All Episodes
Previous Next
Aug. 6, 1997 - Bill Cooper
59:48
Man's Rights by Ayn Rand
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
This is my daddy's station.
I'm Poop.
Classic radio like you always wished it could be.
101.1 FM.
Eager.
101.1 FM is owned and operated by the Independent Foundation Trust as a non-profit community service.
This is The Voice of Freedom.
You're listening to the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
www.worldwidefreedom.org Once upon a long time ago, there was an old man in a farm.
I'm gonna go home and I'm gonna go down and sing.
I'm gonna go home and I'm gonna go down and sing.
Oh, my God.
.
You are listening to the Hour of the Time.
I'm William Cooper.
Ladies and gentlemen, yesterday we, because of a tape the day before, sort of got off into this Battle of Armageddon definition, just as a topic to talk about, because I had been accused, and you heard it on that tape, I'm trying to scare everybody with Armageddon when I have actually never mentioned the subject.
And so I thought it would be nice to talk about it since I've been accused of doing it.
I might as well do it.
But we didn't scare anyone.
We just talked about it.
Well, I got a couple of calls saying that, you know, to say that I was wrong in my interpretation and in what I believe and, you know, they didn't have the courage to call in the air, which is when they should have called because we would have Wanted to hear what they had as an interpretation of it.
But I don't ever want to hear from anybody to tell me that I'm wrong and I should change my belief because of what you believe.
You see, the whole thing about yesterday's broadcast wasn't what I believe or what you believe.
The whole point of the thing was that, and the most important thing about it, is that we have the freedom to believe whatever it is that we individually Believe.
And if you understand that, and you practice it, and you give that freedom to others, then you are a true American.
However, if you're one of the few that thinks that I'm no good, or everybody else is no good because they don't believe your particular church's dogma, or what you particularly believe, or what your interpretation of the Bible, or any other holy book, or religious book, happens to say, Then you're not an American.
You're not for freedom.
And if you ever came to power, you would be rounding those of us up who did not believe like you and you would be dispensing of us in some manner like they did during the Inquisition with torture and the rack and putting eyes out with hot coals and having star chamber courts and burning people at the stake.
And as long as I'm alive, folks, I will never, never permit that to happen.
I'll die first.
And I think a lot of other people in this country who truly understand and appreciate freedom will do the same.
As for my beliefs, it was just the topic of conversation yesterday when it came up and when the caller happened to believe what I particularly believe.
It has no bearing upon anything.
It is my right as an American to believe whatever I wish to believe and worship at whatever altar I wish to worship at.
Whatever God I wish to worship at that altar, and to tell you quite frankly, it's nobody else's business.
Just as you have those exact same freedoms.
As a matter of fact, I thought everybody might enjoy hearing that because I'm always getting these letters.
Well, what is it that you believe?
As if it makes any difference.
It doesn't in this country.
It doesn't make any difference in this country what anyone believes as long as you're not hurting the person or property of any other Human being and as long as you're not infringing upon their right to believe what they wish to believe without your or my or anyone else's judgment about that.
It's just simply nobody else's business.
Today I'm going to be talking about something that's pretty important to all of us.
It's something that I think needs to be said.
In fact, I'm going to read it.
It's an article.
And after I'm finished, I'd be interested, if I finish today, I'd be interested in seeing who can guess who wrote it.
If any of you can guess who wrote it.
It doesn't matter if you're wrong or right.
I just want to know how many of you, or if any of you, can guess who wrote this.
And if nobody guesses it, maybe we'll open the phones tomorrow, and if I get through it today, and see if there's anybody, you know, who can come up with the answer.
And if nobody can, then I'll I'll give you the answer.
And I think you'll be pleasantly surprised, many of you.
But anyway, that's neither here nor there.
Also, we've got our fax operating again.
And so if you need to call the office, always call between 9 a.m.
and 1 p.m.
Pacific Daylight Time, which is also Mountain Standard Time, which is our time, because we never go on daylight time.
The reason I say Pacific Time is because if I say Mountain Standard Time, for some reason that confuses everybody in the country who don't know the difference between Standard Time and Daylight Time and can't compute the difference between their time zone and ours.
So, I just use Pacific Time because everybody's used to hearing Pacific and Eastern Times and that's the two times that we use on this program and on the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
If you hear a little humming in the background, folks, it is not, I repeat, it is not your receiver.
