Poll: Who REALLY Destroyed Rapture?
- Thread starter squidbuddy99
- Start date
Recommended Videos
"Ryan never set up laws against religion, he said in a Bioshock 2 audio tape something along the lines of "each man is entitled to follow his own superstitions." And it is not against objectivist philosophies to set up a police force. I think you're confusing it with anarchy."
I've yet to play Bioshock 2 so I didn't know that, and your right it doesn't contradict objectivism to set up a privately funded police force. It does however contradict objectivism to in any way limit the freedoms of others(with the main exception that you can't coerce others in any way), especially commercially, which Ryan did by making the selling of certain things or in a certain way illegal, if it was legal then Fontaine wouldn't have had to be smuggling.
I've yet to play Bioshock 2 so I didn't know that, and your right it doesn't contradict objectivism to set up a privately funded police force. It does however contradict objectivism to in any way limit the freedoms of others(with the main exception that you can't coerce others in any way), especially commercially, which Ryan did by making the selling of certain things or in a certain way illegal, if it was legal then Fontaine wouldn't have had to be smuggling.
That's not Ryan's philosophy at all. He wants freedom not to be impuned o by the state. His entire economic system and the philosopphy that drives it centres on the powerful dominating the weak. Freedom only matters when the state is forceing altruism.Agayek said:
It was the whales!
Where is NeonBob?!
WE MUST NUKE THE WHALES!
OT: I would actually say it was the Adam that destroyed Rapture.
People would use Adam get strong, then others would use mroe Adam to get stronger, and it just kept going.
Granted I haven't played Bioshock 2 and the last time I played Bioshock 1 was about 3 years ago, so I'm a little hazy on the plot.
Where is NeonBob?!
WE MUST NUKE THE WHALES!
OT: I would actually say it was the Adam that destroyed Rapture.
People would use Adam get strong, then others would use mroe Adam to get stronger, and it just kept going.
Granted I haven't played Bioshock 2 and the last time I played Bioshock 1 was about 3 years ago, so I'm a little hazy on the plot.
Rapture was based on a flawed and retarded ideology, entirely based on Ryan's greed. So Rapture was already destroyed to begin with simply because of the man behind it.
Love the way you have put all of Raptures workers into the category of 'cleaning the toilets.' The fact is, in rapture, the people being oppressed where engineers like the ones who had built the damn place. Now you have moved on to claim the people in Rapture who where disillusioned had their talents squaded because of the closed environment to get over the fact that these people, these skilled people, had no way to apply their skills. You have completely ignored that it was Ryan who made this system, and hence why I blame him, and are using this argument of a 'wider application' would eliminate the flaws in the system without even entertaining just what would happen if it was applied to the real world. I guess having failed to defend the point on topic, in the fictional world of Rapture these ideals did destroy the city, we now have to move away to real world applications for you to find a foothold.Dormin111 said:
So would it? I don't know, we haven't anything to use as evidence for such, but I still feel it wouldn't. Having looked through a fair amount of political history I have come to the conclusion that too many people with money would abuse such a system, more so knowing there would be no backlash for doing so. They have in the past so what would stop them from doing so in the future if we let them embrace 'greed is good?'
What you are seeming to argue for would, to successfully function, have to make it so personal skill and achievements rated above everything else, including wealth. Yet you have failed to gasp that, in the wider world, many people are quite talented and yet can not find the ability to function in their chosen fields or even, in many cases, any field simply because wealth is the measuring stick we use in this day and age. Like Ryan you believe this problem would vanish by magic, when in reality it would take a heavy socialistic hand to minimise these problems... they never will vanish sadly.
This is what you have to realise, and seem to be arguing though at the same time failing to grasp the wider consequences of your planned system, is that personal potential is pointless if you have no way apply your given skills. We can pray and beg and plead with the universe all we want but the universe is far from fair. It doesn't care how skilled one is, many other outside influences can keep even the most skilled of individuals down while putting the cruddiest of mental cases into positions of wealth and power. This is how the world is, wishing it wasn't so wouldn't change that, and the vast majority of people have felt the sting of real world way to much to ever embrace a system where they wouldn't have some sort of support for when things go wrong.
