PaperDetective

Mandatory Community Service = America now fascist & Fuehrer is Obama

87 posts in this topic

You know, I think that's a very important question: what exactly is the state of the American people? Is it Phil's position, which is highly pessimistic, or Betsy's position, which is (relatively) highly optimistic? Something in between? Or, if not a mere matter of degrees, perhaps the American population is just incredibly varied--that is, a jumbled mess of often conflicting and contradictory concretes?

The American population is a collection of individuals with free will and some individuals matter more than others.

In an intellectual battle, you do not need to convert everyone. History is made by minorities—or, more precisely, history is made by intellectual movements, which are created by minorities. Who belongs to these minorities? Anyone who is able and willing actively to concern himself with intellectual issues. Here, it is not quantity, but quality that counts (the quality—and consistency—of the ideas one is advocating).

It doesn't matter if the majority is intellectually bankrupt. All that is necessary is to find a few quality people and supply them with quality ideas.

I ask, because if one wants to influence the culture, then one needs to have a very objective and accurate read on its actual state.

More important, one needs to be a good judge of people so that one can find the quality people and one needs to understand Objectivism and how to apply it to reality so that one can give those people the ideas they need.

It seems to me that we really don't... For example, I don't agree with Phil's seemingly broad generalizations, but then again, I don't agree with Betsy's not-so-broad generalization. It doesn't seem to me that any of us can so easily say that we are facing an "ignorant America" nor that "the majority of Americans" hold any particular ideas. Where's the evidence for either position?

My evidence comes from my dealings -- and my considerable success -- in communicating my ideas to friends, family, co-workers, etc.

Betsy, I agreed with you almost 100% until the last part: you can't make claims about the "majority of Americans" based on your own experiences. For example, I live in California, where most of my coworkers and people I run into on a daily basis are very Leftist (bad luck on my part, maybe) while much of my immediate family is very irrational. So, if I were to draw from my own experiences, I'd have to conclude the opposite as you.

So, I'd say you answered the question, at least in terms of how one should proceed in trying to change the culture: America's a mix of different levels of rationality and honesty, and it's likely impossible (and unnecessary) to make any broad generalizations in either direction. Rather, one picks out and speaks to the honest folks and ignores the rest. That makes sense to me, and clarifies a point for me.

But if one is going to make predictions about the likelihood of success, and adopt an attitude of pessimism or optimism in response, one needs better evidence than I've personally seen. However, that's off my original point, so this is a good enough place to stop.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Betsy, I agreed with you almost 100% until the last part: you can't make claims about the "majority of Americans" based on your own experiences.

I wasn't making any claims about the majority since I don't think that matters. I was referring to my experience and success in finding Good Objectivist Material ™ and turning them on to Ayn Rand.

For example, I live in California, where most of my coworkers and people I run into on a daily basis are very Leftist (bad luck on my part, maybe) while much of my immediate family is very irrational. So, if I were to draw from my own experiences, I'd have to conclude the opposite as you.

I live in California too and most of my family are Jewish liberal Democrats, but among that group I have found some wonderful individuals who are open to my message. Those are the ones who really count.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wasn't making any claims about the majority since I don't think that matters.

Why doesn't it matter, when that majority will cheerfully vote statists into power over everybody in the country, including those who know better?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wasn't making any claims about the majority since I don't think that matters.

Why doesn't it matter, when that majority will cheerfully vote statists into power over everybody in the country, including those who know better?

Forming alliances and strengthening the thinking minority is the only way to prevent that from happening or to change, avoid, or cope with it if it should happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A heavy handed imposition of community service would run square into the 13-th amendment.

The imposition of the military draft was allowed under the 13th Amendment, so imposing "community service" ought to be a piece of cake.

Alas! You may have a point there. All the worse then.

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama and Biden will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

$40/hour for community service? That's good pay.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not really volunteering if you get paid for it. I wonder if ARI can scale up their program so we'll get many, many hundreds or thousands of people doing activism against volunteering =)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama and Biden will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

$40/hour for community service? That's good pay.

