Atlas Shrugged

I suspect she is either
-a secret member of the Situationist International working on a huge, lifelong, satirical prank.
or
-a malkavian vampire

maybe both.

I’m no Ayn Rand scholar, but from what I have read she always struck me as a personally miserable human being who was much more sure of what she didn’t want to believe than she was of what she actually did believe. She can seem either far right or far left depending on which way you tilt your head while reading her.

[quote]kamui wrote:
I suspect she is either
-a secret member of the Situationist International working on a huge, lifelong, satirical prank.
or
-a malkavian vampire

maybe both.

[/quote]

If you care to (though I do not see any reason you would) you can use the search function for pages of post as to my point of view. For the record, I think it short sighted to dismiss Rand’s philosophy. Many readers’ polls over the years have listed Atlas Shrugged second only to the Bible as the most influential book of the last century. Love it or hate it, it is not insignificant.

Most detractors refuse to acknowledge that Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged at a time when she was still learning and mastering the English language. She was a Russian immigrant and detested the effects of communism on her mother country. She saw America as a special, unique and all so fragile place and moment in time where any person, regardless of family, education, wealth or lack of, could from their own efforts, be or accomplish anything provided they did so under the guidance of rational thought.

She saw religion, socialism and communism all as reflections of the same evil, which to her was the sacrifice of the individual to some amorphous, bastardized concept of “the people.” They were all the tools of con men who used manufactured guilt to steal substance from the productive in the name of the "less fortunate.

To steal a line gaining traction today, “Socialism is for the people, not the Socialist.”

In order to express her thoughts, she created a story of a “utopia” springing from the dying embers of a “dystopia.”

Her protagonists were obvious exaggerations of the qualities she thought best suited to move society forward in a way that would benefit the most people, even if she didn’t give a rat’s ass about “most people.”

I liked parts of her message in that I have always believed that individual rights were all important. Everything else followed from there.

As I have repeatedly stated, my problem with most criticism of Rand not that she was beyond criticism. She was a very flawed human being. The problem is simply that more often than not those that have never even read her works quote what others have said about her and attack her for a message she never taught or condoned. It is the ultimate strawman.

She had plenty of real faults to attack. She was sanctimonious bitch in her own right on par with our own Tiribulus.

She never portrayed children in her novels, for in her world people sprang whole from the womb capable, if they so choose, from being encumbered by either nature of nurture, guided only by rational thought and the recognition and acknowledgment of existence as an absolute.

This list goes on. I simply find it silly to dismiss her as a third string philosophical hack. I also wish to see her challenged by what she actually did say instead of the the perverted nonsense that others try to put in her mouth.

I will end by asking for a little slack if my spelling and sentence structure has deteriorated through this post. Unfortunately, I think that I partially tore my pec in tonight’s chest workout, and between the ice packs and the application of percocet left over from my wife’s recent surgery, I am far from my best.

As to those who question my response to Tirib, I will simply state that I find most people interesting or at least entertaining in some way. Rarely do I find anyone repulsive. As a very flawed Christian I find myself challenged by the teachings of love and forgiveness central to my religion, and the visceral repulsion I feel for the brand of Christianity that Tirib espouses. I often wonder how many seeking the good news are turned off and turned away by him and his kind before they are able to find the love and forgiveness they seek.

If anything, this would be an excellent reason to dismiss Rand’s philosophy, because, as Charles Maurice de Talleyrand said, “all that is exaggerated is insignificant”.

That being said, i’m not a “detractor”.
I don’t know which of my hypothesis is true, but either way, i’m absolutely convinced she is a real genius. Albeit not a philosophical one.

[quote]JEATON wrote:<<< As to those who question my response to Tirib, I will simply state that I find most people interesting or at least entertaining in some way. Rarely do I find anyone repulsive. As a very flawed Christian I find myself challenged by the teachings of love and forgiveness central to my religion, and the visceral repulsion I feel for the brand of Christianity that Tirib espouses. I often wonder how many seeking the good news are turned off and turned away by him and his kind before they are able to find the love and forgiveness they seek. [/quote]That sounds pretty serious. You,re just gonna leave a brother languishing in his error, misrepresenting your precious Lord and Savior like that? For shame. There are numerous commands to defend the faith throughout the new testament. When can we expect that you will obey those commands by showing my “repulsive brand” of Christianity for the God dishonoring error that it is? Certainly a Jesus loving champion of His truth such as yourself wouldn’t allow His name to be continually reproached in public with nary a word of defense.

Don’t be shy. Paul named names. “Watch out for Joe and Fred and steer clear. They are heretics” (to accurately paraphrase). So I’m asking. As an erring brother who according to you is a loud public perverter of the gospel of grace and very well may be leading people away from salvation. Help me(and them). Please?

[quote]JEATON wrote:

and Thunderbolt…

We have been down this road before. You mock what you don’t understand even as you all but admit you have never completely read it. You are to politics/philosophy what Tirib is to Christianity. You pretend to stand on a mountaintop with an all encompassing view. While I have admired your knowledge base often, you take yourself far too seriously. [/quote]

I understand her and her works fine, having read them - or as much of them as I could stand - and I never pretended to be on a mountaintop about anything. What rankles you is that I had the audacity to insult your precious cult leader along perfectly legitimate grounds, and you threw a tantrum.

