Ayn Rand & The Prophecy Of Atlas Shrugged

[@teestjulian]

True freedom is to live your life as you want. When you are forced to give your hard earned money to others, you are no longer free. Just because someone elses idea of Utopia means everyone is the same, doesn't mean you are happy. Hell, that sounds like a nightmare to me.

[@diegobotto6245]

You should care about your fellow man, it's not a weakness it actually makes you stronger to help the needy. You shouldn't be forced though except if you're rich.

[@diegobotto6245]

The Joker You shouldn't care about someone that doesn't work. What you should care is of the proletariat that works and still lives in precarious conditions, this isn't communism, it's common sense, having poor people is bad and the government should work to irradicate poverty.

[@goatskin4487]

@@diegobotto6245 rich people help the economy they make jobs and generate wealth they dont take up a piece of the pie they make more. Why should the rich give more just because they worked for their wealth.

[@kamenridernephilim]

Nothing good comes from socialism, socialists, communism, communists, Marxists, Marxism, Bolshevism, or Bolsheviks. You are wrong. You are the problem. We do not need or want your failed ideologies. Get out of our lives. Get out of our country. @@diegobotto6245

[@cvhgx]

Rusty Shackleford all those illegal immigrants work harder than the natives

[@Joseluis4wellness]

Coming from 2023 I can tell you the message is more relevant now than ever.

[@bodavis99]

In schools I was taught how great the philosophy of Karl Marx is. I wish I had learned about the philosophy of Ayn Rand I would be so better prepared to thrive in the world.

[@BrunoPPacheco]

Boy this ages well

[@erpollock]

How many times have I passed Rockefeller Center and the statue of Atlas holding up the world.

[@louisbarbisan8471]

Hi here of her 8 years ago, and now I can honestly say that her predictions is so real that it do scare me by listening and seeing all of the things in Canada and the USA, well all over the world. The most important question is that the freedom of the individual creation is in peril. By just remember the first part of Atlas Shrugged in the big Gov and the elite it explain and shows that it is so close to the realities of today. I had the idea to put on a bilbord on one side, who is JOHN GALT and on the other side, WHY. But I got sick and couldn't afford it. Would love for someone to get together with me on this.

[@donnasherwood283]

i read this first when I was just 20 and can say I felt i did not understand it altogether but never validated the criticisms leveled against it. I am now 74 and a day does not go by or a year that I do not reread this stunned at the depth of its comprehension of how society should work and recognition of the values I admire in people. The news brings me to my knees most days

[@LibertyDownUnder]

The best thing you can do with a copy of Atlas Shrugged is pass it on to a friend that hasn't read it yet. If you're embarassed to do it in person - just leave it in their mailbox.

[@mindjob]

No one seems to remember what a well written book it is and how every paragraph is chocked full of description, not a word is wasted

[@PixelPariah]

If you had known the first thing about Ayn Rand's philosophy you would understand that rational self interest is about determining what is most beneficial for you in terms of achieving your own happiness. Only fools and intellectually dishonest men would believe that it is in their own best interest to abandon the well being of their society or fellowman in the hopes of somehow achieving something from the ruins. But those people do exist, and they hide behind collectivist banners.

[@chippledon1]

Mr. Peezy: I agree. Rational self interest is not evil. My father was a shut-in w/my mother for 5 years due to her having Parkinson's disease. One thing the doctor told him was: take care of yourself first. Then you will be in a better position to attend to the needs of your wife.

[@marcinszewczyk2083]

This piece was uploaded 10 years ago. Fast forward to 2023 and how accurate it is? How prophetic the book will be further on?

[@ContrarianCorner]

I actually disagree with many of Ms. Rand's assertions, but it never ceases to amaze me how poorly her work is grasped by those who decry her the loudest.

[@ContrarianCorner]

If you're asking about my disagreements, it could be neither, or both, depending on how you look at it. I read nearly everything she wrote when I was younger, not just the novels. Eventually, my personal, life experiences led me to some different conclusions. It's not a question of liking or not liking. I just disagree with certain things. It's not about making her wrong and me right. I just have different opinions. It's way too much to go into on KZbin and, frankly, I really don't care about the debate anymore. In short, I have long since divested myself of the need to be "right," a need which takes on near pathological proportions for many people. I still believe in objective truth, but that truth is always filtered through the highly subjective, and imperfect, human mind. One need only study Ms. Rand's personal life to see that even she was not immune from making some very bizarre rationalizations based on her own philosophy. I also understand very well the "cult-like" nature of her following because I was in some of those circles for a short time. I don't necessarily blame her for that phenomenon but it is not hard to understand why so many of her ardent followers fall into that state of mind. On the other hand, I find it somewhat amusing that she has long been the poster child for evil in the minds of many. Just recently I heard yet another person describing her as a "fascist" and that she believed in serving oneself at the expense of anyone around you. I asked if they had actually read her work and, as is often the case, they said, "Well, no, but I know all about her." Rather typical response in my experience.

