View Full Version : Religion Admit it, you were waiting for this

04-13-2011, 02:32 PM
Rand Paul Quotes Ayn Rand, At Length
Posted Tuesday, April 12, 2011 2:40 PM |
By David Weigel

Admit it, you were waiting for this: Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ken., using his time at bat in committee to describe the plot of an Ayn Rand novel.

<object width="640" height="390"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/GNJKO6Pma40&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/GNJKO6Pma40&hl=en_US&feature=player_embedded&version=3" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowfullscreen="true" allowScriptAccess="always" width="640" height="390"></embed></object>

"Ayn Rand wrote a novel, Anthem. It’s a dystopian novel where individual choice is banned and the collective rules society. There’s a young man and his name is Equality 72521. He is an intelligent young man but he is been from achieving or reaching any sort of occupation that would challenge him. He is a street sweeper.

Over time he discovers an abandoned subway and rediscovers the incandescent light bulb. And he thinks, naively, that electricity and the brilliance of light would be an advantage for society and that it would bring great new things as far as being able to see at night, being able to read and the advancement of civilization.

He takes it before the collective of elders, and they take the light bulb, and basically it’s crushed beneath the boot heel of the collective. The collective has no place basically for individual choice.

Now, I’m not suggesting that this collective body is against electricity per se, or that your goals are to quash individualism. But I am suggesting that we’re against choice."


Cave Johnson
04-13-2011, 02:35 PM
Haters gonna hate.

04-13-2011, 02:42 PM
I'd call Anthem more of a novella.

04-13-2011, 02:44 PM
Excerpts from Atlas Shrugged movie preview:

Ayn Rand waxes at length on how some people (geniuses) are better than others (looters), and her characters say the same things to each other over and over in different long-winded ways. I can't help but wonder: What kind of person has to do this? What did she have to convince herself of? Why do the characters speak to each other in essays?

Where many try to find ties to today's U.S. government in Ayn Rand's writing, it can be forgotten what her reference point really was. Born Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum, her family suffered their business being confiscated under the 1917 Russian Revolution by Lenin's Bolsheviks. Her idea of "the socialists are coming to get you" wasn't affordable health care -- it was, literally: the socialists are coming to get you.

As I have maintained, I ultimately enjoyed the book and was drawn to parts of its driving philosophy. I recognized early on in the piece that the author had a bitter complaint against all the people trying to stifle innovation all the time, and figured she would cite examples from the real world, but she only showed it in her two-dimensional foils.

Ayn Rand prizes reason above all else. The problem is, even objective reasoning tends to be used subjectively. The nobility of reason as the penultimate approach to life over faith and compassion vanishes once exaggeration is injected into the argument process.

Any deviation from the accurate facts, devolved of emotion or selective recognition, betrays the virtue of reason. Exaggeration is frequently employed these days to turn a talking point into a terrifying call to arms. Embellishing your argument to incite fear in others so that they subscribe to your point of view is manipulating your case to gain more support, under a misrepresented pretense. Exaggeration is lying. Exaggeration should be recognized as the enemy of reason.

It's not that reason is so objectionable. It's what often passes for reason that is not only disingenuous, but insulting, and ultimately dangerous. Rand's encouragement of relying on labels for types of people, from looters to leftists, breeds oversimplification. Labels are another shortcut around reasoning, a short-sighted fallacy reduced to a descriptor trying to be passed off as accepted fact.

But ultimately, Ayn Rand put her own ego above everything else, not reason. She never again spoke to her contemporary conservative William F. Buckley after he quoted someone else's line of criticism of Atlas Shrugged. This is the author of the greatest selling novel of all time, as William F. Buckley pointed out to Charlie Rose.

Another act of her contempt to those who didn't give her absolute reassurance: Rand tore down her protégé and lover Nathaniel Branden (who she kept in an open arrangement between both their spouses) once she learned that he had slept with one of his own acolytes in their institute of objectivism. Her assaults in print against him failed to include her personal relations with him. To not acknowledge a jealous rage as a factor in the reasoning of the trouncing of a colleague before your shared followers -- this defies the pretense of one's reasoning being superior to another.

When used selectively as a pretense, to be lauded as sublime because of verbose language suggesting superiority, Ayn Rand's principle of reason bears little distinction from the malleable rules behind any other religious belief system -- ones that are always self-sustaining, that won't tolerate doubters and that tend to favor the predispositions of the leaders making the rules.

*WARNING* HuffingtonPost http://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-wellington-ennis/atlas-shrugged-movie_b_848286.html

04-13-2011, 02:45 PM
Haters gonna hate.

... And for you:

Because of course, all ambitious business leaders would share the same priorities of unabated self as Ayn Rand and Alan Greenspan, and the rules regulating industries exist only because whoever wrote them were looters (or as we might think of them today, "haters.")

04-13-2011, 02:52 PM
Ayn Rand, the ultimate user of strawmen.

04-13-2011, 02:56 PM
Ayn Rand, the ultimate user of strawmen.

No one has enough imagination to make you guys believable.

04-13-2011, 03:01 PM
You know, the personal life of the author of a piece of fiction seldom impacts the work itself. I still think that many of the principles in Atlas Shrugged are correct whether you admire the author or not.

04-13-2011, 05:16 PM
While melodramatic, it's not anywhere close to the nonsense that comes out of Washington daily and he actually makes a cognizant point. Many Government policies are designed to eliminate choice which is rarely a good thing for a society that values freedom.

04-13-2011, 05:29 PM

First, Godzilla devoured Tokyo. Now Tokyo is about to take on the Meat Monster. With everyone so health conscious these days, it's hard to believe that Burger King is introducing a new sandwich, (in Japan only) that flies in the face of sensible eating: The Meat Monster. The website Opposing Views says the "aptly named sandwich" consists of two hamburgers, a chicken breast, two slices of cheese, three pieces of bacon, and, of course, lettuce, tomatoes, and onion.

Total calories: 1,160. That's more than half the daily recommended amount for a 40-year-old woman of average height and weight. (A regular Whopper has 670 calories.) Japanese customers can also personalize their Monster, adding teriyaki sauce, an egg or even a fish patty.

No word yet if the Monster will be available in the States, but we assume, if it is, that we'll be allowed to get creative, too. Maybe we can toss on some Spaghetti-Os or Cheez-Whiz to add a real American touch.

Read more: http://slashfood.com/2011/04/13/japanese-burger-king-launches-meat-monster-a-1-160-calorie-burg/#ixzz1JRtJD7AJ

04-13-2011, 05:33 PM
Child please. Say hello to The SkinWich. That's right. Fried chicken skin sandwich.


yes before anyone points it out, I know this isn't real.

04-13-2011, 05:58 PM
I'd call Anthem more of a novella.

True, I was trying to think of that term as soon as I saw this thread. I found it entertaining. I especially enjoyed the concept of enforcing speech patterns to control thought, that reminded me of 1984. I'd recommend it.