The Left and The Right: Enemies of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

The Progressive Left demands the State run our lives in the name of Socialism; the Alt-Right demands the State do it in the name of Religious Nationalism. Both demand unconditional self-sacrifice. Both demand the individual serve the good of all. Both embrace collectivism and disdain and reject individualism. Both see liberty as envisioned by the Founding Fathers as delusional, hypocritical, and the source of all social and cultural failings and ills. Both are evil.

It is time to return to the founding principles of Liberty and Individual Rights. Now is the time for all free men to reject the nihilism of the Left and Right, and embrace the moral heroism of Ayn Rand's Objectivism. Now is the time to open your eyes, let in the light, and turn your mind on.

Read:
The Rise and Fall of the Pajama-Boy Nietzscheans
https://americanmind.org/essays/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-pajama-boy-nietzscheans/

American Heroism
Excerpts:
"The philosophy of Americanism is, as I have argued in my book and elsewhere, synonymous with the founders’ ideas, actions, and institutions. Its core tenets can be summed up as: the moral laws and rights of nature, ethical individualism, self-interest rightly understood, self-rule, constitutionalism, rule of law, limited government, and laissez-faire capitalism.'

" The founders’ frontier republicanism created a nation of self-owning, self-governing, self-starting, and self-reliant men and women who lived by a rigorous moral code defined by certain uniquely American virtues: rationality, independence, initiative, industriousness, frugality, enterprise, creativity, adventurousness, courage, optimism. America’s liberal order was forged when the ideas of Thomas Jefferson passed through the Cumberland Gap and were put into practice by men like Daniel Boone and women like Annie Oakley."

American Crucifixion
The 1619 Canard
"The purpose of the 1619 Project is to “reframe” the narrative of American history from the ground up. Its central claims are fivefold: first, that America’s true birth date was not 1776 but 1619, the year that African slaves were allegedly first brought to America; second, that American revolutionaries fought a war of independence in order “to protect the institution of slavery”; third, that America’s “founding ideals of liberty and equality were false when they were written”; fourth, that “nearly everything that has made America exceptional” grew out of slavery; and fifth, that American-style capitalism is rooted in slavery and racism."

The American Choice
A Summary: America was the product of reason by creating the first moral nation in history; it is the rejection of her moral principles of reason, reality, liberty, and individualism that is driving America toward a fascist authoritarian nightmare America.

Leave the darkness of pragmatic nihilism and enter the world of reason, achievement, prosperity. Come into the light:

https://cordair.com/artists/bokor/works/beginnings/index.html

 

Well, the painting is amusing, putting Ayn Rand at the top. Funny thing about Rand, receiving state assistance, a concept she eschewed all of her life, she wound up signing up for towards the end of her life. So, your master is a hypocrite? Wonderful.

Those who profess to love "freedom" hate freebies from the state, until they need it.

 

Can you give me some examples of those people? I love freedom and fight endlessly against social spending. I don't get arguments from those on the right, only those on the left.

 

Smearing isn’t refutation.

 

Didn't read whole thread, just wanted to point out the above oft seen example of LW "DUMBTHINK."

Just because one disagrees with the state of the law doesn't mean one may ignore the law as it currently exists, or that it is somehow inconsistent or "hypocritical" to avail themselves of the specifics of that law, one way or another.

Always fun to point this out because it is one of the primary "stupid signs" regularly on display by the LW "brain trust."

 

I mostly agree with the sentiment and ideals but take umbrage with your group selections Comparing "progressive left" with "Alt-Right" is like comparing Democrats with Pit Bulls..... it defies rationale. Who are the Alt-Right anyway?

 

From the article:
"The reactionary Right does not form a coherent intellectual movement, nor does it share a positive political agenda except for its political authoritarianism. It is united largely by what it is against, i.e., cultural leftism with its promotion of same-sex marriage, transgenderism, feminism, multiculturalism, the sexualization of children, etc.—all of which it blames on the classical liberalism of the American Founding! In what follows, I shall briefly outline the anti-American ideas of five representative ideologues of the reactionary Right: Patrick Deneen, Sohrab Ahmari, Mencius Moldbug (i.e., Curtis Yarvin), Bronze Age Pervert, and Dan DeCarlo.


The best-known member of the reactionary Right is the Notre Dame academic Patrick Deneen, who is the author of Why Liberalism Failed—a book devoted to denigrating the principles of the American Founding. Deneen is the Nikole Hannah-Jones of the Right: he despises the principles of 1776 and hopes to replace them with something radically different."

They are mostly nationalists, they are mostly Christian, and they are mostly Trumpsters.

