I knew Met never had principles, but he also has no loyalty.

Sarg never said a bad word about Met before or since.

Yeah, I remember when he shut down Internet Aristocrat. He said he was doing it because the movement he helped create had spiraled out of control, and was turning into what he hated, so he was quiting.

Metokur was up and running what, less than a year later?

The silliest part is he didn't even attempt to reinvent his style. he even continued series that he started on his IA channel. I used to love the Hugbox Chronicles.

So, if everyone knows it's still Jim, what's the point?

God damn it.

I read Jim's Dramatica article, i think he may have wrote it himself.

Every other article on Encyclopedia Dramatica is just the most savage of take downs. Razorfist's article is particularly brutal.

Not Jim's.

Jim's reads like a fanboy of his wrote a historical treatises about the great Meme Warrior Metokur and his never ending quest for the lulz...

https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Mister_Metokur

I'd rather not have any debt.

Oh wait.

*remembers he didn't go to college, never bothered with credit cards, and never financed anything*

Boys, to be a 32 year old white cis-male with no debt, no kids, and a girl that can't get pregnant is fucking heaven on earth.

I won't lie, I have VERY bad genes.

You should be patting me on the back for knowing my limits and not muddying the gene pool any more than my Family already has.

I am the culmination of two separate Scot-Irish bloodlines that are both replete with mental instability, diabetes, addiction issues, and overall, a low standard of intelligence.

I'm helping us get closer to the Ubermensch by refusing to allow my inferior genes to further delineate into our race.

I am mostly joking, however I'm just not cut out for fatherhood. I'd be exceptionally bad at it. I'm too self-centered.

A lot of you guys are believers, I take it?

I'd be so bold as to guess most even.

Regardless, you know how religious people just KNOW God is real? They just know it, in their heart, no body can tell them otherwise?

That's how I feel about fatherhood. I just KNOW I can't do it.

@Beemann How so? Not baiting, genuinely curious as to your line of thought.

That's fair.

I do know though that most of my friends who have kids today, were talking about it in highschool.

They KNEW it was in the cards for them.

That's fair.

I consider myself an Objectivist, so I try to be as Objective as I can be at all times. That's where I'm at with it. I saw what My father became, I saw what my firend'ss fathers became. I don't want to become that. Or worse, to have one, realize I was right all along, and bail, just like my father did.

I followed the logic of where I came from.

The key word in that sentence was "Try"

No one can be 100% conistent 100% of the time.

Dude, objectivism is set in stone...

One of Rand's key points was "A is A", reality exists, regardless of our ability to perceive it. Objectivism is a moral absolutist philosophy.

Well, I'm a millenial, soooooooo

I'm two generation removed from the Boomers.

lol

I know.

I'm playing along.

Yeah, she was also anti-gay. Not just gay rights, she thought gays should exist at all, cuz they're existence was contrary to nature.

This is the same women who talks about pure, unfettered freedom, except for the pople she doesn't like.

"Nobody can be 100% consistent 100% of the time."

It's funny, I respect her as a philosopher who quantified the moral code that I live my life by, but she was a terrible writer.

John Galt is probably one of the poorest written literary characters in history.

She put far more effort in Dagny and Reardon, but they were her main protagonists, and Galt wasn't really supposed to be a character. According to her, Galt was to be a living embodiment of her ideals, that's why he's presented as an nigh-omnipotent Gary Stu that Dagny falls in love with the moment she see him for the first time.

Never read it, but heard it's better.

D'Anconia was my favorite character, and even his Money speech at Readon's party made my eyes roll before it was over.

Galt's speech near the end of the book, it's almost unreadable. lol

^^^^^
this guy gets it

lol

I only ever read Shrugged, and I had a HARD time getting through it. lol

That's why I never tried reading any of her others.

Instead, I bought Leonard Peikoff's book on Objectivism. He was her favorite student, and she considered him to be her intellectual heir. It's a pure breakdown of the tenants of the philosophy, so we don't have to suffer through her prose in order to get the message.

Okay...?

Okay. I'm not really listening to him, pre say. I'm listening to Rand through his one book.

Even so, who gives a shit about divorce? Relationship end.

Nothing lasts forever.

It should, but they don't.

I'm not going to call an entire philosophy into question cause the people behind it weren't perfect.

You married?

That they do not.

She's VERY longwinded.

Her characters drone on and on for pages at a time, beating you over the head with her ideas.

I've read a little Nietzsche, but not like an entire book.

I'm actually with you on her being a shit author.

Even though I'm an Objectivist.

She couldn't write her way out of a wet paper bag.

She wouldn't know believable dialogue if it pitched a tent in her ass.

Eh, that's a bit harsh.

One instance in the book, Galt says to Midas Miller, I believe, when he's describing Galt's Gulch... "Other than a few courthouses, there isn't much government at all." I'd say, with that example in mind, she was a 0 taxation person. To be fair, I am speculating, cause I can't explicitly recall here ever going that deep into how her Objectivist utopia would function.

I am not.

Objectivism is the philosophy that I use as my guiding set of principles in day to day life, but I'm not naive enough to believe that Objectivism would actually work as the basis of a system of Government.

I do see a purpose for a federal government, I just wish it was WAAAAAAAAAY smaller than it is.

I'm a Libertarian, but I like borders, and I don't think we should just let any fucking body into our private club.

#BuildTheWall

lol

Truth is, Rand would hate me.

It's funny. Ron Paul once said the same things when asked his opinion on Rand's work. He said that he read her books, and he liked them, but that she didn't like Libertarians, then he just laughed it off.

It can be.

I think Rucka can be a bit much with it.

How so?

I never said anything about my IQ.

I don't think that though. I do my best to be objective, though I know that's not always possible. I'm human, I have biases like everyone else.

I'm confused. What exactly have I done to offend you?

You've really got step up your troll game.

nani?

So, tell me, what does it feel like to be a fucking moron?

I imagine you've been doing it a while.

Call me Ka-Zar, mother fucker.

lol

That she paid for her entire career through taxation.

I don't like this system either, but god damn if SS is still around when I'm old, I'm gonna take it. I paid into it my entire life.

Hypocrite? What are you even talking about. All I've done is talk shit about how terrible of an author I think she was, and I even pointed out some of her hypocrisies myself. How am I Whiteknighting?

The King in YellowToday at 5:57 PM
I don't think that though. I do my best to be objective, though I know that's not always possible. I'm human, I have biases like everyone else.

By my own admission, I read Atlas Shrugged, and I wasn't crazy about it. I own Peikoff's book on Objectivism. I never read any of her other books, though I've listened to hours of her talks over the years.

She's not my idol. I don't worship her. She was a very flawed human being, like we all are.

Just so we're clear (not baiting, just need context), you're implying that she created objectivism to validate her bad choices?

*has literally never bought one of her books*