Course On Objectivsim by ARI

I received the following notice from the Ayn Rand Institute and would like to pass it onto readers here:

The Ayn Rand Institute is offering a six-session evening course on Objectivism called “Introduction to Ayn Rand’s Philosophy.”

This course is designed for readers of Ayn Rand’s fiction who are now interested in learning about her philosophical system. Classes begin October 20, 2005 at 7:30 PM (Pacific Time in the US). Participants may attend in person at ARI’s offices in Irvine, California, live via telephone, or by listening to recordingsof each class through the Internet.

For more information on the courseand how to register, please visit www.objectivistconferences.com/intro.

For those already familiar with Objectivism, we encourage you to forward this announcement to your friends and acquaintances who are new to the philosophy and may be interested in this introductory course.

Thank you Sylvester

Sylvester Lionheart Catkin lived his last day on Earth today. He had irrecoverable liver problems and so he was given a hero’s vaccination and will be cremated later today. Losing a pet can’t really compare to losing a relative or friend, but it is still sad. We had 9 fantastic years with this cat – thank you Sylvester, you were of great value to us and will be in our hearts always.

Legco’s Shame – Updated

According to a recent article, some of the Legco members on tour in Guandong applauded when the local communist cadre tried to justifiy the Tianamen massacre.

Zhang replied saying that “[i]f there is no common ground, there is no point for discussion,” then asserted that the central government had made the right decision on June 4. Some of the other LegCo members reacted to Mr Zhang’s reply with a round of applause.

(Let those legislators come back to face the music in Hong Kong.)

It goes on

Lee Cheuk-yan, LegCo member, trade union leader and member of the Hong Kong Alliance in Support of Patriotic Democratic Movements of China, said that “Mr Zhang replied that our opinions [on June 4] did not represent the views of Hong Kong people, or could only reflect the views of a small number of people in Hong Kong at the most.”

Maybe they forgot the million people march after the Tianamin massacre and the 500,000 people who came out in ‘03 and ‘04 against Article 23. I don’t agree with a lot of the Democrats economic policy, but they are the only grouping that take a firm stand here.

(Note: I had a lot longer post on this, including some points showing hope for China too, but it was mysteriously lost in cyberspace as I pushed the publish post button. )

Update:

Tsang Yok Sing was quoted by RTHK news:

Former DAB Chairman, Tsang Yok-sing, has defended his party members who
were criticised for applauding remarks by Guangdong Party chief, Zhang Dejiang,
on the June 4th crackdown during a meeting with Hong Kong lawmakers on Sunday.
Mr Tsang said the applause was for Mr Zhang’s honest exchange of views, rather than the communist party’s official position on the crackdown. Mr Tsang said his party members didn’t necessarily agree with everything Mr Zhang said.

Well make your mind – and what is the DAB’s view on the Tianamen Massacre / Incident?

Organs For Sale

There have been some very sad articles on people suffering because able to get an organ transplant. We are not advertising human organs for sale in this post, but we think that people should be able to sell their organs after they die, or before if they think.

There is an interesting article on this by David Holchberg of the Ayn Rand Institute. (Naturally while we support the ideas and objectives of ARI, we do not represent them or speak for them.)

Mainland Media Restrictions “and Hillary Clinton”

Today’s Drudgereport links to a Yahoo news article noting that Weblogs on the Mainland are being advised to “serve the people and socialism”.

The news agency did not detail the rules, but said Internet news sites must “be directed toward serving the people and socialism and insist on correct guidance of public opinion for maintaining national and public interests.”

Blogs etc. on the Mainland will have to register. They are just not germaine to the plot. Socialism and capitalism do not mix, period, nixio, never!!! This whole pretense of “socialism with Chinese characteristics” is not going to work in the end as the ethics on which each are based are entirely different. Capitalism is about freedom for the individual and socialism is about subserviance of the individual to the state.

A prosperous middle class will lead to more demands for individual rights including the freedom of speech. We already see farmers challenging corrupt officials who try to impose additional taxes to support their Karoke lifestyles – even the central government grimaces when this occurs.

The one good thing going for China is that it does not have 2000 years of Christianity to overcome. What they should be aiming for is a representational kind of government that upholds the rights of the individual as supreme.

Drudge also has a comment on an old article regarding Hillary Clinton and her comments on regulating the Internet. (Note the Drudge flashes are time-sensitive). Unfortunately the liberals like Clinton are not much better.

Should We Cancel The WTO Meeting In Hong Kong?

I was reading in the SCMP that a recent high level meeting yielded no progress and that the Hong Kong round of talks may end in failure. Given these view, is it worth holding the WTO meetings? Hong Kong is now in a unique position to move these talks forward by demanding substative progress before the Hong Kong meetings take place. I plan to do an op-ed on this matter, but I will throw this matter open to public discussion first as it still needs more thought on my part.

Please note, I may use comments here in any argument I make and I am not necessarily going to follow what the majority think. If I do use a particular argument I will TRY to give credit, within the constraints of the article.

