Guest Post by Robert Bronsdon (Hollywood Rob)
I, as I am sure many of you have, read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead while at college. That was a long time ago. Ayn Rand’s writing affected my world view just as surely as my studies in engineering but I don’t see any echo of her philosophy in my thinking. It might well be there. I just don’t see it as obvious. I am not even sure why I should ascribe to a small Jewish woman from Russia any elevated position in the development of the worlds philosophical viewpoint but there are certainly people who do. It is, currently, a very small number of people, but at some point in time Christ had only a few followers. Mohammed had only a few followers. Buddha had only himself. It’s kinda the “from tiny acorns the mighty oak will grow” thing.
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal
-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=089xOB9bbhU
This video from the Rubin report early last year is a discussion of the philosophy of Ayn Rand. It is a description of one person’s expression of her world view which was formed through direct experience with Communism in Russia and Capitalism in America. Most of us can only theorize about what it was like for her to live through the early years of the revolution. We have been born and have lived in one place all of our lives. We travel, and that is eye opening, but we can never really know any other culture because one has to live in that culture to appreciate it fully. She did that.
This is not an essay praising Ayn Rand. This is not an essay extolling the virtues of a life lived as a Randian hero in one of her books. Her writings were works of fiction. This is an essay extolling the virtues of the points of view expressed by Dave Rubin and Yaron Brook. What I hope you take from this writing and the attached video is that it is the discussion which has value. If you are not arguing with another individual over the finer points of your world view then you are not expanding your understanding of the rational world. We must seek out these arguments. We must eschew the safe spaces set up to allow the cement of our world view to set. We must look at provocative art. We must express our opinion to our fellow souls so that our opinions can be hurled back at us like a weapon. We must hurl opinions at others like weapons and then we must accept our opponents as friends. We can only refine our world view as it relates to reality through this process. It is what makes the concept of free speech foundational.
Without free speech there can be no evolution in each person’s world view. Even if you have free speech, if you censor yourself then no one else will receive the benefit of your thoughts. No one else will be able to challenge you but neither of you will grow. I find this to be the underlying problem with the current crop of snowflakes that infest the colleges and universities of today. They have been taught by people who could not function in the real world to believe that the fundamental truths are only held by their teachers. They have not been taught that they need to participate in the debate. They have been taught, by their professors and their parents, that they need to scream louder because someone else does not seem to appreciate that they are not getting what they want.
The philosophy of antifa, the philosophy of Bernie Bros, the philosophy of the left and the philosophy of the right, the Neo-Nazis and the conservative Christians alike are world views. This is what philosophy is. Philosophy is the underpinnings of the world view of each person on earth. It is in the aggregate that the philosophy of each person on earth expresses itself as a society. It can be a Christian philosophy, it can be an Islamic philosophy, it can be Zoroastrian or Wiccan but in the end, it is the manifestation of each individual’s world view that creates the whole. This is, I believe, what is at the heart of Ayn Rand’s take on philosophy. And I suspect, without any real evidence to back this up, that the gem to take from the video above is that each of us bears the responsibility for developing our world view towards the most rational representation of the existing reality that we can.
We are all simply brains floating in a bone box. We will never be able to see through any eyes but the ones that we have. We will never be able to hear through any other ears. This applies to every human on earth. The only way to expand our individual understanding of the reality of the universe around us is through communications with other brains in other bone boxes. Ayn Rand came to the conclusion that capitalism was better than communism. This is rational for her as she benefited greatly from capitalism. Others benefited more from communism than capitalism so their world view must be different. Muslims have a different world view from Christians. Swedes have a different world view from Pakistanis. Every one of these world views is the result of each individual brain in a bone box seeking a philosopher king to guide them to the truth. You must accept through faith that the philosopher king holds the divine truth. I suspect that Rand concludes that there is no divine truth. There is just truth and we don’t know it all yet.
I actually like that as a philosophy. What actually leads to individual flourishing, and then to all human kind flourishing? Only our philosopher kings can say at this point in time. But we have not yet gotten to the point where we no longer need the philosopher kings. There are billions of brains in bone boxes that need to be confronted. Billions of minds that need to participate in the discussion. What will be the path to all of human kind flourishing? I have to say I really don’t know but one thing I am pretty sure of is that without free speech the evolution to all human kind flourishing can not take place. So go out there and exercise your free speech every chance you get. Talk to your friends but also talk to your enemies. Explain to them that you don’t care to change their minds, but to change your own mind. Invite them into the discussion, find common ground, and share a beer. But don’t bring a knife to a gun fight either. You need to do your research too. And this is not a one time thing. It is an evolution for every one of us that never ends. Humanity will never evolve to one world view. But it can’t evolve to any world view without the free discussion of ideas. All Ideas.
From what I understand of her writing, I’d be predisposed to agree with her points, but the writing was just too fucking horrible for me to endure, so I’ll have to leave it to the Galt fans to push her agenda.
There is no Zoroastrian economics, but there have been rules regarding personal behavior from those associated with certain crafts, for social reasons. None of these are in force anymore. Zoroastrians are smart…until the nineteenth century, Zoroastrians were forbidden to follow any skilled trade or craft that could bring them into close contact with Muslims. Makes sense.