Hell even with socialised plans in place many people with skill are left behind simply because of conditions have ensured they get little to no recognition for said skills. If we went the full 'greed is right' path Ryan wanted to take then these real world people would be worse off then the current system, even inefficient as it is, as it would take charity to get them out of the ditch. Hell, even with today's social systems in place we are seeing far to many people failing to succeed. Some of it is their own fault, but a greater amount of the problem often comes down to location and lacking the means to leave said 'employment dead zones.' Trust me, I immigrated to another country to find better work for myself and that is not cheap... and I didn't have a family to move, while trying to still find a way to pay for a mortgage or the rest that some poor fool has to deal with.
The biggest problem with your system is, simply, that everything is measured by wealth. This was Ryans problem too, as it wasn't skill as his propaganda spread forth but how much money you started with which determined your caste within his world. Without wealth to begin with you are nothing under these systems, cause no matter how much skill you have everything has a cost and unless you can pay it your screwed.
Not ironically but in a misuse of that word, sorry trying to use that word correctly and it doesn't fit right here, the systems Ryan put in place, the same system you are defending right now, is the backbone of a modern caste system. You know, a system of 'birth conditions controlling the rest of your life' that countries like China loved so very much. Also the reason why whole nations in the past have tried to move to away from mercantile wealth even if they failed... again because the embodiment of greed in their leaders leading back to yet another caste system. It is a horrid cycle, but I am getting off point so get back onto it...
It is why I am socialistic, for regulated markets and for use of generating 'community' fund* to ensure that greed is mitigated to acceptable levels is the only way for the masses to thrive. To ensure circumstances out of ones control doesn't dictate the course of ones success has to be a key focus of any government which wants to see the nation grow stronger in many ways. Cause I understand the majority of skilled individuals would get no-where if it wasn't already for the systems which have been put in place to support and finance them during periods where skill isn't enough.
This is why I haven't counter-dictated myself like you claim, cause people are held back by circumstances out of their control all the time within the real world. People, through no fault of their own, can easily be screwed over thanks to even speculation on the world market let alone something like freak acts of the weather or of illness or any number of other factors which cripple many people around the world from producing a living every day. That is people who are already established, how many out there would never have gotten ahead if it wasn't for someone else helping them get the education and skills needed? Without assistance they would rarely be able to overcome these situations and their real, let alone potential, skill will be squander.
That hurts society as a whole, far more then any benefit of letting greed run a muck.
The biggest in mind at the moment being the lack of education. Doesn't matter how smart you are if the only jobs you can hope for are 'toilet cleaners' because you have no education then your screwed. Considering that the majority of people in the world are born in a places where they are not even being taught to read or write correctly then you see the problem here? Under the uncaring systems people like you want to put in place the whole world would be like that, where one has to be born into money or get lucky through some charitable patron to get ahead in life.
Hell, I have to wonder how many of those oh so godly CEOs benefited from the systems that are currently in place to get their education, let alone to get into the positions to get said jobs. In fact I would go as far to say the whole reason more and more people are no longer living off the land, and on paper are richer then their ancestors, is because we left the whole patron system back in history where it belongs.
For every Bill Gates in the world how many people out there, with more money then they can burn, are scheming to find yet another way to take the last five bucks out of the hands of the average Joe? This is why trickle down economy has failed, and continues to fail, because it is the minority who believes in helping each other out with the wealth they amassed. The majority treats wealth as if it is an entitlement, instead of something they need to earn. It hurts my head to look at some of these rich people you know, to see how they where born into wealth and would very well be dead beats if it wasn't for it.
