Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 23

Thread: Psychopath Economics

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    Left Coast
    Posts
    7,822

    Psychopath Economics

    For the nutcases in the Republican party:
    Rand's work is very popular among conservatives now. It forms a core justification for their "on your own" philosophy praising the wealthy and discarding the rest. So it is useful to explore the formation and core of this philosophy. Early in her writings Rand became fascinated with a serial killer named William Hickman.Rand wrote that the serial killer was an "ideal man," a superior form of human because he didn't let society impose their morals on him. He didn't worry about what others thought and just did as he pleased.

    "Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should," Rand wrote. Hickman had "no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. He has the true, innate psychology of a Superman. He can never realize and feel 'other people.'" She considered these to be good qualities! And so does her cult.
    Alan Greenspan and Things Forgotten | OurFuture.org

    Jesus Christ vs. Ayn Rand, from a priest, Father Cleet Kiley:
    There was a time in this country when we all believed in something called the common good. And we believed that if we all put in our fair share, we would be a just country, a strong country, a nation at peace with itself.

    There was a time in this country when we all believed it was right to take care of our elderly; to secure their retirement; to provide them with health care; to give them a dignity and quality of life.
    Ayn Rand's Poison: GOP Faces Backlash for Their Obsessive Worship of a Psycho | | AlterNet

    Ayn Rand would have used the 25th chapter of the book of Matthew in the New Testament as toilet paper.

    And the current big name in the Ayn Rand cult, Paul Ryan, congressman from Wisconsin, is afraid of a Bible.
    Brother, you can believe in stones as long as you do not hurl them at me. Wafa Sultan

    “War is an American way to teach geography,” British soldier

    War is sweet to those who have not tasted it, but the experienced man trembles exceedingly at heart on its approach. – Pindar

  2. #2
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    I am surprised by how people so easily take up some of Ayn Rand's ideas, really makes me doubt the human races ability to think for themselves. Atlas Shrugged was a ridiculous story, it could never happen and says nothing more worthwhile than a poorly written science fiction fantasy story. Atlas Shrugged is said to be the second best selling book of all time the bible being first and it is fitting these two fairy tales are so popular given the intelligence of people in general. These two books basically setup the general public to subordinate themselves without a question. If I were a conservative I would think that it was some kind of conspiracy.

    And then their is the issue of people picking bits out of Rands books that they like and ignoring the rest, very similar to the bible in that respect.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Sydney, Oz
    Posts
    3,253
    Atlas Shrugged, like Sir Thomas More's Utopia, is not very successful as a pure work of fiction or as a pure work of philosophy, but it is a very subversive novel in combining fiction and philosophy in a single work.

    And it is very successful in both attracting people to read it, and in compelling those who have read it to question their beliefs.

    An atheist might say that the bible does the same thing.

    If you are looking to Rand for economics, you are mistaken, she was not an economist. She was an author of fiction and an armchair philosopher.

    It seems absurd to me to level criticisms at an early 20th century science fiction author for penning things that "could not happen", unless your criticism is about sci fi as a genre. I don't see Battlestar Galactica happening either, but it also succeeds in getting people to think about contemporary issues.

    As far as the character assassination goes, Nietsczhe used a lot of drugs, Rand wrote favourably towards a serial killer in her 20s, and the Greeks had sex with small boys. They're all dead now, so besmirching their characters serves really no purpose except to reveal your own.
    He or she who supports a State organized in a military way – whether directly or indirectly – participates in sin. Each man takes part in the sin by contributing to the maintenance of the State by paying taxes.

    ~ Gandhi

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Quote Originally Posted by simone View Post
    Jesus Christ vs. Ayn Rand, from a priest, Father Cleet Kiley:
    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    And then their is the issue of people picking bits out of Rands books that they like and ignoring the rest, very similar to the bible in that respect.
    Oh but we objectivist are far worse than Christians because since we admit rand was a human being with failures, mistakes, and downright irrational qualities we are perfectly justified in picking out the 'bits' we like and throwing out the rest. We aren't claiming she's a prophet or a god, nor that anything she wrote is absolute truth because she wrote it. The bible it is claimed is a book from God. We only claim atlas shrugged is a book. We don't have a 'word of god' principle to contradict.