It is not your satellite receiver.
It is the air conditioner running here because it's hot and humid.
It's not really hot, but it's warm and humid.
Let me put it that way.
Humidity tends to make warm into hot.
And so the air conditioner takes out that moisture, and even though the studio is closed up and the air conditioner is in another room, you can still hear that slight hum.
For those of you who tried to get the rerun of yesterday's Hour of the Time last night, we were unable to get on the satellite, and therefore could not do the rerun last night.
Everything is fine today, as far as I know.
We're on the satellite, and there's no problem.
So anyway, that's what happened.
The, uh, if you want to call the office, once again, call between 9 a.m.
Pacific to 1 p.m.
Pacific.
That, uh, translates, folks, to 12 Eastern to 4 Eastern.
Is that right?
I think that's right.
Yeah, that's right.
That's the time you should call our office.
Those are our office hours.
The number of the office is 520-333-4578.
It's the same as the calling number for this broadcast when we're doing calls.
520-333-4578 is also the fax number.
And you don't have to call to send a fax.
Unless you have one of those strange fax machines which our computer cannot read.
When you send your fax.
In that case, you need to call and during the office hours and Connie will punch in a code that should allow your fax to go through.
But normal faxes can just be sent.
Just sent.
We have a little device there that determines whether it's a voice or a fax call.
If it's a fax call, it automatically routes it to the fax in the computer.
If it's a voice call, the phone will ring.
Okay?
Also, don't forget to take advantage of Southwest International Trading's Most recent premium offer, which is if you purchase any precious metals of any kind in any amount equaling $1,000 or more, you get a free MS-64 Morgan silver dollar PCGS or NGC rated.
And of course it's sealed in plastic so nobody can tamper with it or change that rating or substitute an inferior coin for the one that was rated.
We also have, but let me see.
You can also purchase 40, 90% silver quarters for $40 or 100, 90% silver dimes for $40.
And the number is 1-800-295-2432.
That's 1-800-295-2432.
or one hundred ninety percent silver dimes forty dollars
and the numbers one eight hundred two nine five two four three two that's one eight hundred
two nine five two four three two also remember that every penny you spend
with southwest international trading
also gives us a little bit to help operate the worldwide freedom
radio network uh... we no longer having web page ladies and gentlemen
We do not have a web page.
However, we are in the process of finding a company where we can put up a whole web domain.
In other words, a web site.
Whatever you call it.
With everything.
Even be able to listen to The Hour of the Time.
We're going full-blown into it.
We're investigating that.
Any of you out there who might be able to help us, call 520-333-4578.
Give us your recommendations or whatever you think we should know in order to be able to do this as quickly as possible.
Also, if you want to help the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network, you should switch your telephone long-distance carrier from whoever you have it with to our long-distance carrier.
If you want to hear more information about it, call Connie between 9 a.m.
and 1 p.m.
Pacific Time, Monday through Friday at 520-333-4578.
She'll be glad to give you all the information and answer all your questions.
And if she can't answer them, I'll do it.
And we'll get you switched over and give you one of two plans.
We can give you 10 cents a minute, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 52 weeks a year, with only a low $1 per month service charge.
Or you can get nine cents a minute if you don't mind calling between 7 p.m.
and 7 a.m.
and and it's six second billing and you know it's just it's just wonderful and it's the fifth largest long-distance carrier in the nation it's healthier financially than AT&T It is on the New York Stock Exchange.
It's not a fly-by-night company.
It's not one of these internet things that appear for a couple of months and then disappear.
It is real.
It is there.
It is great.
And by signing up with that long-distance carrier, you help the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
Don't go away, folks.
We'll be right back after this very short pause.
This is a test.
We'll be right back.
you the
the the
Well, in my haste to get into this, I forgot to tell you something else that's important.
For those of you listening on shortwave, beginning Monday, our shortwave time may change.
Our shortwave time may change from 6 Eastern to 11 PM Eastern.
From 6 Eastern to 11 PM Eastern.
And that's in anticipation of going on the new antenna and we'll Make the show available in a time slot that will be easy for everybody in all of the different time zones to listen to it after they get off of work and not have to be at work and take a chance of getting fired by listening to radio while they're working or setting up a jury rig taping mechanism so that they can listen to it later or just missing it altogether.
