Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Lest we forget due the events of the past week, "Atlas Shrugged" failed because it was a terrible story, poorly written, in defense of an ideology only supported by the chronically immature.
I will say this. You haters with your shear idiocy and lack of anything reflecting a constructive argument and what it reduces you to is definatley more entertaininig than the movie. Immaturity? Look no further than what you just wrote.
Of course they're caricatures. All kinds of works of fiction use the people in them to fill certain arch types.
garunteed anyone a certain outcome.
In the framework of the artifical reality Rand created they're not doing ANYTHING wrong.
In fact, within the framework of the supended disbelief that every read must assume to get involved in any fiction, THEYRE HEROIC CHARACTERS.
Our objections aren't that the characters in the book are bad.
Our objections are to those of you who imagine that Rand's world in AS is descriptive of the world we live in.
Hell, if I lived in the fantasy world Rand created (one which I thoroughly enjoyed, I might add, when I read in the early 60s) I'd be trying to follow John Galt, too.
Such is the nature of FICTION.
And your objection is an objection to nothing. No supporter of Rand is suggesting that what she wrote is descriptive of how things are. They are descriptors of how things should be. The more I think about the more this seems like such a petty objection for the simple sake of being disagreeable. You're objection is what she writes about isn't real? NO SHIT SHERLOCK. No one EVER said it was. It is fictional social commentary about the persecution of societies producers. Rand clearly opposses that and fictional or not you STILL can't tell me why that oppositoin is misplaced.
I responded to the question "What are her heros doing wrong"
I added why I thought that people who see her book as a model (Like GREENSPAN did for example) for how the world ought to be are either idiots or liars.
In the framework of the artifical reality Rand created they're not doing ANYTHING wrong.
In fact, within the framework of the supended disbelief that every read must assume to get involved in any fiction, THEYRE HEROIC CHARACTERS.
Our objections aren't that the characters in the book are bad.
Our objections are to those of you who imagine that Rand's world in AS is descriptive of the world we live in.
Hell, if I lived in the fantasy world Rand created (one which I thoroughly enjoyed, I might add, when I read in the early 60s) I'd be trying to follow John Galt, too.
Such is the nature of FICTION.
And your objection is an objection to nothing. No supporter of Rand is suggesting that what she wrote is descriptive of how things are. They are descriptors of how things should be. The more I think about the more this seems like such a petty objection for the simple sake of being disagreeable. You're objection is what she writes about isn't real? NO SHIT SHERLOCK. No one EVER said it was. It is fictional social commentary about the persecution of societies producers. Rand clearly opposses that and fictional or not you STILL can't tell me why that oppositoin is misplaced.
You conservatives have no idea how fiction works. Seriously, read a fucking book.
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.
One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs.
Fake second birth certificate? Get with the times bro...
We need to go after the fake Bin Laden death.....where you been?
I see you are a great representation of Rands philosophy
If you believe that the ridiculously bad work that Obama flashed as real, you are the perfect useful idiot that populates the democrat party in such large numbers. I bet you would have a hard time with chads too.
Winner, winner Chicken Dinner
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.
One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs.
You're only three or four people late on that particular laughable attempt at a counter argument.
One has to find it interesting that you believe those that don't expect hand outs from people or don't obligate others to their well being are the ones ill equipped to handle the real world.
Is this what passes for critical thinking in your world?Of course they're caricatures. All kinds of works of fiction use the people in them to fill certain arch types. What is inherently wrong with that? Seriously, I'm still waiting for someone to tell me what the main 'heroes', Dagny, Hank, Galt, etc. are doing wrong. What is it you think they owed this fictional society? How did they wrong society at large through their actions?
In the framework of the artifical reality Rand created they're not doing ANYTHING wrong.
In fact, within the framework of the supended disbelief that every read must assume to get involved in any fiction, THEYRE HEROIC CHARACTERS.
Our objections aren't that the characters in the book are bad.
Our objections are to those of you who imagine that Rand's world in AS is descriptive of the world we live in.
Hell, if I lived in the fantasy world Rand created (one which I thoroughly enjoyed, I might add, when I read in the early 60s) I'd be trying to follow John Galt, too.
Such is the nature of FICTION.
Really??
Fine, if you're only talking about the self-contained world of the book. If you're trying to make a statement about the real world, however, you'd have to do better than basing it on caricatures.
That was a predictable response. Who ever said the book was based on anything going on in the real world? I ask again, what is WRONG with the heroes of the book? Or is it that you think their opposition is misrepresented?
If you're trying to present a philosophy which is applicable to the real world, but present it in a book in which isn't based on anything in the real world, why should anyone pay attention? Remember, the title of the thread says the move will "change the face of American politics". How can that happen, if it's not based on anything real? Another contradiction in Objectivism, IMO, we're supposed to believe we can make a real change in the world based on something unreal!!!
You people realize the libertopian heroine died suckin' up social handouts under the pseudonym Ann O'Conner, right?
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.
One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs.
That was a predictable response. Who ever said the book was based on anything going on in the real world? I ask again, what is WRONG with the heroes of the book? Or is it that you think their opposition is misrepresented?
If you're trying to present a philosophy which is applicable to the real world, but present it in a book in which isn't based on anything in the real world, why should anyone pay attention? Remember, the title of the thread says the move will "change the face of American politics". How can that happen, if it's not based on anything real? Another contradiction in Objectivism, IMO, we're supposed to believe we can make a real change in the world based on something unreal!!!
I think you are discounting the effect that literature can have on the public's perception.
Consider the change in public tolerance for slavery that resulted from the fiction UNCLE TOM'S CABIN.
"There are those who are witty and those who quote witty people."There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.
One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs.
You're only three or four people late on that particular laughable attempt at a counter argument.
One has to find it interesting that you believe those that don't expect hand outs from people or don't obligate others to their well being are the ones ill equipped to handle the real world.
So? Liberals grow their own personal wealth every day like they deserve them while railing against the rich.You people realize the libertopian heroine died suckin' up social handouts under the pseudonym Ann O'Conner, right?
There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged.
One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
The other, of course, involves orcs.
You're only three or four people late on that particular laughable attempt at a counter argument.
One has to find it interesting that you believe those that don't expect hand outs from people or don't obligate others to their well being are the ones ill equipped to handle the real world.
tissue, john?
You people realize the libertopian heroine died suckin' up social handouts under the pseudonym Ann O'Conner, right?
They don't care.
Their minds (such as they are) are made up.
While there are several organizations that apply regulations to businesses in the private sector, which is a good thing, they can't accomplish everything.
They can't actually FORCE a business to do something.
They also can't cover everything; in the end, you'll need some government regulations.
I was also speaking more of ethics regulations; I should have made myself clearer. Sorry about that.
Sounds pretty good to me.
There will always be people better suited to lead than others.
Sounds pretty anti-tax to me.
So because TWO people have been able to rise up through the system proves that it works? How about no... think of the millions that CAN'T.
I'm not talking about people rising from the middle class to the top, I'm talking about the people that are born into poverty.
Capitalism has stopped working, or at least, it has STARTED to stop working.
There are numerous articles on this on the web.
Did you know that in 2007 the top 1% of America owned ~43% of all the wealth...
Uhhh, so? The fact of the matter is that they are still heavily disadvantaged, with very little opportunity to make their situation better.
When did I say I was a socialist? All I am is someone who isn't an adult with the maturity level of a toddler.
el oh el
or read every single one of your posts