    Atlas shrugged in particular has no objectionable parts in my opinion. It's perfect. That does not mean the author or anything else the author wrote is perfect. Atlas Shrugged purely from a fictional standpoint is average, I'll cede that. What it seems that people who read it and think it sucks as literature can't see is that the plot twists that normally fill a typical novel still exist in atlas shrugged, but the twists are of the philosophy of those involved. You aren't surprised that it really was the butler, you are surprised to find out what Dagny taggart really thought.

    I find the irrational, and clearly absurd actions that Rand took in her life no more a challenge to accepting the ideas she espoused than the fact that half this country used to keep slaves. What is writing about a certain aspect of a serial killer favourable to keeping slaves? I am not trying to march Jefferson to the sociopath ward, and the only excuse emotionalist would give him is that he felt oh so much empathy towards his slaves so it's really 'not that bad'. In fact many of our founding fathers kept slaves, for that reason I will always personally respect Adams, Franklin and the other northern FF more. That doesn't mean the profound quotes on liberty that Jefferson made are any less true.

    Character assassination has always been the last resort of those who cannot deal with another's ideas honestly.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    I am surprised by how people so easily take up some of Ayn Rand's ideas,
    I am surprised at how vehemently some people hate Rand's ideas. If I were like you perhaps I would doubt man's ability to think for themselves, but I know it's in everyone of us. It just needs to be encouraged and nurtured.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    really makes me doubt the human races ability to think for themselves.
    This coming from someone who supports less than 1/4 of what he says. I am still waiting for a defense of your statements on irrational evolution, the center of the universe, the 'beginning' of time, and many other statements.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    Atlas Shrugged was a ridiculous story, it could never happen
    No it could never happen, that is because it was a book specifically designed to portray an ideal, and ideals don't perfectly exist. To some that makes the book unreal, but I love stories like that. I don't like baseball particularly but I loved 'the natural', I like any story with a hero who makes no fundamental errors, small errors, learning errors sure; but no fundamental errors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    and says nothing more worthwhile than a poorly written science fiction fantasy story.
    It implies a lot that is of great worth.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    Atlas Shrugged is said to be the second best selling book of all time the bible being first and it is fitting these two fairy tales are so popular given the intelligence of people in general.
    Where the bible tells men what to think atlas shrugged tells them to think. If atlas shrugged does will it's only because the bible and variations on it's theme have done so well for so long. A healthy uncorrupted person adores the idea that they must think for themselves. Atlas shrugged entices everyone to be scientist while the bible begs them to be mystics.

    Quote Originally Posted by Accipiter View Post
    These two books basically setup the general public
    to subordinate themselves without a question.
    The public maybe, but not people. There is nothing more unquestionably consistent in objectivist literature than the impropriety of blind submission.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    421
    Quote Originally Posted by simone View Post
    the formation and core of this philosophy. Early in her writings Rand became fascinated with a serial killer named William Hickman.
    that is almost too stupid for words:

    1) The first Republican was Thomas Jefferson who formed the party, and the country, in 1794 around the idea of freedom and liberty from government. To suggest that Rand is more important than Jefferson is beyond absurd.


    2) to suggest that Rand liked William Hickman

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    that is almost too stupid for words:

    1) The first Republican was Thomas Jefferson who formed the party, and the country, in 1794 around the idea of freedom and liberty from government.
    You really don't read much history do you.. Jefferson was a Liberal and formed what became known as the Democratic Party.. Lincoln was the first " Republican" President. Read a book sometime.
    "You're too stupid to be saved." -- EasyRider.


    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
    Epicurus

  7. #7
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    3,718
    Quote Originally Posted by Brutus View Post
    that is almost too stupid for words
    just like you!

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Posts
    12,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Xcaliber View Post
    You really don't read much history do you.. Jefferson was a Liberal and formed what became known as the Democratic Party..
    ROTFLOL! You're so lost.

    Jefferson on Sodomy

    Whosoever shall be guilty of Rape, Polygamy, or Sodomy with man or woman shall be punished, if a man, by castration, if a woman, by cutting thro' the cartilage of her nose a hole of one half inch diameter at the least.

    Amendment VIII: Thomas Jefferson, A Bill for Proportioning Crimes and Punishments

    Jefferson also believed in an active God who involved himself in the affairs of men and nations, and he attended church services in government buildings.

