Take One: Three Short Posts

By: TsikTsik
Reply To: None
Tuesday, 11 Sep 2001 at 12:44 PM EDT
Post #216484

I see this is an attack against the philosophy and principles -- the culture and lifestyle -- of capitalism.

They chose to target high-profile American-capitalist icons.

Whoever did this, and I too highly suspect Islamic militants, ... is going to bring the wrath of an organized planet down on them.

They can hand out their candy now in the streets in celebration of their short term victory, ... but as CNN reported "America still stands" ... and I believe the long-term victory will be ours -- i.e., the RATIONAL individuals and cultures of our planet.

By: TsikTsik
Reply To: 216486 by jimmmco
Tuesday, 11 Sep 2001 at 1:17 PM EDT
Post #216496

jimmmco ... First let us identify, positively, who did this outrageous attack. Then, with international support, and under objective law to guide our actions, pursue these attackers with all resources and manpower the rational world can muster together -- and that will be a far more potent and powerful act than any terrorist organization can do.

By: TsikTsik
Reply To: 216498 by jimmmco
Tuesday, 11 Sep 2001 at 2:36 PM EDT
Post #216512

jimmmco ... I never mentioned anything about the UN. But it's premature to start talk about throwing nukes around. The only thing separating us from these terrorists is our rationality. Let's use it to the utmost, and gather the facts necessary, before we act.

As for your and Trooper's rage, I understand it well. I too am angry.

Those two destroyed towers are symbolic not only of America and Capitalism, but are symbolic of the accomplishments of man's mind and man's rise over the course of the last 5000 years of recorded human history.

And with those towers destroyed, the Pentagon smoldering, some of the best and most intelligent minds on our planet have been killed.

There will be justice, I'm sure to that. Nothing will service that justice better than a disciplined rationality.

Take Two: January 2002

I have come across articles and heard a few times the September 11 terrorist attack against the United States was in retaliation to erroneous US policy in the Middle East. To me US policy in the Middle East is not the issue here. To accept this as the cause is to get caught up in the superficial tangles of the violence, missing the root and reason of an ongoing deeper conflict.

If US policy in the Middle East is the reason behind terrorist action, how is it the Muslims are in conflict with India, China, Russia, and other Muslim states? This culture, because of its religious value system, is fighting a worldwide theater of war against almost three-quarters of humanity.

The fundamental and philosophical issue underlying the ongoing cultural contempt between the United States of America and the Muslim world can be effectively summarized in one word: secularization.

Until Muslim populations, leaders and nations learn and consistently apply this concept of life, desperate individuals will continue to feel threatened as their religious culture is progressively undermined by an increasingly rational, free and secularized world. A world best represented by the United States, a country whose virtues far outweigh its shortcomings.

Definition: secular -- of or relating to the worldly or temporal; secularism -- indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations.

As evidenced by the above three posts from day one I thought the terrorists who attacked the United States -- and the civilized world -- have greatly underestimated and misunderstood their enemy. A culture of faith is of no contest to a culture of reason. Their 'God' is no match for human rationality.

No doubt the attack on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon was a spectacular exploitation of weakness. But make no mistake about it the weapons used for this attack -- fuel loaded jet airplanes -- were created by the minds of a secularized and free civilization, not by a faith-abiding Muslim culture.

This group of terrorists are not creators but destroyers. So far as civilized countries are passive these destroyers will do what they do best. If we as rational beings and creators collectively rise to combat and outwit them then these terrorists do not stand a chance of succeeding with their long-term goals.

If this organization of men thought by bombing the United States they could instill fear into the heart of the civilized world, bring sympathy to their cause, then they were and are wrong. A seculized world has united by sending in the warships and warbirds to protect its interests and way of life.

All these radicals of faith have done with their attacks is unite the secularized world. Identifying particular weaknesses secularized countries are now integrating their strengths to make themselves stronger.

Islam has to secularize. This is the bottom line. The faster Muslim cultures are secularized, with a nihilistic Islamic value system replaced by an earth-human-centric value system, the better.

We were a third world planet until Western civilization decided to secularize; make the connection to religion people. (GJW)

As a closing note, what is the long-term solution to undermining religious value systems, be it Islamic, Christian, Hindu, etc., no matter where they are found? How do we minimize cultural conflicts throughout the world? How do we loosen the suffocating strangle-hold of "God's Word" so every individual eventually has the opportunity to live in a rational, peaceful and prosperous world? Education. How?

Tear down the walls.

Free trade.

Take Three: November 2004

Free Trade versus War

The main principles underlying part three are: Metaphysics -- existence is primary, consciousness is secondary. Epistemology -- reason is man’s means to knowledge, not faith or instinct. Ethics -- man is a thinking animal. His life is the irreplaceable value to which all lesser values are the means. His life is the standard by which all lesser values are evaluated. Politics -- man is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others.

