book sucks, ayn rand is a fucking idiot and anyone who is deluded enough to think a word she has to say is enlightened should club themselves over the head with a concrete brick
@dinnivanmalo "I think Rand is an idiot. But rather than address the arguments laid out in her book, I'm instead going to urge her readers to commit bodily harm against themselves." This is what you sound like.
I thought the main character Roark was a decent character (someone who works towards his beliefs regardless of how unpopular they are) up until the point that he rapes Dominique and actually destroys low income housing because the builders didn't completely follow his blue print. Worse, he gets away with both.
once upon a time there was a guy and he was the best and he was also always right (DO NOT QUESTION THIS OR YOU ARE A MORON) and all the mean people said "no you cannot be the best" but he said "yes i can be the best" and then he started a new life with people who were also the best and always right but some were better than others but that was ok for some reason and then asdfhbabfa dgag who is john galt hyperbole platitudes platitudes platitudes arghgss fgfgffgf ffffff
@moralreef The Communist Manifesto: Once upon a time there were evil rich people who stole factories from us that grew out of the ground. Then everyone killed them, and life was okay from then on. The End.
@moralreef But that's just it: you deride other people's productivity without actually contributing anything yourself. You can't even contribute a worthy argument to the discussion. You are a parasite. I probably shouldn't even be replying to you as it's just feeding your attention-whoring.
@smiledammit24 right to free speech; i can criticise anything and everything i want to and there is nothing you can do about it. you're allowed to enjoy the fountainhead as much as i'm allowed to call it poorly written, and i'm allowed to call you a philistine holding onto a dated philosophy for liking it. don't like that? suck my dick. besides, i'm not a parasite, i contribute both culturally and to computer science. what was the last notable thing you ever did?
Book of right wing losers? Why would it be? Oh I know, because the main protagonist refuses to sacrifice his integrity to the whim of public opinion. Opinion manipulated by power and approval seeking slobs. And after losing his job because of it he takes one in a quarry instead of compromising his professional values.
I'd happily be considered a "right wing loser" by the majority of liberals, but I can say that The Fountainhead is in no way a book I would base my philosophy on. I think the Bible of conservatives would be THE Bible, the HOLY Bible.
@coyotepassing Ayn Rand always said that the conservative movement's retreat from reason to appeal to the religious was the worst decision they ever made. I completely agree. Every proposal made by the right wing is tainted by the perception our ideas are based in faith, not reason.
@smiledammit24 Faith and reason don't always oppose each other; many fundamentalists that I know are quite reasonable. What bothers me is the notion that Atheism is inherently reasonable. Many people revert to Atheism on unreasonable grounds, while many Christians choose their religion based on reasonable assumptions. It all depends on the person. However, the point I was trying to make was that right wing conservatism is far from the ideals expressed in The Fountainhead.
@coyotepassing I agree that there's nothing inherently logical or illogical about why someone chooses to follow a certain creed. But to literally reject logically sound arguments in place of "revealed knowledge," or to impose beliefs based in myth upon people that do not ascribe to them, is immoral. Far right wing conservatives base their policy decisions upon the Bible, not because it makes sense, but because it is popular.
@smiledammit24 I don't really think the Bible is that popular nowadays. Most ring-wingers like myself follow biblical morals and teachings because it is tradition, and really the Bible does make sense, it's just that people don't think something 2000 years old can apply to their lives, which is a little shallow. I haven't met many right-wingers who reject logical statements without providing their own logical argument. Trying to stereotype one political position is coping out.
What are those rights? If you can't feed yourself when you are hungry or support yourself when you are sick, all of the other rights are pointless. If you are excluded from the decision making where you live you have no reason to identify with those institutions. A change in management will do you no harm (e.g. foreign invasion). This is why powerful institutions (like government, education and business) created affirmative action programs for minorities and welfare programs for the poor.
It was not a "totalitarian" disrespect, but a disrespect for those who lacked imagination and put a dollar sign on everything. Money does not equal value. Many of the most financially successful men were failures because they were slaves to their wealth.
I think it is the fact that it has abandoned all subtlety and intelligence it once had. The Simpsons used to be creative in the way it mocked people, something obviously went wrong because it is now one of the worst 'comedy' shows I have ever seen, every joke falls flat. I despise what it has become, they should stop making it (if they haven't already)
There is no "free market capitalism" without government. Government maintains the system of property. Property is only a measurement of what you possess. Property does not exist in the real world--just like national boundaries. It only exists to the extent that governments by general agreement between individuals can enforce it. Human rights, for example, do not exist outside human constructs--non-human forces don't recognize your rights. Rights are created for the common benefit of men by men.
There is no distinction to be made. WIthout the State capitalism could not exist. The "free market capitalism" that you attempt to visualize happened during the Middle Ages. It was called feudalism. If there was no government, those who held wealth would have to hire mercenaries to safeguard their wealth. The more wealth they had the more capital they would have to allocate to mercenaries. Anarcho-capitalism is feudalism. It didn't work.
@perdondaris Your right, that's why objectivism never says there should be no government. It says that the government's only role should be to protect its citizen's rights
If you believe capitalism (as the objectionable followers of Ayn Rand do) is clean look up King Leopold and the Congo, Lord John Russell and the Irish Potato Famine. The sordid history of Capitalism is as long and filled with betrayals, assassinations, raping and pillaging as the Black Book of Communism. To believe otherwise is to engage in the same kind of doublethink that Orwell criticized in Stalinists.
There's an important distinction about "capitalism" that you need to understand. When Objectivists and Objectivist-sympathizers say "capitalism" we mean free-market capitalism. King Leopold was using state-capitalism or monopoly capitalism(mercantilism) where only some people were allowed to make money with special permission.
I'm not an anti-semite. Every race and nation has practiced human sacrifice from the Norse to the Semites, Caucasian and colored. Religions vary (on a relative spectrum) in terms of morality. Everything that Nazis, Communists, Muslims have done Jews, Christians, capitalists and Americans have done: including genocide, rape, holy wars, terrorism, slavery, censorship and so on. There are neither innocents nor absolutes. It is only a matter of perception.
@Sivels She is indeed, but the show's producers tend to portray Lisa as the wise one of the family, the most intelligent of them all. Although I enjoy 'The Simpsons' it does have a left-wing bias.
It depends on who wrote the script. Swartzwelder, the best comdey script writer in my opinion, is rather conservative in real life and he wrote many scripts until 2003. Matt Groening is liberal. The movie was more conservative than liberal with the EPA being the main villain. The character strength of Ned Flanders and his always saving Homer definitely is a nod to conservatism and Mayor Quimby is definitely a shot at liberals.
So were the Europeans. The Jews practiced human sacrifice three thousand years ago. The ancient Greeks of Socrates time practiced infanticide. Ayn Rand was full of shit.
Ayn Rand's books don't hurt anyone. Tyrants and dictators just use her books to cover up their crimes. If it weren't for Ayn Rand's books they would use the Bible or the Koran. All of her philosophical work is an Apology for a life poorly lived. You can't live a very good life as a pure individualist--the only examples of pure rugged individualism are guys like Ted Kacynzski. Happiness is only real when shared.
Who has actually ever used Ayn Rand's books to run a country other than the fictional character in Bioshock? Plus, a pure Objectivist would tell you that if happiness is only real when shared, then it is ethical to share happiness.
That being said, I liked The Fountainhead, but I thought Atlas Shrugged was long and boring.
A good antidote for Ayn Rand's Bullshit are the works of Kurt Vonnegut. People wonder why there aren't many direct parodies of Ayn Rand's ghastly novels but there are plenty. You just have to use your head to find them. People wonder why Bond villains always engage in long winded speeches about their schemes (allowing time for Bond to escape). This actually isn't a plot device. Egomaniacs like to give long winded speeches in real life (consider the Unabomber and any serial killer's manifesto).
The best support of Rand comes from Wikipedia, which was inspired largely by Rand's work according to founder Jimmy Wales. The little beneficial banking still done in America is largely done by objectivist-skippered BB&T that was forced against its will to accept government funds.
Yes, Hayek's economic ideas and neuroscience research specifically inspired Wikipedia.
The "Anarchists" and the Communists have tended to argue that open source is "counter revolutionary" because it allows bourgeoisie to offer their opinions of the facts to the proletariat without following the regulations of the proletariat. This is why Wikipedia is banned in China and North Korea.
@MegaAstrodude A user-generated, non-hierarchical, non-profit website seems more like a Libertarian Socialist or Anarchist ideal than one inspired by Ayn Rand, but I guess that's just my opinion. Jimmy Wales says it was inspired both by Rand and Freidrich von Hayek yet it seems more likely to be inspired by Chomsky or Emma Goldman but whatevskis.
The best support of Rand comes from Wikipedia, which was inspired largely by Rand's work according to founder Jimmy Wales. The little beneficial banking still done in America is largely done by objectivist-skippered BB&T that was forced against its will to accept government funds.
