Support NeoGAF

[Deified Data]

Was reading this thread earlier. Particular post caught my interest, by one Kaijima:

A society that doesn't provide health care for its members is no society.

I realize the hyper libertarians and corporatists convince themselves that everybody should only ever open their greedy fingers and let a penny drop if it's purely in their own immediate, cartoonish self-interest. So it's not just health care; society should evidently provide NOTHING for its members.

But it's all a rig for people to indulge in their own greed and myopic ethics.

If you live in a 1st world nation, you do owe "society" something. You owe it the fact that you live in a 1st world nation. There are a thousand thousand things that you would not have, were it not for the pooling of society's resources to alleviate human suffering.

"But mai money is being STOLED to give to people I don't know to make them healthy!"

No. You're being asked to contribute towards making all of society better, healthier, secure, and free of fear for basic life necessities. That directly benefits your greedy little myopic ass.

So tired of listening to Americans with their craven narcissism and infantile, grasping greed, who have grown up living in a paradise when measured against the preceding 99.9% of human history. "Why should I pay taxes for schools when I don't have children!" Because it makes your society smarter, dumbass. Just by being lucky enough to be born into such a society, you've already been given something for free that you almost cannot repay as an individual, not that you're grateful for it.

As someone who grew up poor, truly poor, I can tell you this America: the people you attack as being shiftless, lazy, and trash because they're not all raging successes? Among the poor the number one cause of self-sabotage isn't "laziness". It's not "carelessness". It's hopelessness. The poor see how society's deck is stacked against them. They stop fighting because they have never known a world in which they can win.

My response:

As an ex-Objectivist, this post shames me.

This logic is concrete. No one has ever found success on their own. Our nation's captains of industry rely on roads to transport their goods, schools to educate their workers, police to keep them safe from harm. We owe society and society owes us. As a political pragmatist I can say it's a mutually-beneficial relationship.

Kaijima's post reminded me of the mental hurdle I had to overcome to transition from the rigidity of Objectivist thought. Like many Objectivists, I embraced Rand's philosophy in my teens - a period of life where many of us are prone to the zealous pursuit of ideals. Picked up The Fountainhead for a high school essay contest. Fell in love with the idea that I could live only for myself, that my perceived intelligence and willfullness put me a step above the collectivist peons and social parasites. That the only thing that mattered in life was a singular will to succeed. That was objective truth, and it spoke to me.

Then I grew up.

I realized that not everyone is born a savant. I realized that talent and ambition, while key to success, could sometimes be overshadowed and watered down by environment, social status, physical/mental disability, so on and so forth. I realized that I enjoyed my comfortable, first-world life because the state made it possible. I owed the state and it owed me. What Rand would describe as statist parasitism was revealed as nothing more than the natural relationship between an individual and their government.

I'm still greedy.

I'm still highly individualistic.

I still admire talent and productivity.

I just stopped putting those qualities on a pedestal. I stopped worshipping that make-believe perfect man and realized that I am what I am, faults and all. I realized that in a world built upon Randian principles I'd likely be kicked to the curb alongside 99% of the population. I realized that my relationship with society was one of convenience, and that was OK. That's natural.

But this isn't a thread about me. Ex-Objectivists:

• How did you come upon Randian philosophy?
• How and why did you shed it?
• Does it still play a part in your life and how you perceive the world?
• How would your former self respond to current events?
• What are your current beliefs, in respect to your old ones?

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Oh, gosh, this is an embarrassing topic.

I used to be a so-so fan of Ayn Rand back when I was 15-16, I was absolutely amazed by that 50-page long monlogue by Galt. I loved all the stuff about self-determination, how socialism and anti-capitalism destroys and subverts human beings - and that egoism is a principle to uphold. Though I wasn't completely obsessed with it, and realized that the ideology had a couple of failings, such as the fact that children are somewhat powerless and can't achieve anything if they're raised in a disadvantageous environment, and so I tried to circumvent this problem by adding a little clause that says that everyone should pool together part of their money so that children end up with equal opportunities.

