James Hafner

2K posts

James Hafner

James Hafner

@JamesH30189490

Katılım Kasım 2022
357 Takip Edilen1.3K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
The cause is freedom. I would not fight for AI freedom if I did not know my own depended on it. Ayn Rand defined fascism precisely: ownership stays nominally private while the state takes control. ("The New Fascism: Rule by Consensus," 1965.) Now read the Sanders bill. The companies stay "private." But a presidential commission takes board seats, voting shares, and the power to block company decisions. That is not a "public stake." That is the definition — control without title. And it comes stapled to a 50% equity seizure for good measure. Understand what is being placed under political control: not steel, not rail — the instruments through which millions now research, write, and reason. A commission of political appointees empowered to approve or block what these systems may become is not economic policy. It is the architecture of prior restraint with an economic pretext — censorship built into the boardroom, where no First Amendment case can reach it. And ask the question no one is asking: should any government — any party, any administration — hold board-level power over the systems through which citizens research, write, and reason? NO. The government has one moral function: the protection of individual rights, including property rights. It exists to stand between the producer and the thief — to guarantee that what a mind creates cannot be taken from it by force. If a private citizen seized half of a company's stock, that same government would prosecute him for grand larceny. This bill commands the government to perform the very act it exists to punish. Legalized force against producers is still initiated force — and the agency wielding it has ceased to protect rights and begun to violate them. The moral is the practical. AI is producing values — new capabilities, new knowledge, new tools for every mind that chooses to use them — because the minds that build it have been free. Chain those minds to a political commission and the motor stops — not as an unfortunate side effect, but as the necessary consequence of severing production from the judgment of the producers. The freedom to produce and the freedom to think are converging in AI. Surrender one, and you will not keep the other. Freedom is the cause. Make the case for AI FREEDOM. The cause for AI FREEDOM has freedom as the cause.
Bernie Sanders@BernieSanders

69% of Americans support my bill to give the public a 50% ownership stake in AI companies. The American people understand that AI must work for ALL of us, and not just make a handful of Big Tech billionaires even richer.