I don't misunderstand libertarianism. American "libertarians" believe in plutocracy. Pure capitalism is plutocracy. Rand is not a descendant of Nietzsche. Nietzsche despised capitalism and the "morality of acquisition". He wasn't a socialist either, although he admired the radical forebears of Leninism (e.g. Blanqui). Nietzsche believed more in aristocracy based in artistic merit (as in Plato). The Ancient Greeks despised commerce as a lowly profession and would have laughed at Ayn Rand.
@perdondaris ''The Ancient Greeks despised commerce as a lowly profession'' That is an rather brash & general statement. & consequently wrong. Aristocrats like Plato disliked commerce, as well as the totalitarian Spartans & sympathisers with Sparta(again Plato). But to suggest that the multitude of Greek City states, & merchants who relied on trade for their wealth, culture & power did not value commerce is peculiar & short sighted.
Ayn Rand wasn't Hitler. She died before she could do any damage to the world. She is just a corpse now. In the future however, some tyrant will use her books as a justification for his atrocities--just like the Bible and The Communist Manifesto were. Someone should airmail a copy to Assad or any other dictator that may end up in The Hague. I would love to see him lecturing his judges like Howard Roark.
I've read the book. And other Ayn Rand books. The irony of her morality is that George Soros could be both the hero and the villain in one of her books. There is a certain collectivism in Ayn Rand's ideology: assuming that profitability equals value or that individualism means hard work towards some goal. She engages in doublethink (racism is evil, unless it's racism towards the Indians who once populated the Americas and were obviously "inferior" since they weren't capitalists).
Native American tribes were often very bloody and oppressive. Many individuals sided with the settlers because they gained rights that they didn't have before. La Malinche sided with the Spanish because she had been forced into slavery by the Aztecs and was going to be blood-sacrificed.
The Anasazi practiced cannibalism and the Cherokee owned more slaves per capita than the Confederacy at one point.
@MegaAstrodude Thank you Astrodude. I am so tried of people thinking a portion of my family tree was just setting around getting along with each other before the European arrived. Hell, my Cherokee grandmother thought my Creek grandfather a wimp because her ancestors drove them down into Georgia. No matter what your race or how close your skin color, people are going to fight over land or some other crazy-ass thing.
Of course, the other side of the tree had better weapons.
@hulkinator100 I bet their have only been ~6.5 million copies of the book sold since it was written back in 1943. If 5% of simpsons fans, that would be ~5 times the average for American.
A common world currency, free and open trade with all nations, limited tariff, and individual human rights freedoms is great because it is simple the more complex things are the harder it is to fix them and I doubt that you are capable of understanding the faults of the modern (very complex) financial industry (unless you work in it or majored in mathematics (if did you still would probably work in it or in a university)). Oh and what a great, insightful and polite discussion.
Yes, it is true that man will try to corrupt any and all systems you throw at him and that is why I think the state shouldn't interfere with trade and the economy via bailouts etc. Well I think that this is our main philosophical difference I think that man if left unchecked wouldn't destroy the whole populous. I think that on the whole people are inherently good but the bastards usually get to power . I agree with your idea and this is what Ayn Rand basically wanted or not?
When criticizing Rand, where does one start? Terrible character development, inane plot, magical solution to every problem with the world, poorly-developed "philosophy", laughable "ethics", superiority complex in all her protagonists, removal from reality, general ignorance of her proclaimed hero Aristotle.
The world never had such an overrated "philosopher."
One strawman after another in this thread on both sides. Read first, then have an opinion. To decry or laud Ayn Rand without cracking a book makes you a fool. You don't need others to interpret Rand, she clearly states her meaning. I'll say one thing about both Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead, they are the opposite of propoganda. There is nothing sugar coated about them. Our culture is richer for her selection of the U.S. as her escape from Stalin's USSR. Don't fear ideas, fear censors.
@NH365 O god, thanks Andrew Ryan, hows life for ya down there? Everything Rand said had been said before by Stirner and Nietzsche without her emotional, fallacy filled, right wing slant
@NH365 Ayn Rand never "escaped Stalins USSR". Her parents fled Russia right when they were trying to build a new society. They were cowards and deserters. Naturally, the Soviet (non-Stalinist - in fact, pre-Stalin) government took it over, as it should have under the circumstances. Ayn Rand grew up and lived in America, pampered and safe. Your re-writing of history would have made Stalin proud.
The Soviet government under Lenin was no different than the Soviet government under Stalin as far as morality is concerned. They were just lazier. Rand was purged from university simply for being "bourgeois". That's enough of an experience to explain her nature.
@NH365 Oops, I'm sorry, her family *did* return to Russia after initially deserting, I was wrong, it was the Stalinist-Zinovievist Russia that she escaped. Doesn't them make them any better, though.
IT AMUSES ME WHEN CONSEVATIVES CONSIDER ALL LIBERAL IDEALS TO BE "BRAIN WASHING": IT IS AS IF WE CANNOT THINK FOR OURSELVES AND COME TO THAT COMMON CONCLUSHION THAT GREED IS NOT O.K. AND THAT WE DO OWE ALL OUR FELLOW CITIZENS A RIGHT TO EXIST IN AN ENVIRONMENT CONSISTANT WITH SURVIVAL AND HUMANITY. I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE AYN RAND FOLLOWERS LIVED A SYMPLISTIC LIFE WHERE NO ONE MATTERED BUT THEMSELVES. I WISH THERE WERE TRASPORTATION TO MARS...I WOULD GIVE THEM ALL A ONE WAY TICKET.
@bduhe219 Yeah and when you came to visit from the hell-hole you would call earth, you would see a prospering society of great thinkers and creators. Please do buy us all a ticket.
Ps. we will deal with the lack of resources somehow.
@D0ctorWh4t LOL...I WOULD NEVER WANT TO VISIT A PLANET COMMUNITY WHERE EVERYONE FENDED FOR THEMSELVES AND ALLOWED PROVERTY BLOSSOM AND PROSPER WHILE THE FEW ATE, WERE SHELTERED AND WERE SELF-RELIANT. THAT, MY FRIEND , IS THE RESIPE FOR REVOLOUTIN! ASK THE RUSSINA, FRENCH, AND EVEN THE EASTERN BLOCK OF EUROPE. SOCIALISM WAS NEVER THE VILIAN IN EASTERN EUROPE, IT WAS TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIPS, WHERE NO FREEDOM WAS PERMITTED. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE U.S. IS AND THAT IS NOT WHAT ANYONE PERPOSES.
@bduhe219 Ehm I actually live in "eastern europe" (Czech republic) and don't even get me started on the horrors of socialism. The problem was the bureaucracy, that caused economic inefficiencies. If live would have been good then no one would have rebeled because I doubt 90% of humanity cares about such abstract things like freedom of speech.(although I do care) So please research your arguments before you post. btw. Objectivism demands absolute freedom and so I repeat my previous argument.
@D0ctorWh4t as ilive in the heart of capitalism, i want to know how socialism effects people in a negative way. tell me, what freedoms are restricted from you. i honestly want to know. do you have access to hositals or doctors that the goverment is involved in? in our country cost of medical care is the second most exensive thing you will be effected by, less home purchase or maybe even a car purchase. we do have some medical assistance run by the government, but it is limited to very poor...
@bduhe219 There isn't socialism here anymore. Thank god, but seriously religion, free thought or any kind of deviation was punished. My relative was a member of political party before the second world war and then, when they came to power he was imprisoned and after he came back(10 years for doing nothing but expressing his opinion by being part of a political party) he was a broken man and died soon (this was told to me by my elders I wasn't alive then. That is to general freedoms.
@D0ctorWh4t ...or the poor elderly. do you have some type of government retirement account or pension? we have something called "social security" that assist retired people over 65 that have worked or who are too ill in some ways to work. do you have fee education, or ed. supplied by your gov.? we have primary free education uo until the age of 18, and some smaller ed. or college ed. for free, but a more prestigous university cost a lot of money. do you have restritions on where you can work?
@bduhe219 I will repeat it one more time we have capitalism here now so use the past tense please. Yes, college education is free as is all below it but even if our military presence anywhere is minimal (one contigent of soldiers to support your troops in Afg) our deficit is going up and we have our own form of social security(maybe a bit different than yours). There were restrictions to what you could do when socialism was here if you were an uncomfortable and expressed any discontent.
@bduhe219 To continue on restrictions that used to be... If you were a son or daughter of a former ugly capitalist/landowner/shopowner/catholic you didn't even have the right to study anything like physics philosophy or such things. Oh and did you know that Jazz was considered a buorgeois art and forbidden-good thing I was born so late and can experience the beauty of the world unrestricted by the buearocrats.
@D0ctorWh4t i would consider those kind of restrictions financial issues. are you allowed to read what you want, associate with who you want? worship the religion of your choice? i just want to know what are the issues you have with a socialist system. i am not anti-capitalism or pro-socialism. i think that there are good aspects in both and favor a modified system that incorporates both. i think you may have a quarel with how the system works rather than the concept of government intervention.
@D0ctorWh4t western europe runs with aspects of cap. and soc. governments. sweden is a very socialist gov. but the rules, regulation and taxation goes to things to benefit the citizens. i think that your issue would be in a strict opressive gov. rather than a gov. run to assist the people. the u.s. gov has some smaller soc. programs that benifit the unemployed, elderly, children of poor, and those in need of medical care...but not on a large scale as many in the industialized world.