“Happiness comes to those who give happiness to others.” That is directly from Zarathustra himself and would best describe what should guide all interactions, even economic.
PS, I have read Atlas Shrugged 3 or 4 times and every other work of hers, even her non-fiction books (yes she wrote several such as “Capitalism, the Unknown Ideal.” In my 20’s she was an important influence on me (until I discovered Murray Rothbard). Today I see mostly her flaws. Like many Russians she was somewhat of a totalitarian herself. You either worshiped everything she said or you were an enemy. Rand never debated; she pontificated.
I read The Fountianhead. Damn loooooong book. It was pretty good but could have told the story in half the pages.
Great book. She defended terrorism…not an easy task.
If we make a deal, & the other party welshes, & I burn him down, & he’s terrorized, does that make me a terrorist, or does that merely make him an errorist?
Heat & light often go together.
Yes, she sure did. The creator has a right to protect his/her vision/creation.
i agree wip,loong books–
i’ve said for years that if someone could receive permission from her estate to condense atlas shrugged down to 400-500 pages we would return to a constitutional republic within a couple of election cycles–
I had to force myself to finish that book.
I went to see the movie Atlas Shrugged. Disappointed it wasn’t done better. There’s supposed to be a part II but I haven’t seen it out yet. I’d like to see it done with a bigger budget.
I’m certainly not an Ayn Rand follower but like most other streams of thoughts, there is plenty of good ideas to follow.
Good introductory level books, all of them. Sophomoric philosophy by a naive philosopher. A dead end.
And in agreement will they build, as discord engenders war. Words are building blocks or weapons; they create and destroy. Ideas are skyscrapers and bombs and language inflates orthodoxies like neurotics constructing castles in the air where psychotics will reside.
What is truth? How does one know?
I often wonder if it isn’t unlike light, heat, common sense, and morality; fully recognized, understood, and appreciated only in relation to its opposite. Or, stated another way, indefinable except by its negation.
Just my dual sense. I mean two cents. If I said that was a Freudian slip you would know what I mean. It’s because communication is the lifeblood of any relationship.
What does all that sound like? i forget.
Get it? Got it? Good.
Ha. Words are inanimate. Ide(ation)s of March, too. Like weapons.
If such ‘made ya’ do it’ you’re a twinky. Offensively defenseless. Defensively offensive. Defenestration may be in your immediate future. Windows’ll be opening, at the least, to try & cut that BO some.
Apricot pits is said to have that b-17 bomber stuff, laetrile. A priori is the pit o’ truth. I ain’t yours & you ain’t mine. But if we do a deal, we belong to each other, so to speak, ‘til conclusion. Don’t welsh, rabbit. I make a positively scrumptious rabbit. The joy of cooking, ya’ know?
Comprehension is the lifeblood of otherwise bloodless communication. But fun & curiosity are the heart that pumps that blood. The real purpose of the race is not to win; it’s to test the limits of the human heart. Process without finish line. Everything else is cola; the caramel coloring may be left out, the coca may be gone – but all that HFCS is still in it.
Remember ol’ rapid Roy Scheider? Sounds like they borrowed McQueen’s sound (not to mention the blackhat driver):
Rodger that. Time is the fourth dimension. Things move through and in between. Life happens while the world goes round. Connections, like maps, need scope and topography of terrain.
Words can be weapons and some are taken as warnings. Heeded. That is all. Smart rabbits know that doors are open wider than they should be (dumb, but required) for the time of year (winter is here), especially when they run into a briar patch they didn’t see coming. I guess old Remus and that patch are on the banned and burned list these days?
Skiddish bunnies have sensitive survival instincts. Retreat to the fortified den is as good as coldwars and growing up next to stacks of tactical arrowheads can make it. Some rabbits just need a bit of school’in, I guess.
Did you know that the mama bunnies of some species can turn into the most brutal monsters from the most horrific nightmares when their baby bunnies are (or might be) threatened. Bunny 101- Aria Stark on steroids…with an arsenal…and hell following behind her.
Lots to process, but hopefully not in/on the rotisserie.
Circle of life is expected and hopefully natural, even though I do like a good rabbit pot pie from time to time.
Trick with Bunny pie is that it is divided, patented, and stamped with Uncle Sam’s guarantee of reliability and (no lie)as to the ability. Loyalty is it’s middle name, but it likes bites of clarity from time to time. Some rabbits pars(es)nip words like breath. Define the rhyme and all will be on time. Back online, hopefully in time, with a new line CMS@all the rest(dotcom).
Nice wheels. They sure don’t make ’em like that anymore. Plastic, throw-away, no time to tinker with dad in the garage anymore.
Whoo eee! Writin’ like this’ll attract re-branders callin’ you Milton’s redheaded stepchild. I like redheads. And I was a stepchild.
Where nurture intersects nature is a book of each life that often enough doesn’t get read for comprehension. If it gets read at all.
But, too, allowances for inscrutableness, un translatable ness, Elliott Ness untouchableness, & Loch Ness chick littleness must be granted. Unique individuals, assimilations. (Borg assssimilations, not unique. How’s that Anna Karenina principle go? Does it go all the way? Or too far?)
You aren’t what you eat. Or what eats you. You are what you assimilate. And that is factory parts & settings.
OEM assimilation. Comprehension + collision preinsurance is in every