Atlas Shrugged [Rand]

[velvet]

LOL!
You are taking it a bit to the extreme aren’t you?
I mean no one really would expect Babies to fend for themselves.

As much as I could get from the review Sehnsucht linked (really couldnt read that drivel, not even as a negative review about it, it's all the shit that makes me flip, however), for Rand a baby therefore is a despicable creature, because it is helpless and dependent. Just as is anyone despicable who doesnt step ruthlessly over others to get what one wants.

Luckily Randroids (good word creation there, LV) have an inbuilt die-out mechanism, they just dont reproduce. Which imho is good, there's really no need for these kinds of psychopaths.

[EQ Fighter]

As much as I could get from the review Sehnsucht linked (really couldnt read that drivel, not even as a negative review about it, it's all the shit that makes me flip, however), for Rand a baby therefore is a despicable creature, because it is helpless and dependent. Just as is anyone despicable who doesnt step ruthlessly over others to get what one wants.

Luckily Randroids (good word creation there, LV) have an inbuilt die-out mechanism, they just dont reproduce. Which imho is good, there's really no need for these kinds of psychopaths.

Well I cant say I’m an expert on Rand, but as far as the "Atlas Shrugged" Idea as I understand it is more or less a take on what happens when the producers of society dump the responsibility onto the none productive of society. IE the Welfare State.

And for the most part this seems to play in the real world pretty much that way. Where as "Government" is more or less a ceremonial crutch in the modern world, the Corporate Industry is the only real source of production. Without them the society dies or is defeated by outsiders.

Realistically though Babies, as I can see would more or less represent potential, to society. Dumping them would mean a dead society. I have not read any of Rands Views on babies though? So I cant validate what she thought about them.

On the other hand I think one issue we have here is an old one, and that is the way American's see economics vs the Way Europeans see it. So I think this could be part of the disagreement here.

[Sehnsucht]

Well I cant say I’m an expert on Rand, but as far as the "Atlas Shrugged" Idea as I understand it is more or less a take on what happens when the producers of society dump the responsibility onto the none productive of society. IE the Welfare State.

The welfare state can include health care and increase the quality of life for those not at the helm of a company where the money is. A healthier workforce makes a more productive and healthier society. The ill are often a temporary out of action resource and there is always a pool of unemployed in a capitalist society. If these oh so great 'producers of society' can not distribute work and money well enough, there is a need for state taxes in the modern world. Mainly I am talking about the ruling and management classes here.

And for the most part this seems to play in the real world pretty much that way. Where as "Government" is more or less a ceremonial crutch in the modern world, the Corporate Industry is the only real source of production. Without them the society dies or is defeated by outsiders.

Not necessarily, industry can be nationalised. And looking at the capitalist west now, the Chinese are catching up fast and the western lands filled with immigrants and migrant workers.

Realistically though Babies, as I can see would more or less represent potential, to society. Dumping them would mean a dead society. I have not read any of Rands Views on babies though? So I cant validate what she thought about them.

In that review it explains how babies are dependent on their parents at the beginning of life, and how this goes against Rand's delusional idea of individual greatness. Rand is basically an elitist of the worst kind. In Atlas Shrugged she ignores that people do not create great industries by themselves, and that others make a contribution. Babies are not present in the story as there is no way they would fit in with this ultra-individualistic world view.

On the other hand I think one issue we have here is an old one, and that is the way American's see economics vs the Way Europeans see it. So I think this could be part of the disagreement here.

No. The disagreement is that Ayn Rand is a delusional nutter. I don't see the western elite as truly great, but wolves in sheep's clothing.

[Sigyn]

I tend to believe in a "golden middle way". Too much authoritarianism and state-controlled economy isn't the right solution, but neither is complete individualism and "free market as religion" a good thing for any society. Rand clearly does have some good ideas (that the majority of people in a welfare state are useless, and depend on a few creative minds), but her ideology taken as a whole isn't something I agree with.

Realistically though Babies, as I can see would more or less represent potential, to society. Dumping them would mean a dead society. I have not read any of Rands Views on babies though? So I cant validate what she thought about them.

I suspect Rand's books don't feature babies or families, because that goes against her objectivist, libertarian, hyper-individualist outlook on life.

[Neophyte]

Rosenbaum's (i.e. Rand's) objective was to teach us that Jews have unalienable rights in our nations.

[Sigyn]

Rosenbaum's (i.e. Rand's) objective was to teach us that Jews have unalienable rights in our nations.

