Philosophy Now Forum

when I was 13 i was into Ayn Rand

My parents reaction was like I was into Ayn rand when I was your age, itll pass

My older brother was into Ayn rand when he was 13

at school my history teacher who is rather liberal said he was into ayn Rand when he was in his early teens now he describes here as a stupid cow

in general it seems almost everyone was into Ayn rand at some point in their teens, it always passes, well almost always sometimes it continues to a point where one ends up joining the Libertarian party and becoming the laughingstock of republicans and Democrats alike

what is the deal with that why are so many teens into that

Kayla wrote:when I was 13 i was into Ayn Rand

My parents reaction was like I was into Ayn rand when I was your age, itll pass

My older brother was into Ayn rand when he was 13

at school my history teacher who is rather liberal said he was into ayn Rand when he was in his early teens now he describes here as a stupid cow

in general it seems almost everyone was into Ayn rand at some point in their teens, it always passes, well almost always sometimes it continues to a point where one ends up joining the Libertarian party and becoming the laughingstock of republicans and Democrats alike

what is the deal with that why are so many teens into that

I was never into Ayn Rand. I think she is an American phenomenon.
She was basically a fake. If the society she dreamt of would ever have been put into practice, the USA would have long ago become a third rate nation, economically.
She was a poor philosopher a a second rate thinker.
Her chief opponent was a dead one; Kant whom she totally misunderstood; but his never being able to defend himself never hurt his philosophy, because Rand never understood it.
She reacted to him, not as a thinker but as a Jew reacting to a German. Most of her thinking was coloured by her life's experience as a emigre and she reacted against all forms of government.

She's well read within the corporate world, some of the crackers've called offspring and companies after her.

Pluto wrote:She's well read within the corporate world, some of the crackers've called offspring and companies after her.

Well read in the corporate world? Ummm? And what is the state of international financial systems?

RamboLiberal (1000+ posts) Fri Sep-14-07 11:34 PM
Original message
Ayn Rand’s Literature of Capitalism (Many CEO's Influenced by Rand)
-----

For years, Rand’s message was attacked by intellectuals whom her circle labeled “do-gooders,” who argued that individuals should also work in the service of others. Her book was dismissed as an homage to greed. Gore Vidal described its philosophy as “nearly perfect in its immorality.”

But the book attracted a coterie of fans, some of them top corporate executives, who dared not speak of its impact except in private. When they read the book, often as college students, they now say, it gave form and substance to their inchoate thoughts, showing there is no conflict between private ambition and public benefit.

“I know from talking to a lot of Fortune 500 C.E.O.’s that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ has had a significant effect on their business decisions, even if they don’t agree with all of Ayn Rand’s ideas,” said John A. Allison, the chief executive of BB&T, one of the largest banks in the United States.

“It offers something other books don’t: the principles that apply to business and to life in general. I would call it complete,” he said.

One of Rand’s most famous devotees is Alan Greenspan, the former chairman of the Federal Reserve, whose memoir, “The Age of Turbulence,” will be officially released Monday.

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/15/busin ... nted=print

Pluto wrote:RamboLiberal (1000+ posts) Fri Sep-14-07 11:34 PM
Original message
Ayn Rand’s Literature of Capitalism (Many CEO's Influenced by Rand)

are they really

so why are so many CEOs so willing to ask the government for handouts, trade protection, etc all the things of which Ayn rand would not approve

the corporate world loves government regulation as long as its in their favor

the corporate world loves government regulation as long as its in their favor

This would be your slogan, perhaps.

Kayla wrote:

Pluto wrote:RamboLiberal (1000+ posts) Fri Sep-14-07 11:34 PM
Original message
Ayn Rand’s Literature of Capitalism (Many CEO's Influenced by Rand)

are they really

so why are so many CEOs so willing to ask the government for handouts, trade protection, etc all the things of which Ayn rand would not approve

the corporate world loves government regulation as long as its in their favor

Randism is about getting what you want. Working the system for your own benefit is immoral and therefore chimes with Randism perfectly.

Pluto wrote:

the corporate world loves government regulation as long as its in their favor

This would be your slogan, perhaps.

