Ayn Rand on Donahue 1979 (4/5)

[@shankadank4321]

Wow, I'm just getting more and more impressed the more I hear Rand. She was so reasonable and she saw through the womans statement and supposed question so complex that no one even understood. She was absolutley right that she had non chance to defend herself against such an insult.

[@dposting2941]

She is an illuminati shill.

[@libertea2022]

8:30 that woman referenced GM... which now in the 21st century is no longer a monopoly due to competition from Toyota, Mazda, etc..... GO RAND! you were right!

[@zzevonplant]

Yeah and they would have been knocked out long before that if it weren't for the government helping them anyway.

[@LarrySmithin2012]

Interesting how they feared the domination of Xerox and GM back then...life's funny.

[@Valelacerte]

The preamble Rand was insulted by: "Fifteen years ago I was impressed with your books and I sort of felt that your philosophy was proper. Today, however, I'm more educated and I find that …" This is a passive-aggressive insult for those who lack courage and self-knowledge. The implication is that Rand's work may fool a teenager, but anyone with some education and access to the press will see through it. This is reinforced by the way the speaker continues condescendingly "It's very basic ..."

[@HarryRalte]

Its admirable how Ayn Rand refuses to be a "victim" of the classical argument from intimidation. She responds with dignity to "register her protest".

[@JadeIsBunny]

That girl's syntax presumes that only the uneducated would agree with her sentiments. I don't think it's possible to be any more impolite than that. She was right in calling them hippies.

[@myfz6]

The first words out of the lady's mouth was an insult to Ayn Rand. I picked that up.

[@Mike82ARP]

It’s interesting watching this 32 years later and seeing how prescient Rand was.

[@anaglyphx]

Her comments about not needing a college education is absolutely relevant to today. She was a prophet.

[@Jazzper79]

She was a true individualist -- observe how she acts by the judgement of her own mind when getting that insult from the woman in the audience, she does not back down. Phil Donahue did not think it was anything, but Ayn Rand saw the enourmous insult on her intelligence in that comment. A lot of people do not recognize a put-down because they are used to put up with it, Ayn Rand had so much self-esteem she would not answer. To me it is beautiful. Jesper, Denmark

[@MonroseVila]

That girl was not being impolite. That is clearly the way Ayn Rand took it, however, the girl was only trying to say that she was smarter now, and wasn't referring to anyone else or calling someone dumb for believing in Rand. Ayn Rand overreacted.

[@NicholasWongCQ]

Rand probably should've been big enough to answer the woman's question, but what's truly amazing is that anyone would act like the comment "I used to like your philosophy, but now that I'm more educated..." isn't an insult. She might not have meant it as an insult, but it was an insult. And if she didn't realize it's an insult, she's really really dumb, and it's probably no wonder she disagrees with Rand.

[@Cash4gold84]

Nicholas Wong No, Fuck that bitch

[@1158scott]

I just commented before seeing yours. The woman had a huge ego of certainty & insulted her to declare victory because she had no intention of wanting or listening to any resonse.

[@leeYT321987]

Notice how when Ayn finally lays out exactly how the womans' question was impolite @3:35, and the audience finally starts backing her actions (through applause) Donahue shuts the audience up.

[@melkerner]

I think it is funny that none of these corporate giants being discussed is even considered a global player from either a monetary or political power perspective. I think it proves that Ayn may very well be correct in a lot of things.

[@zzevonplant]

I was thinking the same thing. And those companies have fallen out of their positions on the top even within our system which isn't even close to a true free-market and hasn't been for a very long time. So just imagine what it would be like in an actual free market.

[@myfz6]

I also wanted. To add that Americans often will hear a different type of speech and misjudge a person attitudes by the way. They perceive the tone. Example like emails and text can be mis intercepted , but here I did not find Ayn Rand nothing but pleasant and most gracious. When humans don't see the person talking to them as they would speak they often misjudge their intentions based on a dialect and we often make mistakes in assuming they r being arrogant !

