Ayn rand hate

[mr E No.2205153]

I was looking at that story on yahoo news awhile back about the mistake they made on the atlas shrugged movie posters(they wrote it was rands story of self sacrifice which if youve read the book or anything she wrote you know the botch that was) anyway, i was reading through the comments and saw alot of nasty ayn rand hate comments, all nasty and not one giving a reason as to why, ive aslo seen comments on the net(and here) mention that her philosophy had alot of flaws and things like that.

Now i enjoy her work and agree with her views on many subjects, at the same time its far from idle worship, so i was just wondering what /lit has to say about ms rand/

And explanations please, were talking philosophy so just saying the things a 5th grader would say wont do, how about we use grown up words and reasoning

[Anonymous No.2205155]

All you need to see her theories are a total failure is the financial crises of '08 which was caused in large part due to her toady Alan Greenspan being in charge of the Federal Reserve. He used to chill at her apartment back in the day and lap up every word of bullshit she spewed.

[mr E No.2205166]

Sorry but i cant buy a guilt by association argument, and the financial crisis is a enormously complex beast you cant pin on one guy

[Anonymous No.2205169]

she ugly

[Dr. Seussicide (SLAF) No.2205170]

>>2205153
She ain't no Megan Boyle, the only decent female writer.

[Anonymous No.2205178]

>>2205170

[♥ !Rrxa7zePwI No.2205195]

>>2205170
hurr

[Anonymous No.2205207]

Because all the characters in her books are just representations of her. She's shrewd and advocates an unhealthily selfish lifestyle. She was so mad because she was born into what became the Soviet Union that she rebelled and created all these books with herself as the main character (under different names, of course) so that she could knock down strawmen representations of "socialism" and "communism".

[Anonymous No.2205227]

Overlong, didactic, books full of Mary Sue's. I don't like writers whose sole purpose in writing books is to expound a political belief. I don't mind if the book is well written and the politics is subtle, but when the book is poorly written, and not only expounding a political philosophy but expounding a bullshit one, I quickly loose interest. Is that a grown up and reasonable answer?

[mr E No.2205246]

>>2205227

i dont quite agree but at least your being reasonable, thanks

[Anonymous No.2205304]

because the book is awful and Rand's philosophy is twice as awful.

the book is essentially a giant straw man argument, where Dagny argues with a bunch of incompetent idiots, so of course she wins every argument because everyone who disagrees with her is such a huge idiot they can't argue at all against her. It would be a different story if Rand only did this once, but she does it over and over and over, so by the time you're two hundred pages in you've listened to the same straw man argument no less than seven times in a row. This also means that the characters aren't actually characters. They're caricatures. Everyone in the book only exists to support Rand's philosophy, especially the characters who disagree and are painted as being mildly retarded. This also makes the characters incredibly dull, flat, predictable. If you're a character in Ayn Rand's story you're either God's gift to mankind or you're a brainless leech, and there is no middle ground, ever. An exaggerated black/white dichotomy serves a purpose for propaganda, but not for actual literature.

That's ignoring Rand's blatant wish fulfillment romance subplot which was really just a recycling of her blatant wish fulfillment romance subplot from the Fountainhead. That's also ignoring that Rand's prose is really bad, and that in the 1,000+ pages there are probably only a few paragraphs that seem to shine. And that's also ignoring that Rand's philosophy is horribly, horribly flawed.

Over and over and over she states that people who are poor or unsuccessful just need to work harder, and everyone who is rich earned their wealth through hard work and dedication. It would be nice if that were true, but it isn't. Hard work often goes unrewarded and successful people often have luck and circumstance to owe for their success. This is essentially called a "fundamental attribution error."

[Anonymous No.2205312]

Oh, btw, here's your daily dose of rage

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Ayn-Rand-Atlas-Shrugged-First-Edition-First-Printing-/120810401878?pt=Antiqu
arian_Collectible&hash=item1c20dc7056

And yes, there are actually 45 bids.

[Anonymous No.2205467]

>>2205312

other 1st prints go for big money, why shouldn't this? because you dont like it? really?

[Anonymous No.2205471]

>>2205155

If you read End the Fed by Ron Paul there's some great insight into this. Both Greenspan and Paul are Rand disciples, but Paul blames Greenspan's failings as Federal Reserve treasurer on his merging away from the philosophies he held as a young man. In one part of the book, Greenspan, many years later, is brought in front of a government commitee to explain several key failings under his tenure, and after pathetically blaming it on outdated computers in his office, Paul says "He was not John Galt."