Tell me, though, JEATON - as a Randian, surely you have traded out your cross for a dollar sign by now?

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]

Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.

As push said “repeal the 19th” - and good work Ayn. Can’t always be wrong. 8*)

[quote]groo wrote:
I think this quote sums up most of Rand for me

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”[/quote]

That is a funny quote but it is just a shame that believe it is true.

I absolutely hate Ayn Rand and her 3rd grade Mickey Mouse Club philosophy. I can look at a fly on a piece of dog shit and derive more meaning.
The fact that she is for capitolism and the free market system does not help my opinion of her one bit. It’s not like that’s hard stuff to figure out anyway.

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:
I’m no Ayn Rand scholar, but from what I have read she always struck me as a personally miserable human being who was much more sure of what she didn’t want to believe than she was of what she actually did believe. She can seem either far right or far left depending on which way you tilt your head while reading her.[/quote]

Brilliant people who are surrounded by idiots and have come from miserable conditions have not much cause to not be miserable.

If she seems both equally left and right it is because she was a libertarian before the word even existed; however, she was naive in her belief that government would limit its size and scope through the “will of he people”.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]

Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]

Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.

[quote]pat wrote:

The fact that she is for capitolism …[/quote]

No, thats Obama.

[quote]orion wrote:

[quote]pittbulll wrote:

[quote]groo wrote:
I think this quote sums up most of Rand for me

“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old?s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.”[/quote]

I thought the trilogy was awesome , I do like Atlas Shrugged but it seems to becoming a straw man. I do wonder if it is possibly a depiction of the Robber Barron era or possibly a look at Russia at some period in history ? [/quote]

Yeah?

Get on Youtube and watch the miracle that is Barney Frank.

If you can find out which character he is you win 5 internets.

Also, all of the laws in the book have been done before, in the US. [/quote]

That is what I was curious about , it had to be a book about history . It is too complex and intertwined to be a product of imagination

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]

Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]

Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]

It would be a true utopia but I could not see it getting too big

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]

Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]

Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]

What happens where one guy’s utopian dream conflicts with another guy’s? Say, Tom’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. Dick’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. You’re Harry. What do you do? BTW - Dick and Tom broke into your house and took any firearms that were there.

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

As push said “repeal the 19th” - and good work Ayn. Can’t always be wrong. 8*)[/quote]That’s an amazing quote. Sounds like the biblical view of women in the church.

[quote]JEATON wrote:

[quote]Tiribulus wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:<<< there is nothing profound in them. >>>[/quote]This has come up before. The randies will throw up some quote of hers and then stand back, arms folded, nose in the air, sort of silently and smugly emanating an attitude of “BAM!! Take that knaves”. I’ve never gotten it. These quotes invariably range from random personal proclamations that are mildly thought provoking to truly unintelligible gibberish. Seriously. There have been times where an otherwise at least passably intelligent individual will post some of her thoughts and I’m honestly just staring at the screen. I’m almost afraid to respond. It’s like "either I am REALLY missin it or this woman holds some sort of spell over people whereby they mistake their cat walking across their keyboard with life changing profundity.
[/quote]

He read it once, as a teen. Therefore he knows all about it.

All this from a sanctimonious prick who all but worships another sanctimonious prick who also happened to be a mass murderer.

I have made an honest effort to avoid you short of putting you on ignore.

Please do me the solid of crawling back to your thread (you know the one where you preach that you alone know the mind of God and everyone else is just hell spawn.)

and Thunderbolt…

We have been down this road before. You mock what you don’t understand even as you all but admit you have never completely read it. You are to politics/philosophy what Tirib is to Christianity. You pretend to stand on a mountaintop with an all encompassing view. While I have admired your knowledge base often, you take yourself far too seriously. [/quote]

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:

[quote]SexMachine wrote:

[quote]thunderbolt23 wrote:
Rand’s books are children’s books, and not even good ones. Adoloscents start quoting the books’ banalities like they are some form of gospel heretofore never understood by adults, but there is nothing profound in them. She just rewarms the fable of the Golden Goose and serves it in a verbose and droning package.[/quote]

Dude, how can you deny the genius of Howard Roark? Rejecting everything that came before - Greco-Roman gibberish. A hero of modern architecture fighting against the reactionary/revanchists! Look at modern architecture and tell me you’re not impressed. And Garry Cooper! Oh, he brought Roark alive! A tall drink of water if I do say so myself. And who is John Galt? That’s what we finally find out! Utopianism! That’s the ticket.[/quote]

Every man wants his own utopia and to deny it is to deny your own nature.
[/quote]

What happens where one guy’s utopian dream conflicts with another guy’s? Say, Tom’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. Dick’s dream is to rob and kill Harry. You’re Harry. What do you do? BTW - Dick and Tom broke into your house and took any firearms that were there.[/quote]

Conflicts don’t happen in a utopia.