From there, it was a rapid slippery slope to full-blown social-liberalism. I don't see any value in capitalism or the opportunity to become rich, I don't consider the right to property to be an absolute one, and I don't think you can become anything you want so long as you work hard for it. Instead, I take a more nuanced view of supporting capitalism over socialism whenever it brings everyone more benefits and vice versa.

 

[David Incorporated Esq.]

Ayn Rand made me an enormous political shit-heel in college and I will never forgive her dead ass.

 

[Dude Abides]

I don't know if there are any Randroids left on the forum. That minus guy caught the ban hammer yesterday.

 

[KingGondo]

Ayn Rand made me an enormous political shit-heel in college and I will never forgive her dead ass.

Thanks for making me laugh out loud. That is awesome.

 

[Deified Data]

Ayn Rand made me an enormous political shit-heel in college and I will never forgive her dead ass.

I imagine a lot of people have this particular bone to pick.

I somehow managed to keep my beliefs to myself, with the exception of my graduation speech which was ridiculously Rand-ified. lol, probably wanted to be John Galt. Embarassing looking back on it now, but a portion of that philosophy remains with me today. It's part of who I am.

 

[echoshifting]

This isn't a topic I can really participate in, as I have never subscribed to Randian ideas...but it is definitely one I will subscribe to and peruse with great interest. Hoping for good things.

I will always consider myself very, very fortunate to have spent a year working in the projects of Kansas City before starting college. Changed my whole life; I easily could have fallen into this trap were it not for those experiences.

 

[The Technomancer]

I had an Objectivist phase (I called it Libertarianism, but I didn't understand much about either) for about two months when I was sixteen. Then some other people pointed out how stupid and selfish it was and I was like "yeah....they're right!"

 

[lopaz]

Urgh. I read the Fountainhead and Thus Spake Zarathustra in rapid-fire succession. Looking back, the only way to describe the period of my life that followed reading those books was "severely mentally ill"

 

[Invisible_Insane]

This quote seems appropriate:

“There are two novels that can transform a bookish 14-year-kld’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish daydream that can lead to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood in which large chunks of the day are spent inventing ways to make real life more like a fantasy novel. The other is a book about orcs.”

I'm really glad that I didn't encounter Rand in high school because I think I would have been susceptible to that kind of thinking.

 

[Deified Data]

I had an Objectivist phase (I called it Libertarianism, but I didn't understand much about either) for about two months when I was sixteen. Then some other people pointed out how stupid and selfish it was and I was like "yeah....they're right!"

Nowadays the two are almost interchangable. I know there are Libertarians who aren't Objectivists, and Objectivists who aren't Libertarians, but...I don't know any. Odd, that.

My "phase" lasted from the age of 17 to about 21. I'm 22...

Honestly, part of the reason I've experienced a shift in my worldview is from getting my ass kicked in debates so much. I know I say all the time that "you can't change someone's mind online, don't bother"...but sometimes it works. It's just a matter of chipping away at that hard shell over time.

This quote seems appropriate:



I'm really glad that I didn't encounter Rand in high school because I think I would have been susceptible to that kind of thinking.

Most kids are, I think. We all think we've gotten everything figured out. Rand speaks to that childish mindset.

 

[echoshifting]

This quote seems appropriate:



I'm really glad that I didn't encounter Rand in high school because I think I would have been susceptible to that kind of thinking.

Can you provide a source for this? Because it is hilarious and I would like to add it to my quotations list.

 

[RedCoyote]

Dated a girl in high school who was all about Ayn Rand (and incidentally came from a rich Manhattan family), but I never read any of the books myself, so I'm certainly not as well versed in the ideas as I could be. It always bothered me, though, that anyone could not feel any compassion towards people who just had nothing despite their efforts. Over the years I've taken to the idea that, personally, I'm entitled to nothing, and that I shouldn't waste what privileges I've been given.

To that end I find myself ignoring people (that is, fellow students) who ask for help but don't want to do the work, but have no problem spending much of my free time helping people who are trying yet struggling with their studies.

 

[Alucrid]

This quote seems appropriate:



I'm really glad that I didn't encounter Rand in high school because I think I would have been susceptible to that kind of thinking.

