How Is Ayn Rand Still A Thing?

[PredFan]

Why is she still a thing?
My guess us that in the left's never ending quest to distract Americans from the failure that is Barack Hussein Obama, you guys keep bringing her up.

At least two of your upcoming Republican candidates for president are slavish devotees to her weird views.

So how is she not relevant?

IF they are fans, do they bring her up as much as you do?

Who said she wasn't relevant? You asked a question, I answered it.

I didn't ask a question. Try to pay attention between spews.

Of course they won't bring her up. While she is their guiding ideological light, they know that the rest of the country thinks she's batshit crazy. They don't want to highlight that while pushing her agenda of selfishness.

Yes you did ask a question. Look at your thread title dummy.

OK.

She's not a thing.

Is that because she's been discredited?

You tell me. This is your psychotic rant.

 

[ricechickie]

When your house catches fire, who do you call?

Ayn Rand called the lowest bidder for the job.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

 

[ricechickie]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

 

[hipeter924]

To be fair, Ayn Rand's academic pieces are better than her novels. If you are to read her books though, Anthem is better than Atlas Shrugged, if you want to try and understand her philosophy without reading a tome.

Also:

 

[ricechickie]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

 

[ricechickie]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Hard to believe there are still people who take Ayn Rand seriously

Hard to believe there were people who took her seriously when she was alive.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

I am a libertarian and I have never read Ayn Rand. She was a plagiarist who constantly derided libertarians for "stealing" her ideas and giving her no credit. She may have been a general supporter of free markets, which is great, but she was no friend to libertarians or libertarian ideas. Especially when she essentially supported genocide against Palestinians because they weren't "civilized" like the Israelis.

So why is she "still a thing?" She's a useful political tool for Democrats to use against Republicans. That's why she's still a thing.

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

 

[ricechickie]

Well, perhaps you should read her before commenting. She was an absolute supporter of free markets.

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

Yes, the most limited role imaginable. Defense and law enforcement and due process.

And she probably wasn't all that worried about due process. I'm betting she didn't care if poor people had lawyers in court.

Again, I'm thinking she didn't mind roads being handled by the free market.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

You two never read the book did ya'?

"Atlas Shrugged".

Those of us who have read it lament the time wasted.

It's inane tripe, devoid of originality, Nietzsche Lite for Americans.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

One cannot be an absolute supporter of free markets and support the existence of the state. Therefore, she was only a general supporter of free markets.

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

Yes, the most limited role imaginable. Defense and law enforcement and due process.

And she probably wasn't all that worried about due process. I'm betting she didn't care if poor people had lawyers in court.

Again, I'm thinking she didn't mind roads being handled by the free market.

A limited role is still a role, and thus implies that she did not support the free market absolutely.

 

[ricechickie]

Could you explain that?

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

Yes, the most limited role imaginable. Defense and law enforcement and due process.

And she probably wasn't all that worried about due process. I'm betting she didn't care if poor people had lawyers in court.

Again, I'm thinking she didn't mind roads being handled by the free market.

A limited role is still a role, and thus implies that she did not support the free market absolutely.

So, do libertarians see a role for the government?

 

[konradv]

Brilliant! Take a good look at your role model, Libertarians and misguided conservatives. Pro-choice, anti-Reagan, anti-religion, anti-native Americans, pro-selfishness...you all picked a winner to emulate.

What a dangerously nazi-style crock of left wing, un-American, democrat socialist propaganda. And it isn't even clever. Just chopped up, out of context propaganda. You lefties must be feeling mighty threatened by the all American concept of individualism and intellectual property as opposed to your sheeple collective socialistic herd think.
Creepy idiocy of the left. Only the mindless vote democrat these days.

Look up False Dilemma.

List of fallacies - Wikipedia the free encyclopedia

Saying Rand is a screw ball doesn't automatically mean anyone is threatened by individualism. Nice try but, as you can see, Democrats aren't as mindless as you think. You're the one touting an "ism", usually the signature feature of the mindless.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

An absolute supporter of free markets would see defense, roads, etc.. provided by the free market, as opposed to being provided by the state. Ayn Rand did not support this, thus she is not an absolute supporter of free markets.

Defense, maybe. That is a common need for everyone in the country. I'm not sure she supported the government building roads.

What makes you think so?

Regardless, Ayn Rand was not an anarchist, which assumes that she saw a role for the state.

Yes, the most limited role imaginable. Defense and law enforcement and due process.

And she probably wasn't all that worried about due process. I'm betting she didn't care if poor people had lawyers in court.

Again, I'm thinking she didn't mind roads being handled by the free market.

A limited role is still a role, and thus implies that she did not support the free market absolutely.

So, do libertarians see a role for the government?

Some do, some don't.

 

[Dot Com]

If you're a stoned college freshmen "Atlas Shrugged" is a GREAT read!

you mean a college Republican. Its req'd reading for them. Ask Paul Ryan

 

[konradv]

...but on the whole, her philosophy would lead to anarchy since just about any action by government can be perceived as a loss of freedom by someone.

Wrong. Objectivism, just like it's political cousin libertarianism, does not see all government action as wrong. In fact, quite the opposite. We all understand that someone infringing on the rights of another should be punished by government. You steal, you murder, you should go to jail. That's HARDLY anarchy.

Sorry, you don't get to make shit up.

True most libertarians aren't anarchists, but they never seem to be able to explain how a "principle of non-aggression" by government doesn't dissolve into anarchy. Doesn't one have to be aggressive to catch murderers or shirkers of the taxes any government must levy to exist?

 

[konradv]

If you're a stoned college freshmen "Atlas Shrugged" is a GREAT read!

you mean a college Republican. Its req'd reading for them. Ask Paul Ryan

It's creepy. It's like he was looking over my shoulder. BUY YOUR OWN DAMN BOOK!