Picking up a penny lying on the ground pays at a rate of approximately $36.00/hour, and without the threat that it will become mandatory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Betsy, I agreed with you almost 100% until the last part: you can't make claims about the "majority of Americans" based on your own experiences.

I wasn't making any claims about the majority since I don't think that matters. I was referring to my experience and success in finding Good Objectivist Material and turning them on to Ayn Rand.

For example, I live in California, where most of my coworkers and people I run into on a daily basis are very Leftist (bad luck on my part, maybe) while much of my immediate family is very irrational. So, if I were to draw from my own experiences, I'd have to conclude the opposite as you.

I live in California too and most of my family are Jewish liberal Democrats, but among that group I have found some wonderful individuals who are open to my message. Those are the ones who really count.

Well, you did write earlier "but the majority of Americans still...", which is why I brought that up. But, I don't mean to be picky.

I'm happy for you that you've found some individuals among your family who are open to your message. I haven't been that lucky (although, my family's much smaller, so...).

In any event, I do agree with you completely that the majority doesn't matter, and that--along with the difficulty in defining a "majority" view--is why I usually refrain from making any kind of generalization along those lines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I wasn't making any claims about the majority since I don't think that matters.

Why doesn't it matter, when that majority will cheerfully vote statists into power over everybody in the country, including those who know better?

I'll go ahead and quote Ayn Rand here, because I think it's important. From the Objectivism CD-ROM, The Ayn Rand Letter, Vol. 1, No. 7, Jan. 3, 1972:

If you are seriously interested in fighting for a better world, begin by identifying the nature of the problem. The battle is primarily intellectual (philosophical), not political. Politics is the last consequence, the practical implementation, of the fundamental (metaphysical-epistemological-ethical) ideas that dominate a given nation's culture. You cannot fight or change the consequences without fighting and changing the cause; nor can you attempt any practical implementation without knowing what you want to implement.

In an intellectual battle, you do not need to convert everyone. History is made by minorities--or, more precisely, history is made by intellectual movements, which are not created by minorities. Who belongs to these minorities? Anyone who is able and willing actively to concern himself with intellectual issues. Here, it is not quantity, but quality, that counts (the quality--and consistency--of the ideas one is advocating).

An intellectual movement does not start with organized action. Whom would one organize? A philosophical battle is a battle for men's minds, not an attempt to enlist blind followers. Ideas can be propagated only by men who understand them. An organized movement has to be preceded by an educational campaign, which requires trained--self-trained--teachers (self-trained in the sense that a philosopher can offer you the material of knowledge, but it is your own mind that has to absorb it). Such training is the first requirement for being a doctor during an ideological epidemic--and the precondition of any attempt to "change the world."

I can't add anything to that quote, I don't think, and so I'll let it stand on its own in answering just about all of the "political" debates in which I've allowed myself to get involved.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I assume that, at least initially, that putting in time for something like Salvation Army or United Way would count as public service.

Based on that assumption could college students form franchisable not-for-profits that were focused on cultivating Ayn Rand's ideas and carrying out specific actions related to them, and then find ways for high-schoolers, and others forced into public service to help them? In fact, the mission of the nonprofit could be to educate about the irrationality of what they are being forced to do.

I don't doubt that someone could try this, but I wonder if it would be considered a victory for the Obama camp, since it IS public service... Would it be proper to frame the charter of the nonprofit to clearly state that the service, while public, was dedicated to educating the public about the error of mandatory community service? Would it be considered "unsanctioned" community service, if they did? Would it be considered "unsanctioned" regardless of what was said, if those doing it agreed with proper political principles?

It seems to me that at the very least it would be a way of riding out the storm, and could possibly force clarifications of the concept of community service until it was described in naked terms as the sacrifice it is and that it demands, and also the nature of sacrifice and its corollaries with death.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I assume that, at least initially, that putting in time for something like Salvation Army or United Way would count as public service.