There is a whole line of 'me first' rich people out there that have used their wealth and power to destroy whole industries simply because they where trying to cement a monopoly. People who have done such harm to society it has led to the whole economy collapsing at times, because they profited more off inflating the market artificially and then pulling all physical support out of it and leaving the masses with the bill.
Should we really be saying these sort of people don't need to contribute one red cent to the system?
That they should, in fact, can get away with being the boot that pushes down on everyone else simply cause they have more money then we do?
Also wondered how long you would take to mention Adam Smith, someone who I actually admire for his physiological understanding of human nature. Want to know a dirty little secret of his: He was against what you preach! I wonder how many people who evoke Adams name as if it is the god of all economy has even bothered to read the guys work. He understood there had to be regulations in place to check unbridled greed. Unbridled greed itself would kill any market. Adams was for regulating the shit out of the market to prevent things like Monopolies from forming. He hated monopolies and how a small group of very rich people would be able to strangle the market, for pure greed at that, even more then I do!
So in closing - You can accuse me of being blind to the people who have worked their way into these positions and do a good job but you are equally blind to just how many people are in positions of power simply because they where born to the right family and abuse what they have to gain even more. People who your system would reward for selfish and greedy actions that will, in the long run, harm society far more then it could ever gain. A double blow as it would lower the education and skill level of the work force... not that the USA needs any help doing that, what with outsourcing....
At least socialistic heavy systems don't involve putting the boot down on the heads of people who happened to be born in the wrong caste by taking away whatever little sliver of hope they might have to get away from the conditions of their birth. If we let greed control the markets, well even Adam smith knew very well what would happen... those with the money would use it to ensure no one threatened their lust for even more money.
PS and more on topic: Glad I am not the only one who caught hold of the fact that, in rapture where the system is apparently meant to encourage personal individuality, the very idea of contraband is in itself breaking said system. One more indication that, from the begining, that even Ryan wasn't planning to implement what he said he was trying to create... hence, more and more is resting on Ryans shoulders as being responsible and the rest is just propaganda.
For Ryan, and people who believe like he claimed to, it was claim capitalistic success when things go right but find some closeted 'anti-capitalistic agenda' to blame when thier fingers where crushed in that so called "great chain" of capitalism.
* <- Love those things.... use them too much though but this is out side of the argument:
You might find it interesting to note I find the idea of government using industry to generate funds to be better then taxation...
It doesn't just generate finances to fund social programs and pay for necessaries of government, it also increases the amount of jobs to be found in the home nation, increases the amount and type of goods being manufactured for local consumption and export, keeps raw resources in the nation which would lower cost of industry all across the board and a range of other things. In fact, government owned industry would improve society in far more ways then just tax revenue would and government should be allowed to own and operate industry, though again heavily regulated to ensure it doesn't monopolise industry completely.
Of course people with wealth would hate that idea. It would lead to the government being in direct competition and the government can actually do it cheaper if implemented in the right ways. That translates to being able to undercut businesses, making them not just a competitor but a cheaper one that many people would feel the patriotic duty to support. You see not having share holders to haemorrhage money to, ridiculous contracts and bonuses that get paid regardless of success, and/or a bottom line that doesn't have to put profits first means a product that cost less thanks to a reasonable overhead rate.
Say just enough to raise enough money to cover the governments budget and support further expansion into other business ventures.
That isn't even touching industry that could run into the red, for nothing more then to generate jobs and further the education and skill level of the work force in places that are lacking said jobs and education chances. A trick that actually, which I will lay at the feet of charitable business owners as justly deserved, did just as much to end the great depression then any governmental program. Seems when a few industries in the right places are working for more then just profit the whole of society actually thrives to become greater.
Now if we only didn't have corruption in government.... but lets face it, that kills every system we might want to put in place. One reason the current system is ineffective is we have idiots getting positions of power through political back scratching instead of talent. I hate corruption even more then I hate monopolies and scams designed to rip money from the lower classes.