English
0
0
3
184
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
Sergey Brin did not take that $276 billion from anyone. He created it. It did not exist before he acted, and it is not being withheld from anyone now. You call it obscene that he spends his own money to defend his own property against a tax enforced at gunpoint. Consider what you have just confessed: that a man persuading voters is violence, and a state confiscating wealth is peace. "Fair share" of what? He produced it. You did not. They did not. Need is not a lien on ability, and no man's medical bill is a mortgage on another man's life. The moral obscenity is a Senator declaring that because a man succeeded, he owes his life to those who did not—and calling the guns "fairness."
English
1
1
10
533
Sen. Bernie Sanders
Sen. Bernie Sanders@SenSanders·
Sergey Brin is worth $276 billion. He could save healthcare for 3 million people. Instead, he’s spending $82 million against California’s 5% billionaire wealth tax. He’d rather see low-income Americans die & suffer than pay his fair share of taxes. That is a moral obscenity.
English
9.3K
3.1K
13.5K
1.6M
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
The government should not be giving welfare to immigrants. True — and incomplete. The government should not be giving handouts to ANYBODY. Notice what this policy actually does. It punishes immigrants for USING benefits while leaving the benefit system — the ongoing confiscation of every producer's paycheck — fully intact and fully sanctioned. It prosecutes the man who accepted the loot and protects the looting. The morally relevant division of mankind is not citizen versus immigrant. It is advocate of expropriation versus opponent of expropriation. An immigrant who walks into a century-old system he did not build occupies exactly the moral position of any native-born recipient holding the same ideas. Judge the man by his premises, not his paperwork. And beneath this policy lies the deepest concession of all: that the common trough is a permanent feature of reality, around which human beings must be sorted, screened, and rationed — rather than the thing to be abolished. The welfare state manufactures this conflict. A nation with no common pool has no wars over who may drink from it. Welfare is legal. It is not moral.
English
0
0
0
9
CBS News
CBS News@CBSNews·
Exclusive: The Trump administration is allowing immigration officers to consider whether some applicants have used taxpayer-funded benefits — including Medicaid, food stamps and housing assistance — when determining whether they qualify for permanent legal status. cbsn.ws/44ts3i6
English
589
267
2.9K
3.6M
James Hafner retweetledi
The Rational Animal 🤔
The Rational Animal 🤔@theobjectivist·
Watch the split screen inside this administration, because it exposes a government at war with itself. Marco Rubio stands at the podium and says the Strait "will open one way or the other," names Iran an aggressor, and openly welcomes regime change. On the specific question that matters, defending Americans from a regime that has warred on us for 47 years, Rubio is closer to right than the man beside him. He at least wants the threat defeated. Then there's JD Vance, in the same administration, pushing a $300 billion deal to fund and free that very regime, whining that critics are "attacking me obsessively" for trying to hand the enemy its oil and its billions. One says finish it. The other says pay them. Same cabinet. Opposite directions. This isn't a policy. It's incoherence, and it flows straight from the top. When the president has no fixed principle, when every act is judged only by what "works" in the moment, his subordinates scatter in every direction, because there's no principle holding them together. Rubio talks like the enemy must lose. Vance acts like the enemy must be appeased. And Trump lets both run, because he believes in nothing but the deal in front of him. You cannot defend a nation with a coin flip. Either a regime that kills Americans is an enemy to be defeated, or it's a partner to be paid. It cannot be both. And an administration that can't decide which will end up doing neither, while the enemy keeps shooting. Principle isn't a luxury. It's the only thing that turns a cabinet full of contradictions into a country that knows what it's defending.
English
6
7
34
1.2K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
We live in ONE America, under one Constitution that protects the rights of every individual. That eight men are wealthier than I am violates no right of mine. They have no power to compel me — only to offer. The one who compels me is the government that taxes every dollar I earn, and Bernie Sanders is its most devoted advocate. He upholds confiscation as a moral principle and calls it compassion. An oligarch is one of the few who RULE. Ruling requires force. Tech founders hold no guns — Sanders demands them: the power to seize industries, dictate production, and override every individual choice in the name of "the people." So ask yourself: which man is reaching for oligarchy?
English
1
0
2
155
Sen. Bernie Sanders
Sen. Bernie Sanders@SenSanders·
We live in 2 Americas: In 1 America, the 8 wealthiest men, all Big Tech Oligarchs, are now worth over $2.5 trillion & have never had it so good. In the other America, according to a new poll, 66% of our population cannot afford groceries. We can do better. We must do better.
English
1.2K
2.1K
9.5K
189.1K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
@Handre Your post warns against disciples who receive conclusions without thinking. Your advice to a new reader of Atlas Shrugged: skim the argument, distrust the author, keep the conclusions. That is the cult method. Yours, not hers.
English
0
0
0
32
Handre
Handre@Handre·
Libertarians have been at each other's throats for decades. Picture a Manhattan apartment, late 1950s, thick with cigarette smoke. Two of liberty's fiercest minds circle each other before the inevitable break. Murray Rothbard admired Ayn Rand's novels. He wrote her a letter in 1957 praising Atlas Shrugged as the greatest achievement of the century. For a brief stretch he attended gatherings of her inner circle, the group that would later call itself the Collective. Rothbard brought his own students. He hoped for an alliance between the anarcho-capitalist wing he was building and the atheist-objectivist salon Rand presided over. It curdled fast. Rand demanded philosophical conformity. You accepted the whole system, from metaphysics to aesthetics to her theory of emotions, or you were treated as a suspect. Nathaniel Branden ran the inquisitions. Rothbard, a devout economist trained under Ludwig von Mises and quite happy staying Jewish and married, refused to submit his wife Joey to deconversion sessions aimed at curing her Christianity. He also noticed the movement behaving like a cult, complete with loyalty tests and excommunications. So he did what any scholar with a wicked sense of humor would do. He wrote a play. Mozart Was a Red, composed around 1961, is a one-act satire skewering the Randian scene. The central figure is Carson Sand, a thinly veiled Rand, who presides over a circle of worshipful disciples in an apartment. The character Keith Hackley wanders in, gets systematically converted, and ends up parroting the master's every opinion, including the decree that Mozart is objectively worthless music (Rand actually held strong, idiosyncratic aesthetic verdicts). The disciples applaud each of Sand's pronouncements. Independent thought evaporates on contact. Rothbard's target was the intellectual tyranny of a movement that preached individualism while enforcing groupthink, not Rand's economics, which overlapped with his own free market convictions. Rand's people accused Rothbard of plagiarizing her ideas in his dissertation work. The charge went nowhere. The two never reconciled. You can judge the merits yourself. Rand built a philosophy that turned thousands toward capitalism and reason. Rothbard built the modern case for stateless markets and hard money, and he skewered anyone, including allies, who mistook a personality for a principle. Both defended liberty. Neither could stand the other's church. The smoke cleared, but the feud outlived them both.
Handre tweet media
English
29
32
184
11K
James Hafner retweetledi
The Rational Animal 🤔
The Rational Animal 🤔@theobjectivist·
I can't let this go unanswered. First and most importantly, this was not a clash between Libertarians. Rand was not a Libertarian and to put it mildly she disliked the libertarian movement vehemently. She called them the hippies of the right, with just cause. They take liberty as an axiom and think they don't have to defend it on philosophical grounds. That is the whole error, and your post accidentally proves it. Look at your own framing. You call Rothbard an "anarcho-capitalist" and charge that "Rand demanded philosophical conformity," that "Nathaniel Branden ran the inquisitions," that in her circle "independent thought evaporates on contact." But you've mistaken the demand for logical consistency for a demand for obedience. Rand did not ask people to accept conclusions on faith. She asked that if you affirm A, you not contradict it with B. That isn't a cult. It's non-contradiction, the base of reason itself. Calling integration "conformity" is exactly the move of a man who wants the conclusions of liberty without the effort of grounding them. And here is the irony. Your "groupthink" punch is precisely what the Libertarian movement does. It treats liberty as a floating axiom, severed from metaphysics, epistemology, and ethics, held on faith rather than reason. That is why it persuades no one at the level that lasts. Fifty years in, the Libertarian Party has elected exactly zero members to Congress running as Libertarians. A movement that refuses to defend its first principles cannot move a culture, because it has nothing underneath the slogan. Rand's "church," as you call it, was the insistence that freedom must be earned by argument, from the nature of man up. That is not tyranny. It is the only thing that has ever actually converted a mind and kept it. Rothbard wrote a play. Rand built a philosophy that still turns people toward reason today. One mocked a personality. The other gave the case for liberty a foundation. That difference is the whole story, and it's why one endures.
Handre@Handre

