So the woman suggests voluntary taxation and the crowd seems appalled? LMAO. If they believe taxes need to be mandatory, won't they still pay them if they're voluntary? What a weird group of people. Americans, that is...
You have liberated millions of people around the world by merely saying in your novels "If you want to do it, do it."
Until you've had somebody lift the veil of altruism, religion, and irrationality from your mind, you have no idea what this does for people. I will forever be grateful for Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, & Objectivism for the sanction to follow my dreams and to own my mind & my life.
@IHeartDenver me too :) only for me it was mainly the fountainhead that changed me. Atlas shrugged is awesome though. I love how she could take something like a philosophy, and put it into a really interesting story.
The questioner was rude. The way she posed the question was totally inappropriate. Her "prologue" was not necessary and came across as condescending, i.e. "once I became educated I left your philosophy" etc etc. Rand was right to be offended--she was Old School, bless her--though she really should have just waved the questioner off.
Rand speaks as though free market capitalism has never existed. Of course, it has. And has it brought about the utopia she speaks of? The answer is, no.
@kardentyrell What do you think kidnapping Africans and enslaving them for hundreds of years was? Free market capitalism. Do you consider that a short period of time?
@elizabethfaraone Those weren't times of free market capitalism. Kidnapping and slavery is theft. It is the theft of ones own private property, your own body.
@kardentyrell In economics, laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention. Put two and two together.
@kardentyrell The American Constitution was designed to maintain the economic status quo, allowing for federal interference in runaway slave cases (both a property and economic issue at the time) and preventing, in James Madison's words, the "equal division of property or any other improper or wicked object."
@kardentyrell All income is produced by labor and therefore properly belongs to wage earners. Under free market capitalism, a more or less considerable part of the income that properly should go to workers as wages is instead unjustly appropriated as profit, interest, and land rent, i.e., as one or another of the various forms of “surplus value.”
@elizabethfaraone Check your premises. Government, your so called solution for these issues sanctioned such behavior for how long? Religion both supported and opposed it, I'd say it had more to do with the ignorance of the masses to believe anything their culture put in front of them, then free market forces. The free market gave the slavers the 'means' to do it, culture/religion gave them the will to carry it out. Both are at fault.
@AvaPozen - The definition of "self-interest" is not equivalent to "anything I want to do" or "self gratification." Obviously Hilter's behavior wasn't in his best self-interest because it ultimately was the source of his down fall. Additionally, an important aspect of her philosophy is that you cannot exercise force to get what you want.
I find her philisophy not as deplorable as I find them unrealistic. It is easy to behave in self-interest but what about "rational"? If it is rational to be self-interested, then was Hitler rational?
So embarrassing, the dumb lady @9:00 she doesn't understand the philosophy and I doubt she read any books regarding it. It's said that this monopoly concern keeps needing to be explained.
Ayn Rand was rude and maybe unfair, but she has the right to be unfair its her life, if someone opens a statement which implies "when I was uneducated I was impressed by your work, but now as iam educated i think your wrong" then Ayn Rand says "No way, hosey" and she doesnt apologize about it. Now this is a strong brave woman, and she emits femininity while being stronger than almost every other man in politics/education. Feminism is bs, and Aynd Rand proves it beautifully.
Yes they should stay home and be nice little girls and bake bread. The worst thing that happened to this country was women's lib. We've have serious issues ever since.
@Cocteau120 Not all women wish to be housewives. Those who do and find it fullfilling, more power to them. Those who want a career more power to them as well. I can't imagine from my perspective that it would be a very fulling life but that's just me.
the response of Rand to the lady at 9:00 is totally unreasonable considering her prolific status as an author and intellectual. cutting off her before she makes her point and then saying she isn't interested in the lady's biography shows a slight close mindedness of Rand.
@psspeed I understand your reaction to Ayn Rand's reaction and I do believe she jumped the gun in responding to the lady's remarks. However, in Ayn Rand's defense, I believe she took offense to the lady's opening comment that she had read Rand's books, then went to school and got educated - as to imply, perhaps, that Rand's books were not of service in assisting to develop thought this lady's thinking. Some people are just easily offended.
@psspeed I understand your point, but I think I understand why Ms. Rand cut her off. The woman said "15 years ago I was impressed with your books a...today "however", I'm more educated..." You don't say "I read your book a while ago and agreed with it, "but" now that I'm more educated..." because that's insulting. Perhaps Ms. Rand was being sensitive, but keep in mid that there are dissenters in the crowd. Mr.Donahue (good interviewer that he is) is one of them also
(1) If you don't agree with someone it makes total sense to voice your point of view and consider the alternative perspective presented to further your understanding.
(2) The education of the woman was being mentioned so as to show that at a certain point the woman was exposed to only a portion of information and with time she was exposed to broader points of view. It does come off somewhat insulting to Ayn Rand and I think tha this was the problem with the question.
@iamzer0xx If you go on a show to talk about your ideas and take questions from the audience, then you can expect who do not agree with you are going to also ask questions regarding what they disagree with you about. You then explain your position and why you think they are wrong and you are right. That's what happens when you take open questions from an audience. If one just wants to spout out ideas with out being challenged or questionted, become a preacher and do it from behind the pulpit.
@psspeed Our society has become so rude and careless that the lady's comment does not seem that bad. Listen again and slowly. Process what is being said. It was a (perhaps unconscious) swipe at Rand and Rand was right to be indignant at the insult. Not to mention, the woman was obviously not in Rand's class neither intellectually nor socially.
People in the lower classes are often more crass and possessing of lower standards in everything all together.
@RolandStGermain I agree. The woman said something to the effect of "I USED to agree with you, but then I became more educated" which implies that Rand is uneducated and that her opinions are less educated. It is calling her stupid, essentially. The woman is, of course, free to call Rand stupid, as allowed for by Objectivism itself, and Rand is equally free to choose to not indulge the woman's question because the woman was rude.
@RolandStGermain I would not talk about the classes like you do, or the intellectual, social aspects here. This type of behavior can happen in all classes and circles- Have you ever had to defend a thesis- Jockeying for power position in politics-
Appearance and reality many time is mismatched and even polar opposites. A free society ideally would correct for this mismatch, but in reality societies are not free and gatekeepers restrict this. Skill and Luck is what opens doors up or down.
@RolandStGermain Also, when you say "Our society has become" what time period and context are referring to for comparison?- is there an ego-centrism to your statement or an anthropological one? The masses have always been and always will be. Objectivism fails because your dealing with humans. EdwardLuis Bernays innovator of "Public Relations" or propaganda - "Century of the Self" is a documentary any Rand Philosophy should watch to see how many capitialize on where Objectivism falls short.
@psspeed I am not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but that does not mean I would disrespect her in front of a large audience. The Lady is taking a swipe at Ayn Rand, and Rand stops her there becuase anything at this point is intellectually dishonest. The Lady has already stated her position even before she asked the question.
I was actually impressed that Ayn Rand was so quick to recognize this as fast as she did. The Lady was sitting and waiting to pounce but Ayn Rand stopped her in her tracks!
@flippyflappy1 She strongly implies that Rand is uneducated and that her opinions are less educated. This is obvious. Only Rand would directly call someone on it so straight away. Thats her personality, and in most cases, to be strongly applauded.
@jgribhamnz I wouldn't go that far to say Only Ayn Rand (thats putting someone on too high a pedastal). A good debater who knows there arguements and can recognize when somebody attacks them instead of attacking logic. This show was supposed to be a Q+A about objectivism to learn what it is and what it's not. The lady dd not care to learn anything but was an overzealous attacker ready to pounce. Ayn Rand was not there to debate and there was no reason to let the Lady have the spotlight.
