For those of you with iPods and MP3 players, the admin from PennFans.net has created an RSS/XML feed so you can download the archive.  Please be kind to his bandwidth and only download a few shows at a time.  Use Google Reader, Juice or iTunes to download the shows.  If you are a rational, philosophical, monkey loving human being, you’ll love this podcast.  Hopefully Penn Radio will be back someday, but at least we have the old shows for now:

http://www.pennfans.net/files/audio/pennradio.xml 

Looks like Leonard decided to take a swing at promoting his ideas on the net…  Now all he needs to do is learn how to lower the volume on his microphone and learn what an RSS feed is…

http://www.peikoff.com/MP3FILES/podcast1.mp3

I started writing this post as a criticism of Google’s “Do no evil” policy (when they are clearly doing evil with their blind support of government regulation) but wrestled with myself to write something positive rather than negative.

I recently read a book that got me thinking about self-improvement. Once I am finished with this book I will be sure to post it here. This book reminded me about some books I read before I got heavily into philosophy and the effect they had on me. One of these books was called Think and Grow Rich. This book was written by Napoleon Hill who was a student of Dale Carnegie. Dale Carnegie wrote a lot of self-motivational books like How To Stop Worrying and Start Living, How to Win Friends and Influence People, and The Leader in You. All of these books had the same basic theme: the way you think effects the people you attract, and the people you attract effect the way you think. It’s a very base form of understanding how the human mind works, but I think these books truly did effect my thinking pattern from about 18 years old and on. I didn’t take full advantage of thinking positively until recently and I think that is due to my lack of understanding behind what makes positive thinking produce positive results. I forgot about what I learned from those shoebox philosophy type self-help books.

If you have been a reader of this blog for awhile, you have seen times when I am passionate about spreading my ideas, both in a positive light and a negative light. For awhile I attracted most of my readers by publishing rants and raves against those who I disagreed with. For example, you all know that I hate collectivists and am the first to point out any political policy that violates individual rights. I am fueled to write more of these rants, due to the increased feedback I get. I think the fuel of interaction with like minded individuals, and the intellectual crushing of my opponents gave me a quick and exhilarating feeling that caused me to continue down the path of publishing negative articles. Another example is my atheism and disgust of those who still believe in god. Instead of having disgust in those who choose faith over reason, I should have focused more on promoting reason rather than sticking a stick in a hornets nest of irrational people. Since then I have slowly started to be more motivated with the spread of good ideas rather than the dissemination of harsh criticisms against my opponents. This new motivation is not fueled by those who comment on my posts, but rather the extra energy and motivation I feel when I am speaking positively about my ideas, and leaving negative criticisms of others’ ideas out of the equation. I also find that more positive people begin to enter my life when I promote my good ideas. Now they certainly don’t come in the numbers that my ranting negative posts drew, but I’d rather take quality over quantity.

I think many people have a tendency to get into the bad habit of spending too much time fighting against their opponents rather than simply spreading the ideas that they think are right. The Internet has proven to be a breeding ground of angry, malicious people who are not interested in the spread of ideas. I’m not saying that it is wrong to expose your philosophical opponents for what they are, I am just saying that you will benefit more if you focus on your own ideas and let them speak for themself. If you focus on the good parts of your life (the virtues) then you will attract people who have the same positive outlook as you and you will spread your ideas much more quickly through positive, motivated people than through negative, self destructive people.

So I’m going to start to practice being more positive about my ideas, rather than negative about those who do not hold my ideas. This may not generate the buzz and comment wars that I am used to, but I am really not interested anymore in feeling so angry.

After 12 hours of classes and hundreds of rounds of ammo, I finally decided on a suitable handgun. I know that people get nervous about guns, especially handguns, so let me preface this by saying that my handgun is always in my control, I have gone above and beyond to educate myself about handgun safety, and I do not plan on carrying my handgun on me until I am 100% confident in my ability to use the gun effectively. I think it is important to relay this to my readers because I do not think anyone should consider owning a handgun unless they are ready to take responsibility for the possible consequences associated with this very dangerous weapon. Before you go out and buy a gun, or any weapon, be sure to educate yourself to the fullest. Self defense is your right, but also your responsibility if anything goes wrong.

So, without further hesitation here is my new 9MM M&P Smith and Weston Compact Semi-Automatic Pistol:

Here is how concealable this handgun is:

After weeks of debating this subject I am ready to better define my philosophy. I am no longer an Objectivist because I do not support the idea of a government with a monopoly of protection (which I will refer to as “a state” from this point forward). Objectivism has an inherent contradiction with its support of a state. The contradiction lies with a collective body of any sort violating the non-aggression principle. If you are born within the borders of a state, you are forced to participate in it and this is where the non-aggression contradiction arises. Since you have no choice to where you are born, a state of any form presents you with no choice of self defense. The idea of a country or state is a tribalist and collectivist notion. When you are born within the boundaries of a state, you are subject to a group of individuals who force you to use their protection services. Even in a state that touts a voluntary tax, you are still subject to the rules of the state, and any attempt to form your own protection agency would be stopped with force. There is simply no rational reason to assume that individuals require a government to live rationally. The very idea that this is required assumes that men will generally act irrationally. The idea that anarchy would degrade into gang warfare is a mistrust in people to generally do the right thing.

