It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ayn Rand's Influence on the 21st Century

page: 15
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 28 2015 @ 11:33 PM
link   
a reply to: crazyewok




And god only knows what economic skeletons are hidden in Chinas closet.


The skeleton that is in China's closet is that due to Rand haters and their anticorporate demagoguery is why China is the worlds largest polluter.

We not only outsourced pollution, but jobs that created wealth that the US government borrows from, and sells treasuries.

But wait it gets better that money finances quite a bit of the US 'can't live without' social programs aka 'safety' nets.

Cut defense kills middle class jobs that use to create wealth that people did not need to be on social programs.

Attack firearms with regulations, and adding more kills middle class jobs that use to create wealth that people did not need to be on social programs.

Financial regulations with more regulation like the Frank Dodd Act killed middle class jobs that use to create wealth that people did not ned to be on social programs.

Oh them evil CORPORATIONS are the largest employers of the middle class

I wouldn't say special.

I would say it is American EXCEPTIONALISM at work.

Rand haters are exceptionally self destructive.
edit on 28-5-2015 by neo96 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 29 2015 @ 02:25 AM
link   
a reply to: wasaka

Her (reported) politics and opinions aside, this is a very astute observation and does fit her ideology to a T. I found Atlas Shrugged very interesting but I don't know much about her personally.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 02:55 AM
link   
If society collapses, would it be possible for a Ayn Rand society to survive?

It just seems to be a affluent based belief (religion) and so unnatural to the natural way humans are.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 03:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: LDragonFire
If society collapses, would it be possible for a Ayn Rand society to survive?

It just seems to be a affluent based belief (religion) and so unnatural to the natural way humans are.


Not a great fan of heavy socilism myself but your right.

Without the support of a army/police force the elite are nothing, I mean 1% says it in the name they are out numbered 100 to 1.

As soliders and cops are mostly drawn from the poor and lower middleclasses if the elite trash them too much they can end in a world of hurt.

The French and Russian royal familys found that out the hard way.

Fact is there needs to be some balance and fluid social mobility or things can get bad, very bad or if your in that 1% you can litrally lose your head.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 03:27 AM
link   
a reply to: burdman30ott6

Burd, we've been down this road before and you keep going there. Choice. You are pissed off because you don't choose to pay taxes, so you feel violated. It's personally offensive to you.

YET when you're driving down the public streets, knowing you can dial 911 should something awful happen, and enjoying the society and conveniences that surround you, suddenly that offense doesn't seem to exist at all. I mean you're still pissed that you got taxed - but you expect the benefits of that taxation to exist and would be as lost as the rest of us without the infrastructure we enjoy.

Then you continuously belittle others for being selfish? Seems to me like you might be projecting.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 06:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Hefficide


YET when you're driving down the public streets, knowing you can dial 911 should something awful happen, and enjoying the society and conveniences that surround you, suddenly that offense doesn't seem to exist at all. I mean you're still pissed that you got taxed - but you expect the benefits of that taxation to exist and would be as lost as the rest of us without the infrastructure we enjoy.


Oh man, I love your argument here...

"hey man, it's way cool of us to be doing this for you all, what you know, like robbing you at gunpoint. But, hey man, don't be angry, we're going to use that money to offer you some amazing services we know you'll love.

Who could say no to a police force that refuses to higher anyone with a high IQ, harassing you, arresting you for not committing a crime, stealing your money to generate revenue for the state (and themselves)...I mean, why keep your tax money when you could give it to us, and we can send our highly-trained, boys in blue straight to your home right now for a complimentary tazing and pistol-whipping. Even better, if you send us your money within the next five minutes, we'll throw in a drug-framing free of charge to you! Because the War on Drugs is really just the War on Human Beings!"

Well, I say, just sign me right the hell up, please.

ETA: You never asked us if we agreed to be taxed for those woderful services being offered. If we really wanted those awesome benefits, we would willingly pay for them--the same way we willingly pay for things every single day of our lives .
edit on 29-5-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 07:06 AM
link   
I will say this, I have followed this thread from the beginning with very little actual interaction. I admit that it has been quite some time since I have done any personal research on Ayn Rand. That being said I have read some well articulated posts that paint her and her views in a bit of a different light than the conclusion I made based on my own research.

I especially find it hard not to like her stance on less government involvement in our day to day lives. However I still can't help but feel like I just don't care for her in general. Some of what she said yes I agree with but I find it hard to personally like let alone trust the motives of someone who consorted with the likes of Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan.

I know call that silly but I just can't get past it, I'm sorry I can't.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrappedPrincess
Some of what she said yes I agree with but I find it hard to personally like let alone trust the motives of someone who consorted with the likes of Rockefeller and J.P. Morgan.


