Oh, good, another Ayn Rand thread.

Once again, I must issue my heartfelt, well-researched, and thoughtful position on Ayn Rand, and that is, "F*ck Ayn Rand."

Objectivism is anarchism for the timid.

Maybe it's time to bring back the 90% marginal tax rate. It sure didn't hurt growth in the 1950's and 60's.

And if the CEOs follow through on their threats to leave the country then hey! It's win win for America.

Despite what they say, those borderline sociopaths have given NO evidence their leadership skills are even worth 10% of what they're bringing in.

I'll get this out of the way:

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

50mm: I'll get this out of the way:

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

Ha!

The English Major: Objectivism is anarchism for the timid.

[Insert "Why don't you move to Somalia" challenge]

How bright could she have been? They spotted her an 'A' and an 'N', and she still couldn't spell her name right.

50mm: I'll get this out of the way:

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

I used to very snarkily say " MY touchstone for gauging someone's intellectual worth is whether or not they are capabale of taking seriously the rantings of a spoiled brat with Aspberger's, or worse yet using it as a guiding personal philosophy."

Then I found out that several major CEO's of financial firms, and no less a power than Alana Farking Greenspan were all deeply devoted to Rand's ideology.


and then the giant farking mess we're in right now made perfect sense

Any sane person should be able to see exactly why Rand was a nutcase, and the reasons why any system like hers could never function. This is why she is so popular.

I don't pay much attention to politics, and while I knew who Alan Greenspan was, and how *powerful* he was, I had no idea he was one of Rand's close buddies.

The day I found that out (about 5 years ago), I thought "Man, we're screwed". And we were.

Magorn: Then I found out that several major CEO's of financial firms, and no less a power than Alana Farking Greenspan were all deeply devoted to Rand's ideology.

If my memory serves me well, then I think he was just deeply devoted to her ass and would say anything to tap it at the party.

realmolo: The day I found that out (about 5 years ago), I thought "Man, we're screwed". And we were.

Economists would call that a "Leading Indicator", right?

Senescent Dawn: Any sane person should be able to see exactly why Rand was a nutcase, and the reasons why any system like hers could never function. This is why she is so popular.

Marx has his adherents too. Still, even though he predicted the corruption of government by the "rich", you won't see me calling for a proletariat revolution.

Both economic philosophies are great for the classroom, but worth f*ck-all in real life.

BunkoSquad: The English Major: Objectivism is anarchism for the timid.

[Insert "Why don't you move to Somalia" challenge]

Unfortunately for Aynarchist Randroids, it's the place where self-interest rules all. They may not like it, but that's where Galt's Gulch ends up when you use real human beings, not fantasy caricatures.

vort3xxx: realmolo: The day I found that out (about 5 years ago), I thought "Man, we're screwed". And we were.

Economists would call that a "Leading Indicator", right?

Hmmm... That would be an interesting approach. Sales of Rand's books as a future indicator of market bubbles.

Magorn: I used to very snarkily say " MY touchstone for gauging someone's intellectual worth is whether or not they are capabale of taking seriously the rantings of a spoiled brat with Aspberger's, or worse yet using it as a guiding personal philosophy."

Then I found out that several major CEO's of financial firms, and no less a power than Alana Farking Greenspan were all deeply devoted to Rand's ideology.


and then the giant farking mess we're in right now made perfect sense

it's pretty much all explained here. greenspan actually had rand at his swearing in. seriously.

The English Major: Oh, good, another Ayn Rand thread.

I was well and truly wondering why Zombie Ayn Rand is all the rage now. I mean, I know there's that new biography of her and all, but...

realmolo: The day I found that out (about 5 years ago), I thought "Man, we're screwed". And we were.

Amen, brother. Randers (what are her groupies called? Randers? Randites? Does one give a Randamonials when telling how The Fountain of Atlas's Butt changed their life?) always seem to think their perfect society will be just like Two Year's Vacation when it really comes back to Lord of the Flies.

/hot like the labor of the fields

inglixthemad: Randroids

Randroids! I love it.

The central problem is the selfish aspect asks people to do something with their selfishness which humans are not capable of doing: not using people in pursuit of their selfish ambitions and deny their selfish desires to have power over others.

Ayn Rand's philosophy, like much of modern economics, is built on the shakiest of foundations: that human beings are rational economic actors. Everything from game theory to the most esoteric economic model assumes that every actor is going to rationally attempt to maximize their own benefit.

This is false. Not because of altruism, but because the human brain has cognitive biases that prevent rational action.

Just a simple example: two new vaccines are created to treat a fatal disease. The first vaccine saves an infected victim 33% of the time, and the remainder die. The second vaccine results in the death of 66% of the infected, and the remainder survive.

Which vaccine is superior? In controlled studies, an overwhelming majority of respondents choose the first vaccine, and never note that both vaccines are identical.

And so on. There are mountains of studies that demonstrate cognitive biases that humans have. If humans were rational economic actors, casinos would go out of business and everybody would invest in index funds.

An economic philosophy based on "rational self-interest" may be an interesting academic exercise, but has little to do with the real world.

inglixthemad: Marx has his adherents too. Still, even though he predicted the corruption of government by the "rich", you won't see me calling for a proletariat revolution.

Both economic philosophies are great for the classroom, but worth f*ck-all in real life.

Very true. Both Rand and Marx ignore one rather significant fact (well, they ignore more than that, but they share this one). In assuming that people will work in "enlightened self interest" (Rand) or "for the good of the whole" (Marx), they make you wonder if they've ever actually MET any people. In actual practice, people are quite eager to play "me first, fark you all" when the chips are down. In Randian economics, you end up with the rich farking over everybody else. In Marxism, you end up with the folks in charge telling themselves they're doing it for the good of the people while acting exactly like the rich self absorbed tyrants they overthrew, if not worse.

t3knomanser: This is false. Not because of altruism, but because the human brain has cognitive biases that prevent rational action.

That and one man's utility is another man's extravagance. There was some goofy discussion about this in a thread about fireplaces of all things, some objectivist telling us all that fireplaces served no utility because he lived in Houston, therefore fireplaces were bad. (Yes, I am paraphrasing). I said yeah, maybe... but I like burning stuff. And on and on and on.

As long as you take Ayn Rand's work more like a philosophical comic book it's great. None of ideas could exists in it's purity in the real world but she's brings out a lot of interesting ideas.

Don't take anything at face value.

What you don't understand is that the writings of MarxRand have never been properly implemented. The ideas MarxRand outlines are fair and will lead to a better society. The problem is that the parasitic CapatalistsWorkers are preventing this because they are so evil and selfish.

You people are just bashing MarxRand because you have not read Das Kapital/Atlas Shrugged. If you did you would really understand that MarxRand is right.