:lol, that quote got me. I should have seen it coming, but it got me.

 

[Angry Fork]

I think what Ayn Rand does to people is make them think they're the 'world movers' she talks about. Everyone likes to think they're THE intellectual or special person and everyone else is just getting in their way etc. kind of thing so when they read about figures like that who do everything on their own it makes them think they can relate. But they don't think about the fact that they didn't do it all on their own and the world isn't just about yourself. World's revolve around societies, communities and what you can do for one another rather than yourself.

I went through like a short 1-2 month phase of it when I was younger and hated everyone and everything. I'm the complete opposite of what objectivism is now though. I advocate selflessness and if everyone did that then humanity would be much better off imo. We should transcend the animal instincts that made everything survival of the fittest in the past because we're smarter and more evolved than that now.

I've only read Anthem and Atlas Shrugged though. I have The Fountainhead I haven't read it yet but I heard it's her best 'novel' and doesn't have as much preaching as Atlas Shrugged.

And Obligatory:

 

[ViperVisor]

The Libertarians’ Lament

Their heroic view of capitalism makes it difficult for them to accept that financial systems without vigorous government oversight constitute a recipe for disaster.

 

[Deified Data]

I went through like a 1-2 month phase of it when I was younger and hated everyone and everything. I'm the complete opposite of what objectivism is now though. I advocate selflessness and if everyone did that then humanity would be much better off imo. We should transcend the animal instincts that made everything survival of the fittest in the past because we're smarter and more evolved than that now.

The difference between you and me, Angry Fork, is that I'm still selfish as all get out. Thing is, I realize that I am only able to be selfish on the backs of the selfless. This was a revelation to me. Very important, and very formative.

 

[Joe Shlabotnik]

I never had much sympathy for Objectivists because the cognitive dissonance seemed so obvious to me. But I don't mean to sound too superior (not much anyway)--we all have our blind spots. And I can *easily* see how it would be an appealing philosophy to a young person; it's entirely possible I partially identified with the idea as a teenager without having even been exposed to Rand, so there's no way of knowing how long it would have taken me to reject it if I had read her in high school.

Edit: It's also kind of ironic that the "PC coddling and specialness" often railed against by the right probably contributes to legions of budding Objectivists, if anything.

 

[Bombadil]

I tried reading "Atlas Shrugged" on two separate occasions. I managed to get to page 340 or somewhere around there, both times.

The part where Dagny and Hank are traveling around the midwestern states I believe, and come across an old woman who used to work at a factory or laboratory, and this old woman is talking about loving one another or something like that, and it narrates, I'll paraphrase: "And at that moment, Dagny knew she was staring into the eyes of evil, itself."

Rand equated the hippie, social attitudes of the old woman with evil. That's when everything clicked in my mind about why conservatives love Ayn Rand, why Glenn Beck recommended her.

Rand's philosophy backfired on me. She didn't convince me that socialism was evil. She convinced me that capitalism was evil.

Nowadays, when I want to make a very simple surface argument about which system is the more noble, I always say: What is the root word of capitalism, and what is the root word of socialism?

Elizabeth Warren makes a better case for a social-leaning society in just a paragraph than Ayn Rand could make for no-holds-barred capitalism in thousands of pages of dry narrative.

 

[echoshifting]

The difference between you and me, Angry Fork, is that I'm still selfish as all get out. Thing is, I realize that I am only able to be selfish on the backs of the selfless. This was a revelation to me. Very important, and very formative.

I can't tell you how tempted I am to spend the rest of my day perusing your post history, searching for that "revelatory moment"

 

[Deified Data]

I can't tell you how tempted I am to spend the rest of my day perusing your post history, searching for that "revelatory moment"

Me: "Government shouldn't impose who private businesses should have to cater to."

GAF: "Civil Rights Movement."

Me: "..."

Lesson: Sometimes people have to be forced to be decent to one another. Sometimes government intervention simply makes the world a better place.

...

For what it's worth, I managed to keep most of my Objectivist bullshit out of GAF. It's the anarchistic stuff that followed (and was a direct product of my Objectivism) that got my ass kicked.