Pragmatically speaking, I do not think anarchy is a possibility any time soon. I think that ideas need to spread more, and men need a consensus on philosophy before anarchy is able to work properly. I think the reason governments exist today is because of age old fears that men need to be controlled in order to act in a rational manner. I think this view is a poor outlook on humanity and needs to be changed by supporting the spread of ideas. Only with a change in a majority of individuals thinking, only when we can trust each other to be rational, can we evolve into a society that is no longer so afraid that it requires borders, patriotism and government. I think it is wrong for Objectivists to continue to support the idea of a country, state, government or any group of individuals that have a higher right than any individual. I think this idea is dangerous and more destructive when it is backed by the rational axioms of Objectivism. I encourage Objectivists to carefully think about this idea and consider it before writing off anarchy as “no better than a dictatorship”. I understand the knee jerk reaction that anarchy is bad. I had the same reaction when I first considered it. But with further thought, I realize that I can not hold that contradiction any longer. No matter how against practicality it seems. Men are at their best when they are as free as possible, and I see no greater freedom than a society in which men do business with each other completely voluntarily, where the individual is completely responsible for his/her own life, and without any need for a state to protect or control them, because the individual has all of the philosophical tools at their minds disposal to take care of his/her self.

I hesitate to call myself a market anarchist or anarcho-capitalist because these political philosophies fail to recognize important axioms. There is no word for the philosophy I support now, but it is basically Objectivism without the recognition for the need of a state of any form. I will further refine this post as I find points that require clarification. I wrote this fairly quickly and am sure there are pieces missing, so be sure to ask me questions if you are confused by my argument.

*EDIT* Paul McKeever, leader of the Freedom Party in Canada, released this video just a few hours ago:

I will respond to it as soon as I have watched and digested it a bit. I encourage you to do the same.

*EDIT* XOmniverse Responded to Paul’s video:

And Paul responds to XO’s response:

Paul posted this link: Epistemological Anarchy

*EDIT*

The discussion on this topic will continue here.

I am going to keep everyone up to date with the Atlas Shrugged movie by publishing links to any interesting article I find here. If you find any news that should be highlighted, be sure to comment. I will bump this post to the top every time I make an update. I will also be posting these stories to the Facebook group I created: I was an Objectivist before Atlas Shrugged was a movie

*ATLAS SHRUGGED MOVIE NEWSFLASH*

• I was impressed with Perelman. He’s a quirky, self-confident, outspoken maverick, and no doubt those qualities will rub off on this film in countless ways, large and small. Born and raised under the Soviet boot, he identifies with Rand’s strong opposition to collectivism. He doesn’t consider himself to be a creature of the traditional right or the hard left, and since I don’t, either (and neither did Rand), that’s fine with me. He strikes me as an exemplar of the “principled individualism” we promote in The New Individualist
• Atlasphere has a section of their site dedicated to movie updates
• Atlas Shrugged gets a new director
  • According to the report, Lionsgate has hired House of Sand and Fog director Vadim Perelman to helm Shrugged, as well as rewrite Randall Wallace’s script. Angelina Jolie is still attached to star as main character Dagny Taggart.
• Joe Duarte writes, presumably based upon information he gleaned from the Objectivist Center summer seminar:
  • “The word on the street is that the Atlas Shrugged movie project is in “turnaround” status. That means that the producers (Baldwin Entertainment Group) have given up trying to make the movie right now, and are willing to sell the rights to someone else (presumably for their accrued development costs). This is a major turn of events since last year, when the film looked like a sure thing. It’s amazing how fast a project can hit a dead end in the movie business.”
• Angelina Jolie Tells Cinematical ‘Atlas Shrugged’ is Stalled
  • “the thing with Atlas is just, we all feel that it’s one of those projects where if you can’t do it right, you really can’t touch it. So we have not had all the pieces come together. There’s not been a director that’s right to come on, or all of those elements. So until it does, you know, I certainly don’t want to be a part of something that’s just put together to hit ‘this date’.”
• Randall Wallace (New Atlas Shrugged Screenwriter) Makes Cover of Script Magazine
  • “Fortunately, Wallace admires Rand and “gets” a lot of her message. But he’s sometimes a bit confused. For example, he claims that Rand held that “sacrifice and duty and honor are corrupt.” http://www.theatlasphere.com/metablog/641.php
• Status: Announced
  • Comments: The screenplay is nearly complete, and production is scheduled to begin this year (2007).
  • Status Updated: 30 January 2007
  • Note: Since this project is categorized as being in production, the data is subject to change; some data could be removed completely.*
  • http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480239/
• “I have two hours (of screen time) to try to express what Rand believed to an audience, and my responsibility is not only to Ayn Rand, but to the audience, that this be a compelling movie,” Wallace told the Times. “More people will see the movie than will read ‘Atlas Shrugged.’ And the movie has to work.”
  • http://washingtontimes.com/upi/20070114-054617-2233r.htm
• “I can pretty much guarantee you that there won’t be a 30-page speech at the end of the movie, he said. “I have two hours to try to express what Rand believed to an audience, and my responsibility is not only to Ayn Rand, but to the audience, that this be a compelling movie. More people will see the movie than will read Atlas Shrugged. And the movie has to work.
  • http://www.indianexpress.com/sunday/story/20825.html
• “Everybody involved, the producers involved, we all sat down around a table and we all agreed that if we couldn’t do it right, if we couldn’t do it justice, if along the way any one piece didn’t come together like the right director or the right script, then we would all just fold it and not do it. So that’s where we’re at right now. We’re taking it step by step, and we’re going to make damn sure that it’s done right. -Angelina Jolie on Atlas Shrugged the Movie
  • http://www.theatlasphere.com/metablog/594.php
  • http://www.cinematical.com/2006/12/11/junket-report-the-good-shepherd/
• Atlas Shrugged may be turned into ONE movie instead of a trilogy, because Angelina is too damned expensive and Randall Wallace likes writing really really long movies!
  • http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/publish/article_27269287.shtml
• Randall Wallace (writer of Braveheart) is set to be the writer for Atlas Shrugged.
  • http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20061018-063408-8082r
• Angelina Jolie to star as Dagny Taggart. No joke.
  • http://www.variety.com/index.asp?layout=upsell_article&articleID=VR1117950446&categoryID=13&cs=1
• Brad Pitt may star as John Galt, no confirmation yet.
• Same producers as “Ray”:
  • http://www.baldwinent.com/home.html
• David Kelley (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Kelley) of TOC to do “philosophical consulting” on the movie… Co-producer?
  • CONFIRMED! http://imdb.com/title/tt0480239/fullcredits
• Has the same screenplay writer as Hook and Lara Croft Tomb Raider: The Cradle of Life… *shudders*
  • http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0366337/

