Bashing Ayn Rand

[Cowman]

Ayn Rand was not a great woman.

 

[Sallow]

All indications are that Ho was a die-hard communist, so that claim is crap.

Of course it isn't.

That the problem with you folks. You view the rest of the world as one big evil blob.

Nixon sort of got it after a while. Hence his trip to China.

It is crap. See the post above. Ho was a die hard communist from his days studying in Paris.

Again.

You should try reading what you are disputing.

No one is stating that Minh wasn't a communist.

What the post stated, correctly, was that Vietnam wouldn't have become a Soviet or Chinese puppet state. History bears that out..since they've sought the support of America.

In any case, it wasn't any of our business what sort of government these folks wanted for themselves..so long as they weren't participating in genocide.

 

[Sallow]

Ayn Rand was not a great woman.

She wrote bad fiction people are using as their template for living.

Sorta like L. Ron Hubbard.

 

[Redfish]

Ayn Rand was not a great woman.

She wrote bad fiction people are using as their template for living.

Sorta like L. Ron Hubbard.

Bullshit. what she did was accurately predict where the country was going as govt continued to get larger and more intrusive.

Yes, Galt, Dagny Taggart, and Hank Weldon wanted to keep the fruits of their labor and innovation. How awful is that? Are they any different from Gates, Jobs, edison, Ford, Buffet, Streisand, Maher, and Trump?

The message of Rand, which is apparently over your head, is that government cannot make everyone equal, equal opportunity is guaranteed, equal results are not.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Ayn Rand was not a great woman.

She wrote bad fiction people are using as their template for living.

Sorta like L. Ron Hubbard.

Bullshit. what she did was accurately predict where the country was going as govt continued to get larger and more intrusive.

Yes, Galt, Dagny Taggart, and Hank Weldon wanted to keep the fruits of their labor and innovation. How awful is that? Are they any different from Gates, Jobs, edison, Ford, Buffet, Streisand, Maher, and Trump?

The message of Rand, which is apparently over your head, is that government cannot make everyone equal, equal opportunity is guaranteed, equal results are not.

No one ever that wasn’t the case.

The problem with Rand and her disciples is that they naively pursue a reactionary course designed to return America to a pre-Lochner period predicated on the fallacy of ‘liberty to contract’ and the anachronistic dogma of the ‘invisible hand.’

The modern American economy is far too large and complex for such simplistic thinking.

However unwittingly, libertarians, for the most part, advocate a regulatory policy – or the lack thereof – that affords property owners the ‘liberty’ to destroy the environment, endanger the safety of their workers, and jeopardize the health and well-being of consumers.

It’s far past the time for libertarians to grow up, abandon the Rand fantasy, and live in the real world – however unpleasant.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rand simply did not understand the concepts girding liberty and freedom.

 

[bripat9643]

Of course it isn't.

That the problem with you folks. You view the rest of the world as one big evil blob.

Nixon sort of got it after a while. Hence his trip to China.

It is crap. See the post above. Ho was a die hard communist from his days studying in Paris.

Again.

You should try reading what you are disputing.

No one is stating that Minh wasn't a communist.

What the post stated, correctly, was that Vietnam wouldn't have become a Soviet or Chinese puppet state. History bears that out..since they've sought the support of America.

In any case, it wasn't any of our business what sort of government these folks wanted for themselves..so long as they weren't participating in genocide.

You just got done claiming that the constitution he wrote was almost identical to the American constitution. That couldn't have been more wrong.

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat is the one who quotes ONLY from communist fronts, such as WHO, instead of a wide spectrum of sources.

Careful of bripats in false colors.

 

[Contumacious]

Rand simply did not understand the concepts girding liberty and freedom.

Comrade Starkiev, I bet you understand the concepts girding slavery and tyranny.

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Rand simply did not understand the concepts girding liberty and freedom.

Comrade Starkiev, I bet you understand the concepts girding slavery and tyranny.

Indeed I do, to make sure your type never enslaves the rest of us.

