Today’s podcast features a post-election conversation with Yaron Brook. How should we interpret this week’s election results? Has a new class of voter been created by Obama’s encouragement and moral justification of the entitlement state? I’ll also ask Yaron about Obama’s and the Democrats’ statements, actions and revelations in just the few days since the election, and what they tell us to expect during the next four years. What do Speaker Boehner’s statements say about our prognosis for the next four years? Finally, what should we do now?
Call in, or participate in the chat room, to add your questions and comments to the mix!
Today’s live show and, afterwards, the archived podcast, can be accessed here.
To access the show page at BlogTalk Radio, which will allow you to check out a past episode, or to subscribe to the recorded archives via iTunes and other services, use this link.
To access the iTunes store page for “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard,” where you can find past episodes, subscribe, and leave ratings and reviews (pretty please!), use this link.
And finally, to check out our Indiegogo campaign, which will help “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard” reach an even larger audience in 2013, use this link.
11 responses to “Post-Election Discussion with Yaron Brook, Today at 5 p.m. PST (8 p.m. EST)”
[audio src="http://www.kingworldnews.com/kingworldnews/Broadcast/Entries/2012/11/11_Rob_Arnott_files/Rob%20Arnott%2011%3A11%3A2012.mp3" /]
Interesting…. I, too, thought that months ago: that Romney would be worse for financial markets than Obama, owing to the former’s chameleon (read: secretive) character and convictions (assuming he has any). Our very own fuhrer, on the other hand, is a near-fully predictable Known Quantity. (…. But WHAT a quantity…. A “minus-5”, I think I had him at. If pressed, I think I’d go to a minus-10, about now.)
This is a real milestone!
The first secondary book about Objectivism in Spanish, by the well known Argentine objectivist, Ricardo Rojas, has been published.
Presentación del libro:
“Realidad, razón y egoísmo.
El pensamiento de Ayn Rand”
“Reality, reason and egoism.
The thought of Ayn Rand”
This is much needed by the Spanish speaking world and may be the beginning of objectivist scholarship in Latin American culture. Civilization may die out the the US but perhaps it will continue elsewhere.
“Civilization may die out [in] the US but perhaps it will continue elsewhere.” Yes, the current most likely candidates (for U.S. residents) appear to be Canada and New Zealand. A pity neither of them are nuclear powers (are they?); else, they would be an immediate potential refuge. Otherwise, the world as it is–NOT (for me).
I’d like to throw out an idea I brought up in the show’s chatroom. It’s evident after the election we’re going to have to become more pro-active and spread the message and philosophy of Objectivism.
In the Twitterverse, I’d like to see a hashtag that gives Objectivism some traction without the baggage that comes along with the popular hashtags used by people that may already be Objectivists (or are sympathetic to Objectivism) but identify themselves in their hashtags as conservatives or libertarians
#tlot has the baggage of the anarchists (and we are not libertarians)
#tcot has the baggage of the religious conservatives
#AynRand works but it comes at a price, it attracts trolls and people that are sympathetic to the message but who will disown the tag when pushed, kind of like how Paul Ryan is willing to promote Rand in private but turns traitor in public when push comes to shove. I’d like to see a hashtag that draws people to Objectivism (and will keep them around long enough to survive the hazing that comes along with identifying as an Objectivist.)
The idea is to engage without alienating and create some exposure to attract more attention to Objectivism and Ayn Rand.
#WWJGD (what would John Galt Do)
I’m curious how many Objectivists are on Twitter but are in the closet
“… Paul Ryan is willing to promote Rand in private …” Really? News to me. I think he is only a lightweight phony; a dilettante; a dabbler. So I certainly HOPE he isn’t trying to “promote Rand in private”! (For myself, I tried to vote him out, in our state elections. To no avail. No matter; Wisconsin probably deserves him.)
Thanks for another interesting podcast. I applaud Dr. Brooks’ clear-sightedness. (And his comments concerning U.S. foreign policy and conduct, on the previous cast, were especially illuminating to me. My thanks to him.)
But I also do wish to make one point, that may be slightly at odds with his and your take on the emergence of “the entitlement society.” And that is: we musn’t any of us ever forget that American governments–local, state, and federal–long ago declared absolute right to our material sustenance, in the form of taxation. That, more than anything else, cultivates an “entitlement” mindset. I myself–who am a staunch Objectivist–feel entirely “entitled” to every penny I can extract from the armed thieves in Washington (and, in my case, Madison WI)–and I will take it greedily, without a second thought. On occasion, I even exert effort (in the way of active application) to obtain it. Having taken my money by force, these governments OWE ME–as the federal and other state governments owe every single “taxpayer” in the land.
Taking property and funds by force: THAT is how to cultivate an “entitlement mindset.” I don’t “blame” many of the entitlement-seekers, in the slightest.
Governments do not have or produce anything. So you cannot take anything from THEM. You can only consume (at the price of the subservience you proffer by your application) the loot they have taken from others.
Yes, the politicians, bureaucrats and moochers owe you. But you are not receiving payment from THEM when you consume something they have looted. You are becoming one of them. The loot you receive necessarily comes from innocent producers.
Re your first paragraph: Precisely so–sort of. But you don’t notice, or forget to mention, that I myself am one of those anonymous “others” from whom the loot has been taken, and is being taken. And there is no “subservience” in my retrieving “my portion” of it; quite the opposite. The subservience actually occurs when I (and you, and all the other victims) first surrender it to them (under threat of force).
Re your second paragraph: Yes, the loot I retrieve DOES “necessarily” come “from innocent producers”–of whom, I am one.
Robert Ringer also wants to start a new political party for capitalists. He does not think that the Republican Party can be reformed. I wanted to do this in 2005 and even started writing a charter back then. Let the RP remain the party of the religious and those that want to continue pretending they believe in small government. We don’t need anymore Nixen-Dole-Romneys.
Try to stay optimistic.
A “third party” is our only hope; of that, I (at least), have no doubt whatsoever…. But I know next-to-nothing of Mr. Ringer. The last I heard of him, he was penning second-rate pop psychology books. (Perhaps I need to enlighten myself–not for the first time.)