So beginning Monday, if you're listening on shortwave, If you're listening on shortwave, make note of this.
This is not for certain.
So tune in at the regular time on Monday.
If you don't hear the hour of the time, that means we have switched our time slots.
If you do hear it, it means we have not.
But beginning Monday, if everything goes okay, we will no longer be heard at 6 p.m.
Eastern.
We will switch, beginning Monday, if everything goes okay, to 11 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time.
That's 11 p.m.
Eastern Daylight Time.
And it will always be 11 p.m.
Eastern Time or whatever it is.
I don't know how that's going to work.
We'll find out when the time shifts back anyway.
I think everybody stays on Eastern Time is really what I think happens.
That's the way it was on WWCR.
I don't think it's going to change on WRMI.
Okay.
This is entitled Man's Rights.
I want you to listen very carefully because this is really great.
Something that everybody should at least think about whether they agree with it or not.
And personally, I think it's right on the money.
Here we go.
If one wishes to advocate a free society, that is, capitalism, one must realize that its indispensable foundation is the principle of individual rights.
If one wishes to uphold individual rights, one must realize that capitalism is the only system that can uphold and protect them.
And if one wishes to gauge the relationship of freedom to the goals of today's intellectuals, one may gauge it by the fact that the concept of individual rights is evaded, distorted, perverted, and seldom discussed, most conspicuously seldom by the so-called conservatives.
Rights are a moral concept.
The concept that provides a logical transition from the principles guiding an individual's actions to the principles guiding his relationship with others.
The concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context, the link between the moral code of a man and the legal code of a society, between ethics and politics, Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law.
Every political system is based on some code of ethics.
The dominant ethics of mankind's history were variants of the altruist, collectivist doctrine which subordinated the individual to some higher authority, either mystical or social.
Consequently, most political systems were variants of the same status tyranny, differing
only in degree, not in basic principle, limited only by the accidents of tradition, of chaos,
of bloody strife...
Excuse me ladies and gentlemen, I've got a little cold and was caught unawares there.
Thank you.
Either mystical or social, consequently, most political systems were variants of the same status tyranny, differing only in degree, not in basic principle, limited only by the accidents of tradition, of chaos, of bloody strife, and periodic collapse.
Under all such systems, morality was a code applicable to the individual, but not to society.
Society was placed outside the moral law, as its embodiment or source or exclusive interpreter, and the inculcation of self-sacrificial devotion to social duty was regarded as the main purpose of ethics in man's earthly existence.
Since there is no such entity as society, since society is only a number of individual men, this meant, in practice, that the rulers of society were exempt from moral law, subject only to traditional rituals.
They held total power and extracted blind obedience.
On the implicit principle of the good is that which is good for society, or for the tribe, the race, the nation, and the ruler's edicts are its voice on earth.
Now, this was true of all status systems under all variants of the altruist, collectivist ethics, mystical or social.
The divine right of kings summarizes the political theory of the first.
Vox Populi, Vox Dei of the Second.
As witness, the theocracy of Egypt with the Pharaoh as an embodied god, the unlimited majority rule, our democracy of Athens, the welfare state run by the emperors of Rome, the inquisition of the late Middle Ages, the absolute monarchy of France, the welfare state of Bismarck's Prussia, The gas chambers of Nazi Germany and the slaughterhouse of the Soviet Union.
You know, it's interesting here, folks, and not too long ago I made mention that the Roman Empire deteriorated ultimately into socialism.
And that's exactly what the author of this article has noticed also in the research.
I continue.
All these political systems were expressions of the altruist, collectivist ethics And their common characteristic is the fact that society stood above the moral law as an omnipotent, sovereign, whim-worshipper.
Thus, politically, all these systems were variants of an amoral society.
The most profoundly revolutionary achievement of the United States of America was the subordination of society to moral law.
The principle of man's individual rights represented the extension of morality into the social system as a limitation on the power of the state, as man's protection against the brute force of the collective, as the subordination of might to right.
The United States was the first moral society in history.
All previous systems had regarded man as a sacrificial means to the ends of others, and society as an end in itself.
The United States regarded man as an end in himself, and society as a means to the peaceful, orderly, voluntarily coexistence of individuals.
