Posted on 06/08/2011 9:34:29 PM PDT by Shalmaneser
I think the review of "Atlas Shrugged" that Whittaker Chambers did for National Review did a perfect job of exposing the inherent fallacies and flaws of Rand's philosophy.
How many people have read Nietzsche? Or at least enough to follow that thread?
Not many nowadays. The author went for Rand because she is fairly popular today.
I don' think you really believe that. If you did, you would go a Viking and raid surrounding towns.
“”Do as thou will” shall be the whole of the law.” Satanism creed.
Don’t see any similarity between that and a materialistic and moral based philosophy on the proper economic balance between the individual and the State.
Which doesn’t mean that she isn't right about other ideas.
However Satan can use anything that isn't what God wants. Islam, socialism, nationalism and internationalism, yoga, even.
Some of the things Satan uses may be neutral in themselves, but if they are not used to the greater glory of God, then there is the danger that they are being used by Satan
Done.
You have as much right to post as anyone and FR without a little rancor just wouldn't be fun anymore.
Welcome to Free Republic!
i know my Bible fairly well. and i’d like to hear the author give specifics where it’s Satanic.
- - -
The article relies upon conflating anti-Christianity with Satanism.
///
i’ve never actually read anything by Rand. i admit ignorance.
and i am still confused. is her entire philosophy Satanic simply because she is an atheist? again Oriana Fallaci was an atheist, who i admire for her courage in telling the truth about Islam, that most Christian leaders WON’T.
...and i would deplore Rand for wanting to destroy Christianity. but, the progressives and socialists CERTAINLY do. and Rand’s principles of personal responsibility and small government, seem a good weapon against them.
...perhaps i am simply missing something here, but i think Alinsky and Soros are are threat to our very existence. not Rand. if anyone is a Satanist, i think it is Alinsky. (didn’t he dedicate his book to satan?!?)
the goverment lawyer defending Obama’s health care in oral arguments before the appeals court, actually trashed Rand IN COURT.
and there is more info here:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/bloggers/2731883/posts
Leftists Using Ayn Rand to Smear Republicans, Conservatives
Amerisrael ^
“The use of dead people... is a sort of necromancy...”
What does this even mean?
We use the words and thoughts of “dead people” all the time for inspiration. How does one talk politics and avoid an awareness of “dead people”? I get your desire to discredit this topic, but that seems a strange basis in doing so.
Unless you were going for more sensationalism. The 1960’s pop ideology of “Satanism” was a short lived group of Adams Family goofballs. Don’t buy into the mythology they created.
Bang-on! I've read Nietzsche, and I've also read the Satanic Bible (once.) Le Vey just vulgarized Nietzsche's master-morality by claiming that morality is an impediment; he hooked that vulgarization up with the old Satanic lie that claims all moral people are phariasical.
Amazing how many people assume that a self-confessed Satanist would tell the honest truth about his system when selling it. Isn't there something about Satan being a liar?
You're right; Objectivism is incompatible with Christianity. Rand has more in common with the pagan philosophers, who all agreed that the purpose of morality was to act as a guide to live the good life. Even the Stoics and Cynics, which saw self-denial as a way of making oneself a better person, saw reward in self-denial: independence and self-respect.
For themselves, yes, but Satanism is a con game strategy. The primary method of their con is to impose a false morality on others.
Well said.
I disagree with Hobbes's political points - his elevation of the state to "mortal godhood" gives moral reasoning to kleptocracies.
I see the similarity between Marx and Hobbes myself. There's nothing in those snippets from Hobbes except take-it-or-leave-it claims attached to the kind of cynical motive-guessing that Marxists are fond of.
Hobbes had a motive of his own: he was eager to disparage any authority that could be held over the head of the King.
Wrong. See the Anclient Greeks.
Why a false one, since Le Vey said morality itself is detrimental? Logically, Satanists want saps because saps are easy to exploit. An emasculated Christianity fits the bill far better than a "false morality."
Good job. I was just getting ready to post this.
You will receive a lot of flack over posting any criticism of Rand from the small minority of rabid Libertarians on Free Republic.
Though they can be loud and obnoxious, ignore them. They do not represent the majority conservative Christian viewpoint here on FreeRepublic.
I think Jim Robinson, the owner of FreeRepublic, understands the shortcomings of the Ayn Rand camp followers and their party platform of fiscal conservatism at the cost of jettisoning social conservatism.
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.