@bduhe219 Yes my father works for a Norwegian firm and he says that Norway reminds him of the system that used to be here very much, but they are less oppresive, yet they have to have control of your life(for eg. They see all te transactions you do, where you go with your car and the food is rationed (but there is more of it because they have oil and so they have way more money :D) My issue truly is with oppressive goverments but they always turn out oppressive when given too much power.
@D0ctorWh4t i want to end this by stating..i want gov. to work for me, not me work for the gov. i want certain standards and quality of life that gov. can assue for me. i do not want a bloated opressive gov. i do think the red tape is the issue and the means to get the programs to work destrys ppls faith that this can happen. i still think the u.s. is the greatest country on earth, i just think it can be better. i hope one day a progressive reformer will change this country for the better.
@bduhe219 My personal fav. country is Switzerland, but the USA is great if your deficit wasn't so terrible and if the Patriot act wasn't so threatening and if the FED wasn't such a idiotic concept :) Otherwise I think it is a great country and hey thanks for freeing us (by ruining the USSR), although maybe it was 44 years overdue :D .
@D0ctorWh4t i am an hoest person , even with myself. i will admit my country is great, but i do not think my country is always right. i have disagreements with policy and procedure and do not defend war when not needed, i.e. iraq, etc. i think in the eary years of communism it was viewed as a political ideal instead of a murder machiine and opressive regime that took all of a person's freedoms away, and because of that i can understand why it took so long to be taken as a threat.
@D0ctorWh4t i agree with you that when power iincreases in gov. they can become opressive. i fear that in this country. i think there are too many laws and restrictions on some personal freedoms, but i do think they were implimented because of man's abuses that went unchecked. industry got away with many ills untill gov. stepped in. the civil war ramifications could be strongly felt even after 100 years later. this counrty stilll struggles with race, religion, economic issues that devide us.
@D0ctorWh4t as for the deficit..i agree. but to be honest, it took 6 years of george w. bush to run through a surplus and create this sinkhole of debt. under clinton we had a surplus. the iraq war and all his tax breaks for the wealthy caused this fiasco. oboma is left to handle this mess and try and correct it. it depresses me to think we are in this mess, and all the conservatives blame the poor and those who seek assistance from the gov. as the cause....scapegoating the poor...shameful.
@D0ctorWh4t i have really enjoyed or exchange. i think we can agree on some things and disagree on others. i wish you well in your country. i hope soon, my country will be free of this debt. the u.s. has bailed out many countries and i was thinking, why doesn't china forgive our debt as we allowed some countries to clear thier debt to us. but as you know, they will never do that. i wish we could go back to square oen and forgive all countries debts to start again. but...keep in touch.
@bduhe219 You know debt is forgiven only when the person can never ever pay it back again and America is still the biggest, richest and most prosperous place in the world so I don't think any forgiving will happen anytime soon. Futhermore hope your country doesn't have a bad revolution or something like that because the world would be in for a world of pain :D
@D0ctorWh4t WELL...OUR COUNTRY IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE COUNTRY...MEANING, AFRAID OF DRASTIC CGANGE AND THAT IS WHY LIBERALISM IS HATED BY MANY. WE DON'T EVEN LIKE THAT WORD, WE USE "PROGRESSIVE" NOW TO MAKE IT SEEM NICER. I AM A LIBERAL, AND TO DEFEND LIBERALISM IS TO ONLY LOOK IT'S DEFFINITION UP. IT SPEAKS CLEARLY FOR ITSELF, AND I AM ONE AND PROUD. BUT WE DO NOT HAVE MANY FAR RADICALS THAT COULD REALLY TAKE OVER THE GOVERNMENT. WE ARE A VERY LARGE COUNTRY WITH MANY DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
@D0ctorWh4t THE THING THAT SADDENS ME ABOUT THE U.S. IS IT IS PERCIEVED AS BEING ARROGANT, YET WE ARE THE MOST COMPASSIONATE COUNTRY TO OTHERS IN THE WORLD WHEN IT COME TO THEIR AID, OR HELPING FINANCIALLY, OR WHEN THEIR BORDERS ARE THREATENED. WE HAVE TROUBLE FEELING THAT COMPASSION WHEN IT COMES TO OUR MINORITIES, POOR, ELDERLY, ETC..NOT THAT SOME DO NOT FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS, BUT NOT ENOUGH DO IT. I THINK SOCIALISM GETS A BAD REPUTATION BECAUSE IT LOOKS AT GOVERNMENT BEING TOO INVOLVED...
@bduhe219 Well aid isn't really that good you should really just let the free market do its thing. Like a wise man said once: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime." Almost every country has some natural resources and so these can be used to trade with others and make money and feed the people. if the people just can't fend for themselves in that particular, then they will move elsewhere or die.
@D0ctorWh4t ..IN PEOPLES LIVES. I DON'T WANT THAT EITHER..WHAT I WANT GOVERNMENT TO DO IS KEEP STANDARDS FOR ALL CITIZENS, PROTECT CITIZENS FROM BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY PEOPLE WITH GREAT WEALTH, BIG INDUSTRIES, ETC. AND REGULATE NECESSITIES SUCH AS HEALTHCARE, PRICE CONTROL WHEN NEEDED DUE TO INFLATION, ETC. AND OTHER SMALLER NEEDS THAT MAY OCCUR. I NEVER THOUGHT THAT WAS A RADICAL NOTION FOR A SOCIETY..I REALLY DO NOT SE THE OTHER SIDES OBJECTION IN THAT.....
@D0ctorWh4t ...WHAT I MEAN IS I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY ARE OPPOSED, I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR PREMIS. SOCIALISM GETS A BAD REPUTAION BECAUSE IT WAS UTILIZED IN TOTALITARIAN CONTROL BY OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENTS. ENGLAND, FRANCE, SWEDEDN, GERMANY, SPAIN, ETC..ASLL HAVE SOCIAL WELFARE STATES IN SOME MANNER. THE U.S. HAS TRIED FOR ALMOST 100 YEARS TO IMPLIMENT SOME SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY UPHELD BY GOVERNMENT, BUT BIG BUSINEES, MEN OF FINANCE, AND THE VERY RICH FIGHT IT EVERYTIME..
@D0ctorWh4t ..AND IN THIS COUNTRY, MONEY BUYS ACCESS AND ACCESS INFLUENCES LAWS. THAT DEPRESSES ME GREATLY. MONEY SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO INFLUENCE LAWS THAT EFFECT ALL OF US, BUT THEY DO. WELL...I'VE GIVEN YOU MY OPINIONS, ALTHOUGH I THINK YOU WERE NOT ASKING FOR THEN , NOR DID YOU REALLY AGREE (I THINK)..BUT IT REALLY HAS BEEN WONDERFUL CHATTING WITH YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I AM FREE TO ANSWER THE ONES I CAN. I HOPE YOU KEEP IN TOUCH AND LET N]ME KNOW HOW YOU ARE DOING. THANKS
@bduhe219 Well you know that the moment you transfer some responsibility to the goverment is the moment when they can become corrupted? I am all for giving basic needs for everyone but when the goverment influences the market (price inflation, deflation, trade restricitons) such as Obama is doing now (look at the trade war with China) you give an unfair advantage to some and ruin others. Oh and it would be very nice of you to stop using all caps.It seems as though you are shouting at me.
@bduhe219 People with wealth always had influence(except in socialist countries where the more loyal you were the more influence you had). There were periods when they have less (like now) and usually a bigger goverment means more influence.
@D0ctorWh4t since the 1970's, china has had what we call "most favored nation" in trade. meaning, it is a free market exchange that we trade with them freely as well as they with us. this had much more to with politics than actual trade. we wanted to keep russia from having too much influence by giving china incentives to be favorable towards u.s. policy. i don't agree with much of it, human rights still are violated in china, but we try to keep peace to avoid war. i think many nations violate..
@D0ctorWh4t ...basic human rights, unfortunately, endless war is not an otion in fighting these injustices. i maybe wrong, but i think a common world currency, free and open trade with all nations, limited tariff, and individual human rights freedoms, would make this world a better place. it may sound simplistic, but i think many would try and corrupt that system too..it really is the ugly side of mankiind. the nature of the beast. man left to his own devices would destry the majority of...
"AND IN THIS COUNTRY, MONEY BUYS ACCESS AND ACCESS INFLUENCES LAWS."
Logical. Thus the natural conclusion is men should not have the power to create money like the Federal Reserve and banks do. Also governments ability to control it's people should be limited by law first. If you have little or no influence to sell it's harder to sell influence. It's also harder to pay for if you can't create money for free.
This is what the founding fathers of America envisioned.