    Some liberal.
    “For the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.” - Robert Jastrow

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Location
    Limeyland
    Posts
    7,893
    Rand may have liked Jack the ripper or Billy the kid too.
    She may have admired some part of them or found the lack of empathy enthralling but she made it clear that killing others was totally against her philosophy.
    Im reading Atlas shrugged at the moment but have only read the first part so far.
    I am of the opinion that it is brilliant but flawed,although I cant really state an informed opinion before I complete it.
    I have watched a clip on you tube where she states that a female president would a terrible and disgusting thing..but as another member pointed out , that said more about her than her philosophy.
    How many liberals and marxists were misogynists and indeed psychopaths?
    The OP has often disregarded this with her love of the runt of the Kennedy litter.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Easyrider View Post

    Jefferson also believed in an active God who involved himself in the affairs of men and nations, and he attended church services in government buildings.

    Some liberal.
    As misinformed as Brutus.. Jefferson was a Deist and didn't believe in the divinity of Christ. You should get yourself a copy of " The Jefferson Bible". Jefferson and Madison created what became the Democratic Party, his political views were Liberal . Read a book sometime.

    Oh and your little link to your biased site proves you're ignorance. read at the bottom..
    The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Julian P. Boyd

    If they were edited then this guy could have injected anything he wanted into Jefferson's words or changed the Context of a quote, I'm afraid your source is unreliable at best.
    "You're too stupid to be saved." -- EasyRider.


    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
    Epicurus

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Xcaliber,

    I feel you are purposely misleading. Yes Jefferson's views were liberal but they do not resemble what a "liberal" means today. Yes Jefferson started what became the Democrat Party but it resembled nothing what the Democrat party looks like today.

    Oh and your little link to your biased site proves you're ignorance. read at the bottom..
    The Papers of Thomas Jefferson. Edited by Julian P. Boyd
    Give me a break...It is edited because it is a compilation. It's not biased.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Steeeeve View Post
    Xcaliber,
    I feel you are purposely misleading. Yes Jefferson's views were liberal but they do not resemble what a "liberal" means today. Yes Jefferson started what became the Democrat Party but it resembled nothing what the Democrat party looks like today.
    How is the truth misleading?.. Jefferson's political Views were very similar to modern day Democrats. Of course in that time many of the Modern day Democratic Views were not around so no one really knows what he would have thought about today's Democrats but his views were More Liberal than Conservative, for his own time , so Calling him a Liberal Democrat is technically true.

    Quote Originally Posted by Steeeeve View Post
    Give me a break...It is edited because it is a compilation. It's not biased.
    Something that is written to support Jefferson as being a Conservative and deny the truth is most certainly biased. And I didn't say the Guy DID edit changes I said he COULD HAVE edited in changes. Either way it's not a reliable source if it isn't the truth .
    "You're too stupid to be saved." -- EasyRider.


    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
    Epicurus

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    4,414
    Jefferson also spoke glowingly on liberty, which puts him far away from anything left-wing.
    Morals are a religious Myth.. - Xcaliber
    How is Evil Immoral? - Xcaliber
    I am right until you prove otherwise - Xcaliber

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    3,021
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom View Post
    Jefferson also spoke glowingly on liberty, which puts him far away from anything left-wing.
    and even further from the right...
    "You're too stupid to be saved." -- EasyRider.


    "Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?"
    Epicurus

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    11,660
    Quote Originally Posted by Xcaliber View Post
    How is the truth misleading?.. Jefferson's political Views were very similar to modern day Democrats. Of course in that time many of the Modern day Democratic Views were not around so no one really knows what he would have thought about today's Democrats but his views were More Liberal than Conservative, for his own time , so Calling him a Liberal Democrat is technically true.
    Alright, you aren't misleading, you're just wrong. Was Jefferson for massive entitlement programs? Did Jefferson support Cap and Trade? Did Jefferson support gay marriage and abortion? Did Jefferson support a massive federal government?

    Don't tell people to read a book if you are only willing to give us this BS. Good grief.

    Something that is written to support Jefferson as being a Conservative and deny the truth is most certainly biased. And I didn't say the Guy DID edit changes I said he COULD HAVE edited in changes. Either way it's not a reliable source if it isn't the truth .
    Than you're just an idiot. Basically it is biased because it doesn't support YOUR view. Then you come up with this "could have changes" XXXX because it says "edited by". All the time you apparently aren't smart enough to realize that "written by" is not possible since it is a compilation...you would always used "edited by" in this instance. It is a publication from the University of Chicago Press which is not exactly Drudgereport.

    Your credibility is slipping.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •