Like Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, and NYC?  ;-)

I suppose it depends on the definition of 'altruism.'  Rand mostly was speaking of the conflict between individualism and collectivism.  The individual's motive is 'selfish' — that is to benefit himself and whomever he choses to share the benefits.  The collective's supposed motive is 'altruistic' — that is, what's best for the community as a whole, even at the expense of individual desires and consent.

Reston, your proposal is ungovernable except by centralizing power into hands that will inevitably become corrupt by that power. "Expecting" 'social systems' to serve the people is a dream, not dissimilar from expecting our neighbor to behave a certain way that suits us.

Better to keep the power in our own individual hands, so that each have the opportunity to rise above their circumstances, not 'expect' to be compensated for the efforts of others.  "Do unto others as you would have done unto you."  If that were a key touchstone to the conscience of the people individually, the manifestations would be marvelous without intervention from the state.

Taxes are a scam — if the government can print its own money (it can and does), it has no need of taxes.  Taxes are the way to pass on permanent debt to the masses.  Without taxes, inflation would be the only tax and would effect everyone equally according to their wealth — hence the reason paper money and income taxes, to protect the wealthy, who 9 times out of 10 pay NO taxes, but pass on those burdens to the populace.

The healthcare field has become a protection racket, to keep healthy food and medicines out of the market while cheap processed food and expensive pharmaceuticals are pushed on the populace.  Socialism is the ultimate racketeering dream.  Let it go to hell where it belongs...

We better know a man's true intentions by his actions and the results of those actions.

I agree that the alternative to a free press is worse than its failings, but the mainstream press (CBS, NBC, ABC, Washington Post, New York Times, etc.) have been nothing but propaganda since their inception. 

The independent media of today is their sworn enemy, and every effort to impose 'hate speech' and 'misinformation' controls is aimed at shutting down true journalism exposing the widespread racketeering of our supposed representatives.

I do hope Warren that you have managed to see now, decades later, that the war in Iraq was predicated on false evidence (i.e. the presence of weapons of mass destruction) and the control of Iraqi oil — yes, the US military's very first objective was to secure the oil, which they did and still do.  Hundreds of thousands of Iraqi citizens were killed, if not millions.  Their monetary system of the gold dinar was replaced with paper fiat under the control of the western central banks of the USA and UK.  I still stand by my post above, 16 years after the fact.

Controlling the narrative via censorship and propaganda is integral to keeping a populace weak and under the influence of the powers-that-should-not-be.   But in the end, only outright civilian force can defeat the would-be-rulers.  Perhaps Lee was referring to something along those lines.

Fred, you have not answered the question but merely provided another ad hominem fallacious argument.  Every animal must be able to defend itself against predators — those that cannot get eaten.  This simple fact of life must not be ignored.  Evil must always be addressed by Good, else all eventually succumbs to evil.

Thankfully, the truth destroys lies, light dispels darkness, and love triumphs over hate.  And weapons, in all their forms, in the hands of the citizenry, keeps the insatiable leviathan in check.  That is the American republic, may it forever reign.

I believe the reason for the military is to be able to defend against aggressors.  The word 'peace' can be interpreted multiple ways — it can mean total control of all dissidence (i.e. tyranny) or an absence of war.  War is bad, but is certainly rightful for the defender of liberty, and tyrannical when on the side of the aggressor.

A weak defense is an invitation to powerful aggressors.  That goes for individuals in defense of their rights as well as nations in defense of their country.  With no ability to defend against a powerful state, servitude is guaranteed.

It's true for whoever is provoking war, whether Russia, NATO, Ukraine, Israel, Hamas, US, etc..  Biden's scandals and domestic policy failures aren't even on page 2 of the news... how convenient.

The weapons manufacturers care not who buys their arms — they supply both sides of a conflict.

Yes, Mike!

Have you read the Iraqi Constitution?  It's a bastardization of the US Constitution, without We the People.  It's what the statists wish the US Constitution said, granting all power to the government disguised as protection for the people. 

Jefferson did not support the proposed US Constitution without a Bill of Rights declaring what the government could NOT do.  The same goes for every country that is governed by a Constitution — without a Bill of Rights that cannot be overwritten, servitude is inevitable eventually.

Yes, a reflex like your predictable response to every quote on this blog. ;-)  Are you incapable of independent thought?  The progressive liberals really did a number on you, eh?  I pity the children that attended your schools...

Good lord, Fred, you must be trolling now...  I suppose you would take away every power available to the common man for independence.  Talk about mentally ill...

Yep — just look at England today.  Since taking guns away from the people resulted in the use of knives and machetes by criminals, now kitchen knives are regulated, too.  There will be no end to the control the government will claim over the citizens to make sure they remain defenseless in every way and dependent upon the state.  Slaves are not permitted access to weapons — you know why...

Fred, in Nature, every animal has need for defenses against predators, no less for humans.  We must be able to defend ourselves with the same powers that are aimed at us by human predators which enslave and destroy.  We the People must not be the aggressors but we must be the defenders against aggression.  This is the way.

It matters not what form of government a nation may take, if their currency is fiat and controlled by an elite (plutocracy?) they will forever be enslaved by that system.

Mike, you know Fred falls for such rhetoric every time it is prettied up to distract from the unvarnished truth Rhodes is speaking.  8 billion minds don't need to be 'put together,' they need only be allowed to think for themselves and allow others to do the same.  8 billion can take care of themselves without finding a leader to speak for them as one mind — blecch!

Don't be such a dupe, Fred.  Your last thumbs down comment on colonization by Cecil Rhodes is the same thing Augustus Thomas is saying.  You socialists fall for it every time!  Utopian dreams have ALWAYS led to the centralization of power and servitude to the state for the 'common good.'  Wake up, man...

Never trust a Rhodes Scholar — they have been hand-picked by the globalist establishment to fulfil Cecil Rhodes' dream of totalitarianism and the subservience of all to a fascist world government. 

Rhodes was a proud slaver, and Africa is still scarred from his exploits. Northern and Southern Rhodesia (named after Cecil Rhodes) and neighboring nations suffered greatly under the British South Africa Company which was modeled on that of the British East India Company and other Crown Corporations that came before them laying claim to the vast resources of land around the world. 

The playbook has hardly changed even hundreds of years later. They literally 'own' the world and the citizens pay taxes (i.e. tribute) on their land and labor forever.

Check out a list of notable Rhodes Scholars throughout history:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Rhodes_Scholars

Hundreds of college and university presidents, chancellors, deans, and professors, all shaping history and the laws to fit the narrative of what has been termed the New World Order.

Yes, sir.  And tyranny is promoting what everyone must see and must think through lies, threats, misdirection, fear-mongering, and censorship of actual discoveries — for the common good, of course...

The quote taken on its on without consideration of ad hominem arguments has merit.  That being said, Mandela and his party were communistic in every regard and did not embody this sentiment in the least... hypocritical at best.

Indeed.  Whatever happened to the anti-war movement?  All the old hippies are progressive liberals now calling for the support of Ukrainian Nazis bombing citizens of Russian descent — who they used to support!  Weak minds and fickle hearts are the bulwark of the neo-cons marching lockstep towards WWIII.  Peace, man!

Hear, hear!  Destiny awaits...