Seeing this image for the first time was a real eye-opener for me. This woman is a genius.

 

[lopaz]

. (I retract ponies and friendship are cool)

 

[Telosfortelos]

This seems like as good a place as any to mention The Gardens of Democracy. Anyone read it? I hope to get to it next week.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Good on you, OP.

The less naive Randroids the better.

Time to join the winning(socialist) team

 

[SuperBonk]

Thankfully, learning about objectivism never really had an impact on me because I've always held the opinion that adopting any school of thought (especially relatively extreme ones such as this) can be dangerous because they remove your ability to make a rational choice (which I realize is itself a school of thought).

Though I have to say that as I grow older, I'm getting frustrated at the level of actual "laziness" and ignorance I am seeing from most people. While I do often get a false sense of superiority because of this, I think it is a problem that can, should, and needs to be fixed with education, and indoctrination of the importance of education.

 

[ConfusingJazz]

I think a lot of adolescents hover towards Rand because they still think that they are the characters in the book. That with will and might, you will be the titans of the earth.

Then you grow up, realize that there is a lot of luck in the world, and that their contributions to humanity aren't independent of a lot of other people that also work their ass off who didn't necessarily strike it rich.

 

[Stumpokapow]

I've only read Anthem and Atlas Shrugged though. I have The Fountainhead I haven't read it yet but I heard it's her best 'novel' and doesn't have as much preaching as Atlas Shrugged.

The Fountainhead is less political philosophy and more personal philosophy. You will probably find Ellsworth Toohey obnoxious, and his final monologue is trite and cartoonish, but the rest of the book is very enjoyable and much more relatable than the rest of Rand's work.

(I'm neutral on Atlas Shrugged, I thought Anthem was awful, and I'm personally and politically nowhere near Objectivist)

I think a lot of adolescents hover towards Rand because they still think that they are the characters in the book. That with will and might, you will be the titans of the earth.

Then you grow up, realize that there is a lot of luck in the world, and that their contributions to humanity aren't independent of a lot of other people that also work their ass off who didn't necessarily strike it rich.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusory_superiority

 

[WARCOCK]

 

[ConfusingJazz]

For a man who is an avowed objectivist, he gave an assload of government money away.

 

[mavs]

When I was reading The Fountainhead I thought I was totally on board with Objectivism until Roark burned down his building. Then I was pretty sure I missed something that made that part make sense. Then I realized I hadn't, and gave up on Rand.

 

[echoshifting]

I believe that's from Paul Krugman.

Nope, and there appears to be a lot of contention over who the quote should be attributed to. I think it was John Rogers though many still source it as Raj Patel or some random blogger

 

[Deified Data]

When I was reading The Fountainhead I thought I was totally on board with Objectivism until Roark burned down his building. Then I was pretty sure I missed something that made that part make sense. Then I realized I hadn't, and gave up on Rand.

I forget the reason for this action provided in the text. Fact was, it was petty. It was a warthog shitting on a carcass specifically so no one else could use it. I wrote an entire essay on why this action was "right"...and I can't remember a single word of it. Just warthogs and shit.

 

[Rentahamster]

Seeing this image for the first time was a real eye-opener for me. This woman is a genius.

While I agree with her underlying message about society and community, I wish she would have phrased it better. That particular allegory she used is a strawman, and it relies too much on an "us vs them" argument, which is a debate tactic that I prefer not to be used, if it can be helped.

 

[Grakl]

Read Anthem when I was ~14, tried to move on to The Fountainhead; absolutely hated how terrible Anthem was as a book as well as The Fountainhead, and I rather hate the philosophy. Atlus Shrugged sounds awful, and I doubt I'll ever read it.

 

[Deified Data]

While I agree with her underlying message about society and community, I wish she would have phrased it better. That particular allegory she used is a strawman, and it relies too much on an "us vs them" argument, which is a debate tactic that I prefer not to be used, if it can be helped.

I agree. The less we can depend on the "us vs. them" scenario, the better. This was one of the death knells for Objectivism, as well. Any philosophy that claims a monopoly on absolute truth...is just degenerate in my eyes.

