted. How he'd then gone without, skipping meals even, to get enough money to invest in D'Anconia Global Commodities, because he'd followed Francisco's life since before he became a playboy and admired him. And then his hero ruined him, taking everything he had.
Ragnar has a gun to his head, and is about to deliver the coup de grace because they can't let him out to tell about the valley, and to coerce him to tell them how he followed Francisco to the valley, when Francisco kneels before the man, eyes locked, and quietly says, "I have done you a great harm, and for that I ask your forgiveness.
"Raise your right hand. No, keep looking into my eyes, and repeat after me:
"I swear by my life and my love of it..."
I didn't tell the whole thing because it was all in my mind to entertain myself, and I didn't want to fill pages here with it. sorry. :(
Do you have private property? How do you let people know they are on private property? If you don't care about your property that you pay taxes on, then I guess you don't have private property do you? What's the point then on paying taxes? Why not let the ambiguous "people" pay the taxes on it?
Do you regularly violate people personal boundaries? Do you respect boundaries? From your comment, it seems you don't. How do you respond when someone gets a little to close for comfort towards you? Suddenly, boundaries take on a a whole new meaning.
The question isn't about a cultural commonality or government, but what is generally accepted & respected as a dividing line of different land, customs & values held by the people who live within that line? What about protecting National Sovereignty and National Security within the boundary? What is a boundary? I believe it's an mutually established, understood & respected dividing line between what is mine & what is yours. (not just personal, but beyond, like cities, states, countries)
As you can tell, I absolutely disagree with your first sentence. So, please justify that statement & I'll see if I can agree with you. No boundaries = no sovereignty = no security = no identity. No ambiguity please.
2.The problem is ultimately philosophical. As long as citizens can vote for wealth transfer, you're screwed. Marx, Stalin can be born in a free country.We lost the philosophical battle. It is not about numbers and control.
- People born in US vs born elsewhere
- People with Marxist leanings vs Libertarian Leanings
At one point you suggest the group of people we're making US citizens has a higher percentage of statist progressive attitudes and the people who are born here. Is that true? Certainly many people born here have statist attitudes and many people who come here come seeking liberty from oppressive gov'ts. Even if naturalized citizens are more likely to be statist than natural born citizens, that influence is minor next to the attitudes we're teaching kids who are US citizens, regardless of whether their parents are natural born.
There are many who flee from oppressive Marxist leaning countries. One would like to believe that they come here to embrace fully the opposite of what they left behind, but somehow that does not seem to bear out. They want to pick and choose. This has been the story since the beginning of our nation, has it not? This has influenced the body politic. The slow inroads of foreign political thinking has even infiltrated our highest court, when they wish to refer to other nations laws and constitutions (Ginsberg) as influence on their decisions which are supposed to be only based upon our Constitution. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/ruth-ba...
They are more extreme than our teacher strikes. Do you not believe that other nations foster and tolerate more extreme statist policies?
However, yes, many who are coming here from other countries, particularly illegally, have statist attitudes... why wouldn't they, when they were raised in "authoritarian" societies such as Mexico?
I use the term "authoritarian" loosely, because in places like Mexico the "authority" might well be a drug lord, or your employer. Bosses and peons.
We have almost always been a melting pot. What about the Asian culture? Incredibly different from "ours" yet, these immigrants don't seem to be bucking free markets and liberty in general-these immigrants and there children are freely thriving.
The problem is we the citizens, including our parents and grandparents generations did not/are not doing the tough things necessary to stop the thousand cuts. As Rand said, it only takes a small vocal minority. People of all cultures thrive in an economically free nation. and we were enjoying it while our enemies were plotting to bring it down. Our enemies-BORN IN THE USA.
lol, not yelling at you. But keeping people out will NOT solve the ideology war. It is NOT about culture-it is about philosophy. I agree that since we are already a welfare state-we are toppling fast to illegal immigration, education, etc. The biggest fence in the world will not save the Constitution. The tea party can-if they stop being fixated on fences
it is not the fault of the invaders it is the fault of those who believe we live in a democracy. For those soldiers who valiantly fought in WWII. Did they fight Roosevelt's policies?
For those who voted for Reagan, did they fight to get rid of Sarbane's Oxley? Did they fight against Medicare Part D? No Child Left Behind? THE PATRIOT ACT? and you're worried about borders...jus sayin
Gotta go! :)
My view of the illegal alien invasion is almost certainly different from everyone here. My experience of it is probably different. All I will say is that I vehemently disagree with the myth perpetrated that the illegal invaders are decent, hardworking folk just trying to survive.
