Perhaps the rightwing wouldn’t be so extreme if Ayn Rand never existed

[Billy000]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

 

[impuretrash]

The American right wouldn't seem so extreme if you, yourself weren't an extremist.

 

[CWayne]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Do you understand that you are arguing that some must be slaves so that others can be elite?

After all, a collectivist is a slave to the elite, while an individual is a slave to only his or her desires.

 

[Mac1958]

I think it's more about daily submersion in talk radio, with its pseudo - psycho - bizarro libertarian preaching mixed with a comical defense of big spending.

You can't blame them for being so mal-informed, really.
.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

American Progressives hate EVERYTHING about America so STFU

 

[theHawk]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Would the left be as extreme as they are if Karl Marx never existed?

 

[initforme]

Rand...meh....out there. But no different from the extreme left....out there. The rest of us gravitate towards the middle.

 

[impuretrash]

Rand...meh....out there. But no different from the extreme left....out there. The rest of us gravitate towards the middle.

The left dictates where the middle is. They drag you fence sitters along behind.

 

[Billy000]

The American right wouldn't seem so extreme if you, yourself weren't an extremist.

I’m a lefty through and through, but there are a few ideas on Bernie’s platform I agree with.

 

[Gdjjr]

Ayn Rand seems to bother some people- I've never read her books, but I've seen some quotes- personally, I think anyone who worships at the alter of a political Party is a stooge- it's said that politicians see citizens in two classes- tools and enemies.
The acolytes of both major Party's serve their roles well- your checks are in the mail, I'm sure.

 

[Billy000]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Would the left be as extreme as they are if Karl Marx never existed?

Only republicans even bring that guy up. I am not a marxist and never have been. What I wrote here should give you that impression. The lack nuance you people think with is ridiculous.

 

[Billy000]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

American Progressives hate EVERYTHING about America so STFU

Lol typical lame ass emotional response lacking any substance. That’s a republican for you.

 

[JGalt]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Who is Ayn Rand? Can't say I've ever seen any of her pictures.

Oh well. Al I can say is even without seeing any of her movies, I'd still hate you f*ck*rs as much as I do now.

 

[Gdjjr]

The American right wouldn't seem so extreme if you, yourself weren't an extremist.

I’m a lefty through and through, but there are a few ideas on Bernie’s platform I agree with.

Nothing is free- in spite of what a politician tells you.

 

[impuretrash]

The American right wouldn't seem so extreme if you, yourself weren't an extremist.

I’m a lefty through and through, but there are a few ideas on Bernie’s platform I agree with.

Yeah, I know. You're a hardcore far left weirdo. That's why the GOP's passive attempts to slow down your comrades idea of "progress" seems like extremism to you.

 

[JustAGuy1]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Perhaps the Leftwing wouldn't be so extreme if Stalin hadn't existed.

 

[Gdjjr]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Would the left be as extreme as they are if Karl Marx never existed?

Only republicans even bring that guy up. I am not a marxist and never have been. What I wrote here should give you that impression. The lack nuance you people think with is ridiculous.

Ayn Rand was a woman-

 

[impuretrash]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Perhaps the Leftwing wouldn't be so extreme if Stalin hadn't existed.

Stalin would roll over in his grave if he saw what Billy and his ilk were up to. No lie.

 

[theHawk]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Would the left be as extreme as they are if Karl Marx never existed?

Only republicans even bring that guy up. I am not a marxist and never have been. What I wrote here should give you that impression. The lack nuance you people think with is ridiculous.

Riiiight.....you leftwingers never want to be associated with Marx, and never call yourselves Marxists, yet you champion the Marxist cause.

 

[miketx]

Rand was a pretentious, pseudo-intellectual hypocrite.

The problem with philosophers like her was their extremism and black and white values. The idea of rejecting any form of collectivism is ridiculous and impossible to live one’s life by. Rand, specifically, accepted Medicare which ran completely counter to the values she spewed. It’s impossible to live one’s life on a purely individual basis. Society could not function without a degree of collectivism.

“Degree” is a keyword here. What many republicans fail to understand is that there must be an inevitable middle ground between individualism and collectivism in order for civilization to exist. Obviously, a degree of individual freedom is critical to human happiness, but that doesn’t mean one must reject collective values like socialism. Hell, America has embraced socialism since the founding. Paying taxes for services one benefits from has always been a socialist idea. Just because you support our defense budget, our military, public education for kids, Social Security, etc does not mean these aren’t socialist principles. The problem is that republicans don’t really understand what socialism actually means. They think socialism is all about not having job and living off welfare and capitalism being a mutually exclusive idea. Granted those ideas are socialist in nature, but it doesn’t mean that is some catch-all definition or that American progressives support those ideas.

This is worth repeating: while there are some few exceptions, American progressives by and large don’t want to abolish the private market nor do we want everyone being unemployed and living off the dole. We also don’t want everyone making the same wage regardless of the work. Obviously wealthy people serve a vital purpose to our economy - they just need strict limitations that currently aren’t in place. The ideology is quite nuanced, but republicans like to pretend otherwise.

Perhaps you wouldn't be sch a liar had you been aborted.