@D0ctorWh4t COMMON GROUND ALLOWS EVERYONE A LIVEABLE EXISTANCE. I FIND IT IRONIC SO MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT IS A LEFTIST PILOSOPHY. ALL THIOSE CONSERVATIVES WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE AN ISLAND UNTO THEMSELVES AND THAT SOCIETY SHOULD BE LEFT TO RUN AMUCK WITH DEATH, HOMELESSNESS, PROVERTY AND STARVATION AND THAT THEY COULD SLEEP AT NIGHT AND IT NEVER EFFECT THEM. IF THAT IS YOUR ADMIRATION FOR THE SCHOOL OF AYN RAND...THAN HAVE AT YOUR HELLHOLE.
@D0ctorWh4t MAN HAS NEVER STOPPED THINKING, EVOLVING, CREATING, PROSPERING BECAUSE OF TAXES, MY FRIEND. FIND ANOTHER ENEMY BETTER SUITED FOR THAT HATE, THAN FOCUSING ON POOR PEOPLE. YOU REALLY SHOUDL BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. FINDING FAULT WITHT HE LEAST OF OUR BROTHERS IS A MIGHTY LOW BLOW.
@killerbee2k she happens to be the conscience of the show...think about that. she is the one character that sees things for what they are and tries to correct the wrongs. that maybe a true deffinition of a liberal.
@killerbee2k don't try and make me look like i am an uninformed politico, just because i do not believe in the neo-con randites and the I-ME-MINE philosophy. you choos eto look at yurself more important than the whole, and i choose to look at myself as an equal of the collective. that is where we differ. i see the country as the collective, where yu choose to serve only needs of self-interest.
@bduhe219 Then you completely misunderstand everything about libertarianism, and I'm no randian objectiovisionist or whatver they call them selves. I consider myself equal to all other individuals in the collective, I dont deserve any special treatment and neither does anyone else. The state is a tool for enforcing legal obligations to each other and create a framework for cooperation. Where we differ is that you think you deserve my money because you are "I-ME-MINE", your the selfish
@killerbee2k how did you get that I-ME-MINE was a position i took? i look at the collective as having cases of need, as to where the RANDITES look to ones own interest above the collective. you've got it backwards sir. i do not look to my needs as the duty of governemnt, but to all who may be in need at one point in their lives. believe me, that day comes to many who think they will never be in that position...don't count on your employers kindness..they don't care if you sink or swim.
@flopress The fact is she's right. And who was that ugly-ass man on the back-cover? He really had some twisted ideas. I think he needed a psychiatrist.
Anyone who thinks that living life to only pursue their selfish interests will somehow manifest societal benefit or prosperity for the collective is an utter moron who can't even understand simple logic.
Anyone who thinks I owe the collective anything based on my existence is a moron who I will shoot when they come on my property looking for food when they refused to read writing on the wall and their fucking society collapses.
I understand your logic, your failure who thinks everyone owes you something. We don't.
@BadSwineDOTcom Can you read? Where did I say you or society owes me something?
I'm simply stating the obvious fact that a competitive society with an economy based on mindless self interest and power hierarchies will only lead to destruction. Humanity needs to work together for the common goal of sustainability if we want any hope of surviving.
"The Earth is a single organism, and an organism at war with itself is doomed." -Carl Sagan
@IHighLikePlane Talk about simple logic; count the fallacies. 1) Blanketing "Anyone" 2) Prosperity for the collective non-sequitur 3)utter moron ad hominem 4) Generally Begging the question 5) The Red Herring pursuing life style and intelligence
You made 5 illogical fallacies in one run-on sentence.
@energytomatter You're right, I never spent the time to learn all the fallacies, because its easy enough for me to see when an argument is full of crap. Now that you point it out, I regret my choice of wording. However my argument, that a mass of people fighting amongst themselves for their individual betterment is not likely to benefit all parties involved, still stands. If there is a fallacy in that arguement then let me know.
@energytomatter instead of making fun of the fool, why not deal with his concern straight on? well whatever, I don't know what either of you guys were talking about, but if anyone's going to bitch about ad hominem better make sure they're not doing it himself.
@FrankiePoker Basic economics is a ponzi scheme. It is the most corrupt outdated social system in existence. People act as though monetary economics is a science when it is actually an ideological religion. Money isn't real, nor does it relate to environmental sustainability, or meeting human needs. This is why it is failing and will collapse onto itself as we are seeing now.
Gotta love The Simpsons. What is amazing is that show is on FOX! Murdoch will do anything for money, even cater to to the left and rip right wingers. It seems he never gets involved in editing out controversial shit on The Simpsons, but he loves ruining great newspapers like The Wall Street Journal.
The Simpsons is not funny. At all. I have not laughed at it since the 90s. Last night I saw an episode where they had to teach an object lesson on the cruelty of bull fighting. It wasn't clever or original. The old Simpsons was nowhere near as preachy and politically correct.
book sucks, ayn rand is a fucking idiot and anyone who is deluded enough to think a word she has to say is enlightened should club themselves over the head with a concrete brick
dinnivanmalo 3 days ago
@dinnivanmalo "I think Rand is an idiot. But rather than address the arguments laid out in her book, I'm instead going to urge her readers to commit bodily harm against themselves." This is what you sound like.
smiledammit24 2 days ago
I thought the main character Roark was a decent character (someone who works towards his beliefs regardless of how unpopular they are) up until the point that he rapes Dominique and actually destroys low income housing because the builders didn't completely follow his blue print. Worse, he gets away with both.
poweroftheglory 3 days ago
I used to love the Simpsons but this isn't clever or funny.
PrivateAckbar 1 week ago
atlas shrugged:
once upon a time there was a guy and he was the best and he was also always right (DO NOT QUESTION THIS OR YOU ARE A MORON) and all the mean people said "no you cannot be the best" but he said "yes i can be the best" and then he started a new life with people who were also the best and always right but some were better than others but that was ok for some reason and then asdfhbabfa dgag who is john galt hyperbole platitudes platitudes platitudes arghgss fgfgffgf ffffff
the end.
moralreef 1 week ago
@moralreef The Communist Manifesto: Once upon a time there were evil rich people who stole factories from us that grew out of the ground. Then everyone killed them, and life was okay from then on. The End.
smiledammit24 5 days ago
@smiledammit24 unluckily for you, i don't support communism.
moralreef 5 days ago
@smiledammit24 however i will surmise that the communist manifesto is better written than anything that hack wrote in her lifetime
moralreef 5 days ago
@moralreef Given the depth of your argument, I guess you'll be making millions off the tons of books you'll be writing.
smiledammit24 5 days ago
@smiledammit24 hahahaha what does that even mean i'm allowed to call bullshit on terribly written books without writing a book
moralreef 4 days ago
@moralreef But that's just it: you deride other people's productivity without actually contributing anything yourself. You can't even contribute a worthy argument to the discussion. You are a parasite. I probably shouldn't even be replying to you as it's just feeding your attention-whoring.
smiledammit24 2 days ago
@smiledammit24 right to free speech; i can criticise anything and everything i want to and there is nothing you can do about it. you're allowed to enjoy the fountainhead as much as i'm allowed to call it poorly written, and i'm allowed to call you a philistine holding onto a dated philosophy for liking it. don't like that? suck my dick. besides, i'm not a parasite, i contribute both culturally and to computer science. what was the last notable thing you ever did?
moralreef 2 days ago
@smiledammit24 i'm just amazed the level you're defending a book. it really is a bible to you people...
moralreef 2 days ago
Simpsons? isn't that the kids show watched by left-wing losers?
2212corby 1 week ago
Book of right wing losers? Why would it be? Oh I know, because the main protagonist refuses to sacrifice his integrity to the whim of public opinion. Opinion manipulated by power and approval seeking slobs. And after losing his job because of it he takes one in a quarry instead of compromising his professional values.
MrDanielBowman74 1 week ago
As of right now, 134 right wing losers disliked this video. :p
chromelemon 1 week ago
@chromelemon suck a dick.
Sivels 1 week ago
I'd happily be considered a "right wing loser" by the majority of liberals, but I can say that The Fountainhead is in no way a book I would base my philosophy on. I think the Bible of conservatives would be THE Bible, the HOLY Bible.
coyotepassing 2 weeks ago
@coyotepassing That is the one they claim, but not the one they follow, which, ironically, is their best quality.
l337pwnage 1 week ago
@coyotepassing Ayn Rand always said that the conservative movement's retreat from reason to appeal to the religious was the worst decision they ever made. I completely agree. Every proposal made by the right wing is tainted by the perception our ideas are based in faith, not reason.
smiledammit24 5 days ago
@smiledammit24 Faith and reason don't always oppose each other; many fundamentalists that I know are quite reasonable. What bothers me is the notion that Atheism is inherently reasonable. Many people revert to Atheism on unreasonable grounds, while many Christians choose their religion based on reasonable assumptions. It all depends on the person. However, the point I was trying to make was that right wing conservatism is far from the ideals expressed in The Fountainhead.
coyotepassing 4 days ago
@coyotepassing I agree that there's nothing inherently logical or illogical about why someone chooses to follow a certain creed. But to literally reject logically sound arguments in place of "revealed knowledge," or to impose beliefs based in myth upon people that do not ascribe to them, is immoral. Far right wing conservatives base their policy decisions upon the Bible, not because it makes sense, but because it is popular.
smiledammit24 2 days ago
@smiledammit24 I don't really think the Bible is that popular nowadays. Most ring-wingers like myself follow biblical morals and teachings because it is tradition, and really the Bible does make sense, it's just that people don't think something 2000 years old can apply to their lives, which is a little shallow. I haven't met many right-wingers who reject logical statements without providing their own logical argument. Trying to stereotype one political position is coping out.
coyotepassing 2 days ago
LOL Thats why their show got cancelled.
baller84milw 2 weeks ago
@baller84milw It hasn't been cancelled
Loathomar 2 weeks ago
@Loathomar Really? I beg to differ: this is their last season.
baller84milw 2 weeks ago
What are those rights? If you can't feed yourself when you are hungry or support yourself when you are sick, all of the other rights are pointless. If you are excluded from the decision making where you live you have no reason to identify with those institutions. A change in management will do you no harm (e.g. foreign invasion). This is why powerful institutions (like government, education and business) created affirmative action programs for minorities and welfare programs for the poor.
perdondaris 2 weeks ago
Butthurt rightists ITT.