[@ContrarianCorner]

***** +Jim Bones Thank you for your comment, Jim, but claiming that I "can not" name any of those assertions is an assumption on your part. I simply chose not to. I thought I made that rather clear in my last post but I did ramble on a bit so perhaps my intentions were obscured. I apologize for any lack of clarity. I'm sorry if you're not satisfied with that response. I can understand why, but it shouldn't be difficult to find someone who is more than willing to share ideas with you about Ms. Rand's philosophy. You probably needn't look any further than this video's comments section. I'm just not that person, at least not here and not now. I wish you all the best.

[@ContrarianCorner]

No offense taken, Jim. None at all. I am well familiar with the types you mention. A few of my earlier comments were lamenting some of those very same "irrational hate filled ranting" types you described. I encountered them all the time when I was younger. Very few of those people had any more than a superficial understanding of Rand's works, if any at all. The worst tended to be the ones right out of college. More often than not, they were just parroting their professors' unanimous disdain. As for the "avoidance" crowd, I know them well too, though I also have a lot more sympathy for them these days. As you can probably tell, I now count myself among them. People avoid the subject for a variety of reasons. I can only speak to my own. There is an old saying that many people still swear by. "Never discuss religion or politics at the dinner table." It was not until I emerged from my dip into the Ayn Rand pool that I fully understood the implications of this sentence. It has to do with people's tendency to wrap their personal identities up with their core belief systems. If you question any part of that belief system, whether it be religious, political or philosophical, you are not just questioning the ideas a person adheres to. You are threatening their very identity. This is not true, of course, but that's the way most people will react in those situations. It is an emotional and psychological distortion that lies at the root of this phenomenon. It has nothing to do with logic or reality. Yet, I've met very few people in my life that have been immune to this fallacy, myself included. The emotions that surface when you challenge someone's core beliefs can span from mild irritation to outright rage. I have seen the full range of that spectrum. Once this happens, the desire to learn anything new usually goes out the window. At that point it becomes crucial to remain "right" at all cost. There is simply too much at stake for a such a person to admit he might be wrong. It doesn't matter if your identity is tied to Christianity, Islam, Marxism, Objectivism or any number of other belief systems. If you can't accept that this is merely an opinion rather than the "one and only truth," you will be inclined to feel personally threatened by others who don't share those ideas. I could elaborate on my opinion as to why this happens but that's a whole discussion in and of itself. We benefit psychologically by feeling a sense of certainty. It is crucial for a sense of efficacy and confidence to handle the daily challenges that arise. What few dare to admit to themselves is that we really don't have a clue about the larger questions in life. That is just way too scary a concept for the average person to grapple with. To admit that is to acknowledge our own severe inadequacies in the grand scheme of things. I agree wholeheartedly with Ms. Rand that we are CAPABLE of observing and discovering objective truths. It's what happens AFTER that observation and discovery that leads so many people to see the same thing and come up with entirely different conclusions. In my experience, the deeper one gets into a closed-system philosophy, the more one becomes susceptible to these mental distortions. By "closed-system" I mean any school of thought that says, in essence, "If you believe in THESE aspects of this philosophy, you have to believe in ALL aspects of this philosophy." In my opinion, Objectivism is such a system, at least as Ayn Rand practiced it. It is hardly unique in that regard, though, so I'm not trying to single it out. (Naturally, every objectivist would vehemently disagree with me on this.) As an example, Ms. Rand wrote some very inspiring essays on art from the Romantic period in her book, "The Romantic Manifesto." She went on to say how this style of art, music, literature, etc. reflected the greatness that man was capable of achieving and that it promoted a "sense of life" that supported man's existence as an end in itself. Inspiring stuff... ...until she later started claiming that anyone who liked other types of art, for whatever reason, were somehow being philosophically inconsistent and therefore needed to be "properly educated" or purged from the group. This was less apparent in her actual writings but VERY real to many of the people I knew who actually dealt with her face to face. In her later writings such as "The New Left," she could barely contain her vitriol and utter contempt for any opposing views. I can appreciate why she was so pissed off. She had to endure a lifetime of critical wrath from the only people she ever really cared about getting acknowledgment from. I can't imagine what it must have been like for her to stand tall in the face of that and I admire her ability to do so. What I admired less was the person she became in the process and how badly she treated some of her supporters that were suspected of dissent. Today's Randian diehards will deny all of this to their dying breaths, of course. They have to. Whether they're right or wrong, their very sanity depends on it. Ayn Rand possessed a remarkable intellect. Her writings made a profound impact on me at a young age and continue to influence my thinking to this day. Having said that, there have been many times when my personal experience has put me at odds with those beliefs. I simply came to a point where I found it more intellectually honest to let my experiences shape my beliefs rather than reinterpret those experiences to make them fit a pre-existing system. You wrote: "You may be the true exception who has rational reasons why you disagree with Rand's assertions..." The reasons I have for disagreement are perfectly rational to me and that's really all I care about any more. I came to those conclusions after a great deal of reflection and my beliefs continue to be altered and refined with new life experiences all the time. I simply don't have any stake in the debate anymore because I have so little emotional weight invested in whether I'm right or wrong. In essence, my friend, THAT is why I usually count myself among those "avoidance" types these days and why I don't "talk politics or religion" at the proverbial dinner table. Life is a delicious meal for me. I've learned to gladly give up the heartburn in favor of enjoying the digestion process.

