Tal Tsfany

@brivael Those aren’t really axioms as there are premises underneath them. Philosophically, there are 3 axioms. Recommend reading the first chapter of Leonard Peikoff’s Objectivism.

Voici ma grille de lecture. Mes prémisses. Tout tient en 5 axiomes. On a enfumé l'humanité en complexifiant l'humanité. Sciences humaines, économie, philosophie politique. Des milliers de pages, des thèses, des écoles, des courants, des contre-courants. Pour aboutir à quoi ? À une bouillie où plus personne ne sait ce qui est vrai. Alors que tout tient en 5 axiomes. Lisibles par un enfant de 12 ans. Axiome 1 — Tu es propriétaire de toi-même.Ton corps, ton temps, ton esprit, ton travail. Personne d'autre. Tout ce qui contredit ça est une forme d'esclavage, même habillé en "solidarité", "redistribution" ou "intérêt général". Axiome 2 — Ce que tu produis t'appartient. Si tu es propriétaire de toi-même, tu es propriétaire de ce qui sort de toi. Ton travail, tes idées, ton capital accumulé. La propriété privée n'est pas une convention bourgeoise. C'est l'extension logique de l'axiome 1. Axiome 3 — Tu n'as pas le droit d'initier la violence. Ni physique, ni par procuration via l'État. Tu peux te défendre. Tu ne peux pas agresser. Une taxe non consentie, une réglementation qui t'empêche de produire, une expropriation "pour le bien commun" : ce sont des violences déguisées en lois. Axiome 4 — Les échanges libres sont positifs par définition. Si A et B échangent volontairement, c'est que chacun valorise ce qu'il reçoit plus que ce qu'il donne. Sinon ils ne le feraient pas. Tout échange libre crée de la valeur. Tout échange forcé en détruit. Ce n'est pas une opinion, c'est une tautologie. Axiome 5 — L'État de droit existe pour protéger 1, 2, 3, 4. Pas pour les violer.Le rôle légitime du droit : faire respecter les contrats, punir l'agression, protéger la propriété. Point. Tout ce qui dépasse ce périmètre est une dérive. Et toute dérive, historiquement, finit en tyrannie. C'est tout. Pas besoin de 800 pages de Piketty. Pas besoin d'un agrégé de socio. Pas besoin de Bourdieu, Habermas, Stiglitz. Ces 5 axiomes suffisent à analyser n'importe quel discours économique, politique, social. Le test est simple : quand quelqu'un parle d'économie ou de politique, vérifie si son raisonnement respecte ces 5 prémisses. S'il dit "il faut redistribuer" → il viole l'axiome 2. S'il dit "il faut réguler ce marché" → il viole l'axiome 4. S'il dit "l'État doit décider à ta place pour ton bien" → il viole l'axiome 1. S'il dit "la propriété est un vol" → il viole tout le socle. S'il contredit ces axiomes, il est en train de te pisser dans le cerveau. Peu importe son diplôme. Peu importe sa chaire. Peu importe ses 30 ans de carrière. Il te ment. Ou il se ment. L'humanité est simple. Ce sont les parasites intellectuels qui ont intérêt à te faire croire qu'elle est compliquée. Parce que tant que tu crois que c'est compliqué, tu as besoin d'eux pour te l'expliquer. Et tant que tu as besoin d'eux, ils existent.

“One is a memory of a spring day in 1957. We were walking up Madison Avenue toward the office of Random House, which was in the process of bringing out Atlas Shrugged. She was looking at the city she had always loved most, and now, after decades of rejection and bitter poverty, she had seen the top publishers in the city competing for what she knew, triumphantly, was her masterpiece. She turned to me suddenly and said: “Don’t ever give up what you want in life. The struggle is worth it.” Leonard Peikoff, My 30 Years with Ayn Rand.

The Atlas Prize challenges exceptional young minds to engage deeply with the ideas of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged and demonstrate the power of their reasoning before a global audience for the chance to win up to $100,000. Get the details at hubs.la/Q04cF0zW0.

@bscholl Amazing. Boomerang or “power-split”?

ICYMI: We made our most recent investor update video public, sans financials. Featuring a tour of our engine R&D shop and why our turbine strategy is a 'boomerang' not a 'pivot.'

"I learned a great deal in the years since. I learned that the concept of individual rights is far, far from self-evident, that most of the world does not grasp it, that the United States grasped it only for a brief historical moment and is now in the process of losing the memory. I learned that the civilized world is being destroyed by its dominant schools of philosophy--by irrationalism, altruism, collectivism--and, specifically, that altruism is the tear gas that defeats resistance, by reducing men to crying and vomiting." Ayn Rand, The Lessons of Vietnam

How I feel when I read the news: “This was her world, she thought, this was the way men were meant to be and to face their existence—and all the rest of it, all the years of ugliness and struggle were only someone’s senseless joke. She smiled at him, as at a fellow conspirator, in relief, in deliverance, in radiant mockery of all the things she would never have to consider important again. He smiled in answer, it was the same smile as her own, as if he felt what she felt and knew what she meant. “We never had to take any of it seriously, did we?” she whispered. “No, we never had to.” Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