LOL
The Simpsons Rule
AdamDLDixon 2 weeks ago
It was not a "totalitarian" disrespect, but a disrespect for those who lacked imagination and put a dollar sign on everything. Money does not equal value. Many of the most financially successful men were failures because they were slaves to their wealth.
perdondaris 2 weeks ago
The Simpsons used to be funny, but it took a hard left turn recently.
pqwilrj 3 weeks ago 5
@pqwilrj
I think it is the fact that it has abandoned all subtlety and intelligence it once had. The Simpsons used to be creative in the way it mocked people, something obviously went wrong because it is now one of the worst 'comedy' shows I have ever seen, every joke falls flat. I despise what it has become, they should stop making it (if they haven't already)
TosinTownsend85 1 week ago
There is no "free market capitalism" without government. Government maintains the system of property. Property is only a measurement of what you possess. Property does not exist in the real world--just like national boundaries. It only exists to the extent that governments by general agreement between individuals can enforce it. Human rights, for example, do not exist outside human constructs--non-human forces don't recognize your rights. Rights are created for the common benefit of men by men.
perdondaris 3 weeks ago
Do people still actually watch the Simpsons? It hasn't been funny for the past 10 years.
cvict6 3 weeks ago
There is no distinction to be made. WIthout the State capitalism could not exist. The "free market capitalism" that you attempt to visualize happened during the Middle Ages. It was called feudalism. If there was no government, those who held wealth would have to hire mercenaries to safeguard their wealth. The more wealth they had the more capital they would have to allocate to mercenaries. Anarcho-capitalism is feudalism. It didn't work.
perdondaris 3 weeks ago
@perdondaris Your right, that's why objectivism never says there should be no government. It says that the government's only role should be to protect its citizen's rights
Fortress4ever 2 weeks ago
If you believe capitalism (as the objectionable followers of Ayn Rand do) is clean look up King Leopold and the Congo, Lord John Russell and the Irish Potato Famine. The sordid history of Capitalism is as long and filled with betrayals, assassinations, raping and pillaging as the Black Book of Communism. To believe otherwise is to engage in the same kind of doublethink that Orwell criticized in Stalinists.
perdondaris 3 weeks ago
@perdondaris,
There's an important distinction about "capitalism" that you need to understand. When Objectivists and Objectivist-sympathizers say "capitalism" we mean free-market capitalism. King Leopold was using state-capitalism or monopoly capitalism(mercantilism) where only some people were allowed to make money with special permission.
MegaAstrodude 3 weeks ago
I'm not an anti-semite. Every race and nation has practiced human sacrifice from the Norse to the Semites, Caucasian and colored. Religions vary (on a relative spectrum) in terms of morality. Everything that Nazis, Communists, Muslims have done Jews, Christians, capitalists and Americans have done: including genocide, rape, holy wars, terrorism, slavery, censorship and so on. There are neither innocents nor absolutes. It is only a matter of perception.
perdondaris 3 weeks ago
She wasnt great, but a good polemic piece should abstain from ad hominem.
ZombiBuddy 4 weeks ago
lisa is a lefty bleeding heart.
Sivels 1 month ago
@Sivels She is indeed, but the show's producers tend to portray Lisa as the wise one of the family, the most intelligent of them all. Although I enjoy 'The Simpsons' it does have a left-wing bias.
atticana 1 month ago
@atticana,
It depends on who wrote the script. Swartzwelder, the best comdey script writer in my opinion, is rather conservative in real life and he wrote many scripts until 2003. Matt Groening is liberal. The movie was more conservative than liberal with the EPA being the main villain. The character strength of Ned Flanders and his always saving Homer definitely is a nod to conservatism and Mayor Quimby is definitely a shot at liberals.
MegaAstrodude 3 weeks ago
So were the Europeans. The Jews practiced human sacrifice three thousand years ago. The ancient Greeks of Socrates time practiced infanticide. Ayn Rand was full of shit.
perdondaris 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@perdondaris "The Jews practiced human sacrifice"
No they didn't
eshah100 4 weeks ago
@perdondaris Well I see the Aryan Nation has arrived.
userdenied58 3 weeks ago
Ayn Rand's books don't hurt anyone. Tyrants and dictators just use her books to cover up their crimes. If it weren't for Ayn Rand's books they would use the Bible or the Koran. All of her philosophical work is an Apology for a life poorly lived. You can't live a very good life as a pure individualist--the only examples of pure rugged individualism are guys like Ted Kacynzski. Happiness is only real when shared.
perdondaris 1 month ago
@perdondaris,
Who has actually ever used Ayn Rand's books to run a country other than the fictional character in Bioshock? Plus, a pure Objectivist would tell you that if happiness is only real when shared, then it is ethical to share happiness.
That being said, I liked The Fountainhead, but I thought Atlas Shrugged was long and boring.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
A good antidote for Ayn Rand's Bullshit are the works of Kurt Vonnegut. People wonder why there aren't many direct parodies of Ayn Rand's ghastly novels but there are plenty. You just have to use your head to find them. People wonder why Bond villains always engage in long winded speeches about their schemes (allowing time for Bond to escape). This actually isn't a plot device. Egomaniacs like to give long winded speeches in real life (consider the Unabomber and any serial killer's manifesto).
perdondaris 1 month ago
@perdondaris,
The best support of Rand comes from Wikipedia, which was inspired largely by Rand's work according to founder Jimmy Wales. The little beneficial banking still done in America is largely done by objectivist-skippered BB&T that was forced against its will to accept government funds.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
Comment removed
JediRebelKid 1 month ago
@JediRebelKid,
Yes, Hayek's economic ideas and neuroscience research specifically inspired Wikipedia.
The "Anarchists" and the Communists have tended to argue that open source is "counter revolutionary" because it allows bourgeoisie to offer their opinions of the facts to the proletariat without following the regulations of the proletariat. This is why Wikipedia is banned in China and North Korea.
MegaAstrodude 3 weeks ago
Comment removed
JediRebelKid 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@MegaAstrodude A user-generated, non-hierarchical, non-profit website seems more like a Libertarian Socialist or Anarchist ideal than one inspired by Ayn Rand, but I guess that's just my opinion. Jimmy Wales says it was inspired both by Rand and Freidrich von Hayek yet it seems more likely to be inspired by Chomsky or Emma Goldman but whatevskis.
JediRebelKid 1 month ago
@MegaAstrodude Jimi Wales is a fan of ayn rand and hes highly influenced by objectivism.
Ilike a lot your comments, glad to see some intelligent people over the internet.
sorry for my english.
TheAmericanFreeBird 4 weeks ago
@TheAmericanFreeBird,
Thanks, I appreciate the feedback. Your English is fine, at least in writing.
MegaAstrodude 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@perdondaris,
The best support of Rand comes from Wikipedia, which was inspired largely by Rand's work according to founder Jimmy Wales. The little beneficial banking still done in America is largely done by objectivist-skippered BB&T that was forced against its will to accept government funds.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
I don't misunderstand libertarianism. American "libertarians" believe in plutocracy. Pure capitalism is plutocracy. Rand is not a descendant of Nietzsche. Nietzsche despised capitalism and the "morality of acquisition". He wasn't a socialist either, although he admired the radical forebears of Leninism (e.g. Blanqui). Nietzsche believed more in aristocracy based in artistic merit (as in Plato). The Ancient Greeks despised commerce as a lowly profession and would have laughed at Ayn Rand.
perdondaris 1 month ago
@perdondaris,
The modern Greeks also must despise commerce as a profession; just look at their country now.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
@perdondaris ''The Ancient Greeks despised commerce as a lowly profession'' That is an rather brash & general statement. & consequently wrong. Aristocrats like Plato disliked commerce, as well as the totalitarian Spartans & sympathisers with Sparta(again Plato). But to suggest that the multitude of Greek City states, & merchants who relied on trade for their wealth, culture & power did not value commerce is peculiar & short sighted.