[@ContrarianCorner]

Thank you for your kind words, Jim. It was my pleasure. I appreciate the dialogue. In the end, your questions inspired me to write far more about the subject of Ayn Rand than I ever intended to, and more than I have done in many years. So, bravo! : ) I apologize for my lengthy, rambling dissertations. Brevity is not one of my strengths. Probably another reason I hesitate to elaborate on most of my thoughts. I feel like a heavy mill stone. It takes a lot of effort to get it rolling but it's equally hard to stop when it gets up to speed. All the best to you too, my friend.

[@ContrarianCorner]

JimBones seems to have left the conversation. Nothing makes sense now. Lol.

[@2011is2012]

The machine does not exist without its parts. Without its parts its just an idea. People is what make it a reality. If a honey bee used Ayn Rands philosophy, humans would not exist. When an individual works outside the "collective" for personal gain it causes a weak link in the hive and death. A football team is exactly that a "team" for a reason, 1 superstar won't win games.

[@avro549B]

"Atlas Shrugged" can be read as a rather dark satire on the events of the 1930s. Look at the history, especially of the Progressives.

[@johnstockwellmajorsmedleyb1214]

How is it not 2016?

[@danieldaniels7571]

John Stockwell Major Smedley Butler it seems more like 2020

[@meredrums1]

Prophecy? Strong word. This is one of my favorite parts of the book though. There was no mention of Galt at this point. Slow it down. Try a chapter a year to start. Sit down with the book.

[@joannemckann7948]

I’m reading it now and not only is it relevant, it’s even more so today. It’s downright scary.

[@David-yw2lv]

Another prophecy in Atlas Shrugged was employee owned business would be a disaster.Every such business I know has either folded or ended up bought out.

[@arbmoneyful]

for the love of God somebody post this documentary so that everyone can see it

[@requiemforamerica8432]

actually we cooperate with others because that IS the best way to maximize personal gain. That's how we evolved: with cooperation hard wired the problem is when a group of corrupt schmucks r given INFINITE power to forcefully create inefficient and self-defeating collectives. result: untold human misery, waste of resources & poverty FORCED collectivism is THE biggest evil of them all left to their devices people cooperate with one another VOLUNTARILY for their own survival and gain

[@chippledon1]

RequiemFor America: Again, you've nailed it!

[@Artsartisan]

Will Durant and his wife Ariel wrote “The Story of Civilization” and received the 1976 Humanist Pioneer Award. Will Durant summed up the humanist problem concerning personal ethics and the social order: “Moreover, we shall find it no easy task to mold a natural ethic strong enough to maintain moral restraint and social order without the support of supernatural consolations, hopes, and fears.” Actually, it isn’t merely difficult; it is impossible! Will Durant and Ariel quoted agnostic Renan in their book “The Lessons of History.” According to the Durants, Renan declared in 1866: “If Rationalism wishes to govern the world without regard to the religious needs of the soul, the experience of the French Revolution is there to teach us the consequences of such a blunder.” The Durants themselves stated in the same context: “There is no significant example in history, before our time, of a society successfully maintaining moral life without the aid of religion.”