All previous systems had held that man's life belongs to society, that society can dispose of him in any way it pleases And that any freedom he enjoys is his only by favor, by the permission of society, which may be revoked at any time.
The United States held that man's life is his by right.
Let me read that again.
The United States held that man's life is his by right, which means by moral principle and by his nature.
That a right in the property of an individual, that society as such has no rights, and that the only moral purpose of a government is the protection of individual rights.
A right is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man's freedom of action in a social context.
There is only one fundamental right.
All the others are its consequences are corollaries.
A man's right to his own life.
Life is a process of self-sustaining and self-generated action.
The right to life means the right to engage in self-sustaining and self-generated action, which means the freedom to take all the actions required by the nature of a rational being for the support, the fervor, the fulfillment and the enjoyment of his own life.
Such, ladies and gentlemen, is the meaning of the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
The concept of a right pertains only to action, specifically to freedom of action.
It means freedom from physical compulsion, coercion, or interference by other men.
Thus, for every individual, a right is the moral sanction of a positive of his freedom to act on his own judgment, for his own goals, by his own voluntary, uncoerced choice.
As to his neighbors, his rights impose no obligations on them except of a negative kind, to abstain from violating his rights.
The right to life is the source of all rights, and the right to property is their only implementation.
Without property rights, no other rights are possible.
Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life.
The man who produces while others dispose of his product is a slave.
Now bear in mind that the right to property is a right to action.
Like all the others, It is not the right to an object, but to the action and the consequences of producing or earning that object.
It is not a guarantee that a man will earn any property, but only a guarantee that he will own it if he earns it.
It is the right to gain, to keep, to use, and to dispose of material values.
The concept of individual rights is so new in human history that most men have not grasped it fully to this day.
In accordance with the two theories in ethics, the mystical or the social, some men assert that rights are a gift of God, others that rights are a gift of society, but in fact the source of rights is man's nature.
The Declaration of Independence stated that men are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.
Whether one believes that man is the product of a Creator or of nature, the issue of man's origin does not alter the fact that he is an entity of a specific kind, a rational being, that he cannot function successfully under coercion.
And that rights are a necessary condition of his particular mode of survival.
The source of man's rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity.
A is A, and man is man.
Rights are conditions of existence required by man's nature for his proper survival.
If man is to live on earth, It is right for him to use his mind.
It is right to act on his own free judgment.
It is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work.
If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being.
Nature forbids him the irrational.
To violate man's rights means to compel him to act against his own judgment or to expropriate his values.
Basically, there is only one way to do it by the use of physical force.
There are two potential violators of man rights, the criminals and the government.
The great achievement of the United States of America was to draw a distinction between these two by forbidding to the second the legalized version of the activities of the first.
The Declaration of Independence laid down the principle that, to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men.
This provided the only valid justification of a government and defined its only proper purpose to protect man's rights by protecting him from physical violence.
Thus, the government's function was changed from the role of ruler to the role of servant.
The government was set to protect man from criminals, and the Constitution was written to protect man from the government.
The Bill of Rights was not directed against private citizens, but against the government as an explicit declaration that individual rights supersede any public or social power.
The result was the pattern of a civilized society.
Which for the brief span of some hundred and fifty years, America came close to achieving.
A civilized society is one in which physical force is banned from human relationships, in which the government, acting as a policeman, may use force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use.
This was the essential meaning and intent of America's political philosophy.
implicit in the principle of individual rights, but it was not formulated explicitly, nor fully accepted, nor consistently practiced.
America's inner contradiction was the altruist, collectivist ethics.
Altruism is incompatible with freedom, with capitalism, and with individual One cannot combine the pursuit of happiness with the moral status of a sacrificial animal.
It was the concept of individual rights that had given birth to a free society.
It was with the destruction of individual rights that the destruction of freedom had to begin.
A collectivist tyranny dare not enslave a country by an outright confiscation of its values, material or moral.
It has to be done by a process of internal corruption in the realm of rights.
The process entails such a growth of newly promulgated rights that people do not notice the fact that the meaning of the concept is being reversed.
Just as bad money drives out good money, so these printing press rights negate authentic rights.
Consider the curious fact that never has there been such a proliferation all over the world of two contradictory phenomena of alleged new rights and of slave labor camps.
The gimmick was the switch of the concept of rights from the political to the economic realm.