Rand came to the United States in 1925, Morgan was dead in 1913. Rockefeller died in 1937 and Rand did not start to gain wide spread notoriety until the 1940s.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 07:54 AM
link   
a reply to: TrappedPrincess

Nor can I, Princess.
Thank you for being here. I totally understand your point of view.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:01 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

Wow. You're a poster boy for the Military/Industrial Complex.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:10 AM
link   
Well thank you for correcting me, I believe I said the likes of not actually but to be honest I thought I remembered reading that they did at least cross paths or some connection somewhere. Anyway I could be wrong all together but you still didn't convince me to like her, sorry.

reply to: AugustusMasonicus

edit on CDTFri, 29 May 2015 08:11:08 -0500amppAmerica/Chicago29-05:00Fri, 29 May 2015 08:11:08 -050011 by TrappedPrincess because: (no reason given)


Ok so John Galt the character in Atlas is modeled after them, correct? I haven't read that one or watched the movie, I'm vaguely familiar with the story and concept though. So that is where I'm making that connection but still not a fan. That might be because I am partial to adopting pieces of ideologies that I like and am not big on labels either. I don't really feel like I'm into any one particular ideology to commit to it to the point of labeling myself after it. I take what I like from what I like and I make it work for me and I don't care what YOU call me so long as you call me.
edit on CDTFri, 29 May 2015 08:41:39 -0500amppAmerica/Chicago29-05:00Fri, 29 May 2015 08:41:39 -050041 by TrappedPrincess because: (no reason given)

edit on CDTFri, 29 May 2015 08:45:54 -0500amppAmerica/Chicago29-05:00Fri, 29 May 2015 08:45:54 -050045 by TrappedPrincess because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: BuzzyWigs
Dear Buzzywigs: Thanks for the thread. However you feel about her personally, (and I think there is some misinformation being repeated in your thread) her books taken separately certainly start a good discussion about a true political issue that no longer gets the kind of attention t hat it should, IMHO.




SOME PEOPLE are not equipped to be highly-educated. You are mistaking "lack of personal responsibility" for "lack of smarts, talent, opportunity, and education."

Some people are simply not up to the task.
Because some people are simply not up to the task.



Your reply to someone on the thread a few pages back containing this gem here, is another good example of it, just as my convo with Spiramirabilis highlighted another.

My problem with that assessment is I think it belittles the poor and does the disenfranchised more harm, and could be taken as even elitist. I would counter what you say with we need to identify why that's the problem. I think it's more about education funding and the state public schools than anything: there isn't enough funding to make sure each student is adequately prepared for higher education (college.) And the way curriculum and teaching is structured doesn't fit the way everyone learns. Classrooms need to be smaller, in order that each student can be reached with his/her learning style, so they are ready when the time comes. And the college prices are too high, and the loan program and grants are not enough to cover what each student needs to have college education available to them. Never mind that they can do all the right things in regards to this (students and teachers) and find the job market a disenfranchising experience when they get out of college.

There are other, more subtle underlying issues involved, as well. Ever read Manchild in the Promised Land by Claude Brown? He grew up in poverty, in the ghetto, where most are perceived to be "not equipped to be highly educated."
His story should be read by anyone with this attitude, I think.

If all are not equipped for higher education, we need to identify why, and fix that; nor am I in agreement with a policy toward this that identifies those not equipped, and caters to the lowest, slowing the smartest down. Limiting college education does this, and disenfranchises a good portion of our young population from the get go.

tetra50



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:30 AM
link   
a reply to: TrappedPrincess

What gave you the idea I was trying to 'convince you to like her'?

I was simply pointing out that she did nor cross paths with either Morgan or Rockefeller.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:34 AM
link   
a reply to: tetra50

First, you are welcome for the thread.


My problem with that assessment is I think it belittles the poor and does the disenfranchised more harm, and could be taken as even elitist. I would counter what you say with we need to identify why that's the problem.

It is a fact that some people are brighter than others (the Bell Curve, you know - that's a real thing), and some are more talented than others at certain subjects. Finding the person's strengths is the FIRST thing to be done. And it should be done when they are small children. An "IQ" score is only one way of measuring. "Rain Man" comes to mind. Should he have been forced to try to become something else than what he simply was?

How about "I Am Sam" - the guy was a great father, but not a brilliant 'thinker.'

I could give you endless examples of kids and adults being pushed into things they have no aptitude for, and also of miserable people (in my real life) who were being pushed into a career (specifically, Wall Street) when they wanted to be a writer, a poet. That person was so miserable - the only child of a Citicorp Executive - that they nearly overdosed. Had a nervous breakdown. Threw up every time they had to go to the office. HATED their coworkers. True story -- I didn't just make that up, you know.

See Plato - the Republic on "philosopher kings." It touches on the same premise, that people are not all equally capable at doing everything, and no amount of wishing or demanding is going to change that. I can't learn calculus. It is beyond my capacity. I can, however, play flute quite well. Not everyone can.

There's nothing wrong with recognizing what talents a person has, and what talents they DO NOT HAVE. Ben Carson grew up poor. He's a neurosurgeon. That is fabulous. He worked hard for it, and was found to be talented and capable.