[@BrotherWoody1]

It is in Gary Johnson.

[@Avidcomp]

Wonderful documentary

[@toobadsosad83]

"The film is not available"??? I want to see this right now!!

[@MrBenjamatic]

Type in "Twentieth Century Motor Company" on youtube (1 of 3). I'm sure you'll evade that as well. As Thomas Paine so eloquently put it, "to argue with a man who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead", and equally impractical.

[@valsotto27]

Listen to freedomain radio :)

[@newperve]

Simply saying that someone's argument is based on a fallacy is not an argument.

[@Louipyaps]

It’s a prophecy now?

[@bradchristy8429]

A Hot Carl For You Lookjng back, it was never a work of fiction.

[@jasonhowe1697]

she saw the writing on the walls back when she wrote the book. question I would then ask how far up the totem pole has it flown and how many countries has this repeated too....

What was this "writing on the wall"? Is the US Governed today run by a clique of neo-Communists intent on destroying private enterprise? I think not.

Katherine Affholter Katherine I know it's Christmas Day and I should be forgiving and charitable but seriously the only thing I can say regarding your comment is, don't be such a twat.

@Katherine Affholter Katherine I know it's Christmas Day and I should be forgiving and charitable but seriously the only thing I can say regarding your comment is, don't be such a twat

[@newperve]

Repeating a claim without evidence is evidence that you have no evidence.

[@2011is2012]

Greed- An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth. What is more then one needs? how is need measured? Who is the judge? greed is not neutral and the man who came up with a better light bulb was not through greed.

[@ramboinator4478]

Atlas Shrugged and said; "How can globalism be possible".

[@newperve]

Notice how you haven't got a single actual argument in there? Kinda suggests that not only is Rand right but that you know she's right. If you thought she was wrong you'd try to prove it, not simply assert.

[@sharralynnpiercewoolworth6358]

This could be controlled by term limits.

[@newperve]

Right, because nowhere in Atlas Shrugged do the good guys practice cooperation for mutual benefit. Well except for pages 1 through to the end. Yes the movie shows evil rich and/or power people ripping off other people, but in it this it is totally faithful to the book and the poor are arguably the main victims.

[@grimmer2005]

Hmm... A tree split in half because of the water inside of it. But here it says that the tree had been dead for a long time. Make's no sense.

[@lasttrimestr49califos89]

To visualize the future, you need only to study the past. Everything has happened before and will happen again. I apologize for stating the obvious, but obviously some folks need the reminder.

[@g5162]

wow, this book will be brought back to life due to a presidential election

[@kirtiranjanmoharana3831]

She understood this because she lived once in this type of system...USSR

Kirtiranjan Moharana, Yet it was the USSR that gave her the chance to have a University education something no female would have achieved undertake Tzar's. While totally accepting the USSR's ruthlessness and control over the peoples it controlled that the USSR over short 30 year period from 1917 to 1945 transformed a backward imperial autocratic Nation into one of the worlds only two super powers. This despite the chaos and material and hum cost of fighting three years of a terrible world war and violent revolution with its years of brutal civil war. It had to rebuild during a post war/revolution/civil war no only a devastating flu epidemic but a world wide financially collapse and economic depression. It had to cope with the invasion and later the distrust of the Western powers and the growing threat from Hitlers Germany. It then had to fight a war of National and race survival against the most power, well equipped, well trained war machine ever seen on the planet. It had to endure the loss of so many millions of its citizens it made the losses of its western allies and its German enemies look like a Saturday night brawl. Yet despite all the horror and loses over that 30 year period the USSR not only survived but compared to the previous regime it's people prospered and took deserved pride in its achievements.

[@newperve]

Well her ideas on government spending was that it should be much less than 10% of the economy, it's over 25 practically everywhere. She was for commodity currencies, everywhere is fiat currency, unions should neither be interfered with nor helped by the government, they are both, education should be the parent's responsibility, it's the State's. I looked at the world, guess what? Almost NOTHING is as she would have it. This is why you didn't make an argument, you have no evidence.

[@starguy2718]

It WAS a work of fiction. Not any more.

[@Weeki5]

Everything is being pushed private... Schools... In Rand's world, schools would be 100% private. What percentage of high schoolers go to private schools? Maybe 1%? Hardly "in full effect". Post office is a better argument. For packages, the gov't post office delivers for a similar price, but does it slower with far inferior tracking information. And first class mail can't be delivered privately by federal law, so zero Randian effect. But this one demonstrates that Rand's ideas are better!