@jgribhamnz 2/2 not by acting like a child. Rand was nortorious for her over sensitiveness when criticised, questioned or challenged. It's well known she would purge her inner circle of people who disagreed with her on anything or questioned her - most likely that disagreeable aspect of her personality is why she ultimately died alone. If one makes their ideas public, then they can expect to be challanaged and to have people disagree with them.
@jgribhamnz 1/2 No. The lady was simply making the point that at one time she was impressed with Rand's ideas but was exposed to other ideas and thoughts during her education and as a result of that she now disagrees with Rand's ideas. Any writer or ideologue who goes on a show and takes questions from the audience can expect to have people who disagree with them to challenge their positions. A mature adult handles it by explaining their postion and why they believe the questioner is wrong,
@psspeed Rand was notorious for reacting badly to any criticism. I don't think the lady meant for it to come of as insulting. Essentially what she was trying to say is "At one time I was impressed with your ideas, but during my education as I became exposed to other ideas as well as life experiences I began to disagree with your ideas."
@votumseparatum1 Yes, but I don't thin she actually intended for it to sound insulting. Sometimes people do not word something as wll as they should, but that doesn't mean that they intended to be insulting.
@S24995 Part 1 What "free market"? If you honestly believe there is a free market in the United States today, you are staggeringly ignorant of economics, and I suggest you take the time to learn the subject. The mere existence of the Federal Reserve is enough to destroy all semblance to a free market. By keeping interest rates artificially low, the Fed creates massive inflation and triggers business cycles - something they've been doing since 1913. The US is closer to fascism than a free market.
@S24995 Part 2 Incidentally, I recommend you visit mises.org. It's an amazing resource and has probably thousands of free books and articles. Anyway, if you think that the US has a free market, that is, an economic system driven entirely by autonomous consumer choice, then explain how the mere words off one man - Ben Bernanke - can cause the stock market to surge or plummet over 100 points. The value of the dollar has dropped 98% since 1913 due to inflation created by the Fed.
@S24995 Part 3 This newly created currency was then passed out to big banks so as to protect them from the consequences of their overexpansion of credit via fractional reserve banking - at least, that was when the US was on a gold standard. By 1971, the money had become so inflated that there became no way to sustain a gold standard, so Nixon went off of it permanently, meaning general price stability and the steady decline in consumer prices that comes with capital accumulation died forever.
@S24995 Part 4 "Fascism" was defined (by Mussolini) as the merger of state and corporate power, the direction of the activities of private firms by state decree. After going off the gold standard, Nixon issued wage and price "guidelines," followed by full-blown controls. With the last piece of free-market discipline - gold - on the inflationary madmen removed forever, they were free to print to infinity, and so the inflation crisis of the 1970s resulted.
@S24995 Part 5 Gold was free market money; the fiat money used today is the artificial creation of government. Dollars are now backed by nothing and so there's no limit to how many can be issued. Government instituting wage and price controls to combat an inflation the government itself created is sheer lunacy. Of course, as with all cases of price control, after adoption of the policy, shortages happened that mystified everyone. This happens because price control forces out marginal producers.
@S24995 Part 6 Then there's the Great Depression, and Roosevelt's insane and dictatorial New Deal that was responsible for a decade of economic stagnation. But these topics are far too complex to cover comprehensively in comments. I suggest you visit mises.org and learn economics. Contrary to the fallacious babble of anticapitalists, capitalism is not inherently unsustainable. True capitalism is the ONLY sustainable economic system and the only one that has lifted humans out of slavery.
Apart from the chick at the end apparently not paying attention to Rand's explanation for the eventualities of monopolies... "I liked your books 15 years ago, but now I'm more educated..." lol, holy snots, talk about short sighted and shallow. just because you've learned something else doesn't mean what you knew before was wrong or less-right. But it's funny the view that gives of the human mind, we're very linear in how we assign importance to something.
Donahue is a great interviewer. He really knows what questions to ask to give Rand opportunity to display various facets of her philosophy - and pushes her with those questions to do it in a satisfying and comprehensive manner in such a small amount of time.
Donahue admired ayn and her ideas. He was a great friend of hers. He asked those question because those are the ones people didnt like about her philosophy. He played devils advocate so to speak.
@Dactylus ...its a shame MSNBC capitulated and canceled his show when he criticized the Iraq War. It was a shameful end to a great career. He absolutely shut down Bill O'Reilly. There was aNBC memo that stated Donahue should be fired because he would be a "difficult public face for NBC in a time of war. Dan Rather's career was also ended when he questioned (and rightfully so) George W.Bush's military service with the Texas Air National Guard.
@Dactylus Seriously, what the hell happened to interviewers? They've been replaced by the angry, loud village idiots. WTF? I think Ayn Rand is dead wrong on a lot of issues, but this is entertaining and I've learned a lot more about objectivism from these, a lot of the nuances that most opponents of it don't discuss.
@Dactylus Totally. I really wish we had more interviewers like him in our present. I don't agree with him (his opinions) but I really like his objectiveness and how he gives each person a chance to defend himself. Needless to say how he knows to give the right questions at the right moments.
She's undoubtedly intelligent. But the legions of fanboys/girls are tiresome in their sycophantic support. Alas it seems all it takes is for one human being to present an argument in opposition to the two - or three - main ones, before we run away with it and fuck ourselves most decidedly in the ass. It happened with Karl Marx, and you better believe it'd happen with objectivism.
@olqutseg Yes, some of the hard core Rand devotes I've encountered before seem to see her as almost a god like figure and if you criticise her or her "philosophy" in the slightest way they react with a ferver that is similar to that of a religious fundamentalist.
All sentient beings that are finite rely upon a necessary sentient cause that is anterior to their existence. Just as a mind with a free will can create things through expressing itself, minds that begin to exist must be contingent upon a First, infinite cause with consciousness.
This woman just contradicted herself when she says the ideal man should be honored and followed, yet prior to that she states that we should not follow anyone bcuz that means we have low self esteem. Ayn Rand is a peddler of luciferian doctrines.
@monkeycookies29 Wow, real mature buddy...crack open a book sometime if you know how to actually read. There IS a Lucifer, not only a concept of a spiritual being but also as a concept. In other words, Gnostics, Luciferians, Occultists, etc. worship, not a physical being but a principal of enlightenment they call Lucifer, which means light barer, the one that brings illumination. Don't be so wrapped n ur anger & miss wisdom when u see it.
@FWYGINOND Ayn Rand despised libertarianism because she could not grasp that it was a system of political order only, not a moral philosophy. She wanted people to embrace not just freedom but also a moral structure that would condemn behavior that was unproductive which libertarianism does not (because it applies only to government, and it should not be government's place to tell people what should or should not be valuable in their thoughts and lives). And definitely not anarchist, minarchist.
After this look at the interview with Tom Snyder. You can tell Tom Snyder disagrees with her a little bit, but he is respectful when expressing his disagreement. Then look at donahue and how he interrupts and only has her there to destroy her ideas.
Ayn Rand herself proves that women don't need "help" from society. We're able and as she said, the intelligent employer will hire a woman if she's talented.
People laugh at her use of the term "voluntary tax". The fact is, our tax code is by it's own definition of law, a voluntary tax only. The I.R.S. was allowed to illegally collect taxes by force. Google "Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo.
she makes a brilliant point... in a free socitey initially companies too big to fail will come to pass because of greed like they did in this recession and there will be monopoly. but as she said a time will come when the monopolies will go broke as they should have. she said monopolies exist because of governments... Bailout packages anyone?? these companies should have failed and new chapter in human economic history would have begun.
@amitnagpal1985 Scary that Ms Rand nailed this over 30 years ago. And how applicable it is today to our bailout Obama socialist government. She's rolling over in her grave.
