BBC Article on Ayn Rand

58 posts / 0 new
Last post
#1 Fri, Aug 17, 2012 - 8:45am
beeb
Offline
-
UK
Joined: Feb 21, 2012
47
138

BBC Article on Ayn Rand

Edited by: beeb on Nov 8, 2014 - 5:22am
Sat, Aug 18, 2012 - 5:27pm
Eric Original
Offline
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
4254
0

Ayn Rand: Atheist supporter of abortion rights

This isn't a metals blog anymore. It's a right wing circle jerk, masquerading as a metals blog.
Sat, Aug 18, 2012 - 7:59pm
bam
Offline
-
Searching for freedom somewhere out there
XX
Joined: Apr 25, 2012
437
2509

hmmm

You need to pull back the curtain a bit with Rand, imo. The most pertinant quote from the bbc article was this:

"Rand's world was black and white. You are either all good or all bad. Her world is a good fictional representation but it doesn't work in reality in terms of human beings."

The extremity of her views really skewed her perspective on life to the point of almost being not human. The fact remains that Ayn Rand held in high esteem, one of the most psychopathic, soulless human beings of her time, the murderer William Edward Hickman. His lack of conscience was exactly what impressed Rand, and was an early model for her idea of the Superman.

This source is probably far too left for most on here, but the facts of the story (as opposed to the rhetoric) stand for themselves:

https://exiledonline.com/paul-ryans-guru-ayn-rand-worshipped-a-serial-killer-who-kidnapped-and-dismembered-little-girls/

This particular piece was linked in the previous story and is worth the read (again, probably too left for most):

https://www.slate.com/articles/arts/books/2009/11/how_ayn_rand_became_an_american_icon.single.html

I think her works contain some good ideas that can be used to the benefit of society, but taken as a whole, I'm not so sure. Ultimately, Ayn Rand died alone in her apartment with only her nurse to care for her, having driven away any friends and 'loved' ones. That says a lot to me.

I'd be interested to know what you think.

Sat, Aug 18, 2012 - 9:14pm
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Sat, Aug 18, 2012 - 10:20pm
bam
Offline
-
Searching for freedom somewhere out there
XX
Joined: Apr 25, 2012
437
2509

@peckerwood

I don't want to hijack this thread, but your thoughts on a grey/gray world and absolutes reminds me a recent post over at Jesse's Cafe Americain. I'll include a couple of relevant lines, but the post deserves to be read in it's entirety. I identify with a number of points in this particular, especially the following:

As I have said previously, politically I am almost a perfect centrist, in the classical sense of the term. I say this after having taken yet another 'objective test' to place myself on the political spectrum. I do not hold this out as anything of significance other than to say, this is pretty much where I come out, where I am in my thinking at this stage in my life. It is a hard place to be, because one sees the world in shades of grays, in all its complexity, without the comfort of easy forms in black and white. It requires quite a bit more thought and effort than most can afford

EDIT: Actually, I think I'll leave out most of the quotes. It simply makes more sense to read in its entirety, if in fact you are interested.

Sat, Aug 18, 2012 - 10:24pm (Reply to #5)
bam
Offline
-
Searching for freedom somewhere out there
XX
Joined: Apr 25, 2012
437
2509

.

.

Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 12:19am (Reply to #6)
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 5:23am (Reply to #3)
beeb
Offline
-
UK
Joined: Feb 21, 2012
47
138

bam - thanks for the link to

bam - thanks for the link to the Johahn Hari article - the line that summed it up for me was, "Her message was, think freely, as long as it leads you into total agreement with me...."

I just can't get my head around Ayn Rand - where was her humanity, her empathy. She viewed people as emotionless money-making machines and that to me is not what life is about....

beeb

Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 10:32am
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 12:08pm
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

@beeb

Re: humanity and empathy, I'll try to help clarify some things.

First of all on a side note, it isn't wise for anybody to give initial credibility to anybody writing about Rand who they themselves have not made a career in the productive class. Not to be confused with working class. That's the first test.

Many people fail to acknowledge the difference between choice and force. Rand's heroes and heroines wanted choice. They had no problem with charity so long as they could choose who received what they had to give. Their idea of charity was almost always in the form of investment into the best minds creating the best ideas. As their ideas grow, workers earning wages make a living using their own God-given talents and achieve for themselves a greater level of choice too. The one paying their wages also takes into account that some of these workers are also buying their own product, so they need to be able to earn enough to afford it. This would lead to more production and the thriving of better ideas and minds, and so forth. This IS the essence of real humanity: the best ideas and the best minds become the natural leaders.

Now, onto collectivism and central planning: When a group of non-productive jackals, who have never produced anything in their lives and sold it on its sole merit, gets together and decides who gets what, there is no humanity or empathy. Only theft and looting of the productive. The productive deserve humanity and empathy too and this is de facto slavery. What will always happen is that eventually the looters want too much so the productive pick up and leave, leaving the looters with nothing and, in turn starving. If the looters try to prevent the productive from leaving, again slavery. You can't point a gun at a productive chicken and get them to lay more eggs. These are themes repeated over and over. When looters are in charge, the system dies and always will.

