Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "Libertarian Exposes His Deranged Ideology In Debate With Sam Seder" video.

It's not about feelings or moral condemnation. Lucid thinking proves him wrong. His very existence depends on other people. The very language he uses to express his "ideas" depends for its existence on other people. The money that counts as money depends for its existence on other people. He is incoherent.
8
This is the philosophy of America. You think something else is going on in the US? This is always the case. GoFundMe is our medical care.
6
Alan Greenspan was one of Rand's disciples. She is hugely influential.
5
@komoriaimi Even if the most charitable people are libertarians, and even if plenty of libertarians are charitable, they are still wrong.
5
@fluidthought42 He's completely incoherent. His very existence depends on other people. The language he uses to speak depends for its very existence on other people. The money that counts as money could not be money were it not for other people.
4
@hizzlemobizzle Alan Greenspan was one of her ardent followers. You may not know how influentual Ayn Rand was. She even influenced American psychotherapy. Several prominent Republicans and Silicon Valley billionaires follow her today.
3
@komoriaimi Why? Epstein found it personally advantageous to give millions to charity. His friend Bill Gates wanted to leverage his charity for a Nobel Peace Prize, and thought Jeff could help out. You may not understand what a billion dollars is.
3
Anyone who gets away with it is a profit maximizer who gets rich. Notice how hard it is for Seder to argue against it? That's because this NUT's credo is the American credo.
2
I was reading Orwell and Mark Twain. Or by 14, Dostoevsky, come to think of it.
2
Of course he depends on the dollar being the global reserve currency for his "lifestyle," and the status of the dollar ultimately comes out of the barrel of a gun. But let's not quibble.
2
Cali Meldron My point is that their "charity" is always in exchange for something that these billionaires want to control, including their images and reputations. Their "charity" is not like yours or mine. When you give, you feel it. How is this a mystery?
2
@Nightriser271828 Obviously. A great point. It is so annoying when you hear bougie types unable to come up with any lucid argument, and instead say, "well that's not very nice." He likes not being nice.
2
@impliedlines711 You clearly know nothing about Victor Hugo!
1
@impliedlines711 Why would I bother? I have better things to read. The preface to Murakami's Wind/Pinball is great.
1
@impliedlines711 You read it and don't know? The free spirit that he was, the dreamlike coincidences, the intense intuition, the way he chose to live.
1
@impliedlines711 Oh. That's personal.
1
@impliedlines711 You implicitly asked why I didn't read the entire thread before commenting. I answered that question. Tell me why in this instance that was wrong of me.
1
@impliedlines711 The thread begins with the concept of life-changing literature.
1
@impliedlines711 Not at all. I commented on your very first post about Victor Hugo, which was wrong. That simple.
1
@impliedlines711 Interesting. I found Paint It Black unreadable. Had to put it down. Well. Now you know why I didn't read the thread before posting.
1
@impliedlines711 Rand isn't even a real writer as far as I can see. She could shape up a screenplay. Maybe. Well, she certainly was hired to do so enough times.
1
@impliedlines711 My motivations were to defend Hugo from the anhistorical and anachronistic charge of "conservatism," toward someone who risked his life to gain a grant of asylum in Belgium for fleeing Communards who had escaped massacre. Hugo was the most prominent opponent of the death penalty of his time, or any time. We still have a death penalty. If only we had "conservatives" like that.
1
@impliedlines711 BTW, your replies are delayed from appearing, at least to me. Gotta love tech. We never know where the glitch, or the surveillance, might be. Sort of like the panopticon principle.
1
@impliedlines711 Oh yeah, Fitch. I had to put down White Oleander, too. Overwritten to the point of parody. I was dumbfounded. Is she a friend of yours?
1
@impliedlines711 Okay. To keep it basic: someone who defended the Communards, even if he wasn't a supporter of the Commune from its inception, is not conservative. Imagine a person who has very serious misgivings about the BPP but provides safehouses and legal representation for them after Fred Hampton and Mark Clark are assassinated. That's anachronistic as well, but the analogy is sound. Suppose, also, that person blurted out something racially insensitive sometimes. Or, suppose someone who hid Jews from Nazis and forged papers for them once said "y*d." Not a good look on twitter, true.
1
@impliedlines711 I remember a talk I heard in Minnesota from a retired judge, quite elderly, who was one of the staunchest advocates of a woman's right to choose, and who actually played a major role in abortion becoming legalized. He still used the word "gal."
1
@impliedlines711 I didn't say you said he was a monster, nor that I think he should be lionized. Oh well, we're both tired I guess.
1
@impliedlines711 I agree that anthropology was essentially nonexistent at the time. I'd have to see a sample of Hugo's writings, not just a comment here or there, in the original, to judge. For example, an attorney will argue by conceding a point he knows he cannot win. So, even a death penalty opponent may argue that if we believe death should only apply to the worst of the worst (typical trope in such cases), that precludes people who committed their crimes as minors, or who were mentally disabled at the time of the crime, or psychotic at the time of execution, etc. You concede what you think you can't win. The lawyer doesn't dare bring up blanket opposition to the death penalty, or he risks limiting its application in the here and now.
1
@impliedlines711 "People grow and improve." He wasn't on a self-actualization quest or journey. He risked his life.
1
@impliedlines711 Actually, you'd be a good person to ask: I'm trying to decide whether to read DeLillo's Underworld. What did you think of it?
1
@impliedlines711 I got a kick out of Cosmopolis. Short, a fast read. Offended a lot of people, LOL. It didn't get good reviews but I loved it. More appreciated abroad, I think.
1
The people who get rich are the ones who figure out how to offload risk on others while retaining rewards for themselves. This guy must never have heard of financial engineering. That is a major now.
1
@smilo_don EXACTLY
1
@hizzlemobizzle Very well stated. ^^^^^^^
1
The people who made the decision DIDN'T die in the collapse, you tool. They might lose some money. Maybe. Tony Hayward left BP and got fabulously RICHER after the Gulf well blew. HSBC laundered drug money and was TBTF.
1
He would say you're entitled to try to persuade him, and nothing more.
1
@jeeither Exactly. He's common. Charity is acceptable only where it is purely a choice.
1