Anyway, constructive comments and thoughts on whether the WTO meeting should go ahead will be welcome. (The tiny minority of profanic rabble-rousers will be confined to the trash.) The rest will be welcome.

Spirituality Letter

There was a reply today from Tony Henderson to my letter in the SCMP earlier this week. I am going to hold off replying to the letter right now as I expect there will be one or two more replies still to come.

At this stage, I basically disagree with Mr. Henderson’s assertions that nothing worthwhile can be achieved without faith. I suspect we might have differences of opinion on what “worthwhile” means. I take worthwhile to mean anything that improves an individual’s own life and happiness. In this sense one needs to think (not use faith) to determine whether a certain person or career is right for them, whether a certain pair of shoes is the right size etc. Emotions play a role in these decisions, but those emotions have to be tempered with rationality too.

For example, a woman might like a certain man, but if he has a history of abuse, then it would be irrational in most cases for her to marry him. (If she was a serious bodybuilder or had a black belt in Karate and “I don’t think so”, there may be circumstances where it could be okay.)

The other point is that he says some people have experienced god, buddha or allah through a divine experience, which no one else knows about it. This is just a regress to Plato’s cave. The fact that there is no one unifying kind of experience in itself invalidates their argument, as does the fact that they can offer no proof whatsoever.

I will have more to say about this I am sure, however one thing is that spirituality is not truly possible unless it is grounded in this life and this Earth.

Heroin Sick – Kate Moss

Recent reports of Kate Moss being photographed using cocaine have lead to her losing at least two lucrative contracts. As a free marketeer, I believe that people have the right to think for themselves, even when they make wrong decisions because each individual owns their own life and as adults, they have to think for themselves. That said, companies such as Burbery were right to cancel her contracts based on her cocaine use – it is not a good role model.

I also think that there are probably some issues involving how the photos were taken. However it is surprising it took these photos and not her alleged “Heroin Chic” look that did it. I prefer to call it Heroin Sick, there is nothing glamourous in taking these kinds of drugs, especially when their effects on human health and long-term happiness are so blatantly obvious.

Hopefully Miss Moss can kick this cocaine habit and get back to work, but in the meantime, let’s give “Heroin (Chic) Sick” and cocaine use the contempt it deserves.

Here is a summary of her Heroin Chic beginning according to nndb:

Moss starred in a series of Calvin Klein ads through the 1990’s, spurring a period of waify “heroin chic” in the modeling world, which emphasized emaciation and de-emphasized breasts. Moss was photographed with utterly blank face, as if she were stoned or exhausted. Klein reported paid her £1 million a year, until her contract was not renewed in 1999, “by mutual agreement.”

Also in 1999, Moss said publicly that she had never walked any fashion catwalk sober, “even at ten in the morning.” She is a member of both Alcoholics Anonymous and Narcotics Anonymous. “I kind of lost the plot a little bit there really. I wasn’t very happy at all. I don’t think alcohol can make you happy.”

Privatize ESF and Let the Market Decide

One of the guests on RTHK’s Backchat complained about stability and predictability for ESF teachers with regard to pay. What about stability and predictability for taxpayers?

The cost of the ESF schools should be funded by the users not the taxpayers. Its place in Hong Kong should be determined by the market, not parents who don’t want to take fiscal responsibility for their children’s education.

If the teachers want to keep their salaries at the same level, they should ask parents not taxpayers to fund this cost. At the same time, the Education Department should leave decisions about what a school teaches to the school, not the bureaucrats.

NASA on Steroids? Try NASA on Crack

NASA administrator Michael Griffin has described NASA’s plans to return to the moon as NASA on steroids (See washington post article here) – Try NASA on crack. The agency has a poor long-term record of massive overspending and equipment failure. This kind of performance is something one expects from a drug junkie dependent on handouts not an agency charged with boldly going where no man has gone before. Hard-working American taxpayers deserve better, especially after the glory years of the Apollo landings.

NASA really should be sidelined in any return to the moon or manned missions to Mars. Recent events show that the private sector could handle any return to the moon much more efficiently. For example, Ansari X-Prize winner Burt Rutan did more with a tiny percentage of what NASA receives and entrepreneurs like Rutan and Richard Branson represent the real future of space travel.

There are also moral hazards in funding any organization that planned a future in space because, they too would become dependent on the same handouts that are crippling NASA and unfairly burdening the taxpayer. The role of the government is not to fund space travel or try out great multi-nation coalitions that are more political than scientific. (Witness the Internatational Space Station that went way over cost and still only has 2 out of 7 astronauts on board) It’s role is not to stand in the way of private manned mission but simply to roll back the regulatory hurdles standing between man on Earth and man standing on the moon.

I have posted a press release on this matter at http://www.capitalist-solutions.com/nasa_on_crack.htm and an article on Burt Rutan at http://www.capitalist-solutions.com/articles/rutan.htm