The woman at the end doesnt understand that you cannot have abuse, she already explained this to Donahue. If the company who owns EVERYTHING tries to corner the market. Someone is going to undercut them, this is displayed even video games that simulate an economy. You cant buy these people off cause if you try your going to run out of money to pay people off, cause if your product is too expensive, NOBODY IS GOING TO BUY IT, and if someone sells it for less, and undercuts you. Guess who
@xeikai the consumer will goto? That's right, the person offering the same goods and services for a lower price. where is the big bad company going to get it's money if nobody is buying their product. Sure, they may be able to corner it for just a little while. But they cant sustain it. Cause someone, somewhere will offer it for less.
@HomuncuIus .....our current U.S. Tax code by definition of the law as written, IS a voluntary tax. The I.R.S. was allowed to illegally collect taxes by force. This is true. See "Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo........google it.
I'm sure Donahue is a nice guy; but he looks like a bit of a simpleton next to Rand. If you watch his interviews with Milton Friedman, Donahue's total ignorance of economics & philosophy is even more obvious than it is here.
When video was made gasoline was 50 cents a gallon - phone bills $5 a month and TV was free -Dodger tickets were $3 - you could buy a home for $25K - the only place a home cost that much today is Detroit. (or less) ponder that - gasolene today can go to $20 a gallon and people may take the buss.
If the government were offering services that were indeed of value to the people, they wouldn't have to stick a gun in people's faces to collect payment--the free market would support valuable services and eliminate unneeded services. Taxes force us to pay for unneeded services.
felo790, Yes in the United States freedom comes with responsibility and we believe that if you would sacrifice your freedom to have one less thing to worry about then you are one of the worst possible kinds of people in existence. Conformity produces money? I suppose Edison should have screwed the lightbulb idea so that we'd still rely on fire for light. That way he wouldnt have stood out or had an independent thought. And capitalism is the best system that produces growth of a country.
This bitch is crazy and evil. She goes against economy, psychology and religion. Can anyone tell me if she says anything about ethics? Because she advocates against violence, on her selfishness theory, and what about using unethical tatics to fulfill your egoistic goals? (think about her pupil Alan Greenspan)
And finally, what is the other on her philosophy? Just a tool of the ego (at least thats how she beahave on her life)
This woman is refreshingly rational, makes alot of sense, is against violence andthe type of slander and threat you illustrate. Unfortunately people like you are all too often the majority-the majority can't or doesn't want to hear the truth or act out of reason because mostly our nation has cash incentives for conformity and subservience rather than independence and courage.
This woman ins't rational, she just look rational. What r u saying? That in your nation (US I guess) independence and courage has penalties and conformity and subservience r qualities that make people earn money..... this is fucking irrational, please, explain it better.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
And by the way, this bitch doesnt know a shit about economy, she invents things from her deranged mind - like capitalism isnt exploration of man by man (actually capistalism is exploration of land, labor(man) and capital to make profit), second this thing about monopolies existing only on a state is outrageous absurd. A lot of monopolies exist, not because of laws, but because economic and market factors make competition impossible.
@felo790 Can you offer a cite of your definition of Capitalism? Futhermore, can you offer an example of monopoly, other than those owned and operated by the government?
Capistalism is the exploration (using to obtain profit) of land, capital and labor. She thinks the relation between boss and laborerer is a neutral, profitless relation, so damn wrong. She thinks every relation should be neutral, you dont give anything and you dont take anything - really tough, best stay in the basement to not hurt her ideology.
Non-government monopolies: bio-engineered seeds, genetic matrix of ox, mircosoft (near monoploy), boats for clam producing etc... there r so many.
@craig557 anybody or group that claims to have a monopoly on "the truth" is probably a cult. "The truth" do you even know how crazy you sound? her idea of free markets can only work with t-shirts & other trivial items, anybody who thinks they could compete with an energy company is out of their minds. Non of the infrastructure in this country was built solely by private companies for it is to expensive.
Yeah, refreshingly in the way that she actually tells a person that its thoughts and objections are false and/or depraved. That's not right in any way that's actually promoting a more totalitarian communication between peoples: the ones whom screams the most and/or knows the most should only speak and set down the rules. This is the reason why I couldn't agree any more with Ayn Rand and that most of hers philosophies are so flawed when one tries to put in other variables then just her owns
@felo790 Ayn Rand was not against economy or psychology. She challenged CONFORMIST and ALTRUIST systems of economy, such as socialism. As far as psychology goes, Ms. Rand's entire philosophy was based upon "The task of evaluating the processes of man's subconcious," which is her definition of psychology
She doesnt know a shit about economy or psychology. She ignores the human nature. She thinks we are robots that act according to reasons.
And yes, she is crazy and evil, read about her personal life and her cult. Objectvism is like a non-mystic Scientology. And stop saying she is a philosopher, she isnt, she writes screenplays.
@felo790 Before you go about calling a "bitch crazy and evil," you probably should actually research her philosophy on ethics. If you are curious of her ethics, I suggest you read the essay, "Objectivist Ethics," found in the book The Virtue of Selfishness.
She contends that Middle Easterners have no right to control the oil in Mid East lands because they had previously contracted with Westerners to develop the resource.
And so she mentions no ills, presumably seeing no ills in USA and UK perpetrating operation AJAX on the People of Iran. Bringing about the deaths of innocent people, who wished nothing more than self determination. Which she apparently champions.
I think her logic falls apart when she discusses the enemies of Zionism, or those with plenty of oil.
Claimed to be an atheist & objectivist, opposed to those who initiate force, she shows to be a flustered and dogmatic Jew when Israel and the Muslims are discussed.
Thanks for taking Ms. Rand's philosophy out of context. This was a great exercise!
Her philosophy is rooted in the concept of the inherent liberty of the individual. She clearly states that self-interest, within this context, does not allow for force against another person's inherent right to life, liberty or property.
She was wrong obviously. HIstory has proved it. ITT did indeed prove money is power, political power and conglomerate lobbies are now the ruling class. Ayn is little more than a Nieztchean byproduct, who having experienced the horror of (not real but hijacked) communism, felt the exact radical opposite to be the answer. No in between for Ayn, wrong babe.
Ayn Rand was too nice to refrain from responding to that woman. If the first thing someone said to me was "I was a follower of your philosophy, but then I became more educated", I would've immediately cut them off and told them "You think you're educated? Talk to me again when you really are".
How stupid do you have to be for that to be the first thing you say?
You know in dystopian novels (such as Brave New World, 1984, Anthem, and others), the utopia everyone is living in is so great because that's the way the people living in it have been taught; that their way of life is the only 'good' in that world?
Then there's always those few characters who, whether by reason or feeling, know something is wrong.
Well, what if we looked at our world like that? Are we living in a dystopia now, but most are too blinded be the very world we live in to see it?
her faithless diatribe is shrouded in deception, this cunt would have you believe in no control of the state, free will and choice as long as your objective like a fucking android. stupid evil bitch.
youd need a shitload of faith to believe the chode of lies in the video on your channel! so youre an atomic-relativist! presumably of the nietzschean school of folks who believe projection of desires and values is incomparable to nihilist shadows of the infinite. The infinite is the undefined, so you resolve to lead your life by not defining it, is that it? You ever hear of occams razor? further, no inference of the natural can serve to disprove the natural, so why the hallucinogenic mind games?
The mistake that almost all the Left makes is to think that because the watchmaker of Evolution is blind, it does not work better that we super smart humans.
The truth is that Evolution is not only smarter that we are, it is smarter than we ever can be. You can judge the truth of that by all the mess we have made in all our attempts to run societies larger than about 100 people.