Malthus0 3 weeks ago
Ayn Rand wasn't Hitler. She died before she could do any damage to the world. She is just a corpse now. In the future however, some tyrant will use her books as a justification for his atrocities--just like the Bible and The Communist Manifesto were. Someone should airmail a copy to Assad or any other dictator that may end up in The Hague. I would love to see him lecturing his judges like Howard Roark.
perdondaris 1 month ago
I've read the book. And other Ayn Rand books. The irony of her morality is that George Soros could be both the hero and the villain in one of her books. There is a certain collectivism in Ayn Rand's ideology: assuming that profitability equals value or that individualism means hard work towards some goal. She engages in doublethink (racism is evil, unless it's racism towards the Indians who once populated the Americas and were obviously "inferior" since they weren't capitalists).
perdondaris 1 month ago
@perdondaris,
Native American tribes were often very bloody and oppressive. Many individuals sided with the settlers because they gained rights that they didn't have before. La Malinche sided with the Spanish because she had been forced into slavery by the Aztecs and was going to be blood-sacrificed.
The Anasazi practiced cannibalism and the Cherokee owned more slaves per capita than the Confederacy at one point.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
@MegaAstrodude Thank you Astrodude. I am so tried of people thinking a portion of my family tree was just setting around getting along with each other before the European arrived. Hell, my Cherokee grandmother thought my Creek grandfather a wimp because her ancestors drove them down into Georgia. No matter what your race or how close your skin color, people are going to fight over land or some other crazy-ass thing.
Of course, the other side of the tree had better weapons.
userdenied58 3 weeks ago
I bet 95% of the simpsons fans have never read this book
hulkinator100 1 month ago 14
@hulkinator100 I bet their have only been ~6.5 million copies of the book sold since it was written back in 1943. If 5% of simpsons fans, that would be ~5 times the average for American.
Loathomar 2 weeks ago
fuck you simpsons....no wonder i stopped watching this piece of shit show.
DuncanL7979 1 month ago
I strongly approve of the old lady calling the author of Fountain Head and Atlas Strugged sexy.
I don't think he his, but the old lady's comment was hilarious.
TurtleShroom 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
A common world currency, free and open trade with all nations, limited tariff, and individual human rights freedoms is great because it is simple the more complex things are the harder it is to fix them and I doubt that you are capable of understanding the faults of the modern (very complex) financial industry (unless you work in it or majored in mathematics (if did you still would probably work in it or in a university)). Oh and what a great, insightful and polite discussion.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
Yes, it is true that man will try to corrupt any and all systems you throw at him and that is why I think the state shouldn't interfere with trade and the economy via bailouts etc. Well I think that this is our main philosophical difference I think that man if left unchecked wouldn't destroy the whole populous. I think that on the whole people are inherently good but the bastards usually get to power . I agree with your idea and this is what Ayn Rand basically wanted or not?
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
I suppose Lisa has always been left-wing.
eggory 1 month ago
When criticizing Rand, where does one start? Terrible character development, inane plot, magical solution to every problem with the world, poorly-developed "philosophy", laughable "ethics", superiority complex in all her protagonists, removal from reality, general ignorance of her proclaimed hero Aristotle.
The world never had such an overrated "philosopher."
redshark618 1 month ago
Heh. That's the first time I don't agree with something that was on the simpsons. ;)
DasHinchen 1 month ago
Anyone can write dialogue?
Tama300 1 month ago
fucking hate the simpsons now!
foocha01 1 month ago
I RECOMEND YOU TO WATCH THE ENTIRE STORY, JUST PUT IN YOUTUBE "MAGGIE ROARK"
Objetivismoorg 1 month ago
I expected more from you lisa.
TheAmericanFreeBird 1 month ago
One strawman after another in this thread on both sides. Read first, then have an opinion. To decry or laud Ayn Rand without cracking a book makes you a fool. You don't need others to interpret Rand, she clearly states her meaning. I'll say one thing about both Atlas Shrugged and Fountainhead, they are the opposite of propoganda. There is nothing sugar coated about them. Our culture is richer for her selection of the U.S. as her escape from Stalin's USSR. Don't fear ideas, fear censors.
NH365 2 months ago 15
@NH365 O god, thanks Andrew Ryan, hows life for ya down there? Everything Rand said had been said before by Stirner and Nietzsche without her emotional, fallacy filled, right wing slant
kingnat2 1 month ago
@NH365 Ayn Rand never "escaped Stalins USSR". Her parents fled Russia right when they were trying to build a new society. They were cowards and deserters. Naturally, the Soviet (non-Stalinist - in fact, pre-Stalin) government took it over, as it should have under the circumstances. Ayn Rand grew up and lived in America, pampered and safe. Your re-writing of history would have made Stalin proud.
dalellll 1 month ago
@dalellll,
The Soviet government under Lenin was no different than the Soviet government under Stalin as far as morality is concerned. They were just lazier. Rand was purged from university simply for being "bourgeois". That's enough of an experience to explain her nature.
Russia belongs to the Whiteshirts.
MegaAstrodude 1 month ago
@NH365 Oops, I'm sorry, her family *did* return to Russia after initially deserting, I was wrong, it was the Stalinist-Zinovievist Russia that she escaped. Doesn't them make them any better, though.
dalellll 1 month ago
Objectivism is for loser sociolpaths who don't have any social skills and are selfish, spoiled children. Ayn Rand was a fucking cunt.
gordonottawa99 2 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
I too, expected more from you, Lisa.
TheAmericanFreeBird 2 months ago
IT AMUSES ME WHEN CONSEVATIVES CONSIDER ALL LIBERAL IDEALS TO BE "BRAIN WASHING": IT IS AS IF WE CANNOT THINK FOR OURSELVES AND COME TO THAT COMMON CONCLUSHION THAT GREED IS NOT O.K. AND THAT WE DO OWE ALL OUR FELLOW CITIZENS A RIGHT TO EXIST IN AN ENVIRONMENT CONSISTANT WITH SURVIVAL AND HUMANITY. I ALWAYS THOUGHT THE AYN RAND FOLLOWERS LIVED A SYMPLISTIC LIFE WHERE NO ONE MATTERED BUT THEMSELVES. I WISH THERE WERE TRASPORTATION TO MARS...I WOULD GIVE THEM ALL A ONE WAY TICKET.
bduhe219 2 months ago 2
@bduhe219 Yeah and when you came to visit from the hell-hole you would call earth, you would see a prospering society of great thinkers and creators. Please do buy us all a ticket.
Ps. we will deal with the lack of resources somehow.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t LOL...I WOULD NEVER WANT TO VISIT A PLANET COMMUNITY WHERE EVERYONE FENDED FOR THEMSELVES AND ALLOWED PROVERTY BLOSSOM AND PROSPER WHILE THE FEW ATE, WERE SHELTERED AND WERE SELF-RELIANT. THAT, MY FRIEND , IS THE RESIPE FOR REVOLOUTIN! ASK THE RUSSINA, FRENCH, AND EVEN THE EASTERN BLOCK OF EUROPE. SOCIALISM WAS NEVER THE VILIAN IN EASTERN EUROPE, IT WAS TOTALITARIAN DICTATORSHIPS, WHERE NO FREEDOM WAS PERMITTED. THAT IS NOT WHAT THE U.S. IS AND THAT IS NOT WHAT ANYONE PERPOSES.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 Ehm I actually live in "eastern europe" (Czech republic) and don't even get me started on the horrors of socialism. The problem was the bureaucracy, that caused economic inefficiencies. If live would have been good then no one would have rebeled because I doubt 90% of humanity cares about such abstract things like freedom of speech.(although I do care) So please research your arguments before you post. btw. Objectivism demands absolute freedom and so I repeat my previous argument.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t as ilive in the heart of capitalism, i want to know how socialism effects people in a negative way. tell me, what freedoms are restricted from you. i honestly want to know. do you have access to hositals or doctors that the goverment is involved in? in our country cost of medical care is the second most exensive thing you will be effected by, less home purchase or maybe even a car purchase. we do have some medical assistance run by the government, but it is limited to very poor...
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 There isn't socialism here anymore. Thank god, but seriously religion, free thought or any kind of deviation was punished. My relative was a member of political party before the second world war and then, when they came to power he was imprisoned and after he came back(10 years for doing nothing but expressing his opinion by being part of a political party) he was a broken man and died soon (this was told to me by my elders I wasn't alive then. That is to general freedoms.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ...or the poor elderly. do you have some type of government retirement account or pension? we have something called "social security" that assist retired people over 65 that have worked or who are too ill in some ways to work. do you have fee education, or ed. supplied by your gov.? we have primary free education uo until the age of 18, and some smaller ed. or college ed. for free, but a more prestigous university cost a lot of money. do you have restritions on where you can work?