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@SHIBBYiPANDA ...She is not used to that format, and it showed. She didnt like criticism and reacted poorly in each instance. Being wise means addressing people in a respectful and gracious manner not by disbelief and rudeness. I remember Zbigniew Brzezinski behaved in the same manner when he was taken to task about his foreign policy. The question was not stated well, but the manner in which Ayn responded made her look worsel, and the audience showed it.

[@Soupflakez]

@SuperOmnicron I responded because you've somehow come under the impression that Rand was acting badly, as if she were to sanction that woman's overt poisoning of the well. You are wrong in this case. Rand responded appropriately. If Rand had went so far as to go on a tirade and begin cussing, then you may have had a case; however, not with this. Rand simply refused to answer the question given the context presented, and even offered to answer if someone asked politely.

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@Soupflakez ...we just agree to disagree. Rand is a true intellectual, but she brought herself down to the level of a reactive, shrill, ogre. True class responds even to rude people. A certain disassociative behaviorism occurs with people who cannot engage a wide spectrum of beliefs.

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@stupidfleshmonkies I get what your sayin. It would be quite a spectacle. I think she wasnt used to a live studio format...

[@djNerd42]

Wow ... Rand is right, the lady WAS being rude because rather than merely disagreeing, she implied that Rand was uneducated. Nowadays we are so rude to each other that this sort of thing just slips by us! No wonder the art of dialogue is failing when we treat each other like all differences of opinion must be due to a lack of intelligence or education!

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@Soupflakez "I don't blame Rand for refusing to answer the woman's question given the insulting presuppositions. Rand wouldn't drink from a poisoned well. Why should she? Are you saying all "true" intellectuals can stomach people spitting in their faces? That's probably true, but not of Rand. Rand responded in an appropriate manner given the circumstances--even going so far as to say she would answer the question if someone wished to ask it in a polite way. " -Rand isnt used to a live audience.

[@Teadon86]

Take this event as an example: In the area my father and mother home are situated there's an lack of exploitation. It's an rural area with an healthy lake, wast forest and smaller plots of fields situated below the low mountains. Now we who lives in that area about five years ago got an noticed that two firms have an clearance to exploit the area, without even asking the neighbours if they wished it. In this case we later found out that it where the corporations whom did "forget" to tell us.

[@mmaxim64]

Ayn Rand is absolutely right about the Arabs and how they are. She is brilliant. It is refreshing to have someone so clear spoken.

[@RSheftall]

Ms. Rand is right. Any time you regulate something or grant subsidies, you are favoring one group over another. That is not capitalism, that is corporatism. Its all coming true now. According to the lady in the audience, ITT and Kodak for that matter, would be flourishing. END corporate subsidies NOW!

[@1158scott]

Rand should have told Donahue, "I use to watch your show, but then I got educated". That's a thoughtful criticism, right Donahue? That arrogant woman had to make a "I'm smart, you're wrong" type declaration of victory because she's too cowardly & egotistical to listen to any response. Donahue should have have put her on stage to expound on all the books, essays, etc. she didn't write.

[@IsmaelMartinezPR]

GM and ITT are no longer monopolies

[@fab006]

I love Rand's reaction about the "Illuminati", hahaha.

[@dposting2941]

She's an illuminati shill, actually.

[@MsTheresaKelly1]

I really like her! She's right on target when it comes to goverment entitlements and individualism vs. collectivism.

[@pgplaysvidya]

That woman was probably completely ignorant of the slight she made. Manners, people!

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@Soupflakez 。。 Well, she appeared thin skinned, but its understandable. SEVERAL people with divergent opinions have appeared on that show, and have put up with somewhat rude comments, and demonstrated calm, empathy and wisdom. As said before, she is from the one-to-one style of interview. She responded favorably when she received applause. As you say, she responded appropriately, not necessarily wisely. She is still an iconic figure, though.

[@myhipsi]

She should have said, "now that I'm more indoctrinated...", because she certainly hasn't gotten more intelligent.

[@xxcrysad3000xx]

Citizen's United wouldn't even be a problem if government weren't so big, intrusive, and "generous" with its pork. The reason there's so much influence peddling in Washington is because its where legislators make very real, very important decisions about the ways people decide to make their livelihoods, its really that simple. I agree we should take the money out of Washington, but we ought to start by reducing the size of the pie every lobbyist and congressmen is fighting for.

