Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Glenn Beck wants to build an Ayn Rand-inspired utopia



World famous denim entrepreneur Glenn Beck doesn’t just manufacture jeans. He manufactures dreams. American dreams!

And what’s he cooking up in that dream factory right now? Planned community-theme park hybrids, that’s what. Beck’s “Independence, USA” is a community built on the “principles of the free market” where families can “find happiness, inspiration, courage and hope.”

According to Beck’s website:


Glenn believes that he can bring the heart and the spirit of Walt’s early Disneyland ideas into reality. Independence, USA wouldn’t be about rides and merchandise, but would be about community and freedom. The Marketplace would be a place where craftmen and artisan could open and run real small businesses and stores. The owners and tradesmen could hold apprenticeships and teach young people the skills and entrepreneurial spirit that has been lost in today’s entitlement state.

There would also be an Media Center, where Glenn’s production company would film television, movies, documentaries, and more. Glenn hoped to include scripted television that would challenge viewers without resorting to a loss of human decency. He also said it would be a place where aspiring journalists would learn how to be great reporters.

Across the lake, there would be a church modeled after The Alamo which would act as a multi-denominational mission center. The town will also have a working ranch where visitors can learn how to farm and work the land.

Independence would also be home to a Research and Development center where people would come to learn, innovate, educate, and create. There would be a theme park for people to recharge and have fun with their families.

People would also have the option to live in Independence, with a residential area where people of different incomes could all come together and be neighbors.

More.

It'll devolve into thunderdome within the year.

A truly free market would be a total nightmare...

Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'it belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'it belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'it belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture. A city where the artist would not fear the censor; where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality; where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the sweat of your brow, Rapture can become your city as well.
-Andrew Ryan

 d-usa wrote:



Across the lake, there would be a church modeled after The Alamo which would act as a multi-denominational mission center. The town will also have a working ranch where visitors can learn how to farm and work the land.

Wow. Did someone go off the deep end, here?

"Hi guys! Remember when I was super important and everyone listened to me?"

"No."

"Well they did. Come live with me on my farm. We'll have goats and horses and the Alamo. We'll live like the pilgrims did!"

"There weren't any fething pilgrims at the Alamo!"

"We'll live in peace there."

"Santa Anna killed everyone at the Alamo."

"Then we won't let any Mexicans in."

"Then who will teach you how to farm?"

"...Uh, we'll google it..."

Trying to create Utopiam cities/communities is a popular pastime in the US.

http://www.ushistory.org/us/26b.asp

I don't get the point myself.

 Leigen_Zero wrote:
Is a man not entitled to the sweat of his brow? 'No!' says the man in Washington, 'it belongs to the poor.' 'No!' says the man in the Vatican, 'it belongs to God.' 'No!' says the man in Moscow, 'it belongs to everyone.' I rejected those answers; instead, I chose something different. I chose the impossible. I chose... Rapture. A city where the artist would not fear the censor; where the scientist would not be bound by petty morality; where the great would not be constrained by the small! And with the sweat of your brow, Rapture can become your city as well.
-Andrew Ryan

Dang it! I was going to post that XD

Don't you have to produce something to go to the randian paradise?
All beck ever did was make "European" an insult, say that the Norway killings were a good thing, tell america it needed socialised healthcare when he was sick before changing his tune when it was legislated for, kill political discourse, polarise, misrepresent, lie, obfuscate, lie, call people terrorists with no basis, be racist, speak out about "the gay agenda", encourage people to be afraid, lie and tell lies.
What good is that to any society?

It's entertaining.

Yeah... we have politicians/political hacks with crazy ideas here and it's entertaining to hear them talk crap until they get elected and start to look like the 2nd biggest party after the next general election. That's when it gets worrying.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
Don't you have to produce something to go to the randian paradise?
All beck ever did was make "European" an insult

you mean it isn't?! Dangit!

No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

Whatever the "producers" make they keep, but an unfair advantage just covers the lazy.

I like it actually. Everyone literally starts the same and has the same education. You work and party hard and then whats left goes back into the pool.

 Frazzled wrote:
No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

Whatever the "producers" make they keep, but an unfair advantage just covers the lazy.

I like it actually. Everyone literally starts the same and has the same education. You work and party hard and then whats left goes back into the pool.

But even if you stop a "producer" transfering wealth, kids born of rich people tend to do better because of additional benefits that they receive, better healthcare, better diet, etc etc. Their parents would instil a good work ethic in their kids while the entrenched poor would with some exceptions stay poor due to the value their parents and peers place on further education.

There is no way to ensure everyone gets an equal start without government interference to bring the less privileged up to the same level and the only way to do that is with tax, which kills the ideals of that society. Waiting for people to die is a poor way to fund a country.

 liturgies of blood wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

Whatever the "producers" make they keep, but an unfair advantage just covers the lazy.

I like it actually. Everyone literally starts the same and has the same education. You work and party hard and then whats left goes back into the pool.

But even if you stop a "producer" transfering wealth, kids born of rich people tend to do better because of additional benefits that they receive, better healthcare, better diet, etc etc. Their parents would instil a good work ethic in their kids while the entrenched poor would with some exceptions stay poor due to the value their parents and peers place on further education.

There is no way to ensure everyone gets an equal start without government interference to bring the less privileged up to the same level and the only way to do that is with tax, which kills the ideals of that society. Waiting for people to die is a poor way to fund a country.

Agreed. That why everyone has the same crappy healthcare and the same school system. Then we can see who is -as they would say in South Park - 'gods and clods."

What stops the rich hiring tutors or private healthcare?

I get that Rand didn't think out the process beyond just having a society of the elite but it has some serious holes. It reduces society back to some Hobbesian distopia.

I just want to say that Beck looks tremendously confused and/or intoxicated in that picture. I wonder if alcohol had any influence on his thought process.

So it's like a blue collar version of Ayn Rand. Not the worst idea. The tone feels wrong though.

 liturgies of blood wrote:
What stops the rich hiring tutors or private healthcare?

I get that Rand didn't think out the process beyond just having a society of the elite but it has some serious holes. It reduces society back to some Hobbesian distopia.

Death sentence under and elnightened Frazzled regime. Everyone gets the same. now pick up that can Citizen!

You damn meritocommunists! WHEN WILL YOU LEARN!

Frazzled wrote:No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

Whatever the "producers" make they keep, but an unfair advantage just covers the lazy.

I like it actually. Everyone literally starts the same and has the same education. You work and party hard and then whats left goes back into the pool.

Except that it ultimately fails to recognize that there is quite often a conflict of interest between private interest and public good... Centralia, Pennsylvania comes to mind, and poses a great question: do you tell the "producer" that he cannot continue to operate his mine due to the risk of annihilating the town? Or do you tell the town that the "producer" is entitled to the fruits of his labour, just as the town is thereby entitled to its destruction as a result?

azazel wrote:Except that it ultimately fails to recognize that there is quite often a conflict of interest between private interest and public good... Centralia, Pennsylvania comes to mind

TIL, the setting for Silent Hill is an actual place.

 Ouze wrote:

azazel wrote:Except that it ultimately fails to recognize that there is quite often a conflict of interest between private interest and public good... Centralia, Pennsylvania comes to mind

TIL, the setting for Silent Hill is an actual place.

Ooooo... didn't know that! (very phreaky game!)

OT: I feel like doing this--------->

 Frazzled wrote:
No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

That's pretty much the exact opposite of Ayn Rand's position on inheritance. Indeed, the very notion of confiscating anything would be abhorrent to an Objectivist.

Francisco D'anconia wrote:"Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?"

As an atheist, wouldn't Rand also support Gay Marriage, the removal of religious expression from the public sector in all aspects, and the elimination of government money from any and all "outreach" programs run by religious organizations such as the United Way, World Vision, and the Salvation Army? I'm sure that as a practicing Mormon, Glen Beck supports this element of libertarianism, right?

I have found that for many Tea Party "libertarians" and folks like Beck the definition of Libertarian is "less government for us and more government against people like them".

I think people, either supporters or detractors, make a fundamental mistake when they try to talk of objectivism as a coherent ideology. It's a shambolic mess, all built around Rand's sexual fantasy of ruthless, dashing, hard men of business. Ever wonder why Mad Men mentions Ayn Rand a handful of times - because Don Draper is Rand's absolute sexual fantasy.

Everything that follows from that is just Rand creating a world in which her sexual crush can be the hero.

Now, there's nothing wrong with that kind of writing. It's as old as writing itself, and right now it's healthier than ever - just look at Twilight. It's just that nobody treats 50 Shades of Gray seriously as a political treatise.

 dogma wrote:

 Frazzled wrote:
No if you follow Rand correctly, all assets and monies would be confiscated at death with no permitted inheritence.

That's pretty much the exact opposite of Ayn Rand's position on inheritance. Indeed, the very notion of confiscating anything would be abhorrent to an Objectivist.

Francisco D'anconia wrote:"Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one, would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve the mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?"

Thats how pussies would think. Us true Randians would be all for absolute equality in the beginning followed by a righteous quest to produce!*



*Frazzled has never read anything from Ann Rand, and is making everything up, so just go with it.

Ayn Rand was an athiest... isn't that against Becks beliefs? why would he want that kind o utopia with out religion?

Or did I miss something?

They are including a church, so you did miss something.