The Democratic Party platform of 1960 summarized the switch boldly and explicitly.
It declared that a Democratic administration, quote, will reaffirm the Economic Bill of Rights which Franklin Roosevelt wrote into our national conscience 16 years ago, end quote.
Now bear clearly in mind the meaning of the concept of rights when you read the list which that platform offered.
1.
The right to a useful and remunerative job in the industries or shops or farms or mines of the nation.
2.
The right to earn enough to provide adequate food and clothing and recreation.
3.
The right of every farmer to raise and sell his products at a return which will give him and his family a decent living.
4.
The right of every businessman, large and small, To trade in an atmosphere of freedom from unfair competition and domination by monopolies at home and abroad.
5.
The right of every family to a decent home.
6.
The right to adequate medical care and the opportunity to achieve and enjoy good health.
7.
The right to adequate protection from the economic fears of old age, sickness, accidents, and unemployment.
8.
The right to a good education.
A single question added to each of the above eight clauses would make the issue clear.
At whose expense?
Jobs, food, clothing, recreation, homes, medical care, education, etc.
do not grow in nature.
These are man-made values.
Goods and services produced by men.
Who is to provide them?
If some men are entitled by right to the products of the work of others, it means that those others are deprived of rights and condemned to slave labor to support those who did not work for those rights, which are not rights at all.
Any alleged right of one man which necessitates the violation of the rights of another is not and cannot be a right.
No man can have a right to impose an unchosen obligation, an unrewarded duty, or an involuntary servitude on another man.
There can be no such thing as the right to enslave.
A right does not include the material implementation of that right by other men.
It includes only the freedom to earn that implementation by one's own effort.
This is as foreign to Socialism and to Socialists as the distance between where we stand right
now, ladies and gentlemen, and the farthest galaxy in the universe.
Observe in this context the intellectual precision of the Founding Fathers.
They spoke of the right to the pursuit of happiness Not of the right to happiness.
It means that a man has the right to take the actions he deems necessary to achieve his happiness.
It does not mean that others must make him happy.
The right to life means that a man has the right to support his life by his own work, on any economic level, as high as his ability will carry him.
It does not mean that others must provide him with the necessities of life.
The right to property means that a man has the right to take the economic actions necessary to earn property, to use it, and to dispose of it.
It does not mean that others must provide him with property.
The right of free speech means that a man has the right to express his ideas without danger of suppression, interference, or punitive action by the government.
It does not mean that others must provide him with a lecture hall, a radio station, or a printing press through which to express his ideas.
Any undertaking that involves more than one man requires the voluntary consent of every participant.
Every one of them has the right to make his own decision, but none has the right to force his decision upon the others.
There is no such thing, ladies and gentlemen, as a right to a job.
There is only the right of free trade.
That is a man's right to take a job if another man chooses to hire him.
There is no right to a home.
Only the right of free trade.
The right to build a home or to buy it.
There are no rights to a fair wage or a fair price if no one chooses to pay it.
to hire a man or to buy his product.
There are no rights of consumers to milk, shoes, movies, or champagne if no producers choose to manufacture such items.
There is only the right to manufacture them oneself.
There are no rights of special groups such as... well...
there are so many, we're not going to name any of them.
There are no rights of special groups.
There are no rights of farmers or workers, of businessmen, of employees, of employers, of the old, of the young, of the unborn.
There are only the rights of man, rights possessed by every individual man and by all men as individuals.
Property rights and the right of free trade are man's only economic rights.
They are, in fact, political rights.
And there can be no such thing as an economic bill of rights, but observe that the advocates of the latter have all but destroyed the former.
that rights are moral principles which define and protect a man's freedom of action, but impose no obligations on other men.
Private citizens are not a threat to one another's rights or freedom.
A private citizen who resorts to physical force and violates the rights of others is a criminal, and men have legal protection against him.
Criminals are a small minority in any age or country, and the harm they have done to mankind is infinitesimal when compared to the horrors, the bloodshed, the wars, the persecutions, the confiscations, the famines, the enslavements, the wholesale destructions perpetrated by mankind's governments.
Potentially, a government is the most dangerous threat to man's rights.
It holds a legal monopoly on the use of physical force against legally disarmed victims.
When unlimited and unrestricted by individual rights, a government is men's deadliest enemy.