[@AurorasDawn]

People were really rude.

[@CptChandler]

"I'm not interested in your biography" LOL! Rand ftw.

[@myfz6]

They laughed because they are ignorant and they know rand was right to call her out on the question of rudeness in her opening sentence she was rude to rand. The audience laughed. With the girl that asked the question because of ignorance

[@Teadon86]

I do understand the incentives for corruption when we got an individual with discrete directions over services or other resources. But this is one of the reasons why we should make the system for bidding and enlisting to such events, privatizing of public services and companies, transparent and we should limit and streamline the entire process so the incentives for corruption lessens. The same goes for the authorization of licenses for, lets say, export and import firms.

[@Teadon86]

Another reason why tariffs are being used are because they're main intended use are to combat monopoly within the market, also the intention nowadays are also to combat products that are bad for the environment. It's one way to punish the corporations that still want to use less safe products that are proven to damage the health of the consumers and animals.

[@TheElectricTurtle]

@Thill029 Unfortunately the limited space for these comments leads to ambiguous statements. When I said 'Ayn Rand is wrong' I meant that not in a moral sense but in a logical sense. I was not saying that there is no reasonable degree to which business should be involved in politics, but rather that it is fundamentally untrue that in real capitalist society that money could not buy political power (which is not necessarily the same as 'access to force').

[@samadhir]

Yes, because Rand herself was the very epitome of politeness and good manners...

[@libertea2022]

0:20 lol "I don't believe that"... money is power... IDEAS and KNOWLEDGE are power, where do you think money comes from?! INNOVATION!

[@Teadon86]

PS: I'm not against being corrected if my information is wrong but I'm not found of being said being a supporter of things I'm not. I did state that there's theories that supports the usage of monopolies but there's too many downsizes with using such a system that it's not beneficial for the market, the workers etc.

[@chairde]

She is so far above every one else in the room that they really don't understand her demand to be treated politely. The question was presented in a rude manner.

[@Teadon86]

In America we've seen privatizations of the municipal water distribution and it's effects. Companies couldn't and wouldn't take their responsibility, even when they got tax benefits, to keep the water clean and safe. We've seen how corporations have been showing an larger disapproving attitude towards the public domain since the late seventies; how waterworks and such should be operated. Under the eighties we saw how the market privatized large bodies of water against the peoples will.

[@MREGYPTIANACCOUNTANT]

i admire her way of speaking

[@Teadon86]

So in short we're back again to what I said in the first posts: We must open up the system so anyone can demand information about a government or corporations since both are liable to the public. Of course there's some areas one should not be able demand such things, like what's their next product or technological information but you get the main idea of my statement.

[@IsmaelMartinezPR]

Interesting view of Monopoly. I was immediately reminded of the struggles with corn and other commodities that are under monopoly control right now.

[@arizonabay6]

Rand: Tough against hippies and the causes of hippies

[@Teadon86]

Of course we do have that. But what I'm saying is that to start an civil action and win against a corporation, with almost an endless sum of money, is arduous and to much of an farce. It may take many years before the law notice anything dubious about the declaration or whatever. We still needs to open up the flow of information within corporations so the public can take an active part in making the corporations more responsible.

[@EnTomTanke]

I don't understand why she do not answer the question since the question is still out there without this impolite woman asking it!

[@shanlarren]

the woman's laugh at :49 is a defense mechanism to show that she isnt offended by rand's comment on her impoliteness

[@RSheftall]

Ms. Rand is right, Mr. Donahue is wrong. The lady in the audience was very impolite

[@trehansen]

I definitely see Rand's point about that woman being quite condescending. There was absolutely no reason for her to even bring up her personal history as to try to discredit Rand's ideologies. She attacked Rand's intelligence and not the ideologies themselves.

[@TheShiznittt]

Of course Ms. Rand would take offense to that. "i use to like your work...but then i became more educated." That just implies that only someone who is uneducated and naive would enjoy Ayn Rands work. I can't believe how many times Donahue interrupted Rand and always looked to the audience's applause as affirmation.

