2 ms·
No, because it's funny and points out the stupidity of most objectivist arguments using their own words. It's the same thing when we all found out the original
by zedshaw 13y ago
No, because it's funny and points out the stupidity of most objectivist arguments using their own words. It's the same thing when we all found out the original DPR clumsily ordered overpriced hits on people after spouting off that he wanted a world free of violence. The universal thing about most of these people is that if they believe that everyone should only think of themselves then they cannot be trusted, yet people continue to hand them money and fealty. Eventually, as they continue to implement their flawed beliefs and then scam everyone people will start to realize that a self-interested world view is immediately illogical and not to be trusted.
Then again, the ability of many humans to believe completely illogical bullshit is astounding.
- ivanca 13y agoWhat's the alternative? The goverment? You mean, like when HSBC launders billions of dollars from cartels and gets away with it? http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/14/hsbc-money-laundering-fine-management http://www.theguardian.com/business/2012/dec/14/hsbc-money-l... And your stupidity is also part of this, he never asked for police enforcement, he asked for the members of the site itself to look for the thefts. Plus, when is a mistake made by the goverment the proposed solution is not "We need the goverment to disappear"; same way here; pretending the only solution is to spawn one is just as dumb. If Silk Road was just a forum instead of actually holding bitcoins none of this would have happened. But you don't expose solutions such as those; you only want to transform this in a circlejerk argument that support whatever you already believed before, a confirmation bias.