Classrooms need to be smaller, in order that each student can be reached with his/her learning style, so they are ready when the time comes.

Precisely. However, even LONG BEFORE school age, children's PARENTS need to identify and encourage their strengths, and find identify their child's learning style.
Not everyone can do what Ben Carson does, no matter how much they want to. Or how much their parents want them to.
So, the best-practice is to encourage them to TRY to do anything they are interested in. Give them resources to either succeed or realize it's not their strongest suit or that in fact they are not that interested.

I wish I could dance like a prima dona ballerina, but I can't. I could only manage to become aware of what was required, and that my stamina and an unseen vertebral anomaly prevented some of the movements entirely. I wish my husband found it easier to learn Spanish, but he can't.

If a person is simply unable to 'get it' (any particular subject - like being tone-deaf, or not), that is what it is. It's not "good or bad" , or "elite or disenfrachising." It is meeting the person where they are and then nurturing that set of qualities - not forcing them to be someone who they simply are not.

edit on 5/29/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:36 AM
link   
a reply to: AugustusMasonicus


I was simply pointing out that she did nor cross paths with either Morgan or Rockefeller.

She did champion them, though, and treated them as heroes. When, in fact, they were monsters in terms of their "human resources" theories.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: BuzzyWigs
She did champion them, though, and treated them as heroes. When, in fact, they were monsters in terms of their "human resources" theories.


That is besides the point.

And personally I think people like Rockefeller, Carnagie, Harriman, Vanderbilt, et al did more for humanitarian, education and the arts than those that deride them.



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:43 AM
link   
a reply to: TrappedPrincess


I especially find it hard not to like her stance on less government involvement in our day to day lives.


While Ayn Rand made excellent points in regards to Libertarian ideals, her work in that area is very scattered, and there are issues that she never covered.

I would highly recommend the manifesto regarding Libertarian philosophy written by Murray N. Rothbard, For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto.

Some highlights from Mises Institute:


In For a New Liberty: The Libertarian Manifesto, Rothbard proposes a once-and-for-all escape from the two major political parties, the ideologies they embrace, and their central plans for using state power against people. Libertarianism is Rothbard's radical alternative that says state power is unworkable and immoral and ought to be curbed and finally abolished....

The central axiom: no man or group of men may aggress against the person and property of anyone else. He justifies the axiom on the basis of natural rights. It is an axiom that has few opponents, until Rothbard spells out its implications: taxation is theft, conscription is slavery, and war is mass murder, among many other points....

The anticipated effect of this book on both liberals and conservatives, the Left and the Right, is to force a rethinking of the typical categories. It asks that all sides face their hypocrisies: the Left favors freedom of speech but cares nothing for the private property that guarantees such freedom. The Right demands lower taxes but wages culture wars and real wars that grant government more power to take liberty and property from the American family....



Here is a good Amazon review that really highlights the differences between Rand and Rothbard:



THE introduction to anarchocapitalist, libertarian thought.

If you're looking for an introduction to libertarian thought, this is THE book to read.

Here, free-market economist and radical for liberty Murray Newton Rothbard tackles all the major issues: the philosophical basis of libertarianism, the history of classical liberalism, the failures of government to preserve basic liberties, and the ways in which a free-market economy handily solves problems that seem forever beyond the reach of government.

Rothbard is also one of few libertarians to face the issue of pollution head-on. You'll search Ayn Rand's works in vain for any "pollution solution"; she was apparently content to believe the problem didn't really exist, a practice to some extent continued by her disciple George Reisman in his mostly brilliant treatise _Capitalism_. But Rothbard doesn't duck the issue: demonstrable pollution is an invasion of property rights and should be outlawed.

Nor is Rothbard a friend of "corporate capitalism." Again unlike Rand, who regarded "big business" as "America's most persecuted minority," Rothbard lambastes big business for its constant seeking of government favors and its use of clout to secure protectionist legislation -- including "limited liability."

edit on 29-5-2015 by LewsTherinThelamon because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:48 AM
link   
a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon

Thank you for those sources - perhaps you could start a thread on Libertarianism.
This one is about how people (some people) hold her up as a perfect thinker, however.

So - what are the things she says (if any), that you disagree with? Or what, in your opinion, did she "miss" in her assessments?

edit on 5/29/2015 by BuzzyWigs because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Thanks, I'll put that on the list. Right now though I'm still stuck on the introduction to the Tao Te Cheng and other collected eastern works lol. a reply to: LewsTherinThelamon



posted on May, 29 2015 @ 08:53 AM
link   
a reply to: TrappedPrincess


Right now though I'm still stuck on the introduction to the Tao Te Cheng and other collected eastern works

Yes, those can be tricky to read and comprehend also. Been there, done that. You you tried Alan Watts for eastern thinking?




top topics



 
23
<< 12  13  14    16  17  18 >>

log in

join