It is not as protection against private actions, but against governmental actions that the Bill of Rights was written.
Now observe the process by which that protection The process consists of ascribing to private citizens the specific violations constitutionally forbidden to the government, which private citizens have no power to commit, and thus freeing the government from all restrictions.
The switch is becoming progressively more obvious in the field of free speech.
For years, The collectivists have been propagating the notion that a private individual's refusal to finance an opponent is a violation of the opponent's right of free speech and an act of censorship.
It is censorship, they claim, if a newspaper refuses to employ or publish writers whose ideas are diametrically opposed to its own policy.
It is censorship, they claim, if businessmen refuse to advertise in a magazine that denounces insults and smears them.
It is censorship, they claim, if a TV sponsor objects to some outrage perpetrated on a program he is financing, such as the incident of Alger Hiss being invited to denounce former Vice President Nixon.
And then there is Newton N. Minow, who declares, there is censorship by ratings, by advertisers, by networks, by affiliates, which reject programming offered to their areas It is the same Mr. Minow who threatens to revoke the license of any station that does not comply with his views on programming, and who claims that that is not censorship.
Consider the implications of such a trend.
Censorship, ladies and gentlemen, is a term pertaining only to governmental action.
No private action is censorship.
No private individual or agency can silence a man or suppress a publication.
Only the government can do so.
The freedom of speech of private individuals includes the right not to agree, not to listen, and not to finance one's own antagonists.
But according to such doctrines as the Economic Bill of Rights, an individual has no right to dispose of his own material means by the guidance of his own convictions.
and must hand over his money indiscriminately to any speakers or propagandists who have a right to his property.
This means that the ability to provide the material tools for the expression of ideas deprives a man of the right to hold any ideas.
It means that a publisher has to publish books he considers worthless, false or evil.
That a TV sponsor has to finance commentators who choose to affront his convictions.
That the owner of a newspaper must turn his editorial pages over to any young hooligan who clamors for the enslavement of the press.
It means that one group of men acquires the right to unlimited license while another group is reduced to helpless irresponsibility.
But since it is obviously impossible to provide every claimant with a job, a microphone, or a newspaper column, who will determine the distribution of economic rights and select the recipients when the owner's right to choose has been abolished?
Well, Mr. Minow has indicated that quite clearly.
And if you make the mistake of thinking that this applies only to big property owners, you had better realize that the theory of economic rights includes the right of every would-be playwright, every beatnik poet, every noise composer, and every non-objective artist who have political pull to the financial support you did not give them when you did not attend their shows.
What else is the meaning of the project to spend your tax money on subsidized art.
And while people are clamoring about economic rights, the concept of political rights is vanishing.
It is forgotten that the right of free speech means the freedom to advocate one's views and to bear the possible consequences, including disagreement with others, opposition, unpopularity, and lack of support.
The political function of the right of free speech is to protect dissenters and unpopular minorities from forcible suppression, not to guarantee them the support, advantages, and rewards of a popularity they have not gained.
You see, the Bill of Rights reads, quote, Congress shall make no law abridging the freedom of speech or of the press.
And, of course, there's more, but that makes the point.
It does not demand that private citizens provide a microphone for the man who advocates their destruction, or a passkey for the burglar who seeks to rob them, or a knife for the murderer who wants to cut their throats.
Such is the state of one of today's most crucial political rights versus economic rights.
It's either-or.
One destroys the other.
But there are, in fact, no economic rights, no collective rights, no public interest rights.
The term individual rights is a redundancy.
There is no other kind of rights and no one else to possess them.
Those who advocate lazy, fair capitalism are the only advocates of man's rights.
End of article.
Now we'll see if anybody out there recognizes the author.
The number is 520333.
4-5-7-8.
If you know who wrote that, or if you think you know who wrote that, give me a call.
Let's find out.
Also, it would be interesting as to when you think that it was written.
5-2-0-3-3-3-4-5-7-8 is the number.
I'd also like to know if you agree or disagree with what was written here.
The only one thing that I disagree with, being a man who believes in God, I believe that they are Creator-endowed rights, and I believe whether they are provided by nature, or whether you say it's provided by the Creator, I believe that they are both one and the same entity.
The laws of nature, of course, are dictated by whatever force in this universe that you want to call God that maintains the order of the rules that the universe operates by.
