participant-4603, 5:25 PM, May 22
Yes, I don’t mind helping. I wish Tudor from Romania had more free time because he’s another person that I can say confidently is aware of many different attempts and projects.
participant-4603, 5:27 PM, May 22
Cool, I’ll check it out. Those are some nice guys from what I can tell. Tim’s son Adam has been rather active and I think is writing checks I don’t know about the other guys.
participant-4233, 5:28 PM, May 22
Check it out, I have a lot more going on lately.
participant-2236, 8:09 AM, May 23
this is fascinating. and i agree. so how do you overcome the same bias in yourself? what makes you say “some statements might sound super-logical, but be wrong. but MY logic is obviously sound”.. because everything we/you say, uses “logic”.
sure, in simple cases we can say “zeno paradox is obviously wrong because i can reach the wall”. and with two eyes i can see more than two things.
but for any kind of more complex things, esp. about future models/predictions, how do we do it?
Marx was 100% sure that he grasps the social mechanics in the best and the most scientific ways. Obviously there’s a class struggle, he could see it before his eyes. He defined class, observed struggle, dynamics, etc. In his eyes it’s as solid as Randism is in yours.
participant-2236, 8:11 AM, May 23
or should i say objectivism. or even Objectivism. I wanted to joke “Randjectivism”, but you might kick me out of here, because this can be perceived as insulting the prophet.
participant-5138, 11:15 AM, May 23
Fellow, if your premises are correct (i.e. true) and you apply the laws of Logic, then your conclusion is true. To deny this is to deny Logic, and you cannot do that
A logical reasoning starting from wrong premises leads to wrong premises.
Example:
Men are birds
Birds are immortal
Men are immortal
It’s correct, but factually false
participant-2236, 11:16 AM, May 23
the logic of life is not the logic in the math sense. otherwise we’d by now prove or disprove Marx. like any math problem, most of which are proven or disproven.
participant-5138, 11:17 AM, May 23
Logic means one thing: “It is what it is and it isn’t what it isn’t”
participant-2236, 11:17 AM, May 23
the words are often problematic, because they have slightly or very different meanings. to different people. you could say that Thomas Aquinas (or what’s his name) was mistaken (i.e. either didn’t apply logic correctly, or didn’t start from “correct” axioms), but he would say the same about you
participant-5138, 11:18 AM, May 23
He could say I started from wrong premises, but if I applied Logic correctly, then he cannot deny it
participant-2236, 11:19 AM, May 23
ok, can you prove rigorously prove that .. what shall we say. that taxation of the current kind say in your country is … “wrong”? or that objectivism is right?
participant-5138, 11:19 AM, May 23
Logic is a method of inference, it doesn’t provide you with the solution to all problems: that is Rationalism. To understand Reality you need experience
participant-5138, 11:20 AM, May 23
That’s interesting. Well, I’d start from the premise that it isn’t correct to violate other people’s property and taxation is in fact a violation of property, therefore taxation is evil
In regards to Objectivism, I should agree with every single word by Ayn Rand (which I don’t) and prove each and everyone of them, so I’d need time
participant-2236, 11:21 AM, May 23
either my memory is bad (and it is), or i’m right, but today is the first time i heard about Rationalism, as defined here (if i can rephrase - an approach/way of thinking where what sounds right is presumed right) - as opposed to Objectivism, which is somehow better (less wrong/totally right, as a principle). And this is a great progress!
participant-5138, 11:22 AM, May 23
No, Rationalism is a kind of Idealism: it’s the philosophy which posits that all the axioms of human knowledge are innate and all knowledge can be gained by logical inference starting from that innate knowledge of yours
It comes with the “don’t trust your senses” pack: see Descartes for reference
participant-2236, 11:22 AM, May 23
hm, this is interesting snippet. do you define Objectivism as the gospel of Rand? or as an objective system of thought, of which Rand is only an… say… an important exposer? because the the former is problematic beyond belief
participant-5138, 11:23 AM, May 23
I’d say Objectivism is a system of thought which is based on perceptual experience. Almost a kind of Empiricism, in the sense that you can trust your observations.
But most people (Objectivists: see Peikoff) do define it as “what Rand preached”, that’s why I don’t define myself as an Objectivist
participant-2236, 11:29 AM, May 23
what would you say about Buddhism which i perceive as a totally empirical system, meaning “sure, here’s the model of the world - i.e. a description of it - but it won’t do you any good to just nod and agree intellectually - now you should go and use this technique of EXPIRIENCING a reality as it is (in a way which can’t be mistaken for anything else - you literally sit down and the only thing you do is observe reality of the physical world) - and then (the model suggests) you might see that the model is right, and the reality (as we normally see it) is an illusion, and from this (as you shall see), compassion (etc.) arises? totally empirical and practical and technical and even anti-mystical approach. just curious.
participant-2236, 11:32 AM, May 23
having said that, the topic of the above message of mine is too large for me to be able to formulate it properly, so please disregard.
participant-5138, 11:33 AM, May 23
Bro, what kind of empirical philosophy states Reality is an illusion? Not even the most f-ed up individual could conceive of such mysticism
participant-5138, 11:34 AM, May 23
Empirical=based on observations
You observe Reality and Reality only
How the f- you come to: Reality doesn’t exist, then?