But hey, personal greed is never a good measuring stick and what else is corruption but manipulating or even breaking a system simply by putting personal gain first?
"I won't deny that. Ryan was a little paranoid and wanted Rapture shielded from outside influences. But this is a minor matter" So it's okay when your side takes away people's freedom?
Beyond that all I'm getting are flashbacks to John Galt's 50 page speech about greed being just the best thing ever, I gotta get outa here.
Beyond that all I'm getting are flashbacks to John Galt's 50 page speech about greed being just the best thing ever, I gotta get outa here.
The point was that it didn't matter about that, a society under that structure can never succeed. Someone will always push it too far(tenenbaum), or get greedy(fontaine), and the masses suffer.silver wolf009 said:
Andrew Ryan, for creating something that was doomed to fail.
I never said Fontaine asked for a hand-out. Fontaine used mob tatics and threats to gain power and wealth. Ryan never broke the law in the US to make his money.Axolotl said:
Ah so it's okay if your side takes away people's freedom as long as they have a really good reason for betraying their own ideology, got it. And what exactly would the KGB and CIA do to Rapture? I know Ryan yelled about how you must be working for them when you first visit but I honestly think they had better things to do during the 60's.Dormin111 said:
Fine let's say it really is really important, what gives an objectivist the right to take away the freedom of others? Is it for their own good? Where's the ideological consistency? What's the point of having ideals about no government impugning on freedom if they get broken the first time freedom becomes inconvenient? Are you sure your an objectivist?
Ryan, for thinking that Objectivism is a legitimate system and not just a pathetic excuse for selfishness very un-subtly hinted at in crappy novels written by a crazy Russian lady who didn't have an ounce of compassion or morality in her body.
The idea is, that even without ADAM, it was inevitable that it would fail. Nothing Manmade is infallible. So Rapture would fail eventually. It didn't help that it was under the ocean.
ADAM accelerated it perhaps, but it was doomed to fail from the beginning. Even listenning to the Audio Diaries from before the discovery of ADAM, you could hear that people weren't content.
ADAM accelerated it perhaps, but it was doomed to fail from the beginning. Even listenning to the Audio Diaries from before the discovery of ADAM, you could hear that people weren't content.
Okay, I was happy enough to just read some of the hateful language being thrown around earlier simply because there was at least some form of logic behind it, however this is just silly. First off, Ayn Rand never hinted at anything. She very plainly stated that, in her view, selfishness was the driving force of progress in humanity, and that (excepting where it actively hurt someone else) it was an admirable quality. Secondly, her novels, while droll and long-winded at times, are very well written. Next up is your pronouncement of her coldness. She is very clear that she has only compassion for those who earn it, and I have honestly never heard a more moral belief in my life. And finally, she's "a crazy Russian lady"? Are you aware that your own avatar is a modification of the Communist Russian insignia?Anticitizen_Two said:
I apologize for getting so far off topic.
Despite obviously having Objectivist beliefs myself, I believe Ryan was at fault in this case. He had the opportunity to fund Tenenbaum's research and encourage her to make ADAM healthy, but he favored haste over long-term safety. He had the ability to raise skilled workers to their proper place and give them the recognition they deserved, but often chose attrition, allowing unworthy competitors to win by not preventing those competitors from doing bad business. He could have listened to the engineers that told him improvements and repairs needed to be made, but instead gave them cheap parts and cheap labor. And he could have upheld his own espoused beliefs in a true free market within the city, but instead relied on his ability to make or damn a brand simply by being the ruler of the city.
Now, I expect to receive quite a bit of venom for this, but please try to keep it civil.
-EDIT-
Axoloti made a good point earlier. Ryan's philosophy isn't strictly Objectivism anyway, since he did dip into the whole 'social classes' thing. So, really, why are we having these giant arguments about whether Objectivism ruined Rapture when it wasn't truly present in the first place?
Other. The people did. Put that many ambitious people in so little a space with so many temptations, it was bound to go to hell sooner or later.