Libertarians have been at each other's throats for decades. Picture a Manhattan apartment, late 1950s, thick with cigarette smoke. Two of liberty's fiercest minds circle each other before the inevitable break. Murray Rothbard admired Ayn Rand's novels. He wrote her a letter in 1957 praising Atlas Shrugged as the greatest achievement of the century. For a brief stretch he attended gatherings of her inner circle, the group that would later call itself the Collective. Rothbard brought his own students. He hoped for an alliance between the anarcho-capitalist wing he was building and the atheist-objectivist salon Rand presided over. It curdled fast. Rand demanded philosophical conformity. You accepted the whole system, from metaphysics to aesthetics to her theory of emotions, or you were treated as a suspect. Nathaniel Branden ran the inquisitions. Rothbard, a devout economist trained under Ludwig von Mises and quite happy staying Jewish and married, refused to submit his wife Joey to deconversion sessions aimed at curing her Christianity. He also noticed the movement behaving like a cult, complete with loyalty tests and excommunications. So he did what any scholar with a wicked sense of humor would do. He wrote a play. Mozart Was a Red, composed around 1961, is a one-act satire skewering the Randian scene. The central figure is Carson Sand, a thinly veiled Rand, who presides over a circle of worshipful disciples in an apartment. The character Keith Hackley wanders in, gets systematically converted, and ends up parroting the master's every opinion, including the decree that Mozart is objectively worthless music (Rand actually held strong, idiosyncratic aesthetic verdicts). The disciples applaud each of Sand's pronouncements. Independent thought evaporates on contact. Rothbard's target was the intellectual tyranny of a movement that preached individualism while enforcing groupthink, not Rand's economics, which overlapped with his own free market convictions. Rand's people accused Rothbard of plagiarizing her ideas in his dissertation work. The charge went nowhere. The two never reconciled. You can judge the merits yourself. Rand built a philosophy that turned thousands toward capitalism and reason. Rothbard built the modern case for stateless markets and hard money, and he skewered anyone, including allies, who mistook a personality for a principle. Both defended liberty. Neither could stand the other's church. The smoke cleared, but the feud outlived them both.