[@eileeneclark9011]

9/6/18.....Older YT video but great info.....I have just started reading Atlas Shrugged...... GOD BLESS AMERICA & ALL OUR HARD WON FREEDOMS & LIBERTY & CONSTITUTION! INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS has now become MORE GOVT + A NANNY STATE OF GOVT! GOD BLESS AMERICA & HELP HER GET BACK ON THE PATH OF SELF RELIANCE & RESULTING INDIVIDUAL CONSEQUENCES.

[@codyrafferty9659]

14 trillion in debt.... That's cute

[@fzqlcs]

I just bought it for $3.99. Click the download link in the video description.

[@Terrantulla]

not available anymore. anyone knows where I can get it ?

[@666or999]

He was a kid and I'm not sure he owned the tree.

[@MsAnna47]

Ayn Rand was late. The Christian's Holy Bible foretold this and far more two thousand years ago already. And 1 Enoch even farther back than that. We can't say we didn't know.

[@ninthpuppynotit4332]

nothing here but a commercial

[@thesurvivalist.]

If you need to shame folks into helping others, you can no longer call it help, it becomes an obligation, meaning I am required to do for you when you had the same amount of time as I did to get ready for whatever life bring into your life! Had a female come in my store, she spent 3 bucks, she had a $20 to pay for items, but because with taxes it came to $3.03,, and she wanted $17 back in change, she said that I should give her the 3 cent. That helping others is a good thing. I said I only help folks who actually need real help, and not because someone say I should. When she clearly had money to pay for her items, without me helping her with my money! Trying to shame folk for their help shows that you never plan anything out, working through the world as if someone is always going to come to your aid, make you weak, unable to adapt and a piss poor planner. You loose your ability to think of new ways in which to do things to make your life better, without relaying on someone or their resource so that you can live your life as a free person!

[@MrBenjamatic]

I thoroughly enjoyed this film. Huzza! Huzza!

[@JUICEthGRID]

In order to love those around you, you must love thyself first & as well, otherwise you are just a weak chump with no self-esteem and nothing but good intentions, does squatto for everyone involved.

[@BrotherWoody1]

Well, I'm voting for Johnson. If you want to sit out, sit out.

[@newperve]

So you claim that Rand's ideas have caused disaster, but refuse to put up one iota of evidence. In return you demand I prove Rand's ideas work, even though you've already ignored evidence that it wasn't her ideas that failed. Support your claim.

[@phantomcharger]

OK, Who was the A-hole that voted this down? I need this book

[@jeromemisters2528]

So...was it considered "big government" when we baild out the auto industry? No one was complaining about government intervention then....

[@johnstockwellmajorsmedleyb1214]

Occupy was nothing?

[@johnrmcclure1]

Are you kidding me? The protests of the bailouts of the banks and the auto industry was not Occupy idiots... they were calling for more government... no, the protest of the bailouts was the Tea Party Movement.

[@johnstockwellmajorsmedleyb1214]

I would agree it became something different then our original goals when most were absolutely terrified of authority. Not sure if you were involved? Seems most were pleasantly happy camping out getting high and believing they were actually doing something. It was pretty sad and it happened within I wiuld would say 48hrs. Many Guy Fawkes were preasent in LA and Denver. We really tried to get some action going but in the end it was totally a joke. So yeah Tea Party, Socialists, Oligarchy Manipulators, Capitalist Psyops, a generation of simpletons? Any and or all played out to be a non issue. That was the day I realized in a Democratic society majority rulz. A vast majority do not care to be active as long as consumerism is alive and well and the power and water flows theyll keep making KoolAid by the gallons.

[@Andal8811]

Corporate socialism is fine for the corporate lobbyists in power. It just should not be for everybody. Who would even work for those lousy wages today?

[@johnrmcclure1]

Constitutional Perfection Beside the fact that those of us in the Tea Party have spent the last 8+ years electing like minded small government conservatives. We don't always get the right person in, but we don't stop trying. The "Tea Party" caucus in Congress has been growing every election. The old guard GOP progressives hate us and continually call us names. They are the ones who either are Neocons or are wholly controlled by the Neocons. We're slowly but surely replacing all of them. The problem with the Democrats is that their voter base has been made stupid by the government schools they put them through. Its on purpose... but when the voter base starts to notice things are going wrong... they do shit like Occupy Wall Street... which turns into a bunch of neo-hippies sitting around smoking pot and raping unsuspecting hippy girls in the tents. The Tea Party has been growing and has shown themselves to be very successful. We elected Donald Trump... that should show you our resolve. If nothing else, Trump's election has broken the seemingly unbreakable duopoly the Dems and Repukes held over the electoral process.

