Posted on 04/24/2011 10:07:56 PM PDT by fight_truth_decay
Ayn Rand is recapturing the hearts of American conservatives. The Cold War writer’s individualist philosophy is back in fashion among the Republican faithful. Her 1957 novel Atlas Shrugged has just been released as a movie and while critics call it slow and two-dimensional, Tea Partiers are queuing around the block to see it. Something about Rand’s take-no-prisoners prose strikes a chord with people exasperated by Obama’s tax-and-spend liberalism and desperate for a road-map to liberty.
But Ayn Rand is not a natural pin-up for American conservatives. Her individualism went beyond libertarianism. It was an exciting, revolutionary mix of greed, atheism, materialism and the Marquis de Sade. It comes as no surprise that the 1960s Church of Satan lifted most of its high-camp gospel from Ayn Rand.One of its acolytes notes with approval that, “Rand’s philosophy rejects as ethical accepting the sacrifice of another to one’s self … The Satanic view sees as ethical the reality of domination of the weak by the strong.”
The story of how Rand fell out with the libertarian economist Murray Rothbard is instructive of her anti-conservative temperament (many versions exist; this one is attributed to Rothbard’s protégé, Prof Harry Veryser). In 1958, Rothbard and his wife JoAnn Schumacher
(Excerpt) Read more at blogs.telegraph.co.uk ...
Man is inevitably born into the world naked and hungry, totally dependent upon his mother for the necessities of life.
I would term "good" anything that improves his condition from that of a newborn while causing few negative consequences to the condition of others.
The great failing of socialism is the bankrupt idea that economics is a "zero sum game"; that is, that there is a fixed amount of wealth in the world and "fairness" amounts to deciding who should have it.
Man's ability to reason makes it possible to create massive wealth and to improve the condition of billions of people.
Agriculture and domestication of animals is "good".
Vaccines and indoor plumbing are "good".
Antibiotics are "good".
Mass production of tools is "good".
Our ancestors would be baffled and amazed at what passes for poverty in the U.S. today. Americans just need a good wake-up call to drive home the point. I fear that that wake-up call is fast approaching.
Let me see. Political freedom: Blacks universally enjoyed freedom before 1860. Not. Religious Freedom: Blue Laws had no effect on the lives of all including non Christians. Not.
Sure the media simplifies the problem. But, Northern Ireland is a good example of the marrriage between the witch doctor and the brute as see sees it. Rev. Paisley and the British Government opposing The IRA and Catholic Church.
Sure the media simplifies the problem. But, Northern Ireland is a good example of the marrriage between the witch doctor and the brute as see sees it. Rev. Paisley and the British Government opposing The IRA and Catholic Church.
Well I’ll not bite on your reference to blacks...that’s old hat and nobody wants to dance to that tune anymore. Blue laws are also history so what’s your point...we live in the hear and now.
.... And though many of our freedoms are being taken under this administration we, as a people, are in no wise compared to Islam or Hinduism nor their cultures or countries of origin...and I pray to God that will never be so.
I'd have to agree. I check it pretty much every day...and they have the news out before ours does. But as with all things...perfection is not possible but they are a good read for the most part.
You think Rev. Al and Jesse are looking out for you? You think Louise cares about you? You think Holder cares about you. You think they are not colluding to put you in your place? Witch doctors and brutes, that's Rand's point. Don't be so obtuse.
This site is run by an Objectivist: Christianity Is Evil.
Yes. I find it odd that some people are suggesting Rand is a Christian's best ally. Don't you think it's absurd? A philosophy which characterizes the greatest acts of human self-sacrifice as a foolish vice while insisting that avarice is an enlightened virtue... well, one may as well call that satanic. Because that is the sort of thing we have come to expect from satanism: good is evil, evil is good, a reversal of vice and virture.
Here's something to read about Rand: Ayn Rand's Objectivism is the Antithesis of Christianity, American Self-Government, and Liberty
If you say so.
Some years ago my daughter was told by a Christian friend that she was going to hell. I forget the specific reason. But that is equivalent to saying that my daughter was evil.
If you think that the average Marxist is satisfied with just talk then I think you need to study history more. Neither Marxists nor Christians have a very good history at leaving non-Marxists or non-Christians alone.
The protagonists in the Fountainhead and Atlas just want to be left alone and hate to see good people helping the looters and moochers delay the fate that they deserve.