True, though.

chaz wyman wrote:

Pluto wrote:She's well read within the corporate world, some of the crackers've called offspring and companies after her.

Well read in the corporate world? Ummm? And what is the state of international financial systems?

Absolutely, but do you remember the BBC doco, by Adam Curtis, that I think we might have discussed a while back called All Watched Over By Machines of Loving Grace that had quite a bit to say about Rand and her acolytes? Definitely well worth a watch for anyone here who hasn't seen it already.

I agree though that she seems to be something of an American phenomenon and not taken particularly seriously elsewhere, although here influence on some people might be.

It's Satanism, basiclly.

The individualism preached by libertarians such as Ayn Rand is the same individualism as preached by Anton LaVey, the American founder of the Church of Satan. Beside its symbols and occultism, modern Satanism is all about the individual freedom not to give a shit about others. No wonder such blatantly amoral elitism strikes a chord among some of the business elite, but I find it rather strange that so many American Christians are having tea with Satan.

Focusing too much on individual freedom promotes egotism and greed rather than compassion and charity. Inequality emerges and increases automaticly. Conscious effort is always required to bring about any kind of equality, or even decency. Democracy is such a conscious effort. Democracy means power to the people, which means distributing power to each individual, rather than pooling it in the hands of a small elite.

Modern representative democracy is about giving power to certain people (politicians) whom we choose in elections. Capitalism, on the other hand, is about giving power to certain people (those who own most money) whom are not chosen in any elections.

Those libertarians and tea-drinkers who go on about "big government" and want politicians to have less power, are practically anti-democratic. Just like Satanists.

Notvacka wrote:It's Satanism, basiclly.

The individualism preached by libertarians such as Ayn Rand is the same individualism as preached by Anton LaVey, the American founder of the Church of Satan. Beside its symbols and occultism, modern Satanism is all about the individual freedom not to give a shit about others. No wonder such blatantly amoral elitism strikes a chord among some of the business elite, but I find it rather strange that so many American Christians are having tea with Satan.

Focusing too much on individual freedom promotes egotism and greed rather than compassion and charity. Inequality emerges and increases automaticly. Conscious effort is always required to bring about any kind of equality, or even decency. Democracy is such a conscious effort. Democracy means power to the people, which means distributing power to each individual, rather than pooling it in the hands of a small elite.

Modern representative democracy is about giving power to certain people (politicians) whom we choose in elections. Capitalism, on the other hand, is about giving power to certain people (those who own most money) whom are not chosen in any elections.

Those libertarians and tea-drinkers who go on about "big government" and want politicians to have less power, are practically anti-democratic. Just like Satanists.

When you are led by faith you can hitch yourself to any band-wagon you like.
who says religion ever had to make sense?

No wonder such blatantly amoral elitism strikes a chord among some of the business elite, but I find it rather strange that so many American Christians are having tea with Satan.

Your American Christians having tea with the satans makes perfect sense (as Marc Jacobs might say). The former have become lost in their faith, great disillusionment, bitterness, anger and repulsion pervades; so they climb onto the neo-liberal (ayn rand) life-raft and set sail on a course of destruction, hatred and violence. They have been turned into their opposites, conditioned and twisted into a shape closer to the devil's. Of course, there are exceptions; for whom perhaps the true light burneth still.

Pluto wrote:

No wonder such blatantly amoral elitism strikes a chord among some of the business elite, but I find it rather strange that so many American Christians are having tea with Satan.

Your American Christians having tea with the satans makes perfect sense (as Marc Jacobs might say). The former have become lost in their faith, great disillusionment, bitterness, anger and repulsion pervades; so they climb onto the neo-liberal (ayn rand) life-raft and set sail on a course of destruction, hatred and violence. They have been turned into their opposites, conditioned and twisted into a shape closer to the devil's. Of course, there are exceptions; for whom perhaps the true light burneth still.

Let's face it. Christians are a confused bunch of morons.
How many know the contents of the bible anyway?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btBF8jp6IgE

chaz wyman wrote:Let's face it. Christians are a confused bunch of morons.

And let's face it; that kind of sweeping statements won't help you convince anybody about anything, least of all any Christians. Provoking people is good, insulting them will only make them stop listening to whay you have to say.