My solution to that particular problem has always been; as they may be within the jurisdiction of the U.S., they are not UNDER the jurisdiction of the U.S.. Therefore, remove them from the protection of law. If someone commits a crime and can prove the victim was in the country illegally, he gets a pass.
They will self deport... and quickly.
As for the people who are immigrating to our country – yes, we would like them to assimilate – well, okay, let them turn on the TV and watch what we do. I know a lot of people learn English this way. But what do they watch? Left leaning ideas are everywhere. Most TV shows, movies, and books don’t agree with classical liberal ideas. The businessman is almost always the evil guy. Even the most recent Muppets movie had an evil businessman, for crying out loud… our children grow up hearing this stuff every day, and young adults in colleges are afraid to write conservative-leaning papers for fear of being punished. I dealt with this myself in college almost a decade ago. If these thoughts are everywhere, of course this type of thinking would eventually stain our education system.
That's why "Atlas Shrugged" is so important, because the philosophy is there in the midst of a story you can enjoy. Selling most people on pure philosophy is very difficult. It has to be delivered to people in a way they can receive the message without them getting bored or feeling like an idea was shoved down their throat.
There is so much to do in education, politics, etc. But, right now, I sincerely believe we’re helping the cause already by helping these movies in whatever way we can. That’s why I’m so excited for these AS movies and gave to the Kickstarter fund. As more people write stories and make movies to help spread the ideas within AS, I’ll also try to fund/help them in whatever way I can. There’s more to do, but this is a great start.
I couldn't agree more. Our entertainment and the MSM News we are subjected to not only reflects but influences. The culture needs a shock to the system... an infusion of reason.
Regards,
O.A.
However, it becomes much harder to maintain a border when you let people in, who, disagree with the values & culture and go about sowing discontent (Alinsky) among people & introducing a set of values & culture that aren't compatible with the native ones. Does anyone ever wonder why tyrannical regimes never seem to change? Because the tyrant KNOWS the first step towards changing/overtaking any adversary is to change the values & culture system within their borders...all without taking a shot.
This is why they show no tolerance (what the Left always preach to us) towards anyone who does not explicitly follow (obey, submit) their values. You dig? =)
Saul Alinsky was "native." Theodore Roosevelt, Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, Eleanor Roosevelt- all home grown progressives with great influence. They grew up in our culture with American "values." So you are spot on about defending values-but the enemy is everywhere.
I will say as we crawl closer to a police state, it's damned maddening that citizens of this country are overlooked to the preferential treatment of guests invited or uninvited. From the start, we have had immigrants forming communities all over the US. That was not the problem. It was when we started losing the intellectual battle to Americans things changed. Time was immigrants coming in I bet were highly sensitive to fitting and tried to be as American as the next guy. The advent of the prevailing culture turning socialist was homegrown. For immigrants now, they hear President Obama giving preferential lip speak to Muslim communities, illegal aliens, socialism-well to them-that must be a big part of American culture. heck-they just have to turn on a TV.
How is that different from mob rule? It was the author of the Declaration himself that said the Constitution should be rewritten every generation. Should we have sent him packing?
Separation of Powers is great, but what to do when the people in charge don't respect the Separation? (that boundary thing again) Who slaps them up side the head to remind them of their responsibilities? Based on my short time on this planet, it doesn't seem the "people" have been able to influence those in charge to do the right thing effectively.
However, if YOU purchase STL, I'd like to be on your team for professional, independent-minded, self-sufficient development for the like-minded citizens. :)
We'll meet at Pappy's for some BBQ to discuss your plans. lol.
This tackles that as well... it IS philosophy. What was that I read in FC? (you'll know the exact quote)..about being willing to die for what you believe. Either you stand for evil curtailing your freedoms..or you don't. Both could lead to losing your life...one sooner than the other perhaps... but dying on your feet fighting is a completely different thing than dying on your knees or by the boot on your neck. If you don't have the philosophy you don't know the difference.
I have not been ammo shopping for a while, but a friend who has says she can't find .22s! That sounds odd but think about it - a .22 is the traditional "Zoe, take your .22 and go get a squirrel for supper" cartridge. A lot of people practice with .22s, but they can't be reloaded, so you have to buy new ammo every time you want to shoot it. This conglomeration of facts makes me [more] suspicious.