[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]

/liberty/ - Liberty

Non-authoritarian Discussion of Politics, Society, News, and the Human Condition (Fun Allowed)

Catalog

Name
Email
Subject
Comment *
File
* = required field[▶ Show post options & limits]
Confused? See the FAQ.
Flag
Embed
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Oekaki
Show oekaki applet
(replaces files and can be used instead)
Options
dicesidesmodifier
Password (For file and post deletion.)

Allowed file types:jpg, jpeg, gif, png, webm, mp4, pdf
Max filesize is 8 MB.
Max image dimensions are 10000 x 10000.
You may upload 5 per post.


A recognized Safe Space for liberty - if you're triggered and you know it, clap your hands!

File: 1441186009926.png (1.51 MB, 636x1092, 53:91, Atlas Shigged.png)

 No.8718

Giving this thread another try, now that the last one has been purged. I know, the word "redpill" has certain associations, but I don't see why we should let the stormfucks appropriate it.

 No.8719

I'll start:

>Atlas Shrugged

The book predicted the SJW's, the shitty prose notwithstanding.

>Captain America 2: The Winter Soldier

Not exactly a brilliant movie, but smart enough for something coming out of Hollywood, and it's always refreshing to see a movie propose individualism and liberty.

>Mace Runner

I'm just talking about the movie here, have never seen the book. The protagonist came across as an egoist who challenges established dogmas, always for the better of the group. Maybe I read too much into it.


 No.13707

>accepting drugs from a nigger

Say no to "redpills"


 No.13710

>>8719

>Not exactly a brilliant movie, but smart enough for something coming out of Hollywood, and it's always refreshing to see a movie propose individualism and liberty.

I was actually really impressed with Cap 2 thanks to this. Had a really good message, was deeply refreshing.


 No.13714

>>13710

The movie had its heart at the right place. And the action was fucking awesome.


 No.13725

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.

>>8718

I don't like the idea of a "red pill." There is no one thing that holds all the answers, and all too often the term is abused to mean "enlightened."

"Take the red pill" is the new "wake up sheeple," and every bit as destructive to rational discussion because if your mind is made up on the "enlightened" worldview, then what is there left to discuss? It gets annoying when multiple people have different ideas on enlightenment and all argue about it too, rather than deal with individual issues.

>>8719

>Atlas Shrugged

I heard it was really dry and long. Is it worth it?

>Captain America 2

Hell yeah, that movie was great. It showed how easy a government could turn on the people it was meant to protect, all thanks to the best of intentions setting up the infrastructure for horrifying oppression.

>Maze Runner

Never seen it.

Reason did a good job with this parody. Wish there were more parodies like it that got people interested in stuff like it.

Personally, I'm a massive nerd, so I'd suggest podcasts and documentaries as well. If you have the time, take a look at Hjernevask (Norwegian for "Brainwashing").

http://www.dailymotion.com/playlist/x1xv47_BrainwashingInNorway_hjernevask-english-subtitles/1#video=xp0tg8

It's pretty good at questioning long-held assumptions about a lot of things. Gender differences, child rearing, homosexuality, violence, race, sex, nature v. nurture.


 No.13726

File: 1449439969179.png (86.6 KB, 464x516, 116:129, 1448591497914.png)

>>8718

>Basing your entire concept of political philosophical enlightenment around a Hollywood movie scene

middle kek


 No.13744


 No.13777

bitch bitch moan moаn

bitch bitch moan moan


 No.13785

>>13725

>I heard it was really dry and long. Is it worth it?

"The Virtue of Selfishness" is much better, so I'd say it isn't, except for the experience of it.

>>13726

Except wo one in this thread ever did that.


 No.13860

>>13785

I actually downloaded The Virtue of Selfishness earlier, but I haven't gotten around to reading it yet because I've got a backlog of books atm.

I think the basic idea she presents, from what I've gathered, is that by every person focusing on their own good, they will not need to be cared for by others; there will be no waste or wasters if everyone is acting in their own rational self-interest.

I think the problem is that she tries to define rational self-interest in a certain objective way, whereas mankind is rationalizing and not truly rational. Take gamblers, for instance. They will rationalize their decision to keep gambling one way if they win, and another if they lose - oh, just bad luck! Better go again, I'm sure to win now (even though the statistical chances of them winning haven't gone up, etc). Stuff like that. Either way, I'm sure it'll be a good read, even if I can't follow objectivism's logic fully.


 No.18588

YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.




[Return][Go to top][Catalog][Post a Reply]
Delete Post [ ]
[]
[ home / board list / faq / random / create / bans / search / manage / irc ] [ ]