[@fzqlcs]

she came to America from Russia in her teenage years.

[@marietta5316]

Predictive Programming?!

[@LotharioRowe]

You cannot force a philosophical revolution, politically or otherwise...it can only be done via persuasion. Think about it - if there were enough people voting for a Johnson presidency to get him elected, we wouldn't need him to make any changes, because the majority of the society would already be philosophically libertarian. "If we want a world without politics, then we want a world without people." edit: "If we want a world without politics, then we want a world with peaceful people."

[@larryxillest]

It's funny how you draw conclusions about humanity from metaphors about honey bees. It's funnier when the inner workings a football team contains some of the elements of the philosophy that you're attempting to defame. So let's talk football. Let's talk NFL. It would be the most boring game to watch if some committee stepped in and decided that people like 40-year-old Fred need to remain on the team even though he's not as good as he used to be- at the expense of great talent kept off the team.

[@2011is2012]

never claimed i was

[@newperve]

Ayn Rand's philosophy points out the value of a "level playing field" in terms of economic policy, so to claim it only works in a "level playing field is meaningless". Yes she shared her thoughts during the civil rights era, and what were those thoughts? That capitalism is the enemy of racism, and she was right. To claim that racist legislation disproves her theory, when her theory specifically says it is bad shows complete ignorance.

[@MrBenjamatic]

Firstly, in which dictionary did you find that definition. Secondly, if you hold greed to be evil, why do you have a computer since you can survive without it? And if its a work computer, and if your job pays for more than the bare minimum you need to survive, you're a hypocrite (unless, of course, you give the extra money to those who need it more than you).

[@fzqlcs]

Sounds like tyrannical rot. Voters should have called for a reduction in the size and scope of government awhile ago.

[@thomasboubou1587]

I would have to agree with you. My so-called intellectual/philosophical road to enlightenment began with Ayn Rand, and I have take some things from her philosophy, but I do not agree with much of it. I am now more towards a more spiritual path in my life. I can no longer beieve or trust a woman who does not believe in God and tells people to be more selfish. It's atually quite evil that she does this. How can everything exist but God doesn't? Who created it then? Did it create itself? Peace.

[@diydiva3190]

God was created by man not the other way around.

[@wiecek13]

I would watch the rest of this movie cause its on Netflix. It just spoils to much of the book XD

[@joaquinabreu1003]

very intelligent women.Ithink she was about 80% right.

[@newperve]

You know you have no argument when you make arguments like this. She no more gave the 1% an excuse to be greedy than she did the 99%. The 1% didn't need an excuse to be greedy but to use government power. You and people like you gave them that excuse, and we see the world your like created.

[@jt5452ohio]

Of course, the problem with Ayn Rand's philosophy is that she assumes a level playing field that simply never existed and isn't likely to exist in the future. Considering that she shared her thoughts during the civil rights era when the USA had no choice but to face the truth about inequality, her words are somewhat eerie and misleading. Unfettered capitalism is not much better than communism. We see that truth now that deregulation has peaked and the economy is in the tank.

[@BrotherWoody1]

Is the voluntarist revolution possible outside of a political context and solution? I'm a Libertarian but not a Randian. I'm a realist but not a utopian. Change is incremental & proceeds from culture. I want my govt. changed & a good start would be Johnson who acknowledges the seminal significance of Ron Paul in his political career. Sitting out the election is just what the GOP & the Dems want. If we want a world without politics, then we want a world without people.

[@LotharioRowe]

Gary Johnson only views the world in numbers, and it just so happens that the numbers point to a libertarian society because Austrian Economics is sound...but Gary doesn't hold a candle to Ron's understanding of morality nor the ethics of the philosophy of voluntaryism. Dig deeper into philosophy and ethics, and stop selling your soul to "political solutions."

[@2011is2012]

Her ideas rely on men being honest and not corrupt. Will that ever happen?? No!! Never! Point proven!

[@newperve]

"Her ideas rely on men being honest and not corrupt. " No they don't. In fact if people were not corrupt government might work.

[@2011is2012]

That maybe the best answer I have seen yet. However Rands ideas will really never work, the greed that runs the whole idea consumes itself eventually. We need to move away from me me me and move to us us us.