Pray, do enlighten me
participant-2236, 11:34 AM, May 23
d’you heard once of optical illusions? ‘xperienced one yerself maybe? if ye, you might get the point
participant-2236, 11:35 AM, May 23
illusion doesn’t mean doesn’t exist lol. it’s more like “totally not what it looks to our senses, normally”
participant-5138, 11:35 AM, May 23
Bro: if you can claim that what you’ve just seen is an illusion, it’s because you know later observations can make you understand Reality
participant-2236, 11:36 AM, May 23
yep
participant-5138, 11:38 AM, May 23
So you can’t possibly say Reality is illusory. Fellow, is you a commie, a catholic or what?
Because the arguments you bring, you sound like a cultured catholic
participant-2236, 11:54 AM, May 23
no, Jesus is a cool idea, novel as of 0 BC (and responsible for troves of cool cultural stuff), but i’m anything but a Christian :) and kinda opposite of a commie, i guess. i think Buddhist thought captures the nature of consciousness the best of all things i’ve seen (and at that, Buddhism is not a religion, but a framework or a model, if you will). However, i’m not a practicing Buddhist either. Not at all, unfortunately. But as I said, the topic is too big for me to engage in right now, because besides of being buddhist-wannabe i’m also a moderately-high functioning alcoholic, and i guess i have to go to sleep now.
participant-5138, 12:39 PM, May 23
Why are you interested in this initiative, then?
participant-3927, 2:58 PM, May 23
Randism just linguistically sounds bad, that’s why Ayn Rand picked another name. It’s not that she is a prophet (but she did predict the future America), it’s that we respect her, and thankful for what her works did to us.
participant-5138, 2:58 PM, May 23
I’ve heard many using it, tho
participant-3927, 3:06 PM, May 23
It’s a theory of philosophy invented by Ayn Rand. Similar to theory of gases in physics of Boltzmann. It is what she defined it, because it’s hers. And it’s fine to disagree and change it, just don’t call the new system Objectivism. Call it by a new name.
participant-5138, 3:11 PM, May 23
What if you reach different conclusions but the premises are the same? That is, if Rand was wrong?
participant-4603, 3:14 PM, May 23
When you voice to text her name real fast it often comes up as Iran.
participant-3927, 3:15 PM, May 23
This is a fun topic often discussed on the HBL forum. If interested I can post here something on this.
participant-3927, 3:18 PM, May 23
I’d say still give it a new name. Do you know about Open Objectivism? I think it’s exactly the case: they claim to have the same premises but a different outcome.
participant-6456, 3:19 PM, May 23
Somebody made stupid AI check before sending it. Very embarrassing. Obviously Justin Sun is prime minister of Liberland former representative of Granada to WTO
participant-6456, 3:20 PM, May 23
All massmails have to go through me. And somebody after long time managed to bypass me…
participant-6456, 3:21 PM, May 23
DOGE did some good worl already
participant-6456, 3:21 PM, May 23
I am waiting for results of negotiations with Trump. Cross fingers. We just need him to make one phone call
participant-3927, 3:29 PM, May 23
You need to use induction, not only deduction. And you need axioms that are not arbitrary. You need a lot of examples, which means knowledge of world history, and you need internal consistency. You also need to spot logical fallacies as they come up. Aristotle himself wrote about how to correctly use his rules of inference and listed many fallacies. Ayn Rand identified several more fallacies, like the Stolen Concept fallacy. Finally, no one claims that Objectivism cannot in principle have mistakes.
participant-3927, 4:21 PM, May 23
If you want this to work, you need to find or manufacture a geopolitical painpoint. No one in political sphere will help you for the noble principle of freedom (particularly not Trump, the pragmatist). I already wrote you privately before, an idea that you could house unwelcome Syrian refuges in the region, and this way solve a painpoint. Or maybe it can be a base for American weapons.
participant-5138, 4:44 PM, May 23
Like TAS?
participant-3927, 4:49 PM, May 23
The Atlas Society? Yes
participant-3927, 4:57 PM, May 23
But buddhism stops at experiencing, it doesn’t encourage conceputal abstractions, logic, science, literature. In fact, the Zen variant, is openly against the mind. Also, buddhism takes reincarnation as an axiom, which has no evidence, hence it’s mysticism (religion).
participant-3927, 5:00 PM, May 23
Years ago some buddist guys with a large following spotted my posts on Facebook re atheism, and offered me to speak in front of large audience (not online, in real life). I refused, because they were promoting buddhism as atheism.
participant-5138, 5:54 PM, May 23
I think Buddhism (or, at least, its most traditional branches) technically is atheist, in the sense that it doesn’t postulate the existence of a deity. Obviously, it isn’t rational, but commies are irrational as well, yet this doesn’t mean they aren’t atheists
participant-4603, 6:04 PM, May 23
The Trump administration is all about publicity and making waves; if there is ever a time it would be now, and with this current proposed 50% tariff on the European Union, it’s very possible that the US may want to stick its thumb in Brussels’ eye.