Ayn Rand may not be as smart as the blind watchmaker, but she is at least smart enough to realise it.
thats an incredibly weak argument. in a situation like a society of a hundred people the system employed in organizing the society must accommodate the output of energy released by each individual. small city-state democracy works in a small circuit like early greece. Capitalism is the long circuit that works with a much broader and high energy system like our modern markets.
And as for evolution, mankind obeys the same laws nature does, and even borrows on her designs: airplane, a-bomb, etc.
further, in evolution the species which acts most in accordance with these laws and displays enough proficiency in its own existence may pass the progress of its life to its offspring, and in a closed system of competing forces may find some modicum of prosperity depending upon the relative successes of its dependents and the things it depends on: an economy of life, or an ecosystem. the free market works the same, and since nature doesnt have monopolies, the fittest animal/market wins.
Rands ideas are simple but profound in their implications.
Conduct a thought experiment. What would the world be like if everyone acted in their own rational self interest? Really think about it. Would it be in your rational self interest to steal from your neighbor? Would it be in the businessmans rational self interest to cheat his customers? Would it be in voters rational self interest to elect corrupt politicians?
You missed one important point. How would YOU act if you thought other people would act similarly? Your behavior, as well as everyone else's, would change.
Her primary argument is that people's self AND COMPETING interest will provide better protection than government's, which will only be used by the powerful to further their objectives - witness the bank and Wall Street bailouts.
I agree there are shortcomings in her b&w view, but it is more realistic than most.
@studentofsmith The concept is RATIONAL Self-Interest not greed. In order to understand this concept; you must understand Rand's philosophy from bottom up. Her philosophy was hierarchical and all of her concepts were dependent upon each other. Rational Self-Interest is difficult and ensures thought and use of the brain. Would it be rational to cheat others especially if you were caught and had to pay the price for it? Rational Self-Interest ensures a high ethical standard of behavior.
@studentofsmith A rational being would do nothing of the sort. In Ayn Rand's writing of Atlas Shrugged she explains that the meaning of rationality is to be able to accept what is real and that no man can gain by faking an existence. In short, a rational person would not steal from a neighbor because he is then pretending to own something of value that he has not deserved. He is pretending to be a person that he isn't by pretending to be able to own something that he cannot.
@studentofsmith Rational self interest is not physically possible. Since we are inside the universe it's impossible to have total knowledge; so, we can't make perfectly informed decisions. We are forced to act less than rationally. Of course all of us could act a lot more rationally than we do now and it would be a fabulous improvement. However, violence is very rational if you can get away with it. The fact government exists proves that violence is very possible and profitable.
Ayn Rand was brilliant
dubified89 4 days ago
Ms. Rand was right re the woman who said she followed her "before I was educated, but now..."
It was very insulting and I don't blame Ms. Rand for her reaction.
RSheftall 6 days ago
randroids are like assburgers
pasinurminen2233 2 weeks ago
Donahue couldn't hold a candle to Rand's Star
jonesey5168 4 weeks ago
So the woman suggests voluntary taxation and the crowd seems appalled? LMAO. If they believe taxes need to be mandatory, won't they still pay them if they're voluntary? What a weird group of people. Americans, that is...
PrecisePuncher 1 month ago 2
7:20 there it is, great moment
abcbamz17 1 month ago
she deserved a better interviewer
augustocubas9 2 months ago 2
09:30, funny, ITT is GONE. The market regulates itself.
CurtHowland 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
this video can save the world
asasolsh1 3 months ago
Very intelligent woman!
lovergal1984 3 months ago
Nobody says "That's right" like this woman!
erginakif 4 months ago in playlist More videos from brittle13 16
That woman in the audience was irrational and emotional that is why should could not "believe that"
AnarchoAssassin 6 months ago
You have liberated millions of people around the world by merely saying in your novels "If you want to do it, do it."
Until you've had somebody lift the veil of altruism, religion, and irrationality from your mind, you have no idea what this does for people. I will forever be grateful for Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, & Objectivism for the sanction to follow my dreams and to own my mind & my life.
IHeartDenver 6 months ago 2
@IHeartDenver me too :) only for me it was mainly the fountainhead that changed me. Atlas shrugged is awesome though. I love how she could take something like a philosophy, and put it into a really interesting story.
Chaaarge 5 months ago
I LOVE AYN RAND!!!!
lisettesvision 7 months ago 4
this women is an idiot!!!
selfishness is the way, and helping others is amoral!!! please!
LadyScorpio39 7 months ago
@LadyScorpio39 If you want to persuade people, try using an argument, not just an assertion supported by nothing.
ericcox2 7 months ago
@ericcox2
im not trying to persuade anyone.
im just giving my opinion on her. believe whatever you want.
LadyScorpio39 7 months ago
this woman is magnificent
conraddoavil 7 months ago in playlist Ayn Rand on Donahue 1979
One of Phil's best interviews.
MagUalghairg1916 7 months ago
"We can't be lucky we're here because if we weren't here we wouldn't be".
Rand possesses a rare clarity and insight into the subtleties of ideas.
sweetsweatyfeet 7 months ago
anybody would would believe what this wack jobs says, please please not have any children.
sterline80 7 months ago
Smart as well as Brave.
Hydra773 8 months ago
@ChaosDynamics Who? Rand? Rand wasn't an academic.
xexixk 8 months ago
The questioner was rude. The way she posed the question was totally inappropriate. Her "prologue" was not necessary and came across as condescending, i.e. "once I became educated I left your philosophy" etc etc. Rand was right to be offended--she was Old School, bless her--though she really should have just waved the questioner off.
CastleIvanhoe 9 months ago 4
Rand speaks as though free market capitalism has never existed. Of course, it has. And has it brought about the utopia she speaks of? The answer is, no.
elizabethfaraone 10 months ago
@elizabethfaraone what do you think created steel, petroleum, and polyphase electricity?
kasyapa 9 months ago 2
@elizabethfaraone Wrong... There was government intervention into the economy from the beginning, picking winners and losers.... You fail.
NoKingsNoGodsOnlyMan 9 months ago 3
@elizabethfaraone it never has, there was something close to it though for a short time
kardentyrell 7 months ago
@kardentyrell What do you think kidnapping Africans and enslaving them for hundreds of years was? Free market capitalism. Do you consider that a short period of time?
elizabethfaraone 7 months ago
@elizabethfaraone Those weren't times of free market capitalism. Kidnapping and slavery is theft. It is the theft of ones own private property, your own body.
kardentyrell 7 months ago
@kardentyrell In economics, laissez-faire describes an environment in which transactions between private parties are free from state intervention. Put two and two together.
elizabethfaraone 7 months ago
@kardentyrell The American Constitution was designed to maintain the economic status quo, allowing for federal interference in runaway slave cases (both a property and economic issue at the time) and preventing, in James Madison's words, the "equal division of property or any other improper or wicked object."
elizabethfaraone 7 months ago
@kardentyrell All income is produced by labor and therefore properly belongs to wage earners. Under free market capitalism, a more or less considerable part of the income that properly should go to workers as wages is instead unjustly appropriated as profit, interest, and land rent, i.e., as one or another of the various forms of “surplus value.”
elizabethfaraone 7 months ago
@elizabethfaraone Check your premises. Government, your so called solution for these issues sanctioned such behavior for how long? Religion both supported and opposed it, I'd say it had more to do with the ignorance of the masses to believe anything their culture put in front of them, then free market forces. The free market gave the slavers the 'means' to do it, culture/religion gave them the will to carry it out. Both are at fault.
baihbalm 6 months ago
@AvaPozen - The definition of "self-interest" is not equivalent to "anything I want to do" or "self gratification." Obviously Hilter's behavior wasn't in his best self-interest because it ultimately was the source of his down fall. Additionally, an important aspect of her philosophy is that you cannot exercise force to get what you want.