 

[bripat9643]

Rand simply did not understand the concepts girding liberty and freedom.

Comrade Starkiev, I bet you understand the concepts girding slavery and tyranny.

Indeed I do, to make sure your type never enslaves the rest of us.

You're the kind that volunteers to drop the Xyklon-B tablets into the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

 

[Eric Cartman]

Comrade Starkiev, I bet you understand the concepts girding slavery and tyranny.

Indeed I do, to make sure your type never enslaves the rest of us.

You're the kind that volunteers to drop the Xyklon-B tablets into the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

A tad extreme don't ya think?

 

[bripat9643]

Indeed I do, to make sure your type never enslaves the rest of us.

You're the kind that volunteers to drop the Xyklon-B tablets into the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

A tad extreme don't ya think?

Not a bit. Do you think before the war you could identify the ones who volunteered to drop the poison gas into the gas chambers? I guarantee you it was boot-licking drone exactly like Fakey. There are thousands of such people wandering around in your local shopping mall at this very moment.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Comrade Starkiev, I bet you understand the concepts girding slavery and tyranny.

Indeed I do, to make sure your type never enslaves the rest of us.

You're the kind that volunteers to drop the Xyklon-B tablets into the gas chamber at Auschwitz.

You are talking to yourself in the mirror again. The Rule of Law (our constitution) prevents want be fascists (like you) from opening death camps.

The American people are on to your types, bripat, and reject them.

 

[JakeStarkey]

"I guarantee you it was boot-licking drone exactly like" bripat that want to kill people who disagree with his loony political philosophies.

 

[jasonnfree]

Atlas Shrugged should have been a short story. It is by far the most repetitive drudgery ever written.

I would wager most of the alleged conservatives who fly her banner don't even realize she was a hardcore atheist objectivist, and that objectivism misses an understanding of human nature by a country mile.

You mean like liberals who have never read the bible? It's quite possible to agree with one's politics but disagree with their take on religion.

Ayn was correct --sorry you didn't like the way she expressed it.

Atlas shrugged and the bible have a lot in common. Both are fairy tales. Rand's superheroes don't exist in real life and neither do the ones in the bible.

 

[Erand7899]

She wrote bad fiction people are using as their template for living.

Sorta like L. Ron Hubbard.

Bullshit. what she did was accurately predict where the country was going as govt continued to get larger and more intrusive.

Yes, Galt, Dagny Taggart, and Hank Weldon wanted to keep the fruits of their labor and innovation. How awful is that? Are they any different from Gates, Jobs, edison, Ford, Buffet, Streisand, Maher, and Trump?

The message of Rand, which is apparently over your head, is that government cannot make everyone equal, equal opportunity is guaranteed, equal results are not.

No one ever that wasn’t the case.

The problem with Rand and her disciples is that they naively pursue a reactionary course designed to return America to a pre-Lochner period predicated on the fallacy of ‘liberty to contract’ and the anachronistic dogma of the ‘invisible hand.’

The modern American economy is far too large and complex for such simplistic thinking.

However unwittingly, libertarians, for the most part, advocate a regulatory policy – or the lack thereof – that affords property owners the ‘liberty’ to destroy the environment, endanger the safety of their workers, and jeopardize the health and well-being of consumers.

It’s far past the time for libertarians to grow up, abandon the Rand fantasy, and live in the real world – however unpleasant.

I don't think many libertarians are Rand fans. However, that does not preclude them from taking some lessons from Rand's writings. Even though her books are way too long, poorly writen, and her characters are unreal, she has found some nuggets of truth, and that is why her books sold, and why she is often quoted by people who love liberty more than they love security.

Government is like fire. Necessary and useful when confined in scope and size, but a terrible destroyer when loosened. The debates we have today are over the scope and size of the federal government, and where the dividing line exists between controlled and loosened.