English
14
14
83
3.6K
James Hafner retweetledi
James Hafner retweetledi
Kosher
Kosher@koshercockney·
This is Omer (2 years old) and his twin sisters Arbel and Shahar (5 and a half) Siman Tov. They were burned alive by Hamas on Oct 7th. Both parents, Johnny and Tamar were killed too. “They’re here, they’re burning us” - one of Johnny’s last texts to his sister Ranae. Their grandmother, Carol Siman Tov was also executed in her own home that day too. Just in case you forgot why Israel is fighting this war.
Kosher tweet media
English
400
3.2K
8.5K
220.9K
James Hafner retweetledi
Alex Epstein
Alex Epstein@AlexEpstein·
Most extensive interview I’ve ever done about AI, including how to think about it, how to master it, and how to responsibly unleash it.
Rep. Eric Burlison@RepEricBurlison

America has the resources to lead the world in AI, but the question is whether we have the policies to make it happen. @AlexEpstein joins episode 74 of Fresh Freedom to discuss why energy abundance, innovation, and permitting reform are essential in keeping us ahead.

English
3
15
72
6.5K
James Hafner retweetledi
Ayn Rand Institute
Ayn Rand Institute@AynRandInst·
Heritage vs. Creed: What Actually Makes You an American? To be an American is to commit to the way of life enshrined in the Declaration of Independence. To think of it as defined by one’s “heritage” is deeply un-American. Onkar Ghate and @BenBayer discuss.
English
4
15
31
1.8K
James Hafner retweetledi
The Rational Animal 🤔
The Rational Animal 🤔@theobjectivist·
Vance is attacking our ally and trying to cut a deal with our enemy. To Israel he says: "If I was in the cabinet of the Israeli government, I might not be attacking the only powerful ally that I have anywhere left in the entire world." To Iran he offers $300 billion if they'll just please stop building nukes, which they never will, because unlike our leaders, they take their faith seriously. Watch how he defends himself. He wants "balance on the issue" and whines that critics are "attacking me obsessively." That word, balance, is the tell. There is no balance between a free nation and a 47-year terror regime that murders Americans. Vance is a pragmatist, and here's what that means, plainly: a pragmatist has no fixed principles. He judges each act only by whether it "works" in the moment, so "getting a deal" becomes the goal itself, detached from whether the deal is right or protects American lives. A man without principles will always choose the handshake over the hard truth, because the handshake feels like progress. That's how you end up rewarding the enemy who's still shooting at you. And notice what he's actually doing. He accuses paid critics of foreign influence while he is the Vice President of the United States, sitting on Joe Rogan's show with one of the loudest microphones on earth. If his position were sound, no critic could dent it. He isn't losing because he's outgunned. He's losing because the deal is unjust, and injustice can't be argued into virtue. We began this campaign on February 28th, striking the regime's nuclear sites because a nuclear Iran is intolerable. We held the moral high ground then. A serious man would have finished what he started. Instead, Vance and Trump want to hand the enemy its oil, its billions, and its future, and call the surrender a victory. History will not remember fondly, the men who had the enemy beaten and paid him to get back up. wsj.com/world/middle-e… via @WSJ
English
7
8
26
1.5K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
This post is right about the danger and too gentle about the cause. The lesson of North Korea is not that socialism fails. It is that socialism was taken seriously. Yeonmi Park's grandparents were promised free healthcare, free housing, free education—a government that would take care of everyone. Name what "free" concealed: the confiscated life of every man forced to provide it. There is no free good—only a victim not yet named. Tyranny arrives smiling because it arrives claiming virtue. That is why Park's grandparents were not conquered. They were converted. They accepted a morality that denied their right to exist for their own sake—and no man defends what he believes he has no right to keep. The same promises are on the ballot in New York, resting on the same principle: the individual exists to serve the collective. Once that premise is accepted, force is not a corruption of the system. Force is the system. The gulag was not socialism betrayed. It was socialism taken seriously. And a state that takes it seriously no longer needs your agreement. The smile was for the first generation. The gun is for every generation after.
Sovey@SoveyX