I was forced to read "Anthem" out loud for several weeks as a high school English class assignment, and my reaction to the novel was the way you describe "Dianetics". Her writing style was extremely grating and her characters were all one-dimensional people whose only purpose was to convey her message. The novel was very boring and predictable, no memorial scenes come to mind. Around page 3, I pretty much got the premise that there is no individualism in the future society she described and that the word "I" was forbidden, but Rand continued to beat the reader over the idea with this concept about five times every day, with her characters giving droning monologues referring to themselves as "we" over and over again.
Dystopian sci-fi novels about a oppressive totalitarian future society are a dime a dozen (and that was the case even in Rand's heyday back in the 40s!), and other writers have done a much better of conveying the same concept she had. Perhaps that's why everyone remembers Orwell's "Big Brother is Watching You" even if they haven't read 1984, but nobody knows about "Equality 7-2521" except hard-core Rand fans and people like me who were forced to read the book.
It's amusing that Rand's fans have accused me of being biased against her because she's an atheist, since I didn't discover her views on religion until years later, nor did I realize she had a rabid cult of worshipers who insist her books should be "requiring reading" (which in my case, it certainly was!) until years later. I judged Rand's writing abilities solely on the content of the book itself. Given what I read, I completely reject the idea that she was some kind of masterful storyteller and brilliant visionary that everyone should listen to.
Wanna read something really scary and sickening ? I just got around to M. Stanton Evans’s “Blacklisted By History” about Joe McCarthy (with an added scope of the degree to which our government, and that of the UK and Japan, was penetrated by Soviet agents from the 1930s onward who helped to direct policy and mislead top officials — whom in turn often protected them even after it was KNOWN their loyalties). Over 600 pages, I’m over half-finished. Interesting to see how the left operates (especially the Democrats) in exactly the same way today, and the epic-level demogoguery. McCarthy got the “Palin” treatment to the nth degree.
You sound like you have made some incredible discovery.
I completely reject the idea that she was some kind of masterful storyteller and brilliant visionary that everyone should listen to.
Rejecting her novels as crap doesn't mean you should reject objectivsm. As I said above, objectivism is not incompatible with faith, but it takes a great deal of introspection to integrate faith into an objectivist conceptual hierarchy. It's a lot more work than Ayn Rand or most of her followers were will to do. Atheism is nothing more than laziness: choosing to not believe because it is easy.
That's a decent definition. My main point was to show that goodness is a very complex concept. It can't be simplified into an emotive reaction, it can't be gained from authority (Dear Leader says it is good so it must be good), etc. Those paths lead to misery.
As you implied, goodness relies on a perception of the human condition (our own and others through empathy), the goodness of an action will become clear when the consequences including hidden consequences are considered. E.g., taking from the rich to help the poor is not good.
This article is so ridiculous, I wouldn’t even read it.
In your view then, Objectivists are statisfied with just talk, and they don't do anything. So, what do we need them for? Specifically, what use are they in the struggle against the islamification of the west?
Neither Marxists nor Christians have a very good history at leaving non-Marxists or non-Christians alone.
Ah, so Christians are the enemy. I see.
The protagonists in the Fountainhead and Atlas just want to be left alone and hate to see good people helping the looters and moochers delay the fate that they deserve.
What fate do you think Christians deserve?
From the First Church of Satan (FCOS) website:
The First Church of Satan does not recognize the existence of Satan as an actual being, but as a symbol representing materialism. The church emphasizes that the figure of Satan stands for an inner attitude, and it is never to be regarded as an object onto which human powers are projected in order to worship what is only human in an externalized form. In The Satanic Bible, Satanists are charged to Asay unto thine own heart, ‘I am my own redeemer.’ (Book IV, line 3.)
It is utterly impossible to find connections between Satanism and Objectivism.
Rand and Objectivism has been popular with satanists for a long time, and this has been known for a long time. The thread article is hardly the first to point this out. Satanists identify with Objectivism quite readily and derive inspiration from Rand's writings. A simple search with google can establish this. Satanists speak warmly of the virtues (is that a word they'd use?) of Rand and Objectivism, and recommend them. Those are sufficient causes for a normal person to be skeptical of Rand and her Objectivism.
Oh for crying out loud. I’m fully aware of who is concerned or not about the American people. One can certainly disagree with Rands stance yet see her points which agree with the conservative view. Admittedly she claimed to be an an athiest...that does not mean she checked her brain at the door of reason in the areas she otherwise addresses which have nothing to do with “witch doctors”.
Better we end this conversation...you have missed my point and not made yours clear by any means.
Sheesh...
Yes, excellent book, and Evans is 100% correct. Harry Dexter White was a COMMIE AGENT and was the #2 man at Treasury. McCarthy, though, was late. Many of these people had been removed or quietly resigned when McCarthy finally began to call them out. A few held on through the Truman administration.
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.