WHO IS JOHN GALT? (A survey on Ayn Rand) (page 4)

Terry

Sorry... I've got to say that I can't stand Rand's writing and I think she was a hypocrite. I can't take someone who speaks out against facism yet kicked people out of "her" philosophical movement because their wives believed in God....I don't believe in God and I think that's going way too far. I also can't take someone spouting what's wrong with the poor when they come from the upperclass.

She also hated Libertarians because they didn't follow her word to the "T" ...AND she ripped off Hume, Lyndsander Spooner, and John Locke.

I can come up wih many more reasons why I don't like her or her writings.....

Aren't you doing what you accuse Rand of doing? You are "kicking her out" because you don't agree with her based on your principles. That is what she did; only, with evidence on her part. (I see none quoted on your part.)

I've read alot about Rand, read Rand herself and even most of her detractors. I don't recall what you refer to. Can you enlighten me?

You refer to Ayn Rand as coming from the upper class. Here is a quote from her biography:

"In her teens, she discovered the works of great romantic writers such as Victor Hugo and Edmond Rostand. But as her private vision of human potential expanded, the social horizons of human possibility were shrinking around her. In February 1917 she witnessed the first shots of the Russian Revolution from her balcony. Soon, a communist gang nationalized her father?s shop. Almost overnight, her family was reduced to crushing poverty."

Her dad was a chemist. His business was stolen from him by the Communists. It was "nationalized". She had nothing. On the merits of her own efforts she went from poverty to world wide fame. She earned it. She used her mind. You call what she writes "spouting off" about the poor. I'd say she was writing from experience. What are you writing from?

You say Rand "hated Libertarians". She nailed them for "anarchy" in their views. No hate involved. She examined their premises and carried their arguments to their logical conclusions and pronounced them as anarchists. You find that inaccurate or unfair?

You say she "ripped off" various philosophers (Hume, Spooner, Locke). That is rather cryptic. Sir Isaac Newton said of his work on the laws of physics: "If I have seen farther than others (his predecessors) it is because I stood on the shoulders of giants." Rand stood on the shoulders of Aristotle.

What Rand created in her philosophy is unlike any other because she transcended the work of others.

Your opinion would be more palatable were it accompanied by examples of data.

I'd love to hear your specifics.

T.

Whiskeyjack

Dang,

I'm going to have to head on down to the library next week and finally review some of her stuff. I tend to shy away from "academics" because because they tend to be horridly asymetric in their knowledge/experience base (Adam Smith was an exception to this rule and I like to think he would spit on most of his latter day disciples for their levels of ignorance).

It never fails to amuse me to read upper class idiots expounding on individualism from their safe societal perches. A few years among the lower levels of society would do many of them some good. As far as free markets go, even executives are starting to realize that we can't go on ignoring these markets' "externalities" and that neo-classical economics is autistic with only the veneer of "rational" quantitative analysis (former banker speakin' here!).

Human civilization has a long way to go yet - we're still in early innings! (Maybe we'll get it "right" one day!)

W.

under74

Aren't you doing what you accuse Rand of doing? You are "kicking her out" because you don't agree with her based on your principles.

Yes. But see, I freely admit it. And I don't make rules I end up breaking as Rand did.

In another incident, related by the columnist Samuel Francis, when Rand learned that the economist Murray Rothbard's wife, Joey, was a devout Christian, she all but ordered that if Joey did not see the light and become an atheist in six months, Rothbard, who was an agnostic, must divorce her. Rothbard never had any intention of doing anything of the sort, and this estranged him from Rand, who found such "irrational" behavior intolerable.

http://www.friesian.com/rand.htm ---and this site is way more apologetic than I am

I write as someone who didn't have parents to pay the money to get me out of the poor underclass I was born into. She had parents that bought her a one way ticket over to the US. I'm doubting most Russians living in poverty were able to do so at that time.

...anyway these are my opinions. You can take them or leave them. I won't go as far as to say that Rand hasn't made an extreme impact on America but I will say that I don't like the impact she made. She was an egoist and an absolutist and those attributes really shouldn't have a place in the world.

PS-Rand wanted a Free-market which in itself is anarchy.

under74

Damn right Whiskey Jack.

