No.67555
Is Ayn Rand worth reading or was she an edgelady?
I know she ended up using social security and Medicare towards the end of her life.
No.67558
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>67555
Her stance on individualism is pretty cool. Although not a lot people can appeal to her, due to their understanding of subjective valuing.
No.67560
>>67555
She doesn't deserve the shit she got. Not my favorite, but she's a decent philosopher, and no doubt one of the most important libertarians. Understood better than most libertarians what a heroic and noble death was. In my experience, she becomes more valuable as you discover parallels to other philosophers.
No.67602
I think she had some interesting points, but between the libertarian-objectivist schism and her objectively awful writing, you won't hear a lot about her here.
No.67605
>>67555
She has good arguments and makes good points, but her writing sucks. You won't know for sure until you read her.
No.67606
>>67560
Most of the critique against her comes from people who know nothing about her and haven't read anything by her.
No.67642
>>67606
This. Most critics of Rand have little actual skill and are just looking for an easy and uncontroversial target.
No.67710
Join the Atlas Shrugged reading group:
>>67090
>>67555
>Is Ayn Rand worth reading
yes
> or was she an edgelady?
no
>I know she ended up using social security and Medicare towards the end of her life
There's nothing wrong with that if you've paid into the system and need the money or just want the scales evened before you drop dead.
>>67602
>the libertarian-objectivist schism
Objectivism literally isn't libertarianism. There's your "Schism".
> and her objectively awful writing
nice meme
>>67605
> but her writing sucks. You won't know for sure until you read her.
nice meme
No.67712
>>67710
>>Is Ayn Rand worth reading
>yes
>> or was she an edgelady?
>no
Replying "yes" to the former implies "no" to the latter you illiterate idiot.
No.67713
She was a retard and only got famous because of her stupid trash was used as Cold War propaganda.
No.67714
>>67712
>illiterate idiot
>>67713
> stupid trash
>Cold War propaganda.
Oh boy, all my arguments have been beaten to death!
Very reason! Much argument!
No.67716
>>67714
>Very reason! Much argument!
Disgusting.
I wasn't even talking about Ayn Rand, I was talking about you, and then you came and proved yourself to be retard I thought you were.
No.67751
>>67716
It's funny, I have the namefag filtered so I didn't even know he was lurking until you pointed out his terrible Reddit memes. It's like Jaws lurking in the ocean and all you can see is that little gay Reddit mascot's antenna.
No.67791
literally a degenerate polygamous hypocrite and a welfare queen. this is what lolberts and ancaps fucking worship. a giant disaster of a human being
No.67793
>>67791
To be fair, she only collected $11,002 while making a steady income from book royalties. It looks like Rand's attorney pressured her into it.
http://www.snopes.com/ayn-rand-social-security/
No.67835
>>67791
>this is what lolberts and ancaps fucking worship.
>ancaps
>worshipping Rand
Wew lad
No.67837
>>67791
>have hundreds of thousands of dollars stolen from you
>thief says you can have a little bit back
>take thief up on offer and receive a fraction of what was stolen
You can be against the original theft of your wealth while collecting what little back you can.
Also >>67835, Rand wasn't even a minarchist in her views of how big government should be.
No.67842
>>67837
>Rand wasn't even a minarchist in her views of how big government should be.
I'd classify her as a minarchist. She supported courts, police and a military, but didn't even want them to be supported by taxes. Unless your definition is really narrow, I don't see how she cannot qualify as a minarchist.
No.67843
Even though I found Atlas Shrugged interesting on the first read, it wore of after a few weeks.
The book was thought-provoking and persuasive at first glance, but in the end her fictional world is quite unrealistic, knocking over the foundation of her arguments. It made me think for a few weeks before I realised the trick she had played on me, so I would say; read Ayen Rand, but do not buy into everything she claims.
No.67844
Also: Watch the Atlas Shrugged film for a taste. It is pretty close to the book: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged_(film_series)
No.67846
>>67843
Funny, you're the opposite of me. I hated the book when I first read it, but eventually, it dawned on me that it was quite good in parts. Even now, I still have epiphanies where I realize just how right she was on some things. For example, she really got that being free sometimes means choosing death over life.
Not to say I like the book particularly. She has to compete with the likes of Mises, Hoppe, Rothbard, Hayek, and Kuehnelt-Leddihn, after all. Her defense of free market economics always seemed dogmatic, how her main characters were whoring around was just ridiculous, and she sounded rabid at the best of times.