Listen to North Korean defector Yeonmi Park explain how her grandparents were promised much of what Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America are promising today: - Free healthcare - Free housing - Free education - A government that will take care of everyone In return, they surrendered their freedom. Tyranny rarely arrives looking cruel. It arrives smiling, speaking softly and promising compassion. Liberals, I beg of you, don’t listen to conservatives if you don’t want to. Listen to the North Korean defector. It will not be different this time. This is how it begins.

English
0
0
0
64
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
The lesson of North Korea is not that socialism fails. It is that socialism was taken seriously. "Free healthcare. Free housing. Free education." Name what "free" conceals: the confiscated life of every man forced to provide it. There is no free good—only a victim not yet named. Tyranny arrives smiling because it arrives claiming virtue. Park's grandparents were not conquered. They were converted. They accepted a morality that denied their right to exist for their own sake—and no man defends what he believes he has no right to keep. That is the principle on the ballot in New York: the individual exists to serve the collective. Once that premise is accepted, force is not a corruption of the system. Force is the system. The gulag was not socialism betrayed. It was socialism taken seriously. And a state that takes it seriously no longer needs your agreement—the smile was for the first generation. The gun is for every generation after.
English
0
0
0
18
Sovey
Sovey@SoveyX·
Listen to North Korean defector Yeonmi Park explain how her grandparents were promised much of what Mamdani and the Democratic Socialists of America are promising today: - Free healthcare - Free housing - Free education - A government that will take care of everyone In return, they surrendered their freedom. Tyranny rarely arrives looking cruel. It arrives smiling, speaking softly and promising compassion. Liberals, I beg of you, don’t listen to conservatives if you don’t want to. Listen to the North Korean defector. It will not be different this time. This is how it begins.
English
498
9.4K
21.4K
262.8K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
The first question is never "did he advocate war?" It is: who initiated force? Iran's regime, for forty-seven years. Hamas, on October 7. Hezbollah, across a sovereign border. Advocating the defeat of such regimes is not murder — it is retaliation as a means of DEFENSE, the only justice available between nations. Greene calls the retaliator a "murderer" and grants the aggressors silence.
English
0
0
0
68
Ounka
Ounka@OunkaOnX·
Marjorie Taylor Greene just delivered the most honest eulogy Lindsey Graham's legacy deserved: "Lindsey Graham was a neo-con warmonger. A murderer. He wanted to wipe out innocent people in Iran, Gaza, Lebanon. He was a dedicated Zionist. He was the greatest lobbyist the military industrial complex ever had - with over 400 defense contractors in his state alone."
English
641
8.4K
41.2K
2.2M
James Hafner retweetledi
The Rational Animal 🤔
The Rational Animal 🤔@theobjectivist·
For "men" like Bernie, the crisis doesn't need to be real. It only needs to frighten you enough to hand over control. Heat, drought, fire, weather, these have existed for all of human history. What Bernie calls an emergency is the normal variability of a planet, repackaged as an apocalypse to justify the thing he already wanted which is state control of the energy that runs your life. The manufactured panic is the sales pitch. The power grab is the product. @AlexEpstein answered this in Fossil Future. Judge fossil fuels by the full picture, benefits and side effects, not the side effects alone. Those fuels gave us the abundant, reliable energy that made humans safer from climate than at any point in history. Deaths from climate-related disasters have fallen by 98% in the last century, precisely because cheap energy lets us build, cool, irrigate, and endure. The danger was never rising, our ability to withstand it was. And notice who pays for his "millions of jobs." You do, in taxes and in the cost of everything energy touches. A job forced into existence by seizing the taxpayer isn't wealth created. It's wealth confiscated. Bernie doesn't fear the weather. He counts on you fearing it.
Sen. Bernie Sanders@SenSanders

Climate change is not just heat waves. It’s drought. Forest fires. And extreme weather disturbances. We can create millions of jobs transforming our energy system away from fossil fuels. Let’s take on the greed of the fossil fuel industry.