Based on that assumption could college students form franchisable not-for-profits that were focused on cultivating Ayn Rand's ideas and carrying out specific actions related to them, and then find ways for high-schoolers, and others forced into public service to help them? In fact, the mission of the nonprofit could be to educate about the irrationality of what they are being forced to do.

I don't doubt that someone could try this, but I wonder if it would be considered a victory for the Obama camp, since it IS public service... Would it be proper to frame the charter of the nonprofit to clearly state that the service, while public, was dedicated to educating the public about the error of mandatory community service? Would it be considered "unsanctioned" community service, if they did? Would it be considered "unsanctioned" regardless of what was said, if those doing it agreed with proper political principles?

It seems to me that at the very least it would be a way of riding out the storm, and could possibly force clarifications of the concept of community service until it was described in naked terms as the sacrifice it is and that it demands, and also the nature of sacrifice and its corollaries with death.

If I remember correctly ARI did exactly that. Students who were required by their schools to perform service could fullfill the mandate when they volunteered for ARI, which is a 501©3 tax exempt organization.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
A philosophical battle is a battle for men's minds, not an attempt to enlist blind followers.

That assumes there are enough minds to turn the tide of outright madness followed by the other 99% of a society. Ayn Rand fled Russia for a reason. Kira died trying.

The "land of the free" now has one of, if not the largest, percentage of its population in prisons, largely from non-objective laws. It just voted in a President who hates the country and associated for 100% of his adult life with systematically vicious monsters, a fact that was broadly known and disseminated in electronic media - a man who has promised to make destroying the best men his top priority, a goal enthusiastically cheered by his millions of supporters.

The end of America can be be pushed back, I do not believe it can be reversed at this point.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The end of America can be be pushed back, I do not believe it can be reversed at this point.

As long as we still have a free press, freedom of expression, and freedom of association (and this forum is proof that we do), then I can't help but say that you have absolutely no grounds for making such a statement. To me, it seems a bit arbitrary.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Obama just published on his site at http://www.change.gov/americaserves/ that he wants to introduce 'mandatory community service' in almost every group of society.

This is identical to Hitler's Hitler-Jugend, his hiking and social 'clubs', Brownshirts, League of German Girls, Deutsches Jungvolk, etc.

'Duty to country' is what Obama is selling to Americans and they are buying it. The way he sells it is in a package deal where he packed the evil of 'community' service in a wrapping of 'Original American Values'. The wrapping is of course pure deceit and untrue.

That Americans are in majority ripe for this choice to become fascist, is no surprise. Around me left and right I see people talking all the time and advertising that they belong to a 'community' and that they 'serve a community'. IT is considered a 'badge of honor' now to act on one's 'duty to country'. Bush's altruist policies were already a prequel to this.

Consider what won Obama his election and compare that with Hitler's winning of his elections.

Both organized the youth in their country and got them to vote in majority for them. The new Fuehrer Obama just applied the lessons he learned from Hitler himself.

A small bright spot: My two favorite regional radio hosts at 96.9FM (WTKK) are now mentioning Ayn Rand and especially Atlas Shrugged on a DAILY basis and multiple times in their programs. They are asking themselves already if Atlas should shrug (so do I).

From Little Green Footballs, it looks like Obama's already changing his plan to remove the "requirement" aspect. He could be engaging in subterfuge, or he could have already realized the potential unpopularity of his plan. Or some combination of both. The point is, although things are bad, they're not necessarily that bad, and particularly not if better ideas are presented to the right people.

And for those who are particularly pessimistic, I don't think one can underestimate the difference that the Internet makes in disseminating ideas--good and bad, granted, but as we know good ideas will necessarily drive out bad for those people who matter.