[@chippledon1]

I will first admit that I didn't do the research myself, but I heard the following on a radio talk show. It was stated that studies have shown that the more people have, the more they give. I can attest to that personally. As my salary increased, so did my giving. I give to my local church which ministers DIRECTLY AND MORE EFFECTIVELY AND MORE EFFICIENTLY to the immediate needs of the local population! And it is MY FAITH which compelled me to do so. It was VOLUNTARY, not COERCED!

[@unknownuser99942]

Who is John Galt means, "Don't ask questions nobody can answer." Futility. But... "Only the crassest ignoramus can still hold to the old-fashioned notion that seeing is believing: That which you see is the first thing to disbelieve." --- Do not look for logic. Let us break the chains of the prejudice called Logic. You feel the world around you.... adjust yourself. Obey. State Science Institute page 341.

[@2011is2012]

I get it Ayn Rand must be reality. Wow stupid me.

[@2011is2012]

Greed is not neutral its an imaginary unattainable amount. Its the pork chop just out of reach.

[@mahabharatamonja]

what?

[@2011is2012]

How about you!!! prove it works. Show me an example. Waiting........

[@diydiva3190]

If you need to be shown that free market capitalism works you need to get out more.

[@chippledon1]

How do you take away someone's freedom? You take their money and control their speech!

[@beatriz25ish]

Sadly it became true

[@2011is2012]

She promotes the idea of greed is what drives people to make wonderful things. "Material things" are not wonderful things.

[@shaz3r786]

Lol deregulation is what got us into this recession in the first place... We need to reinstall the Glass-Steagall Act

[@thunberbolttwo3953]

Wrong there.what caused the 08 recsion.Was goverment oredring banks.to give home loans.to people.that could never pay them of.

[@thecapone45]

Next you’re gonna day the Great Depression was cause of the failure of private companies.

[@2011is2012]

The only thing that makes "Money" worth anything is that some have more then others. 99% of people would choose money over humanity!

[@Roihclem871]

2011is2012 you’re really simple

[@2011is2012]

Ayn Rand was in dream land. Her ideas would never work in this world.

[@Terrantulla]

Because people are too stupid to think for themselves and rather use their emotions as their guiding compass and not reason.

[@oscarmunos2710]

Palestine Ohio train derailment.

[@neoepicurean3772]

I finished the book last night. It was a tough read, felt like a chore, but I miss it now I've finished. It was no revelation to me, as I'm already on the libertarian side, and she could pounded her messaged into the reader with no attempt at subtlety. I think it's overrated as a novel.

[@plusaeroservices3235]

Certainly there are too many similarities between atlas shrugged and the bible, and I will only enumerate a few. First of all there is no humor at all in any of the two books, then all the characters are virtuous visionaries with sacred knowledge that place them on top of all other ignorant people that will be left out of the ultimate travel to grandeur. Both books speak about similar and imminent catastrophe but offers salvation if you believe what they say. Rand also speaks about the chosen group of intellectuals that will be saved and save the world. She preaches against racism, but there are not one of her "heroes" that are not 100% Caucasian with the exception of Francisco the Argentinian with clear European descent. She wrote her own bible and obtain her own religion.

[@wetwingnut]

Your parallels are interesting, but there is one enormous difference between the two works. Atlas Shrugged presents an argument, in dramatic form but an argument nonetheless. Rand builds her philosophy by relentlessly applying the principles of logic and reasoning to a base set of incontrovertible facts, and in so doing demonstrates what a logically consistent system of metaphysics and morals looks like. She does not ask anyone to "believe" in her philosophy and in fact she would scorn anyone who did so. She challenges us instead to examine and understand each step in the reasoning process for ourselves. The bible on the other hand offers no arguments - none at all. It's claim of truth rests entirely on the assertion that it is the word of god - a postulated perfect and infallible being who is the source of all metaphysical and moral knowledge. The author of the bible cares nothing for his reader's understanding as is evidenced by the fact that it is self-contradictory and logically incomprehensible. All that he demands is the reader's acceptance - his belief. Rand says, "Because these things are true, so must this other be true." The bible says, "Truth is not for you to grasp - it is for god alone."

[@plusaeroservices3235]

wetwingnut Galt's phrase "Don't ask me to come back and save you" sounds exactly the same as what Paul might have said. An Imminent catastrophe that has not happen so far, so Rand created the threat and offer the solution. Many people, maybe you between them actually believe that we will experience some sort of "economical rapture". Speaking about what is true, Rand's life history certainly is not one to follow as it do not lead to success or happiness but all the contrary. She lived as many of her novel characters lived, complaining about everything, criticizing all others and claiming to be so happy but being actually very bitter themselves. She did not deliver for her own. My suggestion to you, use what is good of her philosophy but look at her the way she actually was.