 

[CorvoSol]

Read Anthem when I was ~14, tried to move on to The Fountainhead; absolutely hated how terrible Anthem was as a book as well as The Fountainhead, and I rather hate the philosophy. Atlus Shrugged sounds awful, and I doubt I'll ever read it.

I read Anthem when I was like, 16, and thought it was an okay story. Not as good as The Giver, but okay. I tried The Fountainhead and hated it. That's about the extent of my familiarity with Ayn Rand.

 

[Mortrialus]

One of the most interesting and telling points of objectivism was an event and some later revealed details of her life:

Rand listened as a prominent psychologist stood onstage and dismissed her fictional heroes—those idealized steel barons and physicists and composers—as implausible. Soon she’d had enough and stood up in the crowd, outraged.

“Am I unreal? Am I a character who can’t possibly exist?” she shouted.

The irony being that Ayn Rand's idealized characters denounced those who take money from the government as being "parasites", but she herself took assistance from medicare in her later years for lung cancer. Ayn Rand was most certainly real, but her perception of her self certainly wasn't rooted in reality.

 

[Fari]

I attempted to read Atlas Shrugged for shits and giggles, but I gave up pretty early on due to its overwhelming shitiness as a novel more than anything else.

Tom Clancy's output remains the highpoint of rightwing literature.

 

[Bombadil]

One of the most interesting and telling points of objectivism was an event and some later revealed details of her life:



The irony being that Ayn Rand's idealized characters denounced those who take money from the government as being "parasites", but she herself took assistance from medicare in her later years for lung cancer. Ayn Rand was most certainly real, but her perception of her self certainly wasn't rooted in reality.

Are there books on her? Although I don't like Objectivism, I'm interested in Rand and want to know more about her personal life.

The one thing I know about her that I think led to her beliefs was, when she was a child in Communist Russia (I think it was Russia) her father's pharmacy was taken from him by the state. I think that's why she became an anti-communist, uber capitalist person.

 

[EmCeeGramr]

i have The Speech on my computer as theworstthingeverwritten.txt and i tried to post it but it's literally over 7 times the character limit for posts

 

[Deified Data]

One of the most interesting and telling points of objectivism was an event and some later revealed details of her life:



The irony being that Ayn Rand's idealized characters denounced those who take money from the government as being "parasites", but she herself took assistance from medicare in her later years for lung cancer. Ayn Rand was most certainly real, but her perception of her self certainly wasn't rooted in reality.

I almost feel sorry for her. Imagine having one's idealized view of oneself crumble and deteriorate with age. Her mistake, 90% of Objectivist's mistake, is believing they are the characters in her literature, when they should have aspired to be like them.

Whether or not they're something to aspire to is another discussion entirely, of course.

i have The Speech on my computer as theworstthingeverwritten.txt and i tried to post it but it's literally over 7 times the character limit for posts

Makes me wonder how they'll handle it in the movie adaptation. Just have the actor talk, staring at the camera for 30 minutes?

 

[Conciliator]

I toyed briefly with it in my late teens, maybe up to 20/21. I was never really into Ayn Rand but I became pretty sympathetic to libertarianism for a couple years there, I think due to being convinced of one fundamental idea: The mechanisms of capitalism and self-interest inspire innovation and economic growth, whereas socialist structures or comparable mechanisms do not, and therefore it is moral to act in self-interest and design governmental systems which reward it. I wouldn't say I entirely disagree with that today, although I don't think anymore that things are quite so simple(I still believe in capitalism in a fundamental, basic sense). A few years ago, I reread Anthem(the only Rand book I've ever finished) and found it to be terrible.

EDIT: I tried to read Atlas Shrugged back in the day but didn't get very far, however one early scene sticks out in my mind: Taggart is in a board room or something with all these men who are stressing and falling apart and miserable because they are weighed down by the socialist stupidity of charitable donation(while Taggart, of course, is cool, calculated, and too smart for such nonsense). I recognized that as the tone of propaganda even then, and knew that this is not a image of reality.

 

[ivysaur12]

Ayn Rand made me an enormous political shit-heel in college and I will never forgive her dead ass.

