Moniker wrote:Also knew that this would give Ren something to do -- he can't help himself.
Well, this is true :)
...but since I think the funny side of this is no longer with us, I will await for my copy to arrive with due patience, and leave it at that.
Blixa wrote:It is. Though if you live in america all you know about it is 50+ years of lies and hatred.
so when someone who (once?) found crude capitalist propaganda interesting talks about shipping someone to Cuba I don't find it funny.
I didn't consider it crude capitalist propaganda -- at all. I didn't recognize it as being as such at the time. I don't view it as hate filled, at all. Still don't. I think it is not "realistic" and has been co-opted by those that seek to enslave the poverty classes and seek to further elevate the "haves" in our society. I don't think the original philosophy was meant in that manner and never read it as such.
Sorry if my Cuba joke fell flat. I just know that those that consider themselves "Libertarians" and "libertarians" (on the right) are more often than not hateful, intolerant, and social Darwinists that have knee-jerks to anything considered socialist in nature. That's why the Cuba joke -- sorry.
Blixa wrote:It is. Though if you live in america all you know about it is 50+ years of lies and hatred.
so when someone who (once?) found crude capitalist propaganda interesting talks about shipping someone to Cuba I don't find it funny.
I didn't consider it crude capitalist propaganda -- at all. I didn't recognize it as being as such at the time. I don't view it as hate filled, at all. Still don't. I think it is not "realistic" and has been co-opted by those that seek to enslave the poverty classes and seek to further elevate the "haves" in our society. I don't think the original philosophy was meant in that manner and never read it as such.
Sorry if my Cuba joke fell flat. I just know that those that consider themselves "Libertarians" and "libertarians" (on the right) are more often than not hateful, intolerant, and social Darwinists that have knee-jerks to anything considered socialist in nature. That's why the Cuba joke -- sorry.
The hatred I refered to was in reference to anti-Cuban lies and distortions that are all americans are fed in the media. "The right" and/or ruling classes were able to co-opt much of the left's anti-Stalinism under a general anti-communism. Rand herself conflated Stalinism with communism, socialism, marxism etc.
Its my own fault for even reading a thread with Ayn Rand in the title let alone letting myself reply. Believe me I'm trying very hard not to get bogged down in no-win threads (which is why I'm not replying to the kind of posts made by people like charity anymore).
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
Reading Atlas Shrugged doesn't make one a cultist, of course. Nor does agreeing with Randian philosophy.
However, there was and still exists a cult devoted to the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Rand was, in the very informed opinion of Michael Shermer, a cult leader, and her devoted followers members of a cult. They call themselves The Collective, ironically enough. Several authors have penned works criticizing the cult-like mentality of Ayn Rand followers.
Again, simply agreeing with Objectivist philosophy or reading Rand's works doesn't make one a cultist, but that doesn't mean there is no Randian cult. According to cult experts, there is.
Just to follow up on that: The difference (for me) between social darwinism and Rand was that social darwinism sees individuals in conflict - one rises and the others fall. Rand saw that each individual had the ability to rise in unison and there was no oppression. This does not work out -- hence why I scrapped the philosophy. I was young and was rather optimistic -- not so much now. :)
I was not hateful, I was not intolerant -- I was the exact opposite of this. I was always concerned with social barriers and class conflicts -- ALWAYS! Which, of course is why I was so dismayed to look about at the other Libertarians that were actually conservative Republicans that just glommed on to some aspect of the philosophy that appealed to them.
Me thinks Blixa doesn't like Rand too much. :)
Last edited by Guest on Sat Feb 09, 2008 4:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
KimberlyAnn wrote:Reading Atlas Shrugged doesn't make one a cultist, of course. Nor does agreeing with Randian philosophy.
However, there was and still exists a cult devoted to the philosophy of Ayn Rand. Rand was, in the very informed opinion of Michael Shermer, a cult leader, and her devoted followers members of a cult. They call themselves The Collective, ironically enough. Several authors have penned works criticizing the cult-like mentality of Ayn Rand followers.
Again, simply agreeing with Objectivist philosophy or reading Rand's works doesn't make one a cultist, but that doesn't mean there is no Randian cult. According to cult experts, there is.
KA
Did you read the rebuttals, KA? Did you go through the checklist? I posted Shermer's article where he addresses it. His main contention is that he can not be a Objectivist.
There are attributes that make one a cult. Look at how Shermer outlines the cult characteristics and make your own determination.
KimberlyAnn wrote: They call themselves The Collective, ironically enough.
I know!! Hilarious.
Maybe Rand still get some play from self-styled "mavericks" like Camille Paglia (who I ironically share not only a birthday, but also a good friend, with). Either way, I think Objectivism's heyday is well over (no more cold war for one thing), but with the increasingly militaristic trend toward a permanent war state, well, maybe it can be revamped...
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
Blixa wrote:It is. Though if you live in america all you know about it is 50+ years of lies and hatred.
so when someone who (once?) found crude capitalist propaganda interesting talks about shipping someone to Cuba I don't find it funny.
I didn't consider it crude capitalist propaganda -- at all. I didn't recognize it as being as such at the time. I don't view it as hate filled, at all. Still don't. I think it is not "realistic" and has been co-opted by those that seek to enslave the poverty classes and seek to further elevate the "haves" in our society. I don't think the original philosophy was meant in that manner and never read it as such.
Sorry if my Cuba joke fell flat. I just know that those that consider themselves "Libertarians" and "libertarians" (on the right) are more often than not hateful, intolerant, and social Darwinists that have knee-jerks to anything considered socialist in nature. That's why the Cuba joke -- sorry.
The hatred I refered to was in reference to anti-Cuban lies and distortions that are all americans are fed in the media.
I have no hatred toward Cuba! Oh my goodness! I was doing parody -- or a Coggins moment.
"The right" and/or ruling classes were able to co-opt much of the left's anti-Stalinism under a general anti-communism. Rand herself conflated Stalinism with communism, socialism, marxism etc.
Its my own fault for even reading a thread with Ayn Rand in the title let alone letting myself reply. Believe me I'm trying very hard not to get bogged down in no-win threads (which is why I'm not replying to the kind of posts made by people like charity anymore).
I'm not going to defend Rand! This philosophy hasn't appealed to me since I was a teen/young adult -- and then it wasn't very well thought out which is why I rejected it. There is no denying that there are those that follow Rand's philosophy (some -- bits -- all) that are hateful -- that have no issues with trampling on the rights with less and blame them for their own predicaments -- I am NOT one of those people -- and I NEVER was.