I simply refuse to believe it's over yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for those who are particularly pessimistic, I don't think one can underestimate the difference that the Internet makes in disseminating ideas--good and bad, granted, but as we know good ideas will necessarily drive out bad for those people who matter.

I meant, "I don't think one can overestimate the difference that the Internet makes..."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for those who are particularly pessimistic, I don't think one can underestimate the difference that the Internet makes in disseminating ideas--good and bad, granted, but as we know good ideas will necessarily drive out bad for those people who matter.

I simply refuse to believe it's over yet.

"It" isn't over yet, not by a long shot. Simply because I don't see the recovery of America (more broadly - *any* - large population) in some unknown timeframe doesn't mean the future is lost for those who deserve it.

The alternative isn't going to happen overnight or in the very near future. I have temporarily brought up this issue precisely so that those who despair at events in America do not equate that to the end of human civilization. It won't be, not unless humanity deserves to perish, and I do not believe that - not for that portion of humanity that is able and willing to live a human life.

The best of humanity is the most glorious thing in the known universe - and it must not let those are barely past the ape stage, destroy it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
As long as we still have a free press, freedom of expression, and freedom of association (and this forum is proof that we do), then I can't help but say that you have absolutely no grounds for making such a statement. To me, it seems a bit arbitrary.

At what point does the regrettable become the irreversable?

ruveyn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Evidently the thug blinked (temporarily--the club in his hand is still there). Maybe he thinks he's showing his hand too quickly?

From http://littlegreenfootballs.com/article/31...lan_for_a_Draft :

Obama Quietly Revokes His Plan for a Draft

Politics | Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 8:49:23 pm PST

Earlier today we posted about Barack Obama’s plan to require community service from middle school, high school, and college students. This is how it read at the time:

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by developing a
plan to require
50 hours of community service in middle school and high school and 100 hours of community service in college every year. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

Lo and behold. Tonight, after the plan was publicized, Obama has quietly thrown that “requirement” part down the memory hole: America Serves.

The Obama Administration will call on Americans to serve in order to meet the nation’s challenges. President-Elect Obama will expand national service programs like AmeriCorps and Peace Corps and will create a new Classroom Corps to help teachers in underserved schools, as well as a new Health Corps, Clean Energy Corps, and Veterans Corps. Obama will call on citizens of all ages to serve America, by
setting a goal
that all middle school and high school students do 50 hours of community service a year and by developing a plan so that all college students who conduct 100 hours of community service receive a universal and fully refundable tax credit ensuring that the first $4,000 of their college education is completely free. Obama will encourage retiring Americans to serve by improving programs available for individuals over age 55, while at the same time promoting youth programs such as Youth Build and Head Start.

Change!

UPDATE at 11/7/08 9:36:53 pm:

They’re going through the site and cleaning up the places where it said “require community service,” but they missed a spot on this page: Service | Change.gov.

Require 100 Hours of Service in College: Obama and Biden will establish a new American Opportunity Tax Credit that is worth $4,000 a year in exchange for 100 hours of public service a year.

[Emphasis added above] A socialist government "setting a goal" is a euphemism and no less coercive than the original description as a "requirement". The description for public consumption still calls for coercive taxation and discriminatory government funding to force people into service until the mandate can be made more open. This change in wording is an examnple of the exploitation of ambiguity in language to try to keep people from realizing exactly what he has in mind. You can see the deliberate cynicism as the words change before your eyes on the web pages.

Did anyone archive the original pages to document this? It ought to be put back on the web. It's not at http://www.archive.org/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
That assumes there are enough minds to turn the tide of outright madness followed by the other 99% of a society.

All it takes is ONE: one Aristotle, one Aquinas, one Ayn Rand.

The end of America can be be pushed back, I do not believe it can be reversed at this point.

I guess you know that I disagree. Even I once thought that Communism would never be rolled back in Eastern Europe, but I was wrong. I thought that Great Britain was lost, and then came Thatcher. I though Jimmy Carter was as bad as it could get, and then came Ronald Reagan.