[@TuesdaysThursdays]

"I agreed with your ideas until I became more intelligent." is an insult.

[@elizabethfaraone]

I don't want Ayn Rand to force me to NOT pay taxes. I want to pay taxes and I want those taxes to be used to provide for those who are unable to provide for themselves. I want a government that does not wage war, that does not back military coups in other countries, that provides for those who cannot provide for themselves and that makes reparations for those it has harmed.

[@invincibleironman3]

The bigger question is why privatization, and corporatism are rampant. The idiocy is countries in debt, ponzi schemes and more. At this time the public could face power and question it...now there is only naked, unelectable, unaccountable corporate power and reality shows.

[@alexavasquez1992]

yeah, i like ayn rand, but this is something that i wish she was still around to be asked.

[@kingdom8474]

4:53 👀 Ayn Rand asked about supporting illuminati

[@Teadon86]

About Singapore I must point it out that it's their government that's done an extremely well job in fighting the corruption, one of their most important tools where transparency and education. So I doubt, with a pinch of salt I must add, that corporations where in the forefront, in the breach, of this hugely successful transformation of an nation that inherited their bureaucracy and government from the British.

[@Teadon86]

So how could we combat any rise or pervasive corruption in this given area of the judicial system? One way is to raise the salaries and to add benefits, but even that might add to the corruption through peoples bribing themselves into an well-paid position. Then we could see to bind this solution together with transparent internal mechanism that do not allow any official themselves to alter this ban on business operations without an court order from an higher instance, ex: court of appeal.

[@E.B.J.S.]

That's one hell of a strong woman. (I'm say she's nice or rude, right or wrong). But, she is one hell of a strong woman.

[@Teadon86]

Also: "While it is impossible to eliminate all subjectivity, our goal is to reduce, to the extent possible, judgment calls on the part of the authors2". They admit that the authors may use their own judgement but tries to limit such calls. We can't deduce with certainty what's done due to judgement calls and, much as possible, objective information gathering and use of it. Even if they use an exhibit comprised of seven areas to explain regulatory policy and other institutional arrangements.

[@newcoyote]

I think it was perfectly valid what the questioner said. A lot of people fall for the ramblings of ideologues because it sounds impressive. Once you consider the variables of reality ( they are numerous) her philosophy is naive. What kind of defense is "I don't answer questions like that". Intellectual integrity? You are offended. Tough. Listen to what your criticizers are saying and learn. Grow up.

[@robertchflynn]

she is right. It is rude to say "I used to agree with you but now that I am more educated..." Granted the woman wasn't trying to be rude but nevertheless was to preface her question like that....

[@Teadon86]

The brilliance with corporation are that they're seen, by the legal system, as a legal person and thus have the exact rights as an living human being. But they aren't held personally responsible as real individuals, they do not even play on the same legal field even though they inherit rights. A government can become inquired by any individual but no corporation can be inquired into without there being good legal reasons for it. Thus corruption are more widespread within the market.

[@Teadon86]

But of course we don't. I rather not blame everything either on the government nor the market but on the handling by both parties and theirs presumptuousness in regards to law and proper conduct in matters that effects the public. There should be laws that explicitly demands openness in such important matters, even in international matters.

[@Scruffed]

I wonder if her dear industrialists would agree to put someone without a degree (and most likely from a very expensive university) in a management position. I'd love to see them looking at such a job application from a "self-taught" person and saying "oh, looks like this guy really knows the trade".

[@Teadon86]

I study law. And because people knows this they tend to ask me questions how they should get their money from their employer. Or at least they want to hold the employer responsible for their actions. But this isn't easy. As an employee you can't make accusations without any proofs, it's illegal, and if you have been working for this employer without him paying taxes and you worked for some time you yourself can come under investigations for fiscal offences.

[@gmenezesdea]

Man, this is the most awkward debate I've ever seen. The host is irritated, the public is irritated, Rand is irritated, but they just go on and on discussing.