Many of us believe that the federal government is very close to, or has already jumped the fire lines and is ripe for creating an inferno that could consume this nation. Others believe that the federal government is benign and compassionate, and would never attempt to bite the hand that feeds it. History has ample examples of how naive the latter opinion is.

Liberty dies when a sufficient number of citizens take it for granted, and ignore the threats to liberty that are always lurking in the shadow.

 

[Redfish]

Bullshit. what she did was accurately predict where the country was going as govt continued to get larger and more intrusive.

Yes, Galt, Dagny Taggart, and Hank Weldon wanted to keep the fruits of their labor and innovation. How awful is that? Are they any different from Gates, Jobs, edison, Ford, Buffet, Streisand, Maher, and Trump?

The message of Rand, which is apparently over your head, is that government cannot make everyone equal, equal opportunity is guaranteed, equal results are not.

No one ever that wasn’t the case.

The problem with Rand and her disciples is that they naively pursue a reactionary course designed to return America to a pre-Lochner period predicated on the fallacy of ‘liberty to contract’ and the anachronistic dogma of the ‘invisible hand.’

The modern American economy is far too large and complex for such simplistic thinking.

However unwittingly, libertarians, for the most part, advocate a regulatory policy – or the lack thereof – that affords property owners the ‘liberty’ to destroy the environment, endanger the safety of their workers, and jeopardize the health and well-being of consumers.

It’s far past the time for libertarians to grow up, abandon the Rand fantasy, and live in the real world – however unpleasant.

I don't think many libertarians are Rand fans. However, that does not preclude them from taking some lessons from Rand's writings. Even though her books are way too long, poorly writen, and her characters are unreal, she has found some nuggets of truth, and that is why her books sold, and why she is often quoted by people who love liberty more than they love security.

Government is like fire. Necessary and useful when confined in scope and size, but a terrible destroyer when loosened. The debates we have today are over the scope and size of the federal government, and where the dividing line exists between controlled and loosened.

Many of us believe that the federal government is very close to, or has already jumped the fire lines and is ripe for creating an inferno that could consume this nation. Others believe that the federal government is benign and compassionate, and would never attempt to bite the hand that feeds it. History has ample examples of how naive the latter opinion is.

Liberty dies when a sufficient number of citizens take it for granted, and ignore the threats to liberty that are always lurking in the shadow.

excellent post. full of truth.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Absolute stupidity from the so-called libertarians on this page.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

Ayn Rand accurately predicted where this country was going in Atlas Shrugged. She accurately showed how liberal governments destroy countries and economies.

Like her or hate her------she was right.

see my sig.

The politics of Objectivism are, in terms of their real-world application, fine, but they’re redundantly unoriginal, and the rest of Objectivism—its metaphysics, its epistemology and ethics—are the ravings of an irrational sociopath. Her ethics are especially ill-informed and depraved.

Her reading of American history and her understanding of its founding socio-political philosophy were deplorable, particularly with regard to the Founders' view of human nature. She actually believed they agreed with her on that score. But then it's hard to tell what she actually believed about the ideas of others at any given time in her writings. She was, after all, a pathological liar, incessantly attributing ideas to others never uttered or thought by them. That her politics were something akin to the classical liberalism of the Anglo-American tradition is purely accidental. We're talking about a women who couldn't make out the difference between the statist collectivism of Comtean altruism and Christian charity.

In other words, Rand is an utter waste of time. She added absolutely nothing to the political theory of laissez-faire and mangled natural and constitutional law. What exactly did she give us classical liberals that we didn’t already have and understand infinitely better than she ourselves?

Answer: Nothing. She was a blowhard, a liar and a vicious human being. Beyond the practical applications of her politics, brilliantly justified and expounded by many, many others long before she came along, Objectivism is a cult-like belief system for simpletons, a collection of the obvious, the mundane and the irrational.

The number of conservatives and libertarians who revere this woman, this contemptible fraud, is really quite amazing.

Objectivism: The Uninspired Religion of "Reason"
Objectivist Cult Member Says Composition Not Relevant to Science