Terry

. She was an egoist and an absolutist and those attributes really shouldn't have a place in the world.

An ABSOLUTE statement if I've ever seen one!

You are a living contradiction.

EvilForce

Terry... I think your statement pretty much sums her up....

I think the people who are attracted to Rand are people who don't have skills in emotional socializing. They want the world to merely work off of intellectual acumen. That is their error. Life cannot be much without the ecstacy of feeling that accompanies it.

I don't think the personal attacks on her are merited. It would be like someone looking back at my work 50 years after the fact and dismissing my achievements as a surgeon because of my failed personal relationships. You may not agree with a certain procedure but to compare X to determine Y is silly. It is what alot of religious right preachers do...dismiss any achievements due to personal flaws.

I think her dying somewhat unhappy as such leads us to the conclusion that Rand'ism is not an end all be all. And she would probably agree if she were here. But at the end of the day we are all poor schmucks just doing our best to get along in this so called life. Calling her a literary sell out and a whore probably gets us nowhere in an intelligent argument.

Terry

Whiskey Jack:

I tend to shy away from "academics" because because they tend to be horridly asymetric in their knowledge/experience base (Adam Smith was an exception to this rule and I like to think he would spit on most of his latter day disciples for their levels of ignorance).

It never fails to amuse me to read upper class idiots expounding on individualism from their safe societal perches. A few years among the lower levels of society would do many of them some good. As far as free markets go, even executives are starting to realize that we can't go on ignoring these markets' "externalities" and that neo-classical economics is autistic with only the veneer of "rational" quantitative analysis (former banker speakin' here!).

Rand was no academic. (Academician: an educator who works at a college or university)

She gave lectures to college students at their invitation. She was despised by Academicians since she showed the inconsistency in their premises and conclusions.

What Rand was would be called an AUTHOR who was PHILOSOPHER.

Rand was neither upper class nor an idiot. Her family lost whatever small financial advantages they had in the Communist take-over in Russia. Wealth was wiped out and collectivized for the benefit of the party. Rand travelled to America to make something of herself. She was a young Jewish refugee who needed to learn english and who became a great writer. She wanted to write for the movies and she became Cecil B. DeMille's protege. She wanted to marry an heroic and handsome man; she married an actor who looked great and who approved of her solitary choices in life even when he didn't understand them.

She was a SELF-MADE person; not an upper class snob out of touch with hardship. You cheat her of her accomplishments when you neglect to offer the true facts about how she EARNED her place in the public consciousness. She was an original thinker and an indomitible personality.

What "executives" ___know___about the free market would be available to you how? Most people inside or outside of business can't even clearly and accurately define a free market; much less KNOW anything about it that is worth repeating. We don't have and haven't had one.

Economics is not a science and that I'll agree with you about. It is more a belief system actuated by posturing and naivete.

T.

under74

You are a living contradiction.

Aren't we all?...anyway, I can admit it.

By the way Terry, maybe Whiskey wasn't talking about Rand? And again you can't be "self-made" when you get help from others.

Thanks for the thread anyway, it's amazing how people worship crappy writers.

Terry

And again you can't be "self-made" when you get help from others.

Thanks for the thread anyway, it's amazing how people worship crappy writers.

Oh my, another absolute statement! You can't be self-made when you get help from others? How absolute--ly wrong. Nothing comes from nothing. We all rely on somebody or something. But, what we make of what resources we have defines us.

Crappy writers? De Gustibus disputandem est.

Who is your idea of a good writer?

T.

Whiskeyjack

Terry,

As I posted, I've never really read any of her work (though I'm going to try given your strong recommendation). What I meant is I tend to avoid these types of authors in general. So I am talking a bit out of my hat in regards to her life experience (professional and personal). Given Russian Jews' collective experience in systemic persecution however; I would expect her background had a huge impact on her philosphy and mind-set (much like the German Jewish expatriates who urged Einstein to press for an Allied Nuclear weapons program even when there was no real threat of the same in Nazi Germany).

Is there a decent quality biography out there? I don't really expect to learn anything but I do try to keep an open and receptive mind for quality thinking.

W.

WHO IS JOHN GALT? (A survey on Ayn Rand)

Share this