VTMyLady 1 year ago
I find her philisophy not as deplorable as I find them unrealistic. It is easy to behave in self-interest but what about "rational"? If it is rational to be self-interested, then was Hitler rational?
AvaPozen 1 year ago
at least donahue's open minded. imagine that moron olbermann talking with rand
tonygmilan7 1 year ago
So embarrassing, the dumb lady @9:00 she doesn't understand the philosophy and I doubt she read any books regarding it. It's said that this monopoly concern keeps needing to be explained.
treypol 1 year ago
What do you think would be the positive and/or negative effects of voluntary taxation?
begood20000 1 year ago
Ayn Rand was rude and maybe unfair, but she has the right to be unfair its her life, if someone opens a statement which implies "when I was uneducated I was impressed by your work, but now as iam educated i think your wrong" then Ayn Rand says "No way, hosey" and she doesnt apologize about it. Now this is a strong brave woman, and she emits femininity while being stronger than almost every other man in politics/education. Feminism is bs, and Aynd Rand proves it beautifully.
killerbee2k 1 year ago
Yes they should stay home and be nice little girls and bake bread. The worst thing that happened to this country was women's lib. We've have serious issues ever since.
Cocteau120 1 year ago
@Cocteau120 Not all women wish to be housewives. Those who do and find it fullfilling, more power to them. Those who want a career more power to them as well. I can't imagine from my perspective that it would be a very fulling life but that's just me.
xexixk 10 months ago
the response of Rand to the lady at 9:00 is totally unreasonable considering her prolific status as an author and intellectual. cutting off her before she makes her point and then saying she isn't interested in the lady's biography shows a slight close mindedness of Rand.
psspeed 1 year ago 3
@psspeed I understand your reaction to Ayn Rand's reaction and I do believe she jumped the gun in responding to the lady's remarks. However, in Ayn Rand's defense, I believe she took offense to the lady's opening comment that she had read Rand's books, then went to school and got educated - as to imply, perhaps, that Rand's books were not of service in assisting to develop thought this lady's thinking. Some people are just easily offended.
mrblujet 1 year ago 3
@psspeed once Rand considers that she insults her with her education why she accept listening her biography?
Yotta1983 1 year ago
@psspeed I understand your point, but I think I understand why Ms. Rand cut her off. The woman said "15 years ago I was impressed with your books a...today "however", I'm more educated..." You don't say "I read your book a while ago and agreed with it, "but" now that I'm more educated..." because that's insulting. Perhaps Ms. Rand was being sensitive, but keep in mid that there are dissenters in the crowd. Mr.Donahue (good interviewer that he is) is one of them also
tipsdaturtle 1 year ago
@psspeed I don't think so. I would have been annoyed as well. I think she's absolutely correct to respond to that women like that.
1. If you don't agree with what she has to say then why bother asking her anything at all.
2. No one is interested in your education. No one even knows what kind of education you have/had for that matter.
iamzer0xx 1 year ago
@iamzer0xx
(1) If you don't agree with someone it makes total sense to voice your point of view and consider the alternative perspective presented to further your understanding.
(2) The education of the woman was being mentioned so as to show that at a certain point the woman was exposed to only a portion of information and with time she was exposed to broader points of view. It does come off somewhat insulting to Ayn Rand and I think tha this was the problem with the question.
DreamINfiniteMoment 1 year ago
@iamzer0xx If you go on a show to talk about your ideas and take questions from the audience, then you can expect who do not agree with you are going to also ask questions regarding what they disagree with you about. You then explain your position and why you think they are wrong and you are right. That's what happens when you take open questions from an audience. If one just wants to spout out ideas with out being challenged or questionted, become a preacher and do it from behind the pulpit.
xexixk 10 months ago
@psspeed
Actually, no it doesn't. This chick wanted to start her question with a back handed comment.
If this chick had gotten in front of a clothing designer and said:
"When I was 20 i used to wear your clothes, and I loved them. However, 10 years later I have much better fashion sense,,,, "insert question here
That is a back handed comment. This chick went to college, got radicalized by some douchebag professor, and came out like this.
A bitchy, know it all, malcontent!!
EchoMike03 11 months ago 2
@psspeed You can save a lot of time and frustration by trusting what information your unconscious processes about a person within a few seconds.
dopejoel 11 months ago
@psspeed Our society has become so rude and careless that the lady's comment does not seem that bad. Listen again and slowly. Process what is being said. It was a (perhaps unconscious) swipe at Rand and Rand was right to be indignant at the insult. Not to mention, the woman was obviously not in Rand's class neither intellectually nor socially.
People in the lower classes are often more crass and possessing of lower standards in everything all together.
RolandStGermain 11 months ago
@RolandStGermain I agree. The woman said something to the effect of "I USED to agree with you, but then I became more educated" which implies that Rand is uneducated and that her opinions are less educated. It is calling her stupid, essentially. The woman is, of course, free to call Rand stupid, as allowed for by Objectivism itself, and Rand is equally free to choose to not indulge the woman's question because the woman was rude.
sithmaster2019 10 months ago
@RolandStGermain I would not talk about the classes like you do, or the intellectual, social aspects here. This type of behavior can happen in all classes and circles- Have you ever had to defend a thesis- Jockeying for power position in politics-
Appearance and reality many time is mismatched and even polar opposites. A free society ideally would correct for this mismatch, but in reality societies are not free and gatekeepers restrict this. Skill and Luck is what opens doors up or down.
flippyflappy1 10 months ago
@RolandStGermain Also, when you say "Our society has become" what time period and context are referring to for comparison?- is there an ego-centrism to your statement or an anthropological one? The masses have always been and always will be. Objectivism fails because your dealing with humans. EdwardLuis Bernays innovator of "Public Relations" or propaganda - "Century of the Self" is a documentary any Rand Philosophy should watch to see how many capitialize on where Objectivism falls short.
flippyflappy1 10 months ago
@psspeed I am not a big fan of Ayn Rand, but that does not mean I would disrespect her in front of a large audience. The Lady is taking a swipe at Ayn Rand, and Rand stops her there becuase anything at this point is intellectually dishonest. The Lady has already stated her position even before she asked the question.
I was actually impressed that Ayn Rand was so quick to recognize this as fast as she did. The Lady was sitting and waiting to pounce but Ayn Rand stopped her in her tracks!
flippyflappy1 10 months ago
@flippyflappy1 She strongly implies that Rand is uneducated and that her opinions are less educated. This is obvious. Only Rand would directly call someone on it so straight away. Thats her personality, and in most cases, to be strongly applauded.
jgribhamnz 10 months ago
@jgribhamnz I wouldn't go that far to say Only Ayn Rand (thats putting someone on too high a pedastal). A good debater who knows there arguements and can recognize when somebody attacks them instead of attacking logic. This show was supposed to be a Q+A about objectivism to learn what it is and what it's not. The lady dd not care to learn anything but was an overzealous attacker ready to pounce. Ayn Rand was not there to debate and there was no reason to let the Lady have the spotlight.
flippyflappy1 10 months ago
@jgribhamnz 2/2 not by acting like a child. Rand was nortorious for her over sensitiveness when criticised, questioned or challenged. It's well known she would purge her inner circle of people who disagreed with her on anything or questioned her - most likely that disagreeable aspect of her personality is why she ultimately died alone. If one makes their ideas public, then they can expect to be challanaged and to have people disagree with them.
xexixk 10 months ago
Comment removed
xexixk 10 months ago
@jgribhamnz 1/2 No. The lady was simply making the point that at one time she was impressed with Rand's ideas but was exposed to other ideas and thoughts during her education and as a result of that she now disagrees with Rand's ideas. Any writer or ideologue who goes on a show and takes questions from the audience can expect to have people who disagree with them to challenge their positions. A mature adult handles it by explaining their postion and why they believe the questioner is wrong,
xexixk 10 months ago
@psspeed Rand was notorious for reacting badly to any criticism. I don't think the lady meant for it to come of as insulting. Essentially what she was trying to say is "At one time I was impressed with your ideas, but during my education as I became exposed to other ideas as well as life experiences I began to disagree with your ideas."
xexixk 10 months ago
@xexixk That sounds friendlier. :) The way the woman phrase it, it most certainly sounded insulting.
votumseparatum1 10 months ago
@votumseparatum1 Yes, but I don't thin she actually intended for it to sound insulting. Sometimes people do not word something as wll as they should, but that doesn't mean that they intended to be insulting.
xexixk 10 months ago
@psspeed Slight?
elizabethfaraone 10 months ago
"Would you fight for anything?!"