>>67844
I found the first film okay, although it left out many of the best scenes. I was so looking forward to
No.67847
>>67846
Got interrupted and then noticed I already sent this unfinished post, I'll talk about the films later.
No.67848
>>67555
I highly recommend reading her book "Capitalism, the unknown ideal" (CTUI) in conjunction with Atlas Shrugged if you want to get a thorough understanding of her.
CTUI can be thought of a nonfiction explanation of free market capitalism, and as a footnote to Atlas Shrugged. For those who had trouble reading through Atlas Shrugged you should defiantly give Capitalism, the Unkown Ideal a try.
Also if you've ever played or heard of the game Bioshock 1&2 it explores the ideas of free market capitalism and objectivism.
Here are some videos on the topic
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=yKf4MtZ4RQA
Second video goes more in depth to the philosophy of objectivism specifically but has major spoilers to the game:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=N4XO28_WaIE
No.67849
>>67848
>Strawmanshock
Does it come with a supplementary reading guide?
No.67851
>>67842
She really wasn't tho. All it takes is to scare her with the red menace and she supports any amount of military spending on behalf of the citizens. Ayn "There Is No Such Thing As The Military Industrial Complex" Rand was all over Reagan's cock back then.
No.67852
>>67849
>strawmenshock
Not sure why you're calling it a strawman. It does explore the ideas in depth.
If you don't want to play the game, and just aren't a fan of survivial horror FPS you can always check the links I put in the first comment, or there actually is a Bioshock book called Bioshock: Rapture by Joh Shirley.
No.67854
>>67837
>Rand wasn't even a minarchist in her views of how big government should be.
wrong
>>67843
A lot of statements, no proof.
>>67844
> Watch the Atlas Shrugged film
no, it sucks.
>for a taste. It is pretty close to the book
nope.
>>67848
>Also if you've ever played or heard of the game Bioshock 1&2 it explores the ideas of free market capitalism and objectivism.
wrong, Bioshck isn't objectivist.
https://objectivismforintellectuals.wordpress.com/2016/11/23/what-bioshock-gets-wrong-about-ayn-rands-objectivism/
>>67851
> She really wasn't tho. All it takes is to scare her with the red menace and she supports any amount of military spending on behalf of the citizens. Ayn "There Is No Such Thing As The Military Industrial Complex" Rand was all over Reagan's cock back then.
all wrong
>>67852
> It does explore the ideas in depth.
No, it doesn't.
No.67870
She writes a good book. I originally thought Atlas Shrugged was going to be kind of a slog, given it's huge length and, given my lack of interest in business and the like, stodgy topic. But holy fucking shit. It moves lightning fast. New characters are constantly being introduced, massive plot twists unleashing every 10 seconds, huge overarching mystery which isn't explicitly explored in the first half of the book but you can see it going on. Great moments of fridge logic making you think "oh wait shit". I think she has some good points.
No.67871
>>67848
Bioshock is fucking retarded. It's a massive misrepresentation of any kind of libertarianism by your usual lefty video game designer. I wouldn't look to the guy who made that for a fair representation of any ideology.
No.67872
having read some of her novels but not experiencing her otherwise, I would say she is literally the opposite of edgy
is she worth reading is another question, I enjoyed the fountainhead but couldnt finish atlas shrugged for example.
No.67876
>>67872
A good chunk of Atlas Shrugged is her ideal of romance, what a proper man/woman is, and that was pretty damn boring for a lot of people who couldn't care any less. You could skip all the way to Dagny's discovery of Mulligan's Valley and start from there.
No.67877
>>67854
>all wrong
"There is a special reason why you, the future leaders of the United States Army, need to be philosophically armed today. You are the target of a special attack by the Kantian-Hegelian-collectivist establishment that dominates our cultural institutions at present. You are the army of the last semi-free country left on Earth, yet you are accused of being a tool of imperialism-and "imperialism" is the name given to the foreign policy of this country, which has never engaged in military conquest and has never profited from the two world wars, which she did not initiate, but entered and won. (It was, incidentally, a foolishly overgenerous policy, which made this country waste her wealth on helping both her allies and her former enemies.) Something called "the military-industrial complex"-which is a myth or worse- is being blamed for all of this country troubles. Bloody college hoodlums scream demands that R.O.T.C. units be banned from college campuses. Our defense budget is being attacked, denounced and undercut by people who claim that financial priority should be given to ecological rose gardens and to classes in esthetic self-expression for the residents of the slums." - p19 Philosophy: Who Needs It
Try with something more than a "nuh uh" this time.
