Ayn Rand's Objectivism: Comments?

[RandomPhantom700]

Thus far, I've looked over the Objectivism website and seen her books in the philosophy section of Borders, but haven't yet read any of Ayn Rand's materials. Having heard her referred to a number of times, I was wondering if anyone has read any of her books and would suggest any. I thought about posting this in the library forum, but since I'm also interested in Objectivism in general, I put this here. If this thread belongs in the Library instead, my apologies. Thanks ahead of time.

 

[Flatlander]

If you would care, then to propose a topical question regarding Objectivism, I can see no reason to export the thread.:asian:

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Uhh...woohoo! artyon:

 

[The Kai]

I just got done with the novel "Atlas Shurgged" it was a good book, Rayn is relentless in her beliefs! but none the less take the time to read it. Also a while back (O.k. years ago) I read for the new intellectual. Also worthwhile. Now what is objectism?

Todd

 

[rmcrobertson]

The first thing, "objectivism," IS NOT is objective.

This is a fourth-rate, "philosophy," based on a really rather simple proposition: greed is good, much as in Gordon Gekko's speech in the movie, "Wall Street." Grab everything you can; the best man--and we do mean, "man"--wins, devil take the hindermost. In Rand's arguuments, this is taken for gospel truth, based upon the idea that this is somehow not only, "natural," but in conformity with the essential spirit of "man."

If you read her novels, however, something even nastier appears: a) we should all bow down before great men; b) most of the ills of the world come from the little people, the coloreds, the Jews who interfere with the Great Men; c) women cannot ever be great men, and if they appear to try, they should be beaten and raped on a bathroom floor, which will be good becacause they will like that a lot.

In other words, "objectivism," is a slightly-weird combo of capitalist theory run even more amuck than usual, and Fascism.

And oh yes--if you like this stuff, you should keep in mind that one thing it is NOT is democratic. She--and that dork Nathaniel Branden--always portray, "the masses," as bad.

Oh yeah, and THX 1138 was a helluva lot better than her science fiction.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

c) women cannot ever be great men, and if they appear to try, they should be beaten and raped on a bathroom floor, which will be good becacause they will like that a lot.

Wow, this seems to contrast quite a bit with the website I read, but of course that's only a website and I haven't hit the texts yet. Tell me, did you read this part in a specific book that I could see what you're talking about? Again, thanks ahead of time.

 

[rmcrobertson]

"The Fountainhead."

John Dos Passos' "USA," trilogy is a helluva sight better book, and bears some relation to life on this planet.

The "Objectivist," websites won't tell you about the Rand/Branden foofaraw of her last decade--equalled only by the way that when L. Ron Hubbard died, the Scientologists lied about it for a year.

 

[The Kai]

I saw it as "everybody works, for what they receive". woman was actually the lead in the atlas shrugged novelIt can go a little over the top
Todd

 

[Randy Strausbaugh]

RandomPhantom700:
In reply to your question, "The Fountainhead" should probably be read before "Atlas Shrugged". It's an easier read, and will give you some idea as to whether or not you want to try the longer book.
For the record, I was extremely offended by the "she was raped but she really wanted it" scene. It was as bad as the marital rape scene in "Gone With The Wind". You would think that the authors (both women) would've been above such drivel. Just my opinion.

 

[rmcrobertson]

The last things these are is, "everybody works, for what they receive." More like everybody works, but a very few Great Men matter.

If you like novels of ideas, try Kim Stanley Robinson's "Mars," series. They're infinitely better written, infinitely more intellectually complex, and they don't have the out-and-out fascism and racist ideology to contend with.

 

[SMP]

I have read a couple of her books and some other writings if you look at political philosophies in a circle instead of a line she would be ultra conservative into a extreme liberal. This may not make sense unless you read her work. I dont agree with a lot of her views but they are interesting. also there is a movie about her.