And to me, that's the Creator.
520-333-4578 is the number.
Give me a call.
Tell me if you know who wrote this, or if you think you know who wrote it.
If you don't know who wrote it, do you agree with it?
If you know, what don't you agree with?
This is a marvelous rebuttal to socialism.
There's very little in here, I think, that any socialist could actually rebut and get away with it in front of any kind of intelligent group of people.
But that's assuming that those intelligent group of people would think like me.
And, of course, a lot of people do not.
Good afternoon.
You're on the air.
Hello, Bill.
If it wasn't Ayn Rand, it was somebody who read her.
Well, you're right.
It is Ayn Rand.
Oh, very good.
When do you think it was written?
Late 60s.
Actually, early 60s.
Early 60s.
Yeah.
Okay.
Yeah, I recognize several key phrases.
I agree.
What did you recognize?
I bet it's in the last paragraph, right?
It was her references to Aristotle.
Yeah.
A of A. Well, if you're referencing Aristotle, it could have been me that wrote it.
Yeah.
I do know that she drew on Aristotle quite a bit.
What I thought would give it away was in the last sentence.
Those who advocate laissez-faire capitalism are the only advocates of men's rights.
That is classic Ayn Rand.
Right.
Right.
She hit most of it right on the head.
Yes.
What do you think about her interpretation of where rights come from?
I think she was coughing out so she wouldn't give an argument from the atheists.
Right.
There has to be an uncaused first cause.
Yes.
And if rights actually begin with man, they have to be revocable by man.
So, I think she copped out there.
There has to be a creator involved.
Yeah, I think she did too.
By the way, science is now getting closer to saying that yes, there is a God and yes, All life originated from a big bang, all at once.
Well, that's what I'm going to comment on.
If God is infinite, how can a limited being, such as man, understand Him?
Well, you know, I agree with that.
I don't believe that anybody talks to God.
I don't believe that God comes down here and whispers in anybody's ear.
I don't believe that He ever did.
I don't believe that he sits on a throne in a big white robe with a big long flowing white beard.
I don't believe that we're capable of understanding exactly what God is or how God works or what makes it all fit.
That's why it's God.
we could understand that, maybe we could duplicate it, don't you think?
Yes.
Most individuals are unable to understand how man works, how we function as a society,
and how it's... the best doings of man are driven by an individual's desire to better
himself.
And if an individual or a government steps out to better a society, it virtually always
ends in disaster, typically genocide.
There are some wonderful examples of that.
And one of them is Shirley MacLean running along the beach spinning and yelling, I'm God!
I'm God!
And yet, have you seen her lately?
No, I haven't.
I can imagine.
She's getting old like everybody does.
Yeah, aging much unlike a God.
She still has to pay her bills and she's going to die.
How she rectifies that.
If she's God, she could short-circuit all of that, and save herself, and make herself younger, and she could live forever, and she could create a new universe that would be exactly the way she would imagine that it should be, and she could step across into that universe and leave all of this problems behind, but she hasn't done that, has she?
She may believe that she knows now, but she most certainly will someday know.
We all will.
I think she knows every time she gets up in the morning, looks in the mirror, and begins to apply her makeup.
Very good.
I want to thank you, Bill, for providing the sort of essays, such as that one that you just did from Rand.
You won't hear that kind of thing elsewhere in the media.
Nowhere.
You'll never hear it anywhere, unless you're listening to, oh, I forgot his name.
He's in California.
He's a big proponent of buying Rand.
He's got his own radio show.
Yeah.
That's one of her studies.
Pykov.
Leonard Pykov.
I thought it was kind of ironic if you read, I believe this is the Romantic Manifesto collection of essays compiled by Ayn Rand and published.
There's a piece in there by, of all people, Alan Greenspan.
Really?
Really.
What did he have to say during his irrational youth?
Well, I bet you, if you really read it properly, understanding probably what you've learned in the meantime, he's probably just saying the same thing that he's saying now.
Well, I bet you if you really read it properly, understanding probably what you've learned
in the meantime, he's probably just saying the same thing that he's saying now.
In just an esoteric manner.
Yes.
Well, thank you very much, Bill.
You're welcome.
Once again, this is about the only place where a person can hear this sort of narrative.
Most individuals who are involved in the media are too egotistical to turn over an hour of time to read someone else's essay.
Well that's what this broadcast is all about.
It's about educating people and trying to find the truth which is elusive at best.
And getting back to the right-thinking principles and ideals that made this the greatest nation on the face of the earth.
And away from this collectivist mindset and this philosophy of political correctness that is in the process of destroying it and making it a third-rate, third-world country.
Hey, it's a road to disaster that we're on right now.
Yeah.
And the laissez-faire of capitalism is not without its faults.
That's right.
Let me tell you something.
If we want to have a new world order, If everybody wants a one-world government, let it be the United States of America under a constitutional Republican government with the creator-endowed rights of man guaranteed and protected for all people in this world.
And let all the other nations become states of this great nation.
If you want a world like that, I'll get up and fight for it.
I'll advocate it.
I will twist arms.
I will argue the point.
Anything but this collectivist, destructive, socialist, Nazi, jack-booted, thug mindset that's going to take us back into something very close to Hitler's Germany.
If you look at the seven deadly sins, we're often taught that greed is one of them, and in actuality, it wasn't greed.
It was covetousness, if I'm pronouncing that correctly.
That's what socialism is.
I'm too weak!
I'm a victim!
I can't ever have a big house like that, so you owe it to me!
Exactly.
I don't owe you nothing, bud.
Get out and work for it.
If you work hard enough and long enough, you'll have it.
Even if it's washing dishes.
You'll learn something along the way, and you'll move up to waiting on tables, and then maybe one day you'll own your own restaurant.
But I'm not going to give it to you.
Very good.
Thank you, Bill.
You're welcome.
Thank you for calling.
I think we've got time for maybe one more call.
520-333-4578 is the number.
That last call was a good one, and may have stimulated you, so to speak.
520-333-4578.
While we're waiting for another call, or maybe another call won't come, I'm going to talk to you a little more about the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
We're going to get bigger, folks, and bigger, and we're going to be broadcasting for a greater number of hours each day.
We have removed the music portion of the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network's broadcasting in the evening simply because none of the affiliates were picking it up and carrying it, and there's no sense wasting the money for the phone uplink to the satellite uplink if the affiliate stations are not going to carry the programming.
We are all of our talk format programming and the Saturday afternoon Johnny Ray and Lonesome Bob's Verifying Radio Show are all being carried by several, if not all, of our affiliate stations.
And so those will continue to run.
And we will continue to add programming until we've filled everything up.
And we're continuing to negotiate for a major market normal type real radio station.
And that's dragging out, and I don't know if it's ever going to happen, but at least we're making the attempt where nobody else is.
And if that happens, then watch out.
Just watch out.
That's all I've got to say.
For those of you who claim that you always want to help, and there's nothing that you can do, there is something that you can do.
You can help us.
You can call Southwest International Trading and buy something.
Not just to buy it, and not just to help the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
When you own precious metal, especially in the form of gold bullion coins, that are readily recognized and known by everybody in the world to be worth something real, then you're helping to protect your assets.
And you are insuring yourself against the total loss of everything in some economic collapse.
Which we know is coming.
You see, the world government is going to be socialist.
Socialists must destroy the middle class.
It is one of the planks of the Communist Manifesto.
It is one of the reasons for the graduated income tax in this country.
And much, much, much more, ladies and gentlemen.
And for them to have their way, they must collapse this economy and destroy the middle class in one fell swoop.
And they will do it.
They will do it.
Unless you wake up.
And stop them, and I don't see any evidence of that happening anywhere.
No, sir.
Not even by those who call themselves our conservative leaders in Congress.
They're not.
There's not a dime's difference between the Republican and Democratic Party.
They're all just a bunch of Nazi jackbooted thug socialists.
That's the truth.
And every time that you help yourself, you're helping the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
Also, if you're paying more than nine cents a minute or ten cents a minute for your long-distance phone charges, and you really want to help this network, then you need to switch your long-distance phone carrier.
If you don't, it means that you don't care about your own money and your own pockets, and you sure don't care about the Worldwide Freedom Radio Network.
So, if you've been procrastinating, stop.
Call 520-333-4578 tomorrow morning, talk to Connie, and let's get it done.
Okay?
That's about it.
In fact, that is it.
▲
Export Selection