No.67883
Funny how people mention Bioshock. That game single handedly killed libertarianism on 4chan /b/ back in 2007.
No.67890
>>67883
>That game single handedly killed libertarianism on 4chan /b/ back in 2007.
Care to explain?
No.67904
>>67890
It made people think which is the antidote to the libertarian mental illness.
No.67906
>>67904
>It made people ENLIGHTENED
No.67907
>>67883
you mean Objectivism.
No.67911
>>67877
nuh uh
That's from the first chapter, which states that this is a transcript of her address given to the graduating class of the United States Military Academy at West Point.
I don't think anyone had any solid arguments for that at the time - you wouldn't denounce Bush's muslim ban a day after 9/11, would you? But the long-term consequences need time to be analyzed concretely.
And even if she's wrong about her facts, Objectivism doesn't support a military industrial complex.
No.67936
>>67911
What you just said
>Objectivism doesn't support a military industrial complex
what Ayn Rand actually wrote
>Something called "the military-industrial complex"-which is a myth or worse- is being blamed for all of this country troubles.
you can't deny somethings existence but at the same time claim to not support it, so either you can't read and don't really know anything about her or you deliberately tried to ignore her denial of the existence of the "the military-industrial complex" to support your own headcannon of Objectivism.
No.67942
>>67936
Denying something doesn't equal supporting it.
Protip: Every view of Ayn Rand =/= Objectivism. Objectivism is a philosophy. Although it is her philosophy, her views are based on the information available to her. It is easy to say she was wrong about it right now, but what matters is that her base for reasoning about the problem was correct. Had she been alive today, she would not support it.
No.67959
>>67890
There used to be a libertarian bent. Rand, Ellis (American Psycho), Hunter S Thompson, and Vonnegut works with libertarian themes got discussed. Bioshock came out, then the conversation petered out. Perhaps instead of imagining a world where you could do what the fuck you wanted, they saw a bleak underwater dystopia.
No.67984
>>67942
>Denying something doesn't equal supporting it.
God doesn't exist but I think sodomy is a sin and everything else said in the bible is true.
No.67998
>>67942
What is important and what I am trying to get across is that her base of reasoning, her premises, are wrong and she would still be wrong.
She had no objective evaluation of the USSR's military strength. She had no coherent limit on what is or is not permissible under war time conditions when property all of a sudden stops being sacred, and "We" are all collectively entered into a war by our holy elected representatives who have found an easy loophole to the limitations imposed on them. It is neither Objective, nor Individualist. It doesn't undermine her entire philosophy because she's contradicting it. A coercive monopoly on violence is the seed that will turn any and every such "Minarchy" into a bloated State and she supported it explicitly. It's hardly minimal when it overreaches everything else you do.
No.68020
>>67984
>God doesn't exist but I think sodomy is a sin and everything else said in the bible is true.
that's pretty stupid tbh
>>67998
Like I said, her context for analyzing the problem is probably different. If she was alive right now, shw would not support it.
No.68034
>>68020
See how supporting the tenets of something but rejecting the very authority/source that tenet was derived from is retarded?
No.68036
>>67936
What you're stating:
Person A doesn't believe the holocaust ever happened.
Therefor Person A is a Nazi
The reality:
Person A doesn't believe the holocaust ever happened
Person A also hates fucking nazis. She's actually some brand of Green Anarchist, she just doesn't think the holocaust happened.
No.74870
No.74872
No.74879
>>67555
I didn't actually read her books yet but I just can't fucking trust women to educate me on something, especially not Jewish women.
No.74882
No.74888
>>74879
Don't hide your power level.
No.74889
>>74888 (checked)
And you stop hiding yours Hitler-kun
No.80973
its pretty good
…if you are 12 or 14
No.80974
>>67847
>I'll talk about the films later
No.81016
>>67791
And yet, people will remember her and forget about you.
No.81026
Personally I'm not a huge fan of her work but if you want to start reading her stuff I'd recommend starting with We the Living, its only like 200-300 pages and compared to her other work it's way easier to get into. Takes place in the Soviet Union in the 1920's with a noble woman returning to her city after the civil war.
>>67560
Once I read on some forum about a guy claiming that Objectivism was "scientifically disproven" and when asked he just gave me links to some working papers about happiness and whatever.
>>67870
This is a joke, right?
No.87939