"How did I get here?"
perfect.
spacesoup 1 year ago 54
I agree with her views on religion, but capitalism is so corrupt in this day and age, I'm not convinced a "free market" society still works.
S24995 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 1 What "free market"? If you honestly believe there is a free market in the United States today, you are staggeringly ignorant of economics, and I suggest you take the time to learn the subject. The mere existence of the Federal Reserve is enough to destroy all semblance to a free market. By keeping interest rates artificially low, the Fed creates massive inflation and triggers business cycles - something they've been doing since 1913. The US is closer to fascism than a free market.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 2 Incidentally, I recommend you visit mises.org. It's an amazing resource and has probably thousands of free books and articles. Anyway, if you think that the US has a free market, that is, an economic system driven entirely by autonomous consumer choice, then explain how the mere words off one man - Ben Bernanke - can cause the stock market to surge or plummet over 100 points. The value of the dollar has dropped 98% since 1913 due to inflation created by the Fed.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 3 This newly created currency was then passed out to big banks so as to protect them from the consequences of their overexpansion of credit via fractional reserve banking - at least, that was when the US was on a gold standard. By 1971, the money had become so inflated that there became no way to sustain a gold standard, so Nixon went off of it permanently, meaning general price stability and the steady decline in consumer prices that comes with capital accumulation died forever.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
Comment removed
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 4 "Fascism" was defined (by Mussolini) as the merger of state and corporate power, the direction of the activities of private firms by state decree. After going off the gold standard, Nixon issued wage and price "guidelines," followed by full-blown controls. With the last piece of free-market discipline - gold - on the inflationary madmen removed forever, they were free to print to infinity, and so the inflation crisis of the 1970s resulted.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 5 Gold was free market money; the fiat money used today is the artificial creation of government. Dollars are now backed by nothing and so there's no limit to how many can be issued. Government instituting wage and price controls to combat an inflation the government itself created is sheer lunacy. Of course, as with all cases of price control, after adoption of the policy, shortages happened that mystified everyone. This happens because price control forces out marginal producers.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
@S24995 Part 6 Then there's the Great Depression, and Roosevelt's insane and dictatorial New Deal that was responsible for a decade of economic stagnation. But these topics are far too complex to cover comprehensively in comments. I suggest you visit mises.org and learn economics. Contrary to the fallacious babble of anticapitalists, capitalism is not inherently unsustainable. True capitalism is the ONLY sustainable economic system and the only one that has lifted humans out of slavery.
IvanTheHeathen 1 year ago
Apart from the chick at the end apparently not paying attention to Rand's explanation for the eventualities of monopolies... "I liked your books 15 years ago, but now I'm more educated..." lol, holy snots, talk about short sighted and shallow. just because you've learned something else doesn't mean what you knew before was wrong or less-right. But it's funny the view that gives of the human mind, we're very linear in how we assign importance to something.
SavedbyJaco 1 year ago
Donahue is a great interviewer. He really knows what questions to ask to give Rand opportunity to display various facets of her philosophy - and pushes her with those questions to do it in a satisfying and comprehensive manner in such a small amount of time.
Dactylus 1 year ago 40
Donahue admired ayn and her ideas. He was a great friend of hers. He asked those question because those are the ones people didnt like about her philosophy. He played devils advocate so to speak.
Bigturns33 1 year ago
@Dactylus ...its a shame MSNBC capitulated and canceled his show when he criticized the Iraq War. It was a shameful end to a great career. He absolutely shut down Bill O'Reilly. There was aNBC memo that stated Donahue should be fired because he would be a "difficult public face for NBC in a time of war. Dan Rather's career was also ended when he questioned (and rightfully so) George W.Bush's military service with the Texas Air National Guard.
SuperOmnicron 9 months ago
@Dactylus Seriously, what the hell happened to interviewers? They've been replaced by the angry, loud village idiots. WTF? I think Ayn Rand is dead wrong on a lot of issues, but this is entertaining and I've learned a lot more about objectivism from these, a lot of the nuances that most opponents of it don't discuss.
BoozyBeggar 9 months ago
@Dactylus Totally. I really wish we had more interviewers like him in our present. I don't agree with him (his opinions) but I really like his objectiveness and how he gives each person a chance to defend himself. Needless to say how he knows to give the right questions at the right moments.
AlexNOSAM 6 months ago
She's undoubtedly intelligent. But the legions of fanboys/girls are tiresome in their sycophantic support. Alas it seems all it takes is for one human being to present an argument in opposition to the two - or three - main ones, before we run away with it and fuck ourselves most decidedly in the ass. It happened with Karl Marx, and you better believe it'd happen with objectivism.
olqutseg 1 year ago
@olqutseg Yes, some of the hard core Rand devotes I've encountered before seem to see her as almost a god like figure and if you criticise her or her "philosophy" in the slightest way they react with a ferver that is similar to that of a religious fundamentalist.
xexixk 10 months ago
Wow there are some really nice looking girls in that audience.
Travixius 1 year ago
this man doesn't deserve to debate such a great mind as Ayn Rand's.
nolaOE800 1 year ago
she exposes the whole collective mindset. questions crumble in the face of her reason RIP
jamiemakk78 1 year ago
I'd like to see Ayn Rand debate Benjamin Franklin
MrMrmike5 1 year ago
All sentient beings that are finite rely upon a necessary sentient cause that is anterior to their existence. Just as a mind with a free will can create things through expressing itself, minds that begin to exist must be contingent upon a First, infinite cause with consciousness.
Pilatocus28 1 year ago
wow she destroyed feminism in a few sentences.
curiouscrutiny 1 year ago 2
I've spotted some nice shiksas in the audience :-)
sorry for the of topic. please continue.
rujtj 1 year ago
This woman just contradicted herself when she says the ideal man should be honored and followed, yet prior to that she states that we should not follow anyone bcuz that means we have low self esteem. Ayn Rand is a peddler of luciferian doctrines.
jmcclellan54321 1 year ago 4
@jmcclellan54321 there is no lucifer fuck face
monkeycookies29 1 year ago
@monkeycookies29 Wow, real mature buddy...crack open a book sometime if you know how to actually read. There IS a Lucifer, not only a concept of a spiritual being but also as a concept. In other words, Gnostics, Luciferians, Occultists, etc. worship, not a physical being but a principal of enlightenment they call Lucifer, which means light barer, the one that brings illumination. Don't be so wrapped n ur anger & miss wisdom when u see it.
jmcclellan54321 1 year ago
I think the idea of voluntary taxation would work based on all of the modern examples of crowd-sourced projects. She's so clever that Ayn Rand.
Wheelsgr 1 year ago 2
Donahue is such a dumbass
deveousdevil 1 year ago
Is Ayn Rand a capitalist libertarian-anarchist?