I read somewhere that Ayn Rand's hatred of collectivism was because of the Russian Revolution, which her family escaped from. Being from a wealthy Jewish upper-class family, she looked down upon the collective. Ironic, since Jews were also overrepresented among the Bolsheviks.

[Neophyte]

I read somewhere that Ayn Rand's hatred of collectivism was because of the Russian Revolution, which her family escaped from. Being from a wealthy Jewish upper-class family, she looked down upon the collective. Ironic, since Jews were also overrepresented among the Bolsheviks.

Or so she said. But remember that she, somehow, managed to get an exit visa from USSR and, unlike so many others, could leave the country legally. No Gulag for that little Jewish girl.

If you google Ayn Rand and Israel, you will see her come down on the predictable side. No surprises there.

[EQ Fighter]

I tend to believe in a "golden middle way". Too much authoritarianism and state-controlled economy isn't the right solution, but neither is complete individualism and "free market as religion" a good thing for any society.

I think it is less a Religion and more the fact that Human beings are naturally driven by their self interest. Sometimes those self interest have positive effects, and some times they don’t. I will assure you though the "State" has less control over the market than the Market has over the state.

Mexican Drug Lords have never had a problem with the "State" if the "State" gets out of hand they simply kill them off and replace them with more palatable individuals.

Rand clearly does have some good ideas (that the majority of people in a welfare state are useless, and depend on a few creative minds), but her ideology taken as a whole isn't something I agree with.

It is more like a few, criminal minds that have the motivation to dumb down the other 99% of the population so the real "Creative Minds" as you have it do not create a Revolution and remove them from their post.

I suspect Rand's books don't feature babies or families, because that goes against her objectivist, libertarian, hyper-individualist outlook on life.

I have only read a few of Rands Essays, and from those what I can say is her interpretation of "Government" is pretty much dead centre.

1) Human Beings are born greedy and selfish little bastards, form the time they are in the crib, to the day they are in the coffin. The only ones on the planet are worth a dam are the ones that through personal effort perfect themselves.

2) Guberment is now and always been a Racket to lift resources and support from the rest of the unsuspecting society for the "Common Good" which when translated means the Fat SOB's the run the Oligarchy.

3) Which ruffly means All forms of government are organized crime syndicates. The only real option is to create and maintain a dynamic system of checks and balances on power. And for those in power that cant understand the above provide for them a clear one way path to a dirt nap.

[EQ Fighter]

Luckily Randroids (good word creation there, LV) have an inbuilt die-out mechanism, they just dont reproduce. Which imho is good, there's really no need for these kinds of psychopaths.

Ok maybe I missed something here.

How is Rands writings connected with "Dieing Out" or have a built in die-out mechanism?

[Sehnsucht]

I think it is less a Religion and more the fact that Human beings are naturally driven by their self interest. Sometimes those self interest have positive effects, and some times they don’t. I will assure you though the "State" has less control over the market than the Market has over the state.

Surely the Free Market should be left to do what it likes! Problem solved! Humans are driven by their self interest? Surely the collective should be part of their interest or something is terribly wrong with society.

Mexican Drug Lords have never had a problem with the "State" if the "State" gets out of hand they simply kill them off and replace them with more palatable individuals.

A bit like the 'great men' who hold the money and power. Our corrupt elites.

It is more like a few, criminal minds that have the motivation to dumb down the other 99% of the population so the real "Creative Minds" as you have it do not create a Revolution and remove them from their post.

Woah, I sort of agree with you on something! And a lot of the 'useless' people are on welfare due to a broken society and system. It is easier to tar all the unemployed and ill with the lazy, useless and scum than fix any problems.

1) Human Beings are born greedy and selfish little bastards, form the time they are in the crib, to the day they are in the coffin. The only ones on the planet are worth a dam are the ones that through personal effort perfect themselves.

2) Guberment is now and always been a Racket to lift resources and support from the rest of the unsuspecting society for the "Common Good" which when translated means the Fat SOB's the run the Oligarchy.

3) Which ruffly means All forms of government are organized crime syndicates. The only real option is to create and maintain a dynamic system of checks and balances on power. And for those in power that cant understand the above provide for them a clear one way path to a dirt nap.

1) Not true. And Western society and 'values' reinforce selfish behavior and attitudes.

2) And Libertarianism will solve this? Seems to me like it would reinforce and strengthen it.

3) Thomas Sankara's government was pretty good, despite it's flaws, until his French supported murder. Although I know he is a Marxist which might make him the route of all evil or something around here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_...and_popularity