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 I will repeat it one more time we have capitalism here now so use the past tense please. Yes, college education is free as is all below it but even if our military presence anywhere is minimal (one contigent of soldiers to support your troops in Afg) our deficit is going up and we have our own form of social security(maybe a bit different than yours). There were restrictions to what you could do when socialism was here if you were an uncomfortable and expressed any discontent.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@bduhe219 To continue on restrictions that used to be... If you were a son or daughter of a former ugly capitalist/landowner/shopowner/catholic you didn't even have the right to study anything like physics philosophy or such things. Oh and did you know that Jazz was considered a buorgeois art and forbidden-good thing I was born so late and can experience the beauty of the world unrestricted by the buearocrats.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t i would consider those kind of restrictions financial issues. are you allowed to read what you want, associate with who you want? worship the religion of your choice? i just want to know what are the issues you have with a socialist system. i am not anti-capitalism or pro-socialism. i think that there are good aspects in both and favor a modified system that incorporates both. i think you may have a quarel with how the system works rather than the concept of government intervention.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t western europe runs with aspects of cap. and soc. governments. sweden is a very socialist gov. but the rules, regulation and taxation goes to things to benefit the citizens. i think that your issue would be in a strict opressive gov. rather than a gov. run to assist the people. the u.s. gov has some smaller soc. programs that benifit the unemployed, elderly, children of poor, and those in need of medical care...but not on a large scale as many in the industialized world.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 Yes my father works for a Norwegian firm and he says that Norway reminds him of the system that used to be here very much, but they are less oppresive, yet they have to have control of your life(for eg. They see all te transactions you do, where you go with your car and the food is rationed (but there is more of it because they have oil and so they have way more money :D) My issue truly is with oppressive goverments but they always turn out oppressive when given too much power.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t i want to end this by stating..i want gov. to work for me, not me work for the gov. i want certain standards and quality of life that gov. can assue for me. i do not want a bloated opressive gov. i do think the red tape is the issue and the means to get the programs to work destrys ppls faith that this can happen. i still think the u.s. is the greatest country on earth, i just think it can be better. i hope one day a progressive reformer will change this country for the better.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 My personal fav. country is Switzerland, but the USA is great if your deficit wasn't so terrible and if the Patriot act wasn't so threatening and if the FED wasn't such a idiotic concept :) Otherwise I think it is a great country and hey thanks for freeing us (by ruining the USSR), although maybe it was 44 years overdue :D .
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t i am an hoest person , even with myself. i will admit my country is great, but i do not think my country is always right. i have disagreements with policy and procedure and do not defend war when not needed, i.e. iraq, etc. i think in the eary years of communism it was viewed as a political ideal instead of a murder machiine and opressive regime that took all of a person's freedoms away, and because of that i can understand why it took so long to be taken as a threat.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t i agree with you that when power iincreases in gov. they can become opressive. i fear that in this country. i think there are too many laws and restrictions on some personal freedoms, but i do think they were implimented because of man's abuses that went unchecked. industry got away with many ills untill gov. stepped in. the civil war ramifications could be strongly felt even after 100 years later. this counrty stilll struggles with race, religion, economic issues that devide us.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t as for the deficit..i agree. but to be honest, it took 6 years of george w. bush to run through a surplus and create this sinkhole of debt. under clinton we had a surplus. the iraq war and all his tax breaks for the wealthy caused this fiasco. oboma is left to handle this mess and try and correct it. it depresses me to think we are in this mess, and all the conservatives blame the poor and those who seek assistance from the gov. as the cause....scapegoating the poor...shameful.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t i have really enjoyed or exchange. i think we can agree on some things and disagree on others. i wish you well in your country. i hope soon, my country will be free of this debt. the u.s. has bailed out many countries and i was thinking, why doesn't china forgive our debt as we allowed some countries to clear thier debt to us. but as you know, they will never do that. i wish we could go back to square oen and forgive all countries debts to start again. but...keep in touch.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 You know debt is forgiven only when the person can never ever pay it back again and America is still the biggest, richest and most prosperous place in the world so I don't think any forgiving will happen anytime soon. Futhermore hope your country doesn't have a bad revolution or something like that because the world would be in for a world of pain :D
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t WELL...OUR COUNTRY IS A VERY CONSERVATIVE COUNTRY...MEANING, AFRAID OF DRASTIC CGANGE AND THAT IS WHY LIBERALISM IS HATED BY MANY. WE DON'T EVEN LIKE THAT WORD, WE USE "PROGRESSIVE" NOW TO MAKE IT SEEM NICER. I AM A LIBERAL, AND TO DEFEND LIBERALISM IS TO ONLY LOOK IT'S DEFFINITION UP. IT SPEAKS CLEARLY FOR ITSELF, AND I AM ONE AND PROUD. BUT WE DO NOT HAVE MANY FAR RADICALS THAT COULD REALLY TAKE OVER THE GOVERNMENT. WE ARE A VERY LARGE COUNTRY WITH MANY DIFFERENT OPINIONS.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t THE THING THAT SADDENS ME ABOUT THE U.S. IS IT IS PERCIEVED AS BEING ARROGANT, YET WE ARE THE MOST COMPASSIONATE COUNTRY TO OTHERS IN THE WORLD WHEN IT COME TO THEIR AID, OR HELPING FINANCIALLY, OR WHEN THEIR BORDERS ARE THREATENED. WE HAVE TROUBLE FEELING THAT COMPASSION WHEN IT COMES TO OUR MINORITIES, POOR, ELDERLY, ETC..NOT THAT SOME DO NOT FIGHT FOR THEIR RIGHTS, BUT NOT ENOUGH DO IT. I THINK SOCIALISM GETS A BAD REPUTATION BECAUSE IT LOOKS AT GOVERNMENT BEING TOO INVOLVED...
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 Well aid isn't really that good you should really just let the free market do its thing. Like a wise man said once: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, feed him for a lifetime." Almost every country has some natural resources and so these can be used to trade with others and make money and feed the people. if the people just can't fend for themselves in that particular, then they will move elsewhere or die.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ..IN PEOPLES LIVES. I DON'T WANT THAT EITHER..WHAT I WANT GOVERNMENT TO DO IS KEEP STANDARDS FOR ALL CITIZENS, PROTECT CITIZENS FROM BEING TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF BY PEOPLE WITH GREAT WEALTH, BIG INDUSTRIES, ETC. AND REGULATE NECESSITIES SUCH AS HEALTHCARE, PRICE CONTROL WHEN NEEDED DUE TO INFLATION, ETC. AND OTHER SMALLER NEEDS THAT MAY OCCUR. I NEVER THOUGHT THAT WAS A RADICAL NOTION FOR A SOCIETY..I REALLY DO NOT SE THE OTHER SIDES OBJECTION IN THAT.....
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ...WHAT I MEAN IS I UNDERSTAND WHY THEY ARE OPPOSED, I JUST DON'T AGREE WITH THEIR PREMIS. SOCIALISM GETS A BAD REPUTAION BECAUSE IT WAS UTILIZED IN TOTALITARIAN CONTROL BY OPPRESSIVE GOVERNMENTS. ENGLAND, FRANCE, SWEDEDN, GERMANY, SPAIN, ETC..ASLL HAVE SOCIAL WELFARE STATES IN SOME MANNER. THE U.S. HAS TRIED FOR ALMOST 100 YEARS TO IMPLIMENT SOME SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY UPHELD BY GOVERNMENT, BUT BIG BUSINEES, MEN OF FINANCE, AND THE VERY RICH FIGHT IT EVERYTIME..
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ..AND IN THIS COUNTRY, MONEY BUYS ACCESS AND ACCESS INFLUENCES LAWS. THAT DEPRESSES ME GREATLY. MONEY SHOULD NEVER BE USED TO INFLUENCE LAWS THAT EFFECT ALL OF US, BUT THEY DO. WELL...I'VE GIVEN YOU MY OPINIONS, ALTHOUGH I THINK YOU WERE NOT ASKING FOR THEN , NOR DID YOU REALLY AGREE (I THINK)..BUT IT REALLY HAS BEEN WONDERFUL CHATTING WITH YOU. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME, I AM FREE TO ANSWER THE ONES I CAN. I HOPE YOU KEEP IN TOUCH AND LET N]ME KNOW HOW YOU ARE DOING. THANKS
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 Well you know that the moment you transfer some responsibility to the goverment is the moment when they can become corrupted? I am all for giving basic needs for everyone but when the goverment influences the market (price inflation, deflation, trade restricitons) such as Obama is doing now (look at the trade war with China) you give an unfair advantage to some and ruin others. Oh and it would be very nice of you to stop using all caps.It seems as though you are shouting at me.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@bduhe219 People with wealth always had influence(except in socialist countries where the more loyal you were the more influence you had). There were periods when they have less (like now) and usually a bigger goverment means more influence.
D0ctorWh4t 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t since the 1970's, china has had what we call "most favored nation" in trade. meaning, it is a free market exchange that we trade with them freely as well as they with us. this had much more to with politics than actual trade. we wanted to keep russia from having too much influence by giving china incentives to be favorable towards u.s. policy. i don't agree with much of it, human rights still are violated in china, but we try to keep peace to avoid war. i think many nations violate..
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ...basic human rights, unfortunately, endless war is not an otion in fighting these injustices. i maybe wrong, but i think a common world currency, free and open trade with all nations, limited tariff, and individual human rights freedoms, would make this world a better place. it may sound simplistic, but i think many would try and corrupt that system too..it really is the ugly side of mankiind. the nature of the beast. man left to his own devices would destry the majority of...