[@newperve]

"First of all there is no humor at all in any of the two books," I could list the jokes in Atlas Shrugged but there isn't time to tell you. See what I did there? No because you have no sense of humor.

[@gpecaut1]

Eddy Willers is a major part of the story and is black. Perhaps you should read it before you knock it.

[@jupitermadcat]

Hypocrite

[@alg11297]

The book is so poorly written it's hard to believe it's still in print. There are no children, old people, families, comminities. Although most of the country is shown as a bleak wasteland the entire book is about incredibly wealthy people who aren't affected by it. No one gets sick, no one gets into a fatal accident. And even minor characters are given paragraphs and pages to spew their diologue. In addition, she did not predict that airline traffic would be so commonplace, travel would be easier, no electronic devises or anything else we see in modern america. Even though it was written in the 50s she barely mentions television or mass madia. DON'T READ IT.

[@newperve]

"There are no children," There are few, but they exist. "old people," Actually one of the first people introduced is old. "families," Why is the Railroad called "Taggart Transcontinental"? "Although most of the country is shown as a bleak wasteland " Most? Citation needed. While of course towards the end it's indicated that much, indeed all, of the country is sliding that way though most of the book most of the country is presented as being a 1st world nation, albeit with problems. "the entire book is about incredibly wealthy people who aren't affected by it." It's specifically mentioned that several characters, even though wealthy, are affected by shortages. "No one gets sick, " Not even close to true. "no one gets into a fatal accident." Other than the literally hundreds of people. It's specifically mentioned that fatal accidents were becoming more a more commonplace and that people had to worry about them when forming their plans. " In addition, she did not predict that airline traffic would be so commonplace, travel would be easier, no electronic devises or anything else we see in modern america. " So? "Even though it was written in the 50s she barely mentions television or mass madia. " She BARELY MENTIONS mass media? Right because Galt's Speech was communicated by semaphore you clueless waste of protein.

[@alg11297]

I'll tell you; if you an evangelist trying to defend the New Testament you couldn't have done a better job. Could you just try to explain the bizarre similes in this book. Only someone using english as a second language would make such awkward sentences. And, oh, how does Taggert RR continue in business after an accident that smokes all the passengers.....wouldn't there be a class action for wrongful death? After trying to handle the 81st RR disaster Dagney comes across Galt and they screw in the basement...the rest of the scenario just end. Hey I can see employees using shotguns to ward off the enemy so their boss can make a bigger profit, I mean at the risk of their own lives. Just give me so quotes.

[@newperve]

"I'll tell you; if you an evangelist trying to defend the New Testament you couldn't have done a better job. " Well if you were claiming that the New Testament involved lots of knights and a round table it would be just as easy. you got almost everything wrong. "Could you just try to explain the bizarre similes in this book." You haven't read it have you? What bizarre similes? "Only someone using english as a second language would make such awkward sentences. " Right because you're a better writer than a multiple bestselling author. "And, oh, how does Taggert RR continue in business after an accident that smokes all the passengers.....wouldn't there be a class action for wrongful death?" God you're stupid. TT is MASSIVE, while getting sued would hurt it's nothing like big enough to waste the company. "Hey I can see employees using shotguns to ward off the enemy so their boss can make a bigger profit, I mean at the risk of their own lives. Just give me so quotes." Look why don't you read the book you moron?

[@alg11297]

Just give me some good quotes. No one ever does.

[@mikeashe9859]

children: the book has parts about the childhoods of most of the main characters and describes children in many instances for instance rearden and taggarts "vacation" old people: Rearden's mother is a prominent character, hugh axton, Dr. Stadler, etc... families: reardens family is prominent throughout, again the family during the encounter of their vacation and families throughout doing regular day to day things like waiting for trains. the whole book is about communities the book is about incredibly wealthy people: yes and no, the book is about the world seen through the eyes of the primary producers of wealth no one gets sick: Jim met his wife buying tissues for his cold no one gets into a fatal accident: there are many fatal accidents, train crashes, mine collapses. The main characters aren't working class and such accidents mainly effect the poor.(displaying how the alleged empathetic looters are harming not helping the poor) even minor characters: displaying the complexity of society and thought throughout society requires many voices she did not predict: early on they discuss rearden metal planes. it's a novel about philosophical things like morality. It is not the Jetsons. mass media: the media is a constant topic, how things are reported on and why is a major topic throughout You sir are a moron.