Of course the media are, for the most part, part of the looting class because their primary job is to manage perception. There is no real tangible value in that.

The nice thing about being a productive person is that I have real choices. Most in my government understand this relationship better than others because we don't piss away resources on destructive wars of aggression. It must be hell for those whose only choice is deciding who they want to try to steal from.

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.
Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 12:12pm
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

@P-wood

The American tea party knows nothing of Rand's philosophy and do not live it. They want handouts without work too. It's as if you're letting them dictate your personal principles.

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.
Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 12:29pm (Reply to #10)
beeb
Offline
-
UK
Joined: Feb 21, 2012
47
138

  OK - some quick

Dagney - thanks for your thoughts

OK - some quick comments...

Your first paragraph does not make sense to me - could you rephrase it..

re "charity" - I don't think I mentioned it. I was implying that a society should have empathy towards the "needy" by way of social services as we call them in the UK and that it should not be a matter for individual people's charity to support those who need help. By "needy" I do not mean those who choose not to work but those who through no fault of their own need some support. Of course individuals can decide to whom they give, but society as a whole should not discriminate in terms of race, gender, belief etc. A christian charity can choose not to help hindus if it chooses, but society as a whole should make no such distinction.

I'll look at your comments further when I get a chance but a quick glance seems to imply that you are commenting about people and groups in very general terms. You seem to be looking at "humanity" in purely economic/political terms and that as I previously mentioned is the problem I have with Rand.

I assume your third paragraph refers to politicians and the banking elite.

Your fourth paragraph seems to imply that I'm an American - I'm not.

I'm a productive person too.

Will look in more detail later :)

Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 12:32pm
Mr. Fix
Offline
-
NY
Joined: Jun 8, 2012
10738
64172

This is a great thread!

 I took the time to watch Atlas Shrugged (part one) on Netflicks this week. 

There was a phenomenal amount of good material in this movie for discussion, and

and I am thrilled to find this particular thread this morning.

This topic has been on my mind for the past few days,

and after I take the time to do some chores that need attending to,

I would like very much to post what I have observed about this topic.

I've read the comments so far in this thread,

But time is short and I will have to get back to this later.

As for right now, the movie drove home some points that need to be learned,

and the philosophy that it portrayed was stark.

I have in enormous problem with moral relativism.

Keeping it black-and-white works for me.

"When the student is ready, the teacher will appear."
Sun, Aug 19, 2012 - 10:50pm
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

Sorry about that beeb

What I meant to imply is that you may find some answers/clarifications to your questions in the "soliloguy" I wrote.

Rand wasn't purely black and white and that is a common way she is demonized by the class of parasites she warns us about. Hell, look at the childish ways political parties demonize each other by making polarizing examples. Anyway my point is that this is a case of cart and horse: if the majority are unproductive, what's the ultimate point of charity? If the majority are unproductive, charity cannot persist as much as we would like it to.

I agree with your conditions for charity and it is obviously criminally abused by some. However, charity requires production beforehand so that there is something to give later. Someone always pays and the bill will come due here soon. And this time it will be famine/destruction until the majority are productive again. This would stop too if wealthy and powerful parasites pretending to be do-gooders would stop playing God with the world and stop trying to make themselves appear as gods to those they give handouts to. Every time these people try to become Gods, it pisses Him off metaphorically. It's simple math really. But I think it's more of a problem that people don't even recognize what production is anymore. Just because someone has a job that pays doesn't mean they are a net producer. Example: EVERY career politician and banker.

"The problem with socialism is eventually you run out of other people's money" - M. Thatcher

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.
Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 2:46am
beeb
Offline
-
UK
Joined: Feb 21, 2012
47
138

DagneyI'm not looking for

Dagney

I'm not looking for answers or clarifications, I am pointing out that I find Rand morally reprehensible and at odds with my view of what life is about. Humourless and inhumane - a bit like the bile-inducing Mrs T that you quote...

Here's another article from the UK press that I think sums up the attitude you generally find on this side of the Atlantic (thankfully):

https://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/05/new-right-ayn-rand-...

Two topics to maybe discuss:

Following Rand's ideas one would unfetter Wall Street from any oversight etc - prob not a great plan.

Following Rand one would overturn child labour laws - need I say more .....

As I wrote previously - "I just can't get my head around Ayn Rand - where was her humanity, her empathy. She viewed people as emotionless money-making machines and that to me is not what life is about...."

beeb

EDIT - and please don't brand me a "socialist" or something like that lol....

Here's a comment that I find apposite:

"Marxism is a humane and noble system in theory, which turns out to be savage barbarism when put into practice.

Whereas Objectivism is savage barbarism in theory, which turns out to be savage barbarism when put into practice."

Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 7:56am
Anonymous

Removed comment

Removed comment.

Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 9:51am
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

@beeb

You said, "I just can't get my head around Ayn Rand - where was her humanity, her empathy." Sounds like you are looking for clarification to me. She had humanity and empathy and I think I have thoroughly laid out the argument for you.

