29 Dec 2010, 8:36 am
"Fountainhead" is my favorite novel. I'm so like Howard Roark. Appropriate enough for this forum, I've also seen a couple cases where a reviewer of the book thought that Roark was mildly autistic.
I think all her fiction is a wonderful read except "Atlas Shrugged." The latter is a fine book, but it was meant to be a philosophical dissertation first and a novel second. This makes it difficult if you approach it like a novel. If you approach it the same way as you'd approach something like Plato's "Republic" (which also has characters and dialogue but is certainly not meant to be an entertaining story) then it's an excellent book. But most people think it's a novel and rightfully hate it because it's not really a novel.
Although I like much of her philosophy, I find Ayn Rand as a person to be rather disgusting. I won't dwell on why; a simple Internet search about her life and things she's said outside her books will suffice if you care.
Although her philosophy is great and worth reading, there are two main problems I have with it, and I recommend two other authors to suppliment her: Nietzsche and Thoreau.
1) She dwells too much on how people ought to be but never on how they actually are. I can write all day long that people ought to follow my favorite moral code and also that pigs should fly. Both writings are equally productive. I think that it's more useful to discuss morality and people as they actually are. We give humans too much credit. They are what they are and will always behave as humans, just as a dog will always fetch a ball and a cat will always chase a mouse.
I believe Nietzsche does an excellent job exploring morality and humanity as they actually are rather than as they should be. If you read him then you will likely find that statement horrifying. But considering how much experience people here have had with bullies then perhaps Nietzsche's assessment would be unsurprising to most.
When this happens we no longer debate which is more evil: corporations or governments. We then discover that because both are run by humans with power over us then both of them basically do the same thing, and no appeal to morality, law, or constitutions will stop that. And the fact that we divide over which side of that same coin should win explains why we always lose. Though I'd argue that if a corporation controls a government or has its own private army then it is a government even if we don't call it that, so you can still blame a government. 
Critics of Rand are too quick to forget her harshly negative portrayal of corporations that did use violence or exert control over the government. Again, she's portraying ideals, not reality, just like leftist utopists portray their fantasy land of virtuous strong governments keeping society orderly by eliminating the evil corporations.
Caveat: Nietzsche is very difficult to understand. But he also has a very funny humor, sometimes unintentionally. Recomended titles: "Genealogy of Morals" (his least incoherent writing), "The Antichrist", and "Thus Spake Zarathustra."
2) Though her philosophy is interesting, she is severely lacking culturally. Her philosophy does not necessitate being a high powered CEO as demonstrated by the positive portrayal of certain of blue collar characters in "Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged", but culturally she was certainly very urban and very decadent.
I find Thoreau to be a breath of fresh air in that regard, especially "Walden." The book is very short but not easy at first. Fortunately, there is a free copy of Walden with excellent clarifying notes and commentary here. That makes the book very easy to read! It's actually a very funny book, but even NTs would probably miss half the humor without the notes. In fact maybe some aspie would get the more humor than NTs if his special interest lined up with Thoreau and recognized the humorous but obscure references to Greek classic literature, etc.
29 Dec 2010, 9:04 am
29 Dec 2010, 9:14 am
Liberal democracies are less likely to crush anyone in its path? You must not be too familiar with the democracy over here in America and how it treats things internationally and domestically.
It's also worth noting that Hitler was democratically elected. It's worth looking at the body count from government generally. And if you count theocracis as government deaths rather than religious deaths and plutocracies as government deaths rather than corporate deaths then it doesn't look good for government.
All powerful people do that and similar things. Whether how Rome treated the Cartheginians or how the democractially elected National Socialists of Germany starved Stalingrad, power is power regardless of if you call it government or call it something else. (I might be getting the exact city wrong, but they did literally starve the civilians of an entire major Russian city, massive death toll. Imagine an army cutting off all food to New York City and trapping the citizens within.)
(Sorry for the post spam, but I keep finding more to respond to as I read through more of the thread!)
Last edited by theexternvoid on 29 Dec 2010, 9:22 am, edited 1 time in total.
29 Dec 2010, 9:21 am
29 Dec 2010, 10:54 am
29 Dec 2010, 1:00 pm
29 Dec 2010, 1:05 pm
29 Dec 2010, 6:00 pm
29 Dec 2010, 6:42 pm
29 Dec 2010, 7:21 pm
29 Dec 2010, 11:57 pm
30 Dec 2010, 12:05 am
Liberal democracies are less likely to crush anyone in its path? You must not be too familiar with the democracy over here in America and how it treats things internationally and domestically.
I live here; I am fully aware of and disgusted by our foreign policy. But governments are still less cut-throat and single-minded than corporations.
Not technically true. He never won a majority in any election, but was given power by other German politicians after two socialist factions were unable to set aside their petty bickering to form a coalition government.
I'm not a fan of democracy, but it should be criticized on its own inherent failings rather than the sort of convoluted mess that the Weimar Republic made.
All powerful people do that and similar things.
Yes, but corporations are much faster at crushing their enemies, and will do so for smaller offenses. Think of the "robber barons" of the 19th century and early 20th century. That is what corporations are with minimal government involvement.
30 Dec 2010, 2:48 am
30 Dec 2010, 10:48 am
30 Dec 2010, 5:22 pm
30 Dec 2010, 6:05 pm