It may be earlier than you think, but I don't think it's too late.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And for those who are particularly pessimistic, I don't think one can underestimate the difference that the Internet makes in disseminating ideas--good and bad, granted, but as we know good ideas will necessarily drive out bad for those people who matter.

I simply refuse to believe it's over yet.

"It" isn't over yet, not by a long shot. Simply because I don't see the recovery of America (more broadly - *any* - large population) in some unknown timeframe doesn't mean the future is lost for those who deserve it.

The alternative isn't going to happen overnight or in the very near future. I have temporarily brought up this issue precisely so that those who despair at events in America do not equate that to the end of human civilization. It won't be, not unless humanity deserves to perish, and I do not believe that - not for that portion of humanity that is able and willing to live a human life.

The best of humanity is the most glorious thing in the known universe - and it must not let those are barely past the ape stage, destroy it.

Well, okay, I certainly differ with you on your specific theory about large populations. But, I can't disagree with you on your ultimate conclusions, although I'd take it back a notch: those who despair at this election should not equate it with the end of America. That's where we differ, I think, but there you have it...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
But, I can't disagree with you on your ultimate conclusions, although I'd take it back a notch: those who despair at this election should not equate it with the end of America. That's where we differ, I think, but there you have it...

I think Ayn Rand would agree:

The political ignorance and intellectual disintegration of our age become appallingly evident in a major election year. They range from the lethargic passivity of those who ignore elections as of no consequence-to the frantic hysteria of those who believe that the life or death of a nation is determined on a single Tuesday in November.

Things will get worse as the result of this election, but as long as we fight for and keep freedom of speech, we can come back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Waves waver in the turning tide;

Winds wind south, or north abide;

Stars fade out in the rising sun,

And time is over and just begun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This post shows some disagreements about facts as well as principles.

Before we can agree on anything principles (and their underlying facts) need to be commonly accepted.

A principle that it is irrelevant that a majority of a population supporting an idea is not very relevant for oneself (the bad ideas of a majority of Americans) does not seem practical to me, therefore not valid.

It would fundamentally mean to me that measurements ('majority') do not matter or are of small significance.

Should one then ignore an army of bad guys vying for your life and your propery while you are a small band of people with the right ideas, but not physically qualified to fight those thugs at teh moment when they act on their ideas?

This does not mean that I assign evil the final word, but a battle can only be won when one is actually armed with the power to destroy the enemy 'at the moment' when he attacks you.

Waiting for your good ideas to 'germinate' into other people's minds is not a time you always will have. neither did Ayn Rand, so she fled Russia.

Neither did many rational people left in pre-Nazi Europe, so they fled the Nazis.

Fleeing, a retreat, is no defeat of one's ideas. One lost battle is no loss of a war.

Letting oneself be destroyed in an unwinable battle is. Then it is not evil that wins, but you who left reason behind. I'm not suicidal though.

Again I reiterate that there is a time for 'John Galt speaking' and there is a time where John Galt and his friends decide to head into hiding.

Wheteher that 'retreat' moment is there, or when it will be there, is something that each of you will have to decide, but please do not put it out of your mind and please develop your criteria for recognizing that moment. Many of the 6 million Jews who died at the hands of the Nazis did not have that alarm set up. Their philosophy did not arm them for that. Ours does.

By the way, for anyone who wants a look into the minds of Fuehrer Obama and his thugs, follow their 'words' closely when they speak. They are then at their most transparent and cannot take those words back like on a web site.

Peter

PS

Today I heard on the radio at Meet The Press Valerie Jarrett, co-chair of Fuehrer Obama's transition team talk literally about 'Obama taking POWER and starting to RULE on January 20'. If those typically dictatorial (so also fascist) words do not spell out their bad intentions what does?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PS2

Apologies for the few spelling errors. In my haste dealing with the many things I am juggling right now, I failed to run the last posting through the spelling checker.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites