Critique of our overtly economic language

[dscrib]

This is some very good constructive critizism of the freedom movement..
delivered by the founder of Whole Foods Market at Freedomfest this past
year... he's a hippie, vegan, capitalist, businessman-- and capital L
libertarian.

http://www.wholefoods.com/blogs/jm/archives/2006/02/winning_the_bat.html

Doug from MN

[lapafrax]

So how does this brainiac suggest we outreach?

[One two three]

everyone should post to it and plug their favorite radio show

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

I was surprised that this guy read friedman and hayek!  Especially that he votes Libertarian!  Awesome.  But Arnold Shwartzneggar also read Friedman...look where he is...

[matthew6]

Doug, are you the guy who called the show the other day and talked about this?  If so, do you (or does anyone else) have a link to the video that was refered to of John Mackey's speech?

I saw a really interesting debate in Reason a few months back between John and Friedman and the Cyprus Semiconductor guy (another libertarian whose name escapes me).

This is some very good constructive critizism of the freedom movement..
delivered by the founder of Whole Foods Market at Freedomfest this past
year... he's a hippie, vegan, capitalist, businessman-- and capital L
libertarian.

http://www.wholefoods.com/blogs/jm/archives/2006/02/winning_the_bat.html

Doug from MN

[JetlagQ]

TJ Rodgers is the guy's name. He kicks ass. He fought Jesse Jackson's extortion campaign and won.

See the wikipedia entry at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/T.J._Rodgers

(from the article)

He received his bachelor's degrees from Dartmouth College in 1970, graduating as salutatorian with majors in chemistry and physics. He received his master's degree (1973) and Ph.D. (1975) in electrical engineering from Stanford University. While pursuing his PhD. degree , Rodgers invented the VMOS process technology which he later licensed to Advanced Micro Devices. He founded Cypress Semiconductor in 1982.

oh and by the way here is his Reason interview: http://www.reason.com/rodgersint.shtml

[Grey]

I especially like this point:

"I believe that Rand has also harmed the movement. How? Ayn Rand was overly provocative. The "virtue of selfishness" is an oxymoron. Selfishness is not a virtue. Now, I understand all the arguments—I've read all the books. I know that self-interest channeled to the social good, as expressed through Adam Smith's Invisible Hand, is the single most brilliant insight about social organization ever made in history. That being said, selfishness (as opposed to self-interest) is still not a virtue. It is something to be discouraged, and not something to be supported."

Ian's done this a numerous amount of times on air - saying there's no nothing wrong w/ being selfish.  I agree w/ the hippie - it shouldn't be a virtue - but that doesn't mean you can't be a principled Lib/Free Marketeer as well.

[MobileDigit]

Semantics.

[Grey]

it's more than semantics ... there's a difference b/w selifshness (not considering other's rights/feelings whatsoever) and self-interest (helping one self, while still considering others.)

My point is, you can have it both ways...

[MobileDigit]

there's a difference b/w selifshness (not considering other's rights/feelings whatsoever) and self-interest (helping one self, while still considering others.)

In that selfishness is a subset of self-interest. This is irrelevant, because it is still self-interest.

"I believe that Rand has also harmed the movement. How? Ayn Rand was overly provocative. The "virtue of selfishness" is an oxymoron. Selfishness is not a virtue. ... That being said, selfishness (as opposed to self-interest) is still not a virtue. It is something to be discouraged, and not something to be supported."

This is not an argument, it is a contradiction. Stating 'Selfishness is not a virtue.' repeatedly does not alter its falseness.

[mikehz]

I didn't know there are any hippies left in the world. I thought they were all dead or in nursing homes.

[Sam Gunn (since nobody got Admiral Naismith)]

I especially like this point:

"I believe that Rand has also harmed the movement. How? Ayn Rand was overly provocative. The "virtue of selfishness" is an oxymoron. Selfishness is not a virtue. Now, I understand all the arguments—I've read all the books. I know that self-interest channeled to the social good, as expressed through Adam Smith's Invisible Hand, is the single most brilliant insight about social organization ever made in history. That being said, selfishness (as opposed to self-interest) is still not a virtue. It is something to be discouraged, and not something to be supported."

Ian's done this a numerous amount of times on air - saying there's no nothing wrong w/ being selfish.  I agree w/ the hippie - it shouldn't be a virtue - but that doesn't mean you can't be a principled Lib/Free Marketeer as well.

That's dumb.  Ayn Rand's "The Virtue of Selfishness" is one of the greatest philosophical analyses ever written in the form of a book.  She's probably one of the main reasons I consider myself libertarian.

[JetlagQ]

it's more than semantics ... there's a difference b/w selifshness (not considering other's rights/feelings whatsoever) and self-interest (helping one self, while still considering others.)

My point is, you can have it both ways...

Per Wikipedia:

"Selfishness" is, at base, the concept and/or practise of concern with one's own interests in some sort of priority to the interests of others; it is often used to refer to a self-interest that comes in a particular form, or above a certain level.

Why shouldn't a person give priority to their own interests? I assume (hope) thats not your problem with the word. I assume your problem with the word is that it has "loaded" connotations. That it sets people off - people who lazily form their own opinion of anyone "selfish" based on the loaded connotations. The question then boils down for me to - do you care what those people think? are they worth winning over?