[@TuesdaysThursdays]

If the Ayn Rand's motive was to sway the audience, then the best move would have been to let it slide. She is of the opinion that her arguments stand on their own feet through their logic. It's hard not to feel contempt for people who are more likely to be swayed using emotional pleas then reason, especially when your whole morality is based on reason as the good. Subjugation to insults wasn't worth it, when the only people it would benefit are those who reject reason for emotion.

[@Teadon86]

One would argue that such information will create an stronger black market; the thief will now be able to concentrate their work to attack bank accounts with the 'correct' amount of money and to use the numbers that's being shared between these two bank accounts. Of course we now must use official numbers that's being showed and used as tags and can then be tracked down to the individual bank account.

[@Teadon86]

Whilst corruption has to do with what you're willing to do in order to achieve an goal. In it's dry essence this are what corruption and freedom really are. Why would a economic system with less freedom be more corrupt then the other? It's the agents, the acting individuals that define both systems, both social structures.

[@Teadon86]

A STUDY OF THE EFFECTS OF CORRUPTION ON ECONOMIC AND POLITICAL DEVELOPMENT OF ARMENIA This little study will show for the reader how difficult it is to define corruption and the effecting variables. You see I can too use studies all the way I want but I rather not unless I see no other way. The only reason I do not use studies, like I said, is because it's too easy to hide behind one and one do not have to flex their own mind in the argument. So my claim still stands about the social variables

[@Gabriel21733]

I wonder what ayn rand would say of today's banking system and monopolies...

[@zzevonplant]

Gabriel21733, She would say that those things are only able to be monopolies and be as horrible as they are because they're being assisted in doing so, by the government. As John Smith said above, it's essentially fascism.

[@Teadon86]

And even when it's clear by the legal system that these corporations are not taking their responsibility, they still can't be forced into fulfilling their part of the agreement. Thus saving an huge amount of money by the expense of human life. These lawsuits are horrible to adjudicate, they're extremely arduous. It's easy for the corporation to muddy the civil action by pointing to interpretations of words, how the costumer interpreted it, in order to further strengthen their defence.

[@Teadon86]

If you don't agree with this notion then feel free to link me to a study that has been trying to analyse the social effects on the economy, not a study that's been just mentioning it and then drops the subject.

[@StarTazer]

Donahue only loves scandal, he has a brillant woman sitting there just cat fighting with a total stranger, just for the show, you can see him smiling the minute Ayn points out that woman was impolite, that "here comes the show" smile.

[@BroodjeEend]

donahue is a polite man but he often comes across as condescending

[@snakeinthegrass20]

No, you don't sanction a principle. Not once. Taken to it's extreme, would it be ok to kill just 1 person ?

[@Teadon86]

so far I've been reading some paperworks about how corruption is must dependable on the social landscape and if the opportunities where there to admit the existence of corruption. If the judicial system is answering to politics and/or the market first and foremost or not. If the population is educated or not. How each and every law are hobnailed both in theory and practice of course. If the market and the government can discuss behind closed doors relatively undisturbed.

[@Teadon86]

I've been showing objective data why I don't agree with that study and have even provided you some references to international transparency's own data. The ONLY reason why I used a study here is show you exactly what I mean since you rather use studies then believing in other peoples abilities to reason and analyse. I've been discussing the phenomenon that peoples so readily use studies right at the beginning instead of trying to reach an conclusion themselves.

[@Anubis4815162342]

@2legs2armsetc You do realize that Ayn didn't produce that movie right?

[@jtbovis]

I agree that the way the questioner begun the question was completely unnecessary and Rand was right to point it out. I disagree with many of Rand's positions myself but I wouldn't phrase a question to her, nor to anyone, in such a disrespectful manner.

[@Girka9011]

Someone can translate this to spanish? Thanks..

[@RadAntelope]

Does ITT exist today? No. Rand was right.

[@JustinK617]

Bingo

[@DrLeoKouts]

Funny about those monopolies that were going to take over the world, What happened to GM in 08?

[@Teadon86]

I do recognize that the market is important but it doesn't answer the entire history behind corruption, in this case we have to look into other areas of expertise to draw more data from in the search of an answer. We still see discrepancies between the market studies about corruption and, as many of them claim, the sole reason behind corruption. The only way to effectively combat corruption is to use non-governmental anti-corruption agencies with no economical incentives.

