She was a hypocrite, but many of the things she said were correct. She was alright, but not really as good as other individualist philosophers. 6/10

>>5065 what individualist philosophers would you recommend for libertarians? also curious on Rand hypocrisy, if you can elaborate further I'd appreciate

She believed that the state should exist. She believed in copyright. Ayn Rand and her associates are a jewish red-herring. Shes not ancap and not shes libertarian, shes an atheist conservative. That's it. She should be avoided. Don't let statists like OP try to derail a conversation by bringing her up. She is irrelevant. >>5067 Did you read hoppe and bastiat already?

>>5069 You do realise many of libertarian economists which helped shape libertarianism are jewish right?

>>5072 Yes, some more than others, and all must be tread with carefully. The sovereignty of the individual and a system with a state that doesn't involve itself with jewish interests, are often both called libertarian but obviously aren't the same thing. Look at say rand and rothbard, rands group was against rothbards for their degeneracy and promotion of prostitution and drugs, where at the same time rands group wanted a strong military to protect isreal and democracy. This is whats on the face of libertarianism, this is the lean the jews take.

>>5073 It's almost like jews are also individual humans who disagree with each other instead of an unified group. Who would have thought.

>>5076 The point I was trying to show is that nether of them were about liberty at heart, and that their ideas don't at all conflict. The jews play all sides while never really changing or differing in their habitual views.

>>5077 Are you sure?

>>5077 Honestly it amazes me how people who spew shit like this don't even consider the far easier alternative. How many assumptions do you need to make to believe that instead of "There are jews, jews are individuals like any other race and they disagree with each other". I'm asking geniuently, you have to literally assume that jews are some sort of other species that are collectivistic instead of individualistic like humans are. Where the hell do you take that assumption?

>>5079 >Where the hell do you take that assumption? The brain is a physical thing. Every thought you have, every feeling, impulse is physical; and is no different than any other part of the body of being molded by your genes. Men and women don't have the same brains any more than the same bodies. And same can be said for people of different races, that their brains, like their faces, are not the same; and are more inclined than others to certain thoughts,behaviors, emotions etc. Where the hell do you come with the assumption that the brain ignores the conditions the rest of the body, and bodies and brains of every other thing in existence? Besides out fear of the status quo, and the state. >you have to literally assume that jews are some sort of other species that are collectivistic instead of individualistic I do not. WIth the same means and tools and conditions and information come the same conclusions. The brain being that tool, condition, information and means to process it.

>>5080 The make-up of the brain for humans, although not the same, still operates under the same developmental rules regardless of race. If you know anything about developmental psychology, you should also know that humans are hypersensitive to environmental factors, to such an extent where even interacting with a fetus can change their disposition and personality. You're making a gigantic fucking assumption saying that you can say what kind of ideas and behavior are specific for a race, when all of humanity follows basically the same general framework of mental development, on the way of which they develop individuality. Granted, you can gleam some tendencies **women tend to get stuck on the third stage of Kohlberg's morality spectrum for example", but those aren't absolutes nor as major to not have big groups of individuals that deviate from the standards. Although women tend to get stuck on Stage 3 of Kohlberg's development, that doesn't mean that there are no women that go above that, there is quite a lot of them, just statistically less than men. Do you believe that jews operate under a different framework somehow? Or that they do not develop correctly? Can you prove such a thing if it's the case.

>>5082 Would you say that its feminine to have morality past level 3? What study did you conduct to come to that conclusion? Its pretty evident no doubt, but how many credible psychological papers are there saying women are morally stunted? Or that social contract is a higher moral than law and that the later should be disregarded entirely? There are plenty that our own experience and reason can show that no official paper is ever going to support. The jews are synonymous with the state and run the western world, its culture and beliefs are their reflection. Its law not to be against them. Why strain yourself for them here?