FWYGINOND 1 year ago
@FWYGINOND Ayn Rand despised libertarianism because she could not grasp that it was a system of political order only, not a moral philosophy. She wanted people to embrace not just freedom but also a moral structure that would condemn behavior that was unproductive which libertarianism does not (because it applies only to government, and it should not be government's place to tell people what should or should not be valuable in their thoughts and lives). And definitely not anarchist, minarchist.
TheElectricTurtle 1 year ago
Does ITT exist today???
gomedoc1 1 year ago
Y los subtitulos?
hastioperu 1 year ago
After this look at the interview with Tom Snyder. You can tell Tom Snyder disagrees with her a little bit, but he is respectful when expressing his disagreement. Then look at donahue and how he interrupts and only has her there to destroy her ideas.
pogoman555 1 year ago
Ayn Rand herself proves that women don't need "help" from society. We're able and as she said, the intelligent employer will hire a woman if she's talented.
AshillaBeige 1 year ago
In fact ITT did fall apart on its own weight in free market system ....
deadlychemist 1 year ago
Stupid liberals. Everyone is so afraid of freedom.
scott04la 1 year ago
Donahue is such a tool... It seems to me that he has seen into the future and this is a Murray Povich show with good special guests.
brianwallace1984 1 year ago
Donahue what a faggot.
sundancekid122 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Ayn Rand is a cunt. Anybody who agrees with her is a cunt. Fuck her.
mussman717word 1 year ago
@mussman717word Well, with an argument like that, YOU should be on Donahue; clearly you are an intellectual heavyweight.
JohnColt 1 year ago
@mussman717word But that's only 15 words! I can suggest two more....
madmax8903 1 year ago
@mussman717word You're clearly a liberal democrat. I feel sorry for you.
comlax22 1 year ago
People laugh at her use of the term "voluntary tax". The fact is, our tax code is by it's own definition of law, a voluntary tax only. The I.R.S. was allowed to illegally collect taxes by force. Google "Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo.
The truth will hurt.
rubbersole79 1 year ago
she makes a brilliant point... in a free socitey initially companies too big to fail will come to pass because of greed like they did in this recession and there will be monopoly. but as she said a time will come when the monopolies will go broke as they should have. she said monopolies exist because of governments... Bailout packages anyone?? these companies should have failed and new chapter in human economic history would have begun.
amitnagpal1985 1 year ago 2
@amitnagpal1985 Scary that Ms Rand nailed this over 30 years ago. And how applicable it is today to our bailout Obama socialist government. She's rolling over in her grave.
comlax22 1 year ago
The woman at the end doesnt understand that you cannot have abuse, she already explained this to Donahue. If the company who owns EVERYTHING tries to corner the market. Someone is going to undercut them, this is displayed even video games that simulate an economy. You cant buy these people off cause if you try your going to run out of money to pay people off, cause if your product is too expensive, NOBODY IS GOING TO BUY IT, and if someone sells it for less, and undercuts you. Guess who
xeikai 1 year ago
@xeikai the consumer will goto? That's right, the person offering the same goods and services for a lower price. where is the big bad company going to get it's money if nobody is buying their product. Sure, they may be able to corner it for just a little while. But they cant sustain it. Cause someone, somewhere will offer it for less.
xeikai 1 year ago
Look how much more intellectual TV was 30 years ago!
VictoryCough 1 year ago
@VictoryCough
And on Donahue at that!
maskedphrogg 1 year ago
"Voluntary taxation LOL"
HomuncuIus 1 year ago
@HomuncuIus .....our current U.S. Tax code by definition of the law as written, IS a voluntary tax. The I.R.S. was allowed to illegally collect taxes by force. This is true. See "Freedom to Fascism" by Aaron Russo........google it.
rubbersole79 1 year ago
I'm sure Donahue is a nice guy; but he looks like a bit of a simpleton next to Rand. If you watch his interviews with Milton Friedman, Donahue's total ignorance of economics & philosophy is even more obvious than it is here.
starinapapercup 1 year ago
When video was made gasoline was 50 cents a gallon - phone bills $5 a month and TV was free -Dodger tickets were $3 - you could buy a home for $25K - the only place a home cost that much today is Detroit. (or less) ponder that - gasolene today can go to $20 a gallon and people may take the buss.
mrce500 1 year ago
Rand: "Incidentally, displaying the quality of her brain." LOL!
BFC2011 1 year ago
I don't know about all of her ideas but she sure has Christianity down. What an absurd notion, this original sin an redemption BS.
newcoyote 1 year ago
If the government were offering services that were indeed of value to the people, they wouldn't have to stick a gun in people's faces to collect payment--the free market would support valuable services and eliminate unneeded services. Taxes force us to pay for unneeded services.
basspig 1 year ago 5
@basspig : Current news: the government is riding the muddy slide right now.
buzzclick500 1 year ago
i used to like your books but now I'm more educated. What? did I say something wrong? LOL
setmedic 2 years ago
felo790, Yes in the United States freedom comes with responsibility and we believe that if you would sacrifice your freedom to have one less thing to worry about then you are one of the worst possible kinds of people in existence. Conformity produces money? I suppose Edison should have screwed the lightbulb idea so that we'd still rely on fire for light. That way he wouldnt have stood out or had an independent thought. And capitalism is the best system that produces growth of a country.
Pantalaimon345 2 years ago
This bitch is crazy and evil. She goes against economy, psychology and religion. Can anyone tell me if she says anything about ethics? Because she advocates against violence, on her selfishness theory, and what about using unethical tatics to fulfill your egoistic goals? (think about her pupil Alan Greenspan)
And finally, what is the other on her philosophy? Just a tool of the ego (at least thats how she beahave on her life)
felo790 2 years ago
This woman is refreshingly rational, makes alot of sense, is against violence andthe type of slander and threat you illustrate. Unfortunately people like you are all too often the majority-the majority can't or doesn't want to hear the truth or act out of reason because mostly our nation has cash incentives for conformity and subservience rather than independence and courage.
craig557 2 years ago 36
This woman ins't rational, she just look rational. What r u saying? That in your nation (US I guess) independence and courage has penalties and conformity and subservience r qualities that make people earn money..... this is fucking irrational, please, explain it better.
felo790 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
And by the way, this bitch doesnt know a shit about economy, she invents things from her deranged mind - like capitalism isnt exploration of man by man (actually capistalism is exploration of land, labor(man) and capital to make profit), second this thing about monopolies existing only on a state is outrageous absurd. A lot of monopolies exist, not because of laws, but because economic and market factors make competition impossible.
felo790 2 years ago
@felo790 Can you offer a cite of your definition of Capitalism? Futhermore, can you offer an example of monopoly, other than those owned and operated by the government?
christevenson 2 years ago
Capistalism is the exploration (using to obtain profit) of land, capital and labor. She thinks the relation between boss and laborerer is a neutral, profitless relation, so damn wrong. She thinks every relation should be neutral, you dont give anything and you dont take anything - really tough, best stay in the basement to not hurt her ideology.
Non-government monopolies: bio-engineered seeds, genetic matrix of ox, mircosoft (near monoploy), boats for clam producing etc... there r so many.
felo790 2 years ago
@craig557 anybody or group that claims to have a monopoly on "the truth" is probably a cult. "The truth" do you even know how crazy you sound? her idea of free markets can only work with t-shirts & other trivial items, anybody who thinks they could compete with an energy company is out of their minds. Non of the infrastructure in this country was built solely by private companies for it is to expensive.
benympls 1 year ago
Yeah, refreshingly in the way that she actually tells a person that its thoughts and objections are false and/or depraved. That's not right in any way that's actually promoting a more totalitarian communication between peoples: the ones whom screams the most and/or knows the most should only speak and set down the rules. This is the reason why I couldn't agree any more with Ayn Rand and that most of hers philosophies are so flawed when one tries to put in other variables then just her owns
Teadon86 1 year ago
@felo790 Ayn Rand was not against economy or psychology. She challenged CONFORMIST and ALTRUIST systems of economy, such as socialism. As far as psychology goes, Ms. Rand's entire philosophy was based upon "The task of evaluating the processes of man's subconcious," which is her definition of psychology
christevenson 2 years ago 3
She doesnt know a shit about economy or psychology. She ignores the human nature. She thinks we are robots that act according to reasons.
