Detailed market commentary at The Market Ticker and Ticker Classics
(The Year 2012 In Review)
Donations accepted; we offer GOLD ACCESS for enhanced privileges. T-Shirts, caps, coffee mugs? Click here.
BlogTalkRadio - Mondays at 3:30 Central - Yes, TickerGuy has a radio show (kinda)
RSS available You are not signed on; if you are a visitor please register for a free account!
|MarketTicker Forums Single Post Display (Show in context)||
User: Not logged on
|User Info||FROG STEW; entered at 2010-03-22 16:25:42|
OK Tea Party: Put up — or Shut Up
All right then. Now that the socialized medicine bill has passed, we will now find out once and for all whether Billy Beck is right — that America is dead: http://www.two--four.net/weblog.php?id=P....
Mon Mar, 22 2010I do not yet agree with Billy. America is not dead yet.
However, the knife is at last on its jugular. Americans must now face the final alternative: to renounce liberty in favor of duty to others — or to summon up the moral courage to say No. http://go-galt.org/Galt_Pledge/
No to whom? Seeing as I'm an Objectivist, the expected answer is no to altruism. That is correct — but I am not operating at that level of abstraction here. Objectivists have been making that point for over half a century now, and sadly, the mainstream epistemology is sufficiently crippled such that people still insist that liberty and duty can coexist.
I'm going to put the alternative to everyone, in terms of a plain concrete, one that lays it out in no uncertain, clear-cut terms, that will separate the moral adults from the altruist children.
It runs as follows:
There is someone in front of you asking for help, and you have plenty of money. Do you have the moral right to say no?
His need is genuine. Do you still have the moral right to say no?
It's not his fault. Do you still have the moral right to say no?
It's a very pressing need. Do you still have the moral right to say no?
It's a child. Do you still have the moral right to say no?
If you do not answer "Yes" all the way down the line — if you do not assert your individual moral sovereignty, if you do not assert your right to choose as being morally prior to anyone’s need –
– than SHUT UP and get out of the way. You are not morally equipped to partake in this battle, let alone win it, and you are wasting your time.
Now PAY ATTENTION, please.
Notice that I am NOT asking what you believe you should choose. I am NOT asking you whether you should give to the needy.
I am asking you whether the choice is morally yours, all the way down the line. I am asking you whether you believe that you still have the moral right to exist after saying "No".
Do not trifle me with waffling exceptions. Whatever they are, they can and will be used against you. Liberty is indivisible; http://www.newclarion.com/2009/06/one-li.... if you cede your moral sovereignty anywhere, you cede it everywhere.
See what was done to this Tea Party protester? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NwiKGjM5t.... Expect more of it. Lots more. You've heard of human shields; the needy are the enemy's shield, spear and dagger aimed right at your soul. Don't let them be used as weapons against you in this way.
No entitlement program has ever been repealed in the United States. This is why. If the Tea Party wishes to make political history, they must first make moral history.
Repealing this bill — and more: repealing the welfare state in toto – requires nothing less than the willingness of each Tea Partier — hell, each American — to gaze past the outstretched hand of need, to look the blackmailers behind them all in the eye and declare:
By Jim May · March 21st, 2010 9:48 pm · 2 Comments ·
Last modified: 2010-03-22 16:45:04 by bezzle