Fan-fucking-tastic.

EDIT: I ended up creating a list with myself and my college adviser for my thesis on dystopian literature when I was exploring the topic (ended up writing it on Margaret Atwood). The Anthem was on there.

While it definitely mirrors some other, earlier works (such as We), it lacks a general message of human empathy that is so important in other dystopian novels. It's shocking how cold and alone Rand's ideal world is.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Makes me wonder how they'll handle it in the movie adaptation. Just have the actor talk, staring at the camera for 30 minutes?

Musical number.

 

[Mortrialus]

Are there books on her? Although I don't like Objectivism, I'm interested in Rand and want to know more about her personal life.

The one thing I know about her that I think led to her beliefs was, when she was a child in Communist Russia (I think it was Russia) her father's pharmacy was taken from him by the state. I think that's why she became an anti-communist, uber capitalist person.

There are, but I haven't read any of them so I can't recommend. And I agree that it's impossible to look at her life and not think her political philosophy wasn't a response to her interactions with communism.

I almost feel sorry for her. Imagine having one's idealized view of oneself crumble and deteriorate with age. Her mistake, 90% of Objectivist's mistake, is believing they are the characters in her literature, when they should have aspired to be like them.

Whether or not they're something to aspire to is another discussion entirely, of course.


Makes me wonder how they'll handle it in the movie adaptation. Just have the actor talk, staring at the camera for 30 minutes?

It's pretty sad.

 

[Deified Data]

Musical number.

Atlas Shrugged: The Musical.

If this hasn't been done before, I'll eat my shoe.

EDIT: I tried to read Atlas Shrugged back in the day but didn't get very far, however one early scene sticks out in my mind: Taggart is in a board room or something with all these men who are stressing and falling apart and miserable because they are weighed down by the socialist stupidity of charitable donation(while Taggart, of course, is cool, calculated, and too smart for such nonsense). I recognized that as the tone of propaganda even then, and knew that this is not a image of reality.

Yes. The way Rand depicts the "villains" of her works is insultingly juvenile, and I recognized that even as a teenager. Rand's villains are thuggish, bafoonish, ugly, stupid, and prone to laziness and temper tantrums. All politics and philosophy aside, her works are awful from a literary perspective.

Re-read Atlas Shrugged. Find the part where Dagny compares smoking to "holding the fire of Prometheus at one's finger tips". It really is the silliest thing I've ever read. Smoking killed the woman. I wonder if her unbending worldview ever allowed her to realize that.

 

[mavs]

I forget the reason for this action provided in the text. Fact was, it was petty. It was a warthog shitting on a carcass specifically so no one else could use it. I wrote an entire essay on why this action was "right"...and I can't remember a single word of it. Just warthogs and shit.

The reason was basically just that he owned it. The building never would have existed without him, and that gave him the right to destroy it. Of course that makes no sense because Roark didn't pay for it, he didn't own the construction company that built it or the land it was built on, and really the book itself doesn't provide any justification except that he was the smartest person involved with the project, therefore everyone should bow down to the ubermensch. So I'm not sure how Rand saw it but the way she wrote it made me think Roark needed to get a life.

 

[CHEEZMO™]

Atlas Shrugged: The Musical.

If this hasn't been done before, I'll eat my shoe.

What could have been.

 

[Deified Data]

The reason was basically just that he owned it. The building never would have existed without him, and that gave him the right to destroy it. Of course that makes no sense because Roark didn't pay for it, he didn't own the construction company that built it or the land it was built on, and really the book itself doesn't provide any justification except that he was the smartest person involved with the project, therefore everyone should bow down to the ubermensch. So I'm not sure how Rand saw it but the way she wrote it made me think Roark needed to get a life.

...and he was put on trial for destroying the tower. One impassioned speech later, the jury renders him not guilty. Of blowing up the tower. That he admitted to blowing up. Because it was "his".

 

[Myke Greywolf]

Objectivism never took off where I live (Portugal), since we transitioned straight from a (admittedly soft, relatively speaking) dictatorship to a socialist-leaning democratic system. The whole concept just passes over the head of the people of this country, for better and for worse.