It’s also possible that they have some sort of an in with the Trump team. The trouble is that Gornja Siga is not exactly Terra Nullius; it’s more an area where there are competing legal doctrines over the geopolitical boundaries of the Danube River, where if one side were to exercise its doctrine, it would be to the detriment of other of their claims, so it is a mutually exclusive situation, thus creating a sort of grey zone by default.
The trick would be to get a trilateral deal out of Zagreb, Belgrade, and Brussels, but I don’t see how it would be in the interest of those capitals to play ball.
participant-3927, 7:56 PM, May 23
Please direct some of your good chatting energy to post public comments on the website. Here’s already a page with a comment:
https://anthemism.org/article/sovereignty/ . Every article has a comment section under it. The more comments, the more credible the site looks.
participant-2294, 9:07 PM, May 23
The issue with Gornja Siga is that it’s a floodplain rather than a island
participant-2294, 9:14 PM, May 23
One territory with potential is Cabinda; the new country needs ports
participant-4603, 9:31 PM, May 23
It’s a serious issue, and the terrain itself, or rather the lack thereof, is not super conducive. I remember reading or hearing stories about mosquitoes and wild boar, not to mention, of course, the Croatian authorities, who may or may not have let up - I’m not sure.
It’s a real tough business, and from my understanding, they are camping out in Apatin, Serbia, or near there. It’s just not the approach I would take. I do think, on a certain level, it’s good that they’re raising liberty awareness and they’re getting people to think about State formation.
But I’m just not sure this is so great, and without being too picky, I’m not sold on the name or the flag, which is difficult to draw by freehand - but those are minor, nitpicky things.
I mean, maybe if, for whatever reason, they’re able to strike some deal with the Kremlin and their allies in Belgrade, who knows? But I don’t think that’s a set of cards I would play if I were them, but hey, that’s just me!
participant-4603, 9:36 PM, May 23
Lots of folks have had their eye on that enclave; it’s unlikely Angola is ever going to let it go, especially since they’re flush with petrodollars. But there have been - and I don’t know how active it is - a secessionist movement in Cabinda, but since the Angolan Civil War ended, I don’t know how serious of an effort there is on their part to secede.
There’s no doubt it’s a super strategic area with its own oil too. At some point, I think it even had the lion’s share of Angola’s reserves, but I don’t know off hand. I just wouldn’t want to follow in the footsteps of Margaret Thatcher’s son, Mark, who had a little escapade not too far to the north of there.
participant-4603, 9:37 PM, May 23
*I meant exclave not enclave.
participant-2294, 10:25 PM, May 23
As I’ve said before, the most pragmatic approach is to wait for Bougainville to gain independence, then migrate there in large numbers to take it over.
participant-2294, 10:34 PM, May 23
d.m. Bougainville is about the same size as Cyprus but has only 300,000 inhabitants…
participant-3927, 1:25 AM, May 24
Does anyone of you know people/separatists in Bougainville ?
participant-3927, 3:54 AM, May 24
I would define atheism as rejection of faith in things that have no evidence.
participant-2236, 4:04 AM, May 24
That’s etymologically wrong/unrelated
participant-3927, 4:09 AM, May 24
Maybe etymologically it’s not. But that should be the definition. There’s no difference between faith in Abrahamic god, and in reincarnation. Both are made up stuff.
participant-5138, 5:51 AM, May 24
But atheism is rejection of faith in deities
participant-5138, 11:46 AM, May 24
Your alternative is a land whose mainly spoken language is Tok Pisin and 70% of the population is Catholic?
participant-5138, 11:47 AM, May 24
Let’s all go to Naples, then. Basically the same thing: a savage dialect as language and Catholic Church everywhere
participant-2294, 11:50 AM, May 24
Will Naples become a new country? Naw.