I'll tell straight up about the topics you propose:

"Following Rand's ideas one would unfetter Wall Street from any oversight etc - prob not a great plan." The old Wall Street and today's Wall Street are nothing like each other. Rand would be repulsed by today's Wall Street: a bunch of parasites who produce nothing and have no personal stake in the companies they own. Milk companies for all they are worth and golden parachutes galour.

"Following Rand one would overturn child labour laws - need I say more ....." Of the heros and heroines in her books, do any of them use or advocate child labor or slave labor conditions? No. Rand would advocate for better schooling and get rid of the modern crap of today. They do not encourage enough entrepreneurialism. Regarding just compensation and treatment of workers, real business owners (who actually OWN their business) know that if they don't compensate their workers appropriately, they can't afford to be consumers of their own products or stay content and fit enough to work at their highest level of efficiency. If the workers are under-compensated mentally or physically, they wear out. Why would an owner would want to keep recurring the cost of retraining and a learning curve for new workers? And if the owner keeps running people into the ground, he goes down too. Therefore a REAL owner has a vested interest in the health, safety, and welfare of his employees.

Another point I am trying to make: If you're looking for rags like the BBC or the Guardian to give you the honest big picture, you may as well interview the family pet. All they do is manage perception. That's it and that's all. What an honest and noble existence.

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.
Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 10:06am (Reply to #17)
beeb
Offline
-
UK
Joined: Feb 21, 2012
47
138

    Dagney Taggart

Dagney Taggart wrote:

You said, "I just can't get my head around Ayn Rand - where was her humanity, her empathy." Sounds like you are looking for clarification to me. She had humanity and empathy and I think I have thoroughly laid out the argument for you.

No you haven't - all you have done is reinforce the views that I already have....

I'll tell straight up about the topics you propose:

"Following Rand's ideas one would unfetter Wall Street from any oversight etc - prob not a great plan." The old Wall Street and today's Wall Street are nothing like each other. Rand would be repulsed by today's Wall Street: a bunch of parasites who produce nothing and have no personal stake in the companies they own. Milk companies for all they are worth and golden parachutes galour.

It's spelt "galore" btw :)

Removal of government control is what she preached - therefore unfettered Wall Street whether she was repulsed by it or not. In fact it's repulsiveness would probably increase were it to be further unfettered as per her ideal....

"Following Rand one would overturn child labour laws - need I say more ....." Of the heros and heroines in her books, do any of them use or advocate child labor or slave labor conditions? No. Rand would advocate for better schooling and get rid of the modern crap of today. They do not encourage enough entrepreneurialism. Regarding just compensation and treatment of workers, real business owners (who actually OWN their business) know that if they don't compensate their workers appropriately, they can't afford to be consumers of their own products or stay content and fit enough to work at their highest level of efficiency. If the workers are under-compensated mentally or physically, they wear out. Why would an owner would want to keep recurring the cost of retraining and a learning curve for new workers? And if the owner keeps running people into the ground, he goes down too. Therefore a REAL owner has a vested interest in the health, safety, and welfare of his employees.

Or just send jobs overseas...now where have I heard that before?

Another point I am trying to make: If you're looking for rags like the BBC or the Guardian to give you the honest big picture, you may as well interview the family pet. All they do is manage perception. That's it and that's all. What an honest and noble existence.

I read from a wide variety of publications - those I quoted happened to fit my points. And I am aware of when someone is trying to manage my perceptions. But thank you for your concern....

Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 10:07am
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

@ P-wood

If I may regarding marijuana: This far right being mentioned and the far left are the same. They just think they are different. They are both collectivist in nature. Reagan, policy-wise, was far left. Telling others what they shall and shall not do with no regard as to whether he or she is the only party involved is a left-wing perspective. I can't think of one true libertarian who would care if a person smoked marijuana so long as that person didn't try to force their choices upon others or force them to be present while they did so.

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.
Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 10:20am
¤
Offline
-
Black Hole Sun
XX
Joined: Jun 14, 2011
18692
92317

Nice Conversation

Good morning all...

Seeing lots of activity over at this thread lately and it's nice to see everyone in a intense conversation and the 'give and take' throughout.

I'm finding the conversation interesting and learning from all of you. Hope you keep it upyes I'm not really up on my Ayn Rand like some of you seem to be.

Video unavailable

An epic lack of foresight, accuracy and rationale... https://www.tfmetalsreport.com/comment/170246#comment-170246

Mon, Aug 20, 2012 - 10:38am
Dagney Taggart
Offline
-
Canada
Joined: Jun 21, 2012
1436
10908

@beeb

The free market, by definition, will achieve equilibrium in an efficient manner. It is unprofitable and thus unacceptable to the corporations posing as governments who need the private sector to fund their useless and wasteful endeavors of playing god with the world. It is this interference that messed everything up and continues to do so.

Re: sending jobs overseas. This has been done for a few reasons though we only hear of it as exploiting cheap labor to satisfy the greed of greedy capitalists. This is partly true and yes repulsive. Here's the other side: others do it to invest in an undervalued or underserved market. They also do it to escape and starve the parasites that we are discussing.

-There is no difference between democracy and communism when the majority are unproductive.