And comparing the Progressive Left to the Alt Right is like comparing vipers to mad dogs. They are both deadly, one uses the stealth of a serial killer, the other the brute force of a thug.

 

I lost interest in Rand as a freshman undergraduate.

That said.

What is your view on corporations?
Do they fall outside the definition of a private party (individuals)?

If so, should they be banned or highly regulated in a laissez-faire economic environment?

 

I don't now. What do you think of square circles? Should they be solid or striped?

 

Thanks for the explanation, but it evades my primary point, which is if you are trying to compare mainstream large political contingents you should compare mainstream large political contingents. It is of little interest to compare political philosophies between vipers and mad dogs.

I still agree with the sentiment.

 

The left is more of a threat than anything. The only ones on the right that are a threat are the Never Trumpers.

The OP's assumption that the "alt right" wants to force religious dogma on people is not quite true.

 

Im not familiar with the term 'religious nationalism.' Could you be a bit more descriptive as to what it is on the right you're percieving as 'demanding unconditional self-sacrifice, the individual serve the good of all, collectivism, disdain of individualism, and see liberty as envisioned by the Founding Fathers as delusional'?

 

I assert you are making the error of being kind to the undeserving. The political parties today are vipers and mad dogs. Proof? The destruction of an economy to prevent the dead from dying, the lockup of liberty in the name of an hysterically absurd and immoral notion of safety--lives before profit, or on a broader level, the good of all before the good of the one. AOC was wrong--it didn't take the Left 12 years to end the pollution of industry and stop air travel, it took the Right 60 days. Who would of thought that so called "liberty loving conservatives" would lock up hundred's of millions, rob future production, transfer wealth from the not yet living to the presently panicked, and sentence the American soul to 25 years of stagnation. give birth to an authoritarian government, and forge by force a direct path to a fascist dictatorship under socialist slogans, and with God as the final arbitrator as to who can do what, who can get what, who can create what, and who can be what? Ayn Rand would. I would. And Yaron Brook does.

Ayn Rand: "Both [conservatives and liberals] hold the same premise—the mind-body dichotomy—but choose opposite sides of this lethal fallacy.

The conservatives want freedom to act in the material realm; they tend to oppose government control of production, of industry, of trade, of business, of physical goods, of material wealth. But they advocate government control of man’s spirit, i.e., man’s consciousness; they advocate the State’s right to impose censorship, to determine moral values, to create and enforce a governmental establishment of morality, to rule the intellect. The liberals want freedom to act in the spiritual realm; they oppose censorship, they oppose government control of ideas, of the arts, of the press, of education (note their concern with “academic freedom”). But they advocate government control of material production, of business, of employment, of wages, of profits, of all physical property—they advocate it all the way down to total expropriation.

The conservatives see man as a body freely roaming the earth, building sand piles or factories—with an electronic computer inside his skull, controlled from Washington. The liberals see man as a soul freewheeling to the farthest reaches of the universe—but wearing chains from nose to toes when he crosses the street to buy a loaf of bread.

Yet it is the conservatives who are predominantly religionists, who proclaim the superiority of the soul over the body, who represent what I call the “mystics of spirit.” And it is the liberals who are predominantly materialists, who regard man as an aggregate of meat, and who represent what I call the “mystics of muscle.”

This is merely a paradox, not a contradiction: each camp wants to control the realm it regards as metaphysically important; each grants freedom only to the activities it despises. Observe that the conservatives insult and demean the rich or those who succeed in material production, regarding them as morally inferior—and that the liberals treat ideas as a cynical con game. “Control,” to both camps, means the power to rule by physical force. Neither camp holds freedom as a value. The conservatives want to rule man’s consciousness; the liberals, his body."--http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/conservatives.html

How Economics is Distorted by Political Ideology
Yaron Brook



Reality proves they're right. Look around.

 

Don't let it go.

 

You have the players mixed up. It is the Democrat governors who are forcing the draconian measures on people, locking them up, enforcing an authoritarian government -- and looking for ways to maintain it, and keeping the economy closed. It is Pelosi and the Democrats (with one or two no-account Rinos) who want to spend $4 trillion of the yet unborn's money for her today's Christmas list, and wanted to spend much of the first support bill on their pet projects.

How can you get things so 180 degrees out of phase? The liberals are the ones that denigrate the religious realm, that support heavy censorship, support government control of ideas, people, the press, and education. You are correct that liberals advocate government control of production, business, employment, wages and profits, though it is not clear if you think that is good (it is not) or bad. True conservatives despise government control of man's spirit (or for that matter man's anything), oppose censorship by anyone or the rule of any intellect. You are confusing government "establishment" of morality and religion, which conservatives abhor, with a government founded on moral principles on the premise that without virtue at its base one cannot have a democratic civil society, which conservatives believe.

