Posted on 11/03/2009 12:13:51 AM PST by Tempest
Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"—her readers—were "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
Why won’t you answer the question? Why do you change the subject? If you haven’t read it just say so.
I take it you didn’t read the article...
she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters
pretty much explains the gist of the article and all the Ayn Rand bashing thats been going on lately.
If all you know is what others have told you, your criticism won't mean much to them either.
What is the important point you are trying to make about an author you haven't read?
A person who doesn’t have to read Rand’s works to know that they are ‘objectionable’ suffers from the same blindness as those who condemn Rush Limbaugh for what he supposedly “said”, but haven’t actually listened to his show...
So just to make sure I got this straight... you are ok with the six billion people starving and being destroyed from within right?
It’s interesting that you say the book is “Hate-Filled”, I believe the book is a work of genesis. A creation, but instead of having a blank slate, something must cause the masses to realize they deserve nothing, but that which they earn. And being bound and gagged by the masses so they can have something for nothing by your labor and mind is the very collectivist theme we face today, and not just in the world as a whole but across the USA.
From your tone, I get the sense that you think it’s hate to let people burn in their own creations?
Maybe you can clear this up for us?
We each use the gifts we are given. Rand was a writer, and Mr. King was a spiritual leader. I’m sure if you started digging you’ll find out that King was “just a man” and had MANY faults of his own. I know it’s shocking that a woman could actually have faults, you know like enjoying her body, etc. Shocking!
What is your point?
Do you find one better than the other? Clearly if you look at success I’d say King failed overall and now we have a population that is largely not self-sufficient yet places the blame on someone else...
Yea... I’m thinking we need to actually identify what success should have looked like.
Wow no bias or antipathy in the opening to this screed.
First of all, that is an over-simplification of what transpires in the book.
But, yes, as a matter of fact I am, especially since those six million people pulled the food from their own mouths. That doesn't mean I don't feel for their suffering. But I do believe in consequences for one's actions, and those six million people are responsible, ultimately, for their own starvation.
But then you would know that, having read the book and understanding how those six million people got to that point, right?
First of all, that is an over-simplification of what transpires in the book.
But, yes, as a matter of fact I am, especially since those six million people pulled the food from their own mouths. That doesn't mean I don't feel for their suffering. But I do believe in consequences for one's actions, and those six million people are responsible, ultimately, for their own starvation.
But then you would know that, having read the book and understanding how those six million people got to that point, right?
sorry, that double post (how that happened is beyond me) was meant for dangus
You cannot possibly be as ignorant as you represent yourself on this thread.
So what’s your game, tempest in a chamber pot?
.... Nikolai Google?
The one thing I didn't like about the article was that it made no mention of the virulent atheism which was as central to her deranged philosophy as it was to her diseased mind.
America's political philosophy has proven to be very successful, however. "We hold these truths to be self-evident..."
What a shame that we have to so great a degree abandoned it.
What glorious freedom and security and prosperity our posterity could enjoy if we would reembrace it.
She had the morals of an alley cat in heat.
Too much attention is paid to a trashy, selfish woman consumed with money on her mind. Her inner circle abandoned her as well. Now we have other idiots impressed with her. Who is really surprised? They are as narcissistic, selfish and preoccupied with money as she was. She was a pathetic souls as many today are - so they relate to her. Her condition is quite common in our culture today.
John Denver smoked pot. Yet, I still liked his music. When I was a pre-teen and found out he smoked pot, boy, I was really disappoited. Then I grew up and still liked his music.
Slate hates it. Must be something good in it.
Good points!
Quite an interesting thread...so far.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.