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t ..the worlds population. that is an ugly truth about man's inhumanity towards his fellow man. das but all too true.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219
"AND IN THIS COUNTRY, MONEY BUYS ACCESS AND ACCESS INFLUENCES LAWS."
Logical. Thus the natural conclusion is men should not have the power to create money like the Federal Reserve and banks do. Also governments ability to control it's people should be limited by law first. If you have little or no influence to sell it's harder to sell influence. It's also harder to pay for if you can't create money for free.
This is what the founding fathers of America envisioned.
Ron Paul 2012
davincij15 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t COMMON GROUND ALLOWS EVERYONE A LIVEABLE EXISTANCE. I FIND IT IRONIC SO MANY PEOPLE FEEL THAT IS A LEFTIST PILOSOPHY. ALL THIOSE CONSERVATIVES WHO BELIEVE THEY ARE AN ISLAND UNTO THEMSELVES AND THAT SOCIETY SHOULD BE LEFT TO RUN AMUCK WITH DEATH, HOMELESSNESS, PROVERTY AND STARVATION AND THAT THEY COULD SLEEP AT NIGHT AND IT NEVER EFFECT THEM. IF THAT IS YOUR ADMIRATION FOR THE SCHOOL OF AYN RAND...THAN HAVE AT YOUR HELLHOLE.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@D0ctorWh4t MAN HAS NEVER STOPPED THINKING, EVOLVING, CREATING, PROSPERING BECAUSE OF TAXES, MY FRIEND. FIND ANOTHER ENEMY BETTER SUITED FOR THAT HATE, THAN FOCUSING ON POOR PEOPLE. YOU REALLY SHOUDL BE ASHAMED OF YOURSELF. FINDING FAULT WITHT HE LEAST OF OUR BROTHERS IS A MIGHTY LOW BLOW.
bduhe219 1 month ago
Loser, that is the word
aitorshangrila 2 months ago
Rand is the most fascist of your generation.
Your philosophy is typical of a housewife of the 50s
aitorshangrila 2 months ago
@aitorshangrila lol at your comment... objectivism is precisely the opposite of any altruist, collectivist ethic.. such fascism.
i would spend hours to explain you this philosphy, but i give up.
TheAmericanFreeBird 2 months ago
I expected more from you, Lisa.
orospakr 2 months ago
lol. that was funny. the guy on the cover XD
jamesellis33 2 months ago
Little girl regurgitating left-wing talking points like a true mindless liberal.
flopress 2 months ago
@flopress yeah, but its a good provocative statement :) and Lisa has always been a stereotypical hippie that nobody likes.
killerbee2k 2 months ago
@killerbee2k Lisa is the mofockin BOMB. She is by far the smartest, most enlightened character in the entire simpsons canon.
erik4727 2 months ago
@erik4727 then you are one hell of a boring person
killerbee2k 1 month ago
@killerbee2k she happens to be the conscience of the show...think about that. she is the one character that sees things for what they are and tries to correct the wrongs. that maybe a true deffinition of a liberal.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 then you have never studied political philosophy or clearly not able to comprehend it
killerbee2k 1 month ago
Comment removed
bduhe219 1 month ago
@killerbee2k don't try and make me look like i am an uninformed politico, just because i do not believe in the neo-con randites and the I-ME-MINE philosophy. you choos eto look at yurself more important than the whole, and i choose to look at myself as an equal of the collective. that is where we differ. i see the country as the collective, where yu choose to serve only needs of self-interest.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@bduhe219 Then you completely misunderstand everything about libertarianism, and I'm no randian objectiovisionist or whatver they call them selves. I consider myself equal to all other individuals in the collective, I dont deserve any special treatment and neither does anyone else. The state is a tool for enforcing legal obligations to each other and create a framework for cooperation. Where we differ is that you think you deserve my money because you are "I-ME-MINE", your the selfish
killerbee2k 1 month ago
@killerbee2k how did you get that I-ME-MINE was a position i took? i look at the collective as having cases of need, as to where the RANDITES look to ones own interest above the collective. you've got it backwards sir. i do not look to my needs as the duty of governemnt, but to all who may be in need at one point in their lives. believe me, that day comes to many who think they will never be in that position...don't count on your employers kindness..they don't care if you sink or swim.
bduhe219 1 month ago
@flopress The fact is she's right. And who was that ugly-ass man on the back-cover? He really had some twisted ideas. I think he needed a psychiatrist.
gordonottawa99 2 months ago 4
The philosophy inside of the book is horrific, but Rand can write a damn good fiction
wiltay15 2 months ago
@wiltay15 In what way?
wedjatgod 2 months ago
Ayn Rand looks funny in that Simpsons-style drawing!
luizcadu 2 months ago
The Simpsons was funny in 1999 when Family Guy had not yet appeared and Matt Groening had not run out of ideas yet.
redshark618 2 months ago
Anyone who thinks that living life to only pursue their selfish interests will somehow manifest societal benefit or prosperity for the collective is an utter moron who can't even understand simple logic.
IHighLikePlane 2 months ago
@IHighLikePlane
Anyone who thinks I owe the collective anything based on my existence is a moron who I will shoot when they come on my property looking for food when they refused to read writing on the wall and their fucking society collapses.
I understand your logic, your failure who thinks everyone owes you something. We don't.
BadSwineDOTcom 2 months ago
@BadSwineDOTcom Can you read? Where did I say you or society owes me something?
I'm simply stating the obvious fact that a competitive society with an economy based on mindless self interest and power hierarchies will only lead to destruction. Humanity needs to work together for the common goal of sustainability if we want any hope of surviving.
"The Earth is a single organism, and an organism at war with itself is doomed." -Carl Sagan
IHighLikePlane 2 months ago 2
@IHighLikePlane Talk about simple logic; count the fallacies. 1) Blanketing "Anyone" 2) Prosperity for the collective non-sequitur 3)utter moron ad hominem 4) Generally Begging the question 5) The Red Herring pursuing life style and intelligence
You made 5 illogical fallacies in one run-on sentence.
energytomatter 2 months ago 5
@energytomatter You're right, I never spent the time to learn all the fallacies, because its easy enough for me to see when an argument is full of crap. Now that you point it out, I regret my choice of wording. However my argument, that a mass of people fighting amongst themselves for their individual betterment is not likely to benefit all parties involved, still stands. If there is a fallacy in that arguement then let me know.
IHighLikePlane 2 months ago
@IHighLikePlane I can respect that. I might just add that ______ "fighting amongst themselves for their individual betterment" is a tenant evolution.
energytomatter 2 months ago
Comment removed
ScionAscendant 2 months ago
@energytomatter instead of making fun of the fool, why not deal with his concern straight on? well whatever, I don't know what either of you guys were talking about, but if anyone's going to bitch about ad hominem better make sure they're not doing it himself.
erik4727 2 months ago
@IHighLikePlane Somebody who says that does not understand basic economics.
FrankiePoker 2 months ago
@FrankiePoker Basic economics is a ponzi scheme. It is the most corrupt outdated social system in existence. People act as though monetary economics is a science when it is actually an ideological religion. Money isn't real, nor does it relate to environmental sustainability, or meeting human needs. This is why it is failing and will collapse onto itself as we are seeing now.
IHighLikePlane 2 months ago
If there was a who looks like more of a man contest between Ayn Rand, Rachel Maddow, and Anderson Cooper. Rachel Maddow would still win.
dslkflkdsfskldfj 2 months ago
Ayn Rand was a fucking moron and her beliefs dangerous. The fact she looks a bit like a man isn't really my problem with her though.
Lonelywreckage6 3 months ago
@Lonelywreckage6 ahaha fuck you
faraway9222 2 months ago
@Lonelywreckage6 you are the fucking moron.
Lucasmvpkmn 2 months ago
Gotta love The Simpsons. What is amazing is that show is on FOX! Murdoch will do anything for money, even cater to to the left and rip right wingers. It seems he never gets involved in editing out controversial shit on The Simpsons, but he loves ruining great newspapers like The Wall Street Journal.
eqsmooth 3 months ago 2
The Simpsons is about as liberal as a Murdoch owned show can be, but that's not so liberal.
So Ayn Rand looked like a man and her fans are losers. Not terribly funny, no, but to point out that they're 'sociopathic' is probably even less so.
cavalrycome 3 months ago
The Simpsons is not funny. At all. I have not laughed at it since the 90s. Last night I saw an episode where they had to teach an object lesson on the cruelty of bull fighting. It wasn't clever or original. The old Simpsons was nowhere near as preachy and politically correct.
666dagstein 3 months ago
not everybody is going to agree with your political views. i love the simpson and i love ayn rand. i'm not going to choose one above the other.
ChasingCharles 3 months ago
@ChasingCharles The Simpsons is/are funny. But like their liberal creators, they don't have to live in the real world.
LarryH54 3 months ago
I'm in favor of The Fountainhead. Still "The guy on the bookjacket..." made me lmao.
BaconWeaveTurtles 3 months ago
@BaconWeaveTurtles I know, right? Classic Simpson's humor.
AlbinosaurusR3X 3 months ago
The Simpsons hasn't been good in many, many years.
mrrobotica 3 months ago