 

A poser as suspected.

 

And who wants to control your bedroom fun? And who wants to control your reproductive decisions? And who wants to prevent companies from going over seas? And who wants prayer in schools? And who wants to tell you what you can and cannot read? And who created the EPA? And who wants the government educating the children? And who supports the sacrifice of one to the many?

Reality shows the republicans as tyrannical as the Democrats, just different sides of the same authoritarian coin, heads your actions, tails your soul. That’s the only difference.

Liberty means freedom of thought and action protected by a moral government, not dictated to by a totalitarian monster pock-marked by the puss-filled sores of altruism.

Ayn Rand: “Freedom, in a political context, means freedom from government coercion. It does not mean freedom from the landlord, or freedom from the employer, or freedom from the laws of nature which do not provide men with automatic prosperity. It means freedom from the coercive power of the state—and nothing else.“—http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/freedom.html

 

One difficulty is that while liberal, progressive, and Democrat are nearly synonymous, conservative and Republican are not necessarily in that Republicans come in different types. But I'll play along:
Republican conservatives do not want to control bedroom fun, though I don't think Democrats do either. However, Republicans and probably most Democrats want to restrict some aspects of bedroom fun, rape, incest, and child molestation for instance.
Republicans do not want to control anybody's reproductive decisions. However, they do want to restrict some reproductive decisions, like those that include murder for example. Granted there are a few outlying zealots, mostly Republican but many Democrats who don't want any method of birth control, mainly on religious grounds, to be used.
Both groups would prefer companies stay in America, but neither can prevent companies from going overseas.
Democrats want to control prayer in schools, mostly by banning it. Republicans just want to exercise their freedom to pray or not.
Democrats support censorship to a much greater degree than a few Republicans. If they could they would ban talk radio and control/censor the internet in a New York second.
Nixon and Ruckelshaus created the EPA.
Democrats want to control education, especially what is taught. If they could they would ban charter schools and home schooling in a heartbeat. They fight the hardest to prevent vouchers. However, some Republicans want to stick their federal nose in the schooling tent where it doesn't belong, and there are a few dingbat Republicans at the state and local level.
I have no idea what "sacrifice of one to the many" means.

I do like your general sentiment, though. I agree fully with your Any Rand quote.

 

mostly all right is a term that refers to the extreme far-right neo-nazis and other white supremacist. The KKK the Aryan brotherhood those groups. Militant white supremacist

The term alt-right was actually created by Republicans not Democrats. It was created to say that white supremacists and neo-nazis are not true Republicans. That they follow an alternate view compared to the true Republicans

 

There are no true republicans, if you mean those that defend a constitutional representative government limited to protecting the rights of the individual. What they’ve become is nationalistic xenophobic authoritarian religious dogmatists.

 

Thanks.

 

Utter bilge. There are many Republicans but few Democrats who are true constitutional conservatives. Only the outlying fringe so-called alt-right Republicans are as you describe. Very few main stream Republicans are either nationalistic, xenophobic, authoritarian, or religious dogmatists. It is mostly Democrats who are always discussing nationalism, though in a derogatory manner, which shows their fixation. It is Democrats who show their hypocrisy with foreigners and minorities by loudly and fraudulently proclaiming how much they love them. It is Democrats that want a totalitarian government with only them in control. It is Democrats who are obsessed with and against other people's religion.

 

Hell, Trump is the very definition of a republican. You really believe Trump supports capitalism, reason, and individual rights? Really?

Democrats want to rule your wallet, Republicans your soul. Reality is reality. Proof? Reality. Time to start being an objective observer, and stop being a blind loyalist.

 

That's the lie being feed to the blind loyalists. The republicans are leading America to a fascist dictatorship under the banner of self-sacrifice, obedience to God, and the common good as they define it, religious Nationalism. The democrats are fighting for a socialist dictatorship under the banner of self-sacrifice, obedience to the state, and the common good as they define it, social equality and justice. Both believe the power of the state to rule in the name of the general welfare. Neither respect liberty, individualism, or reason.

The republicans not longer fight for capitalism and individualism, they fight for state control of our lives according to their divine inspiration.

 

And when did fun become defined as rape, incest, and child molestation? I'm referring to sexual activities of consenting adults.

And who wants to jail you for exercising your reproductive rights? Kay Ivey? A republican? My, my, my.

The sacrifice of the one to the many? Really? You have no idea? Let's see: If my blood could be used to save those infected by the COVID-19, and I want to sell it at a $100/drop, how fast would the republicans support the extraction of my precious blood by force for the common good? A second? Maybe.

And thanks.