If you're interested in understanding the phenomenon that @realDonaldTrump is, I suggest you read "Selfishness Without a Self," by Ayn Rand (Philosophy: Who Needs It?). A couple of excerpts: "such a person, left to his own devices, becomes a kind of intellectual hobo, roaming about as an eclectic second-hander or brainpicker, snatching bits of ideas at random, switching them at whim, with only one constant in his behavior: the drifting from group to group, the need to cling to people, any sort of people, and to manipulate them." "The tribal lone wolf has no firsthand grasp of values. He senses that this is a lack he must conceal at any price--and that this issue, for him, is the hardest one to fake. The whims that guide him and switch from moment to moment or from year to year, cannot help him to conceive of an inner state of lifelong dedication to one's chosen values. His whims condition him to the opposite: they automatize his avoidance of any permanent commitment to anything or anyone. Without personal values, a man can have no sense of right or wrong. The tribal lone wolf is an amoralist all the way down."

Do you know someone who should read Atlas Shrugged? aynrandbooks.org

The state of politics.

Being a "moderate" on an issue is seeing compromise as a virtue. This is how we ended up with a mixed economy. "If an uncompromising stand is to be smeared as "extremism," then that smear is directed at any devotion to values, any loyalty to principles, any profound conviction, any consistency, any steadfastness, any passion, any dedication to an unbreached, inviolate truth-any man of integrity." Ayn Rand, "'Extremism,' or the art of smearing"

@TheDeanJanes And ( reject the derogatory references you've made. If you're intersted in a serious exchange, then please respoect the other side.

@taltsfany Your Eminence, please enlighten us with thou's vast knowledge as to how your holiness would have correctly solved this problem. Lmao

What I think about the Israel-Hamas deal: “A major symptom of man’s —or a culture’s— intellectual and moral disintegration is the shrinking of vision and goals to the concrete-bound range of the immediate moment… the manifestation of a disintegrating consciousness is the inability to think and act in terms of principles.” (Ayn Rand, “the anatomy of compromise”) As long as whim and emotionalism govern the culture and its leaders, fatal mistakes will continue to occur and cost us in wealth, happiness and human lives. There’s no compromise on moral principles.

Full military control of the territories and a long-term plan to slowly assimilate freedom-respecting pallastinias into the Israeli culture (just like it started to happen organically in the 70's before the Iranian revolution). Israeli Arabs are the same people and they are immersed in western civilization culture - running companies, creating new scienctific knowledge and respecting individual rights. This will take 1-2 generations, but this is how you stop a war. You eradicate the ideas of your enemies (see Japan and Germany post WWII)

@rodneyk41 That is the pragmatist view which Rand talks about. Without uncompromising attitude toward core principles, all will be lost.

@taltsfany Your position may be right, but mankind has never existed in your paradise. We have a short lifespan and should work toward the ideal but also remember that we live in the present. The transition from what we have been to what we want to be takes many steps not one giant leap.

Why negotiating with Hamas is a loss to Israel: “In any collaboration between two men (or two groups) who hold different basic principles, it is the more evil or irrational one who wins. The rational (principle, premise, idea, policy or action) is that which is consonant with the facts of reality; the irrational is that which contradicts the facts and attempts to get away with it. A collaboration is a joint undertaking, a common course of action. The rational (the good) has nothing to gain from the irrational (the evil) except a share of its failures and crimes; the irrational has everything to gain from the rational: a share of its achievements and values.” Ayn Rand, “The Anatomy of Compromise”

@ThirdRailParty @RockChartrand Businesses can only offer you a positive value. Hating legimate, value-offering businesses, domestic or international is irrational.

Free the business people! The most persecuted group on earth. “If a small group of men were always regarded as guilty, in any clash with any other group, regardless of the issues or circumstances involved, would you call it persecution? If this group were always made to pay for the sins, errors, or failures of any other group, would you call that persecution? If this group had to live under a silent reign of terror, under special laws, from which all other people were immune, laws which the accused could not grasp or define in advance and which the accuser could interpret in any way he pleased--would you call that persecution? If this group were penalized, not for its faults, but for its virtues, not for its incompetence, but for its ability, not for its failures, but for its achievements, and the greater the achievement, the greater the penalty--would you call that persecution?” Ayn Rand, “America’s persecuted minority: big business”

"No mind is better thant the precision of its concepts" Ayn Rand

Rights are delagated from individuals to the government. Individuals do not have the right to initiate force. Thus, the government doesn't have the right to initiate force-just to protect individual rights in response to others initiating force. This also means that there's no function for the government to regulate anything in the economy as the economy is a voluntary domain of human echange.

The core reason for our cultural decline: foggy metaphoes, sloppy images, unfocused poetry, and equivocations. Don't fall for those bromides such as "economical force or power". Only the government who has a legal monopoly on the use of physical force can coerce soemone. Never a business who can engage with you through voluntary exchange. "Foggy metaphors, sloppy images, unfocused poetry, and equivocations--such as "A hungry man is not free"--do not alter the fact that only political power is the power of physical coercion and that freedom, in a political context, has only one meaning: the absence of physical coercion." Ayn Rand, "America's persecuted minority: Big Business"