Capitalism is the only philosophy of mankind founded on the concept of individualism. All other philosophy systems value a king, a god or society as their greatest good. Individual rights, the linchpin of capitalism, cut across criteria of race, nationality, cultural background and gender, identifying the smallest minority of a society to construct a just and fair political system.

A secularized constitution is designed to protect people from the government. The proper purpose of a limited government is to protect individual freedoms.

A limited government consists of -- "the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law" (Ayn Rand).

All other government functions are illegitimate and should be privatized, dismantled and/or liquidated. Business should be separated from the state for all the same reasons the state should be separated from the church. Government should be a referee -- not a player -- among competing interests in society and the marketplace.

As the ultimate democracy is the capitalist marketplace it is here -- not government -- individuals should turn to for leadership and creative problem-solving. Government should exist solely to carry out the limited but crucial mandate of a secularized constitution to guarantee the rights of free individuals." (GJW)

Within the context of my chosen values, particularly my concept of man (nephesh), Islam is my enemy. For its destruction I feel, nor think, no regret. And I am not hesitant to say: the faster all humanity is secularized the better.

Initially I supported the Bush offensive. A part of me still does. I thought "sure, go on the offensive. Go to war. If individuals and countries of Muslims want to go to heaven so bad, let's help them."

Contrary to anti-war belief war does work in influencing and, eventually, converting populations to new ways of thinking. Consider Roman Caesar's aggressive and incredible wars in France and Britain. To protect Rome from attacks he went on the offensive to subdue the tribal threats of northern Europe.

Two millenia later, thousands of miles from Rome, I am an example of Caesar's actions. As the descendant of European barbarians (non-Roman) I am an advocate of a republic. Many other individuals favor this same republic, including the Founding Fathers of the United States.

Having said this, my position for war is being undermined by a more consistent application of my own principles.

Rather than using military force I think it would be more effective -- as well as less bloody and less expensive -- to let trade conquer. The latter is more in line with my ideal of minimal government.

As documented in previous letters I despise government subsidization of any kind for individuals, businesses and cultures. I now move to include foreign countries into this formula. Thus the new formula reads: some individuals, businesses, cultures and/or nations do not have the right to live at the expense of others.

Therefore my laissez-faire ideal on an international scale is: stop all subsidization and/or "aid" to all foreign nations.

First, the United States government does not have the right to re-distribute the taxes of its citizens to foreign countries. I disagree with government expenditure for anything non-core to its proper function.

As example this includes unncecessary billions for the military protection of Saudi Arabia and neighbors. Mo & Flo taxpayer should not have their property confiscated to pay for the protection of a Saudi who, in turn, funds terrorism against the US. The Saudis and their neighbors should be paying their own expenses.

Second, this subsidization or "aid" impairs the evolution of the individuals and governments of foreign countries. Subsidization breeds laziness, incompetence, inefficiency, stagnation, and stupidity.

Contrary to the 'good intentions' of subsidization the resultant stupidity impairs the progressive development of what should be thoughtful, independent individuals. Extrapolated to international relations, subsidization does not work in favor of peace but against it.

Thinking more subtly and seductively, I think the United States should conquer by what it does best: the trade of reason. Let rational individuals market and sell reason to every corner of the earth via idea, product and service. By means of the greatest democracy man can conceive -- the capitalist marketplace -- let all individuals vote with their dollars according to their convictions, conscience and worldview.

Trade means competition. Competition means thoughtfulness. Thoughtfulness undermines religion. In the democratic marketplace of capitalism thoughtfulness is rewarded with a vote. The more thoughtful one is the more votes. The more votes the greater the wealth and potential for earthly happiness. If we encourage and reward rationality and the attainment of earthly happiness, the importance of God and religion will be greatly devalued throughout the world.

Conversion via trade is more in step with the founding principles of the United States. To identify a couple: by means of trade America needs minimal military. It need not pass "emergency laws" undermining individual rights. Government expenditures are less.

Conversion via trade is interaction via contract, not force. Trade to mutual benefit brings men and women together like nothing else. It is thereby a bringer of peace and mutual prosperity -- provided all traders are on an even field of competition. Enter the World Trade Organization.

My greatest hope for humanity is to get all men on an even playing field of competition. In my mind the consequences of the so-called War Against Terror are pitifully small compared to the worldwide consequences of Wealthy nations subsidizing their agricultural businesses.

I say scrap these subsidies and -- over time -- as poor farmers and families around the world find an increased pricing power -- i.e., empowerment -- watch a large part of the desperation and anger that fuels "terrorism" evaporate.