And yes, she is crazy and evil, read about her personal life and her cult. Objectvism is like a non-mystic Scientology. And stop saying she is a philosopher, she isnt, she writes screenplays.
felo790 2 years ago
@felo790 Before you go about calling a "bitch crazy and evil," you probably should actually research her philosophy on ethics. If you are curious of her ethics, I suggest you read the essay, "Objectivist Ethics," found in the book The Virtue of Selfishness.
christevenson 2 years ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
I just read respectable authors.
felo790 2 years ago
She contends that Middle Easterners have no right to control the oil in Mid East lands because they had previously contracted with Westerners to develop the resource.
And so she mentions no ills, presumably seeing no ills in USA and UK perpetrating operation AJAX on the People of Iran. Bringing about the deaths of innocent people, who wished nothing more than self determination. Which she apparently champions.
phoneyid 2 years ago
I think her logic falls apart when she discusses the enemies of Zionism, or those with plenty of oil.
Claimed to be an atheist & objectivist, opposed to those who initiate force, she shows to be a flustered and dogmatic Jew when Israel and the Muslims are discussed.
phoneyid 2 years ago 2
studentofsmith -
Thanks for taking Ms. Rand's philosophy out of context. This was a great exercise!
Her philosophy is rooted in the concept of the inherent liberty of the individual. She clearly states that self-interest, within this context, does not allow for force against another person's inherent right to life, liberty or property.
Nice try though.
GodsFavoriteBassPlyr 2 years ago
She was wrong obviously. HIstory has proved it. ITT did indeed prove money is power, political power and conglomerate lobbies are now the ruling class. Ayn is little more than a Nieztchean byproduct, who having experienced the horror of (not real but hijacked) communism, felt the exact radical opposite to be the answer. No in between for Ayn, wrong babe.
stefbren 2 years ago
I agree on her theology, though countless atheists and anti-theists since have come up with finer points.
stefbren 2 years ago
I just learned about Ayn, but I love what she is saying. I'm going to get her book.
railroadtrash09 2 years ago 6
long shoreman and football player--haha!
mediblue9 2 years ago
Rand was doing certainly right in dildo-slapping this little bitch down.
hyperseauton 2 years ago 3
That's not a philosopher, that's the former prime minister of New Zealand - Helen Clark.
fomastephanovitch 2 years ago
Ayn Rand was too nice to refrain from responding to that woman. If the first thing someone said to me was "I was a follower of your philosophy, but then I became more educated", I would've immediately cut them off and told them "You think you're educated? Talk to me again when you really are".
How stupid do you have to be for that to be the first thing you say?
BlackWolf4830 2 years ago 4
Thanks for posting. I am pleasantly surprised it came from Donahue.
BrittonMorrell 2 years ago
You know in dystopian novels (such as Brave New World, 1984, Anthem, and others), the utopia everyone is living in is so great because that's the way the people living in it have been taught; that their way of life is the only 'good' in that world?
Then there's always those few characters who, whether by reason or feeling, know something is wrong.
Well, what if we looked at our world like that? Are we living in a dystopia now, but most are too blinded be the very world we live in to see it?
ookookschool 2 years ago
This may be the smartest lady ever to live. I love her.
chaserehn 2 years ago 2
her faithless diatribe is shrouded in deception, this cunt would have you believe in no control of the state, free will and choice as long as your objective like a fucking android. stupid evil bitch.
jay19xxx 2 years ago
youd need a shitload of faith to believe the chode of lies in the video on your channel! so youre an atomic-relativist! presumably of the nietzschean school of folks who believe projection of desires and values is incomparable to nihilist shadows of the infinite. The infinite is the undefined, so you resolve to lead your life by not defining it, is that it? You ever hear of occams razor? further, no inference of the natural can serve to disprove the natural, so why the hallucinogenic mind games?
LegalizeCapitalism 2 years ago
She's so shallow intellectually. How can any rational person see anything in her? I don't get it.
Svankmajer 2 years ago
The mistake that almost all the Left makes is to think that because the watchmaker of Evolution is blind, it does not work better that we super smart humans.
The truth is that Evolution is not only smarter that we are, it is smarter than we ever can be. You can judge the truth of that by all the mess we have made in all our attempts to run societies larger than about 100 people.
Ayn Rand may not be as smart as the blind watchmaker, but she is at least smart enough to realise it.
CoeurDeLoin 2 years ago
thats an incredibly weak argument. in a situation like a society of a hundred people the system employed in organizing the society must accommodate the output of energy released by each individual. small city-state democracy works in a small circuit like early greece. Capitalism is the long circuit that works with a much broader and high energy system like our modern markets.
And as for evolution, mankind obeys the same laws nature does, and even borrows on her designs: airplane, a-bomb, etc.
LegalizeCapitalism 2 years ago
further, in evolution the species which acts most in accordance with these laws and displays enough proficiency in its own existence may pass the progress of its life to its offspring, and in a closed system of competing forces may find some modicum of prosperity depending upon the relative successes of its dependents and the things it depends on: an economy of life, or an ecosystem. the free market works the same, and since nature doesnt have monopolies, the fittest animal/market wins.
LegalizeCapitalism 2 years ago
Rands ideas are simple but profound in their implications.
Conduct a thought experiment. What would the world be like if everyone acted in their own rational self interest? Really think about it. Would it be in your rational self interest to steal from your neighbor? Would it be in the businessmans rational self interest to cheat his customers? Would it be in voters rational self interest to elect corrupt politicians?
You see, the implications are staggering.
studentofsmith 2 years ago 29
@studentofsmith
You missed one important point. How would YOU act if you thought other people would act similarly? Your behavior, as well as everyone else's, would change.
Her primary argument is that people's self AND COMPETING interest will provide better protection than government's, which will only be used by the powerful to further their objectives - witness the bank and Wall Street bailouts.
I agree there are shortcomings in her b&w view, but it is more realistic than most.
666sigma 2 years ago
@studentofsmith The concept is RATIONAL Self-Interest not greed. In order to understand this concept; you must understand Rand's philosophy from bottom up. Her philosophy was hierarchical and all of her concepts were dependent upon each other. Rational Self-Interest is difficult and ensures thought and use of the brain. Would it be rational to cheat others especially if you were caught and had to pay the price for it? Rational Self-Interest ensures a high ethical standard of behavior.
RolandStGermain 1 year ago
@studentofsmith if you're commenting this way, and if you really mean it, you didn't understand nothing of what she said...
renzoxeneize 1 year ago
@studentofsmith A rational being would do nothing of the sort. In Ayn Rand's writing of Atlas Shrugged she explains that the meaning of rationality is to be able to accept what is real and that no man can gain by faking an existence. In short, a rational person would not steal from a neighbor because he is then pretending to own something of value that he has not deserved. He is pretending to be a person that he isn't by pretending to be able to own something that he cannot.
ToXiC2MiNd 1 year ago
Comment removed
MarkProffitt 1 year ago
@studentofsmith Rational self interest is not physically possible. Since we are inside the universe it's impossible to have total knowledge; so, we can't make perfectly informed decisions. We are forced to act less than rationally. Of course all of us could act a lot more rationally than we do now and it would be a fabulous improvement. However, violence is very rational if you can get away with it. The fact government exists proves that violence is very possible and profitable.
MarkProffitt 1 year ago
@MarkPro