[Anonymous No.2205506]

I'm thinking of taking on a Rand-esque trip and just defending her on here 24/7 in the same manner Deep&Edgy used to troll fantasy readers.

[Anonymous No.2205514]

Here's why:

Her writing is abysmal, it's dry and forced and stilted and every other terrible word you could use to describe literature. It's also rapey and creepy.

Here's another reason:
Her philosophy is comically extreme and her ideal society is not only unsustainable but it can't even be created.

>>2205471
Great, too bad Paulites are some of the objectively dumbest people of all time, who have no idea what kind of system would support their interests as individuals. Libertarianism can in no way shape or form put an end to all of the crises that have arisen from Capitalism as it has existed. The only good thing about him is his anti-war stance, which doesn't matter, accumulative conditioning is more powerful than the US president could ever be, and the bottomless bloodbath of Capital will lead deeper into the heart of the Earth.

You can't blame the 2008 financial collapse on anything other than the blind force of accumulation and you can't separate that force from the heart of Capitalism, it wouldn't be itself if you did.

[Anonymous No.2205539]

>liking books in which a bunch of shallow characters go out of their way to make a case for egoism
>not reading a sexy sodomite but an ugly Russian woman

Start with Philosophy in the Bedroom, OP.

[Anonymous No.2205543]

>>2205153

Philosophy aside, Ayn Rand is a horrible writer. The block of Atlas Shrugged was written and proof-read only by herself, with no editing allowed. What follows is page upon page of essentially a neo-conservatives/Pure capitalist's wet dream. It reads more like fan-fiction or a wish-fullfillment novel. If this had been done ironically it would have been wonderful. It's literary masturbation, where everyone against the main, perfect Mary Sue character is craven and spineless because they think differently than she does.

[Anonymous No.2205565]

>>2205514

but that's wrong....cut the funding, cut the wars. shut down the Central bank, go back to the gold standard and end fiat currency, and there won't be a blank check for preventative wars anymore. not trying to simplify anything (and your argument would be more effective if you didn't resort to name-calling) but all economic woes in the US since 1971 can be traced to fiat money and the federal reserve fucking with interest rates, pumping up inflation, and imaginary money.

[Anonymous No.2205568]

It's pretty simple, OP. Ayn Rand is alpha as fuck, while /lit/ is beta as fuck. Enjoy your basements, fags.

[Anonymous No.2205575]

Combine sub-par writing skills of a second language English speaker and the stupidest fucking hyper-conservative ideologies ever and you get Atlas Shrugged.

The only people that like this bitch are the crazy conservatives Palin, Bush, Cheney *shudders*, and the people that were stupid enough to be influenced by them.

[Anonymous No.2205613]

>>2205565
That has more to the fact that since the end of WWII the Federal reserve never returned power to an actual federal bank system. fiat currency isn't what's fucking us over, it's a mix of the lowest tax cuts in the last fifty years mixed with the highest spending in that same time, combined with a financial system that was turned from production to essentially gambling on debt.
The gold standard really wouldn't save us, because what people(including other governments) depend on is the idea of the US dollar being around forever. That's hwy when the economy tanked everyone started buying US bonds immediately. Because they're a safe return. you don't need to return to the Articles of Confederation to stop expensive wars, cut military expenditures, and actually sit down and fix a broken legislative system to run on what actual elected legislators think will fix things, and not what lobbyist groups(right OR left leaning) want instead.

[Anonymous No.2205622]

>>2205568
>capitalism
>alpha

Try again.

[Anonymous No.2205626]

>>2205613

Which will never, ever be accomplished by a Republicrat. Or maybe it will, lets wait another 5-6 terms and see what comes after trillion on the debt meter.

Once again, if we can only spend real money, then all the cuts you speak of will be force fed on every branch of government, the military, etc. The libertarians are far from perfect but they seem to be the only one's saying fuck the partisanship, we need to do something drastic before we're burning dollars in out fireplaces to keep warm.

[Anonymous No.2205633]

>>2205626
Much like expanding the government, gutting it (other than the military) will do nothing to improve the economic situation. It will almost completely fuck over the poor and what's left of the middle class though, and that seems to be what every one of the thousands of libertarian think-tanks across the country wish to do.

[Anonymous No.2205636]

>>2205622
lol, as opposed to what?

[Anonymous No.2205639]

>>2205633

Can you tell me how it would hurt the poor and middle class? I'm serious, I'm just getting into this shit. Isn't the aid they receive generally state programs? From what I've read the Libs want to even further empower the states. If people aren't paying any more federal income taxes, they could double state taxes and we'd still pay less overall.

[Anonymous No.2205643]

Ayn Rand is embarrassing. No one who really knows anything about philosophy takes her seriously. She is to philosophy what Nickleback is to rock music, or what Adam Sandler movies are to cinema, or Farmville is to video games.

If you want to endorse a selfish, libertarian strand of capitalism, at least read some competent philosophers like Nozick or something. You can hold those views and still do much better than Rand.

Yes, I know I have not provided reasons but this is 4chan, so who cares.

[Anonymous No.2205650]

>>2205643
and no one will listen, because even on 4chan people wont even acknowledge a hassled passer byes comment

[Anonymous No.2205651]

>>2205636

Fascism, of course.

[Anonymous No.2205652]

>>2205643
correction, half assed passer byes comment

[Anonymous No.2205661]

>>2205651

Fascism is a type of government. Capitalism is a vague umbrella term used to describe an economic system reliant on private property and markets.

[Anonymous No.2205664]

>>2205661

Sure. But it's alpha as fuck. And comes with its own economic system.

[Anonymous No.2205665]

Is Ayn Rand still worth reading just because of relevance? Her name gets tossed around a lot.

[Anonymous No.2205668]

>>2205664

What?

[mr E No.2205676]

>>2205665 pick it and make up your own mind, i thought it was great but im biased, a copy is cheap, but get rdy for some reading, its over 1000 pages

[Anonymous No.2205680]

People hate Ayn Rand because she takes the contemporary Christianity-based philosophy of the West and completely trashes it. Objectivism offends liberals because it says social justice is shit and it offends conservatives because it says religion is shit. I'm not saying she was right, but that's where the hate comes from.

[Anonymous No.2205693]

>>2205665

If you read her, read The Fountainhead.

[mr E No.2205700]

>>2205665
should have mention i was talking about atlas shrugged

[Anonymous No.2205703]

saging for ayn rand

[Anonymous No.2205706]

>>2205703
>Saging is not thread voting.

[Anonymous No.2205708]

A hypocrite who despised government aid, yet at the end of her life happily took Social Security. I think Atlas Shrugged had boring prose, an unrealistic story, and a fifty page monologue that shoved Objectivism down the throats of any reader.

[Anonymous No.2205732]

>>2205708

You do understand we pay into Social Security all our lives and receiving it is not "government aid"?

[mr E No.2205739]

>>2205732

damnit said it before i could

[Anonymous No.2205748]

>>2205732
No, he doesn't understand that.

In his defense, /lit/ has an 80% or higher unemployment rate.

[Anonymous No.2206181]

>>2205153
>far from idle worship

I lol'd

>how about we use grown up words and reasoning

How about you learn to hyphenate, spell, and use apostrophes before you start a thread populated by /lit/erates?

Before I realized she fancied herself a philosopher and was the darling of conservative thought, I read The Fountainhead because I liked architecture. I had to put it down two-thirds of the way through. Her prose is overlong and shitty.

[Anonymous No.2206208]

>Rand thread

[mr E No.2206676]

>>2206181
i guess this is what passes for debate here, the more insulting and cocksure you sound is how right you are, love your reasoning and troll tactics, you must really know what your talking about, say what you will about rand, she backed up her arguments with logic and even a egoist like her realized that you cant just insult and greentext people into taking you seriously, and before you start typing a troll retort you cant refute a complex subject with a greentexted lol and a stupid picture try as you might

[Anonymous No.2206686]

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

[Anonymous No.2206703]

What's the difference between the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged?

The Fountainhead burns hotter but Atlas Shrugged burns longer.

[None !!4tV++0AG5iF No.2206708]

>>2205170
eudora welty
flannery o'connor

there are some great female authors out there.

anyways i despise rand. i think responsible adults need to have a sense for both the individual and the communal. too much of either without consideration of the other is unhealthy imo.

[Anonymous No.2206716]

Why do I hate Ayn Rand? Well, there's always this:

http://aynrandcontrahumannature.blogspot.com/search/label/Aesthetics

But most of all I find it frustrating, as an egoist, to be associated with her juvenile, self-defeating ideology.

[Anonymous No.2206717]

Flannery O'Conner is the fucking bomb!

[None !!4tV++0AG5iF No.2206724]

>>2206717
very true. :)

[Anonymous No.2206749]

>>2206686
saw that in the comments in the story mentioned above, your not even original in your half-assed opinion