[@Teadon86]

The study do mention the difficulties in studying social structures and the effects. Just as I've said from the very beginning. It's no figure that our societies today would not have been so educated and relatively free of corruption if it wouldn't be for accessibly information. Also ways of acquiring information both from corporations and governments are much more possible today then before, obviously. We have actually the last one hundred years or so been freeing, so to say, information.

[@Dactylus]

Her reasons for not answering the woman's questions are valid - but she ought to have stated them right from the beginning. "There was no need to phrase the question in such and such a way, and thus I will not answer it." Further, by being impolite in return and not mentioning her validation of why that was acceptable (that if one aggresses upon another, the other has a right to aggress in return), she appeared to be speaking in contradictions.

[@Teadon86]

They didn't with us to know anything about the plan of a new golf course, neither that they wished to enlarge the roads in the areas so they could build row-houses. So they stressed their wish of closed sessions with the town planning committee, it's clear they knew the neighbours wish to preserve their rural surrounding. If there were a law forcing and stressing the free flow of information we would had been able to stop these plans and force them to discuss with us; instead of lying to us.

[@Teadon86]

Even though I do agree with parts of the study, the informational bits of how to measure the markets different components I don't agree with how they judged the more "elusive" bits of an economy. Like: how does an large state sector have for impact on an economy? What it be with an minimum state sector? What I've read they seems to, almost, be voting in some more elusive areas. They claim that they've been discussing, apparently, objectively these more elusive areas.

[@samadhir]

All I can find about her opinions on Native Americans is how they lived like brutes, wasted the potential of land by not building large cities and factories, and how the Europeans, as a superior culture aware of property rights, had every right to throw them of the land they had been living on for centuries. It simply looks like a justification for all the atrocities commited against them in the founding of the United States, and a very harsh and chauvinistic one at that.

[@KeenenBlockson]

@1:08-1:21 Ayn Rand's new nickname is officially Petty Crocker 😂 never try that with an elderly Russian woman

[@SuperOmnicronsj44]

@jnick1980 BRILLIANT ANALYSIS. That ending is pretty much apparent in her demeanor . Perfect encapsulation of the entire thread.

[@Teadon86]

A tariff isn't used the same today as it was a hundred years ago. You might believe that tariffs are used to benefit one market prior to another market. What you, seems like it, do not know that tariffs actually are used to lower the cost-differentials in between goods. Also the use of tariffs today also have an use within the juridical system. This is because the use of quittance or voucher is being practised when businesses do pay taxes for their entire bailiwick, like for their employees.

[@Teadon86]

At the fall of the Berlin Wall, in Russia we saw how the market started to rampage to collect more of the Russian market shares and we saw how violence and corruption just sky-rocketed. I'm well aware that we saw many government officials went sour and started collect bribes but the market is just as a big part of the corruption as those within the government. Their judicial system where not updated and it was still answering to officials and where not autonomous.

[@SHIBBYiPANDA]

@SuperOmnicron nope. Rand has a RIGHT to be impatient and condescending because she is better than everyone asking a question. By better I mean more intelligent and wise. That question was condescending. end of story. That stupid interviewer was trying to deflect the impoliteness of the question off of the stupid person to the intelligent person like all stupid people do because all stupid people attack intelligent people.. Its obvious..

[@nvcn86]

but she should've answered "let me guess - educated in a liberal university?" ;)

[@Teadon86]

No, vital or deleterious numbers is being showed since the tag-number only lead you down to one bank account; of course logs containing information about whom requires the information should be used. So how would this example not be strengthening corruption and the power to authoritarian governments? Easy, everyone at any time will be able to obtain the exact same information and there's no limits enforced unto others that cuts off their ability to obtain such information.

[@Teadon86]

Why is that so? Obviously if both practice, in this case Sweden and USA, open market with, more or less, the same market legislations but experience a different level of corruption then we must look for other areas for an answer. We found such an answer in social studies, what I now call social variables to encompass an obscenely wide area of expertise, which we now can apply in studies explaining corruption. So again: just making an market free doesn't make it less corrupt.