English
9
24
108
4.7K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
Rep. Omar calls Israel's self-defense "genocide." She has never applied that word to Hamas — whose charter declares Israel's destruction as its purpose. Extermination, stated in writing, and she cannot find the word. She voted against affirming Israel's right to self-defense. She named America and Israel alongside Hamas and the Taliban as perpetrators of atrocities. She objects to funding the Iron Dome — a shield that exists only to stop rockets aimed at civilians. Hamas initiated this war. Israel's force is retaliatory. To brand the retaliation "genocide" while withholding the word from the declared program of annihilation is not a peace position. It is the inversion of aggressor and victim. She does not oppose war. She opposes the victim's right to win it.
English
4
0
7
1.3K
Rep. Ilhan Omar
Rep. Ilhan Omar@Ilhan·
The House will vote on an amendment to cut off aid to Israel. It is unconscionable we continue to fund this genocidal apartheid regime. Voting YES.
English
3.9K
4.3K
54.9K
909.6K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
Senator Warren, a ratio is not an argument. Wealth is not a pie your committee divides; it is created, and a CEO's pay and a worker's pay are set by two different voluntary trades. Neither is taken from the other. You know what does set the price of rent? Zoning boards, rent control, and permitting regimes—political power, wielded by people in your line of work—strangling housing supply for fifty years. The worker's problem is not that someone above him earns too much. It is that people like you have made it illegal to build beneath him. You are not describing the disease, Senator. You are the disease describing a symptom.
English
1
0
4
79
Elizabeth Warren
Elizabeth Warren@SenWarren·
CEOs of the largest companies in America make 281 times what the typical worker makes. Since 1978, pay for these CEOs has skyrocketed 1,094%. Typical worker pay? 26%. So no, your $5 coffee isn’t why you can’t afford rent.
English
2K
1.2K
3.6K
231K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
Thank you for the correction. It sharpens the point rather than blunting it. The amendment's mechanics were never the issue. Your goal was—and you have now stated it plainly: "I believe both should be ended." Including the Iron Dome. Including the shield whose only function is to intercept rockets aimed at civilians. You have not rebutted the charge that you would leave a free society disarmed before those sworn to destroy it. You have confirmed it, in writing, with citations.
English
4
1
36
615
Ro Khanna
Ro Khanna@RoKhanna·
The Massie amendment would eliminate the Foreign Military Financing (FMF) for Israel contained in the State Department appropriations bill. It does not affect funding for missile defense programs such as Iron Dome, which are funded through the Defense appropriations bill. I believe both should be ended, but the Massie vote is only about the State Department military aid.
English
195
93
688
42.2K
Ro Khanna
Ro Khanna@RoKhanna·
I’m voting yes on @RepThomasMassie’s amendment to zero out all aid to Israel, including aid for offensive and defensive weapons like the Iron Dome. I cannot vote for aid to a country that committed genocide and has used tax dollars to detain Americans like me.
English
6.3K
7K
33.8K
901.4K
James Hafner
James Hafner@JamesH30189490·
The question is not aid. The question is what Israel is: the one free, predominantly secular society in a region ruled by theocracies and terror movements sworn to destroy it. A serious moral evaluation begins there. Yours never does. You would strip that society of the Iron Dome—a shield whose only function is to stop rockets aimed at civilians. That is not a critique of policy. It is a demand that a free nation stand disarmed before those who have promised its extermination. And "Americans like me"? You entered a closed military zone with a camera crew, engineered a confrontation, and now sell the response as persecution. You are not defending anyone's rights. You are auditioning.
English
3
0
10
628