participant-5138, 11:51 AM, May 24
What’s the difference? The fact the country is new doesn’t mean there gonna be more opportunities for freedom
participant-2294, 11:52 AM, May 24
What needs to be done is similar to the Free State Project in New Hampshire: to migrate en masse to the new country and take it over
participant-5138, 11:53 AM, May 24
Yeah, you can bet it’s gonna work
participant-2294, 11:53 AM, May 24
Low population and a higher chance of influencing it to push pro-growth policies
participant-5138, 11:55 AM, May 24
To push whom exactly? Fellow tribesmen? To found a new, rational nation we need cultured individuals who speak English and share the same love for freedom
participant-5138, 11:57 AM, May 24
If we found a nation with mostly Catholics, you can bet it’s gonna become a Welfare, no matter how convinced they seem at first
participant-2294, 11:57 AM, May 24
We need to find 400,000 pro-capitalists who are interested in formally becoming citizens of that country (from anywhere in the world)
participant-5138, 11:59 AM, May 24
We need to find 400.000
well armed pro-capitalists, since it would probably wind up in tribal warfare with the local population
participant-2294, 11:59 AM, May 24
An island country doesn’t need a welfare state; employment can be extremely high
participant-5138, 12:00 PM, May 24
Go tell ’em Catholics
participant-5138, 12:03 PM, May 24
You know the famous “drop of poison in the food” metaphor by Ayn Rand?
participant-2294, 12:04 PM, May 24
Yeah, “no compromises”
participant-5138, 12:04 PM, May 24
Bro, in that country male gay s€x is illegal. They’re not just Catholics, they are complete savages
participant-5138, 12:04 PM, May 24
The guy is a priest
participant-2294, 12:06 PM, May 24
How do they know?
participant-2294, 12:07 PM, May 24
Guy is a based priest
participant-5138, 12:07 PM, May 24
Idk, but it was the same in Europe until a century ago, so I guess there’s some way to enforce it
participant-5138, 12:08 PM, May 24
There ain’t no such thing as a based priest but a fake priest: he’s either a medieval real life larper or a very confused priest
participant-2294, 12:09 PM, May 24
A bit of HHH shouldn’t hurt
participant-5138, 12:10 PM, May 24
What is HHH?
participant-2294, 12:11 PM, May 24
Hans-Hermann Hoppe
participant-5138, 12:11 PM, May 24
Are you kidding me?
participant-2294, 12:12 PM, May 24
No, only considering private intentional communities without homosexuals
participant-5138, 12:15 PM, May 24
Hoppe also suggested that John Maynard Keynes’s homosexuality might explain his economic views, with which Hoppe disagreed.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans-Hermann_Hoppe
That’s all I wanna say: I don’t think a person that makes this claims can be taken seriously
participant-5138, 12:15 PM, May 24
We’re not talking about what kind of people you want in your house: we’re talking about homosexuality being illegal
participant-2294, 12:17 PM, May 24
Let’s push them to be less intolerant (like Hoppe)
participant-2294, 12:20 PM, May 24
However, Bougainville is preparing for independence, potentially around 2027–2028. In theory, a new constitution could change the approach to gays.
participant-2294, 12:21 PM, May 24
I’ve read, however, that lesbians aren’t prohibited
participant-5138, 1:17 PM, May 24
Yeah, it’s that f-ed up
participant-3927, 2:10 PM, May 24
Hoppe’s philosophy is bad. Nikos Sotirakopolous has done a video on it. I also read a little.
participant-3927, 4:37 PM, May 24
In my article “Waiting for Godot,” I show examples of people who remained steadfast with their ideas, despite widespread opposition and ridicule. We face the same in the attempt to create a new country. “Why won’t you just get in with the collective? If you can’t beat them, join them. Trying to create a new country is crazy and a waste of your time and energy.”
Here’s a story from Ayn Rand’s biography, that hopefully can inspire us to remain steadfast. In 1934, when she was completely unknown, she searched for a publisher who would publish her first novel “We The Living.” An editor at an important publishing house (Barry Benefield, Appleton-Century-Crofts) suggested that she rewrite it with the help of a collaborator. She wrote to her agent (Jean Wick):
As to the matter of a suggested collaborator, I give you full authority to refuse at once, without informing me, any and all offers that carry such a suggestion. I do not care to hear of such offers. I consider them nothing short of an insult. Anyone reading my book must realize that I am an individualist above everything else. As such, I shall stand or fall on my own work. I hope you do not consider this as a beginner’s arrogance. It is merely the feeling of a person who takes pride in her work. At the cost of being considered arrogant, I must state that I do not believe there is a human being alive who could improve that book of mine in the matter of actual rewriting. If anyone is capable of improving that book—he should have written it himself. I would prefer not only never seeing it in print, but also burning every manuscript of it rather than having William Shakespeare himself add one line to it which was not mine, or cross out one comma. I repeat, I welcome and appreciate all suggestions of changes to improve the book without destroying its theme, and I am quite willing to make them. But these changes will be made by me.
Full story here: https://newideal.aynrand.org/publishing-we-the-living/
participant-5138, 8:25 PM, May 24
If you can’t beat ’em, shoot ’em and their (elected) representatives :D