Why are we raised to believe that the Nobel Peace Prize is so important? I just want to highlight some people who have won this “prestigious” prize over the years:

• Mother Teressa (had a kink for death and suffering)
• Dali Lama (wants to replace communism with serfdom)
• Yasser Arafat (do I need to point out what’s wrong with this guy?)
• Jimmy Carter (peanuts for brains)

Can you find anyone on the list that absolutely does not deserve the prestige and recognition they are given? Tomorrow there will be one more added to the list, and you may just be shocked and appalled at who it is. Why do we pay attention to this award and still hold it as a societal value? I can’t quite figure that one out.

50 years ago yesterday, one of the most important works of fiction to free market capitalists was published.  If you haven’t had a chance to read this book, I suggest you pick up a copy.  If you absolutely must have a preview before you purchase, start with these two important speeches in the book:

• Francisco’s Money Speech (CHANCE OF A SPOILER WARNING:  this speech may give hints that may spoil important parts of the book)
• Galt’s Radio Address (SPOILER WARNING: do not listen to this if you don’t want a crucial mystery in the book spoiled)

Ayn Rand laid out her ideas about life as succinctly as possible in this book, and although I have come to disagree with some of her ideas, I still think this book was pivotal to my philosophical views.  I suggest you pick up a copy of Atlas Shrugged and other works by Ayn Rand, even if you don’t agree with all of her ideas.

I tried to be nice. I really did.

A few months ago, I was having trouble getting my local mailman to take my outgoing mail. I filed a complaint with USPS and they actually got back to me within a few hours and said they would take care of it. I was surprised that they actually had some level of customer service. The next day I went to check my mail and found this:

My mailman was obviously in too much of a hurry to close the loading bin for my entire apartment building’s mail. I tried to close it but unfortunately you need a key to close it. I notified my landlord and they came and closed it.

I filed another complaint with USPS and they said they were sorry and would take care of it. I assumed they did, because a few months went by with no problems. My outgoing mail was being taken and I saw no evidence of careless mailmen. Last week I saw a note on a mailbox next to mine that said, “My mail has been sitting in my mailbox for 4 days. PLEASE take my outgoing mail.” This week I waited FOUR days for my outgoing mail to be sent (sorry Cappy, your check is going to be late). I knew that I’d get nowhere with the complaint department and put a note on my mailbox that said, “Tired of crappy USP “SERVICE”. Take our outgoing mail!” I found my note, my incoming mail, and my outgoing mail in my mailbox. My outgoing mail had been crushed.

I’m done being nice. Fuck you USPS. I wish I had an alternative mail carrier, but unfortunately your coercive monopoly is unstoppable because so many people are afraid of private business. Your “service” is a bane to this country and should be used as an example why government should stay the fuck out of business.

Leave a comment with your experience or if you agree that USPS sucks. I’ll even post your story/pictures on this post if you want.

p.s.  Yes, I know, “No big news here.”,  “Everyone knows they suck.”,  “It’s like hitting a retard.”  I just had to get this off my chest.