>>5082 >Brains are physically wired differently >They just develop the same for the benefit of my raceless philosophy somehow

Switched devices so IDs change. >>5084 Wow anon! It's like the human species can have individual differences while still existing under the same rules! I'll surprise you that despite the individual differences between humans, fetal development stays largely the same... Interesting huh? It's almost as if this is normal for specimens or the same species. >>5083 Did you read my post? It's masculine to have morality past level 3. Level 3 is where females usually get stuck on. Kohlberg and later studies were based around researching the moral beliefs of kids in different stages of development and also adults. It is not that stage 5 and 6 are necessarily better, they simply develop later in development (though I would argue it is better personally). Turns out that when people are asked moral dillemas, they tend to answer with basically the same logic depending on their development stage, which is tied to the development of brain capabilities. The basis of women getting stuck on stage 3 comes simply from women adults explaining their moral reasoning with stage 3 logic during research. Individuality starts to form past stage 4 with most adult people (normalfags) getting stuck on stage 4 with women on stage 3. Kohlberg believed women are morally stunted due to effects of his research while if you look at the response to his work (made by a woman) you'll see that her argument is basically "Well its not that we get stuck on stage 3, it's just that women have a different moral framework than men more based around relations between people!" which ironically proves Kohlberg's point. And its not that women that crossed the stage 3 barrier exist, they're just rarer. It's not like this is baseless either, we have empirical proof for all of this, and whether something stands or not is down to logical examination of the subject. As for "why strain yourself for Jews", its because the whole idea of "Jewish rule" is inaccurate. I am not going to pretend that Israel and Jewish individuals don't have a large influence over the world of politics. But I do not believe this is due to some kind of racial predisposition, nor do I believe that every jew is the same, nor do I believe it is exclusively Jews running the world. I don't see any basis in treating Jews as anything else than individuals with their own personal motivations, the idea of them being some kind of parasitic hive mind is nigsoc collectivist brain rot for me, and a giant cope from one of the most thieving regimes or history. There were Jews which had good influence on the world, there were Jews which had bad influence on the world. This is true for any other group. There were Jewish artists, creators, scientists who did a lot of good for the world just as there were rabbis, shitty philosophers like Marx and criminals like the ones committing crimes against humanity in Israel, and insidious bankers. Just like there were good and bad anglos, kraurs and Germans. Whether the environment of an individual pushes them towards good or bad is another thing entirely.

>>5089 Yes I did. I was making a point. If you'd say it was masculine to have morality past level 3 and feminine to have morality at or below it, then why can't you say that its jewish to swindle or parasite? If much in the same way the nonexistent women wouldn't change that sentiment any more than the nonexistent jew.

>>5090 Because there exist females beyond stage 3. There exist females with morality on stage 4, 5 and 6, it's just that they are slightly more predisposed to getting stuck on stage 3. Besides I have not seen any proof of jewish "parasitical" behaviour, so far jews have both historically and socially acted the same way as any other human did. With many of them being cunts, with some good people thrown in. My point is that if jews were to be "parasitic" you would have to prove that they in some way either develop differently than other humans or that they aren't developing properly. Otherwise why should one assume that they follow any other framework as humans? Besides that, you would also have to prove that such a difference is racial and not for example religious/cultural/environmental because humans in abusive environments have a tendency to go backwards or get stuck in moral development if bad behaviour is rewarded. Do you have an alternative framework for development of Jews? Can you prove that they develop differently to humans to begin with? Do you have any proof for the idea that they get stuck on a stage of moral development for example? There is proof of females getting stuck, but even then that doesn't include all females, many of which still develop normally.

I am an Objectivist, or at least used to be one. I used to post on 8chan's /liberty/ back in '16-'17. I am extremely right wing now, but I still see the value in reading what Ayn Rand wrote.

Americans are completely retarded now. Americans scream that there's nothing wrong with Trump paying taxes to China if Biden did, too. Americans think being groped by the TSA is just fine if Muslims are, too. Americans say tyranny is wonderful if North Korea is a police state, too.

>>5154 I was one in 2005 or so. I am 39 years old, about to be 40

The world used to have no cities. City-states then started appearing. City-states led to countries. Now there is a global government. Hopefully, countries will break into small villages again when everything collapses. Iceland is not a free country, but maybe small places are more likely of having peace if everyone has similar values and backgrounds and everybody knows each other.