Ayn Rand destroys Socialist philosophy

Actually I do... Nobody over 17 takes Ayn Rand seriously.

 

Can you point me toward such a conversation? I'd be interested to see how you shut up an Ayn Rand groupie without having read anything of what she wrote. Personally, while I'm a fan, I'm not a groupie, I can see where she made some errors, so if you attack on that basis, it won't affect me much. I'm also not a Rand expert, so if you attack on a specific subject matter, I may or may not be able to give you an answer in keeping with Objectivist philosophy.

Still reading the Fromm article... interesting that he says the contradiction between the command, "Don't be selfish," and the requirement to be selfish to make capitalism work has resulted in people having mental breakdowns. I see from Wikipedia that Fromm veered toward Marxism in later life.

 

I already debunked that, since I'm well over 17 and I take Ayn Rand seriously. Here's a list of philosophers who do as well:

Harry Binswanger, Allan Gotthelf, Stephen Hicks, John Hospers, David Kelley, Tibor Machan, Douglas Rasmussen.

Here's a Wikipedia list of people, all of them over 17, who count Ayn Rand among their most important influences: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_people_influenced_by_Ayn_Rand

So stop lying already.

 

Well, since you have yet to post even on thing that Sowell actually said, and instead dismissed the one I mentioned without even addressing it, I have no reason to take you seriously,.'

My point about Rand's obsession and her world view, is that it was backward looking,even at the time she was writing. Attributing the decline of civilization to managerial atrophy in legacy industries is true as far as it goes. However, it also ignores changing economies, changing technologies, and emerging industries, all of which Rand studiously ignored.

 

And yet, she is right. We are losing our liberty, the government is printing money it doesn't have, creating an inflation that is taxing the middle class out of existence. Tyranny grows stronger and larger, while racism, tribalism, and collectivism are becoming more violent. Furthermore, in any government policy that is enacted, the question is never will it violate an individual's right, its always, how many will be helped. So criticize away, I will stick with Miss Rand's final arbitrator of disagreements, reality, and eventually we will see who was right, the Objectivist and their defense of liberty and individual rights through the use of intellectual argument, or the progressives and their promotion of the common good and their tactic of gang warfare.

 

And Karl Marx was a closet capitalist.

Sowell is very much alive, thank you very much.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Sowell
https://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/

Here's the latest article from Sowell, debunk it for us, please: https://townhall.com/columnists/thomassowell/2017/05/01/tax-cuts-for-the-rich-n2320748 Show us all just what a genius you are.

 

Quite wrong many do and unfortunately for you she is very influential

 

Famous only amongst American right-wing weirdoes and their hangers-on elsewhere, in my view. People who study literature have never heard of her, rightly.

 

When I read some American weirdoes ranting, I had a look. Total crap, published only for the nutty politics!

 

It always amazes me how many brilliant writers there are that never put anything down on paper and sell. Because you would think that if Atlas Shrugged, written by a horrible, unbelievable mediocre, inept hack writer like Ayn Rand could be chosen by Americans as the number 2 influential book read in a Library of Congress Survey, or have Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead finish 1 and 2 in a book of the month club survey, that they, her critics, could triple her sales and become some of biggest and richest celebrity writers America has ever had. But here they are, like me, posting for free, on a blog.

 

Amen brother, amen.

 

They most certainly have and her circulation and sales numbers prove you wrong.

She is in fact vastly famous and wildly popular.

Clearly you never read anything she wrote and have only hyperbole

 

Not out in the civilised world she's not. Ask 'em to let you out to check!

 

Now you do. I'm 51, have a J.D., and I take Ayn Rand very seriously.

Some people never grow up

So you would have preferred that she keep her mouth shut about the evils of statism and socialist and communist policies because she a) benefitted from coming to the US and b) benefitted from our generous old-age funds?

Yes. She was a total hypocrite. Born rich and pissed that the commies took her inheritance (that she did nothing to earn) away


So you would have preferred it if she had stuck to her principles and refused Social Security and Medicare and died

Yes. See above

 

Yes especially and overwhelmingly in the civilized world once again I have some inconvenient facts proving you wrong.

Her circulation numbers are HUGE. Whether you like what she wrote or not those numbers prove you dead wrong uninformed and silly about her popularity.

 

There is no hypocrisy you have demonstrated in her acceptance of SS as has been decisively proven.

In order to establish such hypocrisy you have to pie and ignore the fact that she was reclaiming that which was stolen from her and that willful ignorance destroys your premise.

She left Russia long before the death of her father would have allowed her to receive that inheritance so your spin on that is also massive ignorance.

She was rightfully angry that her father' property was stolen and nothing more.

She did stick to her principles visa vi social security and medicare.

Once again it is not a violation of her principles to take back some of what was forcibly taken from her.

This is true for anyone who opposes such entitlements. William Buckley for example received criticism for doing the same thing. You may hate or disagree with much of what Buckley said but an accusation of hypocrisy on him for this reason is stupid and dishonest.

It is not hypocrisy to oppose government theft and then accept some return on what the state stole from you

 

For all I know her wise words are written all over lavatory walls all over Finland and Mongolia. I live amongst normal. civilized British people who have never heard of the weirdo.

 

The hundreds of millions of copies sold proves you wrong end of discussion.

You can hate and criticize what she wrote all day long. But you are stupidly denying reality and fact when you claim she is unheard of and not famous

 

Nice rant. You write about as well as Rand

 

And as accurately

 

Her life eventually imploded because she was a psychopath... It is what it is.

 

Give or take hundreds of millions of copies...

 

Rand was playing chess while the left was playing checkers.

 

Yet, by accepting them, she tacitly acknowledged that the programs, much to her chagrin, work as intended.

 

As far as the first, that's a matter of opinion, and you are welcome to it. To the second, I did not cite to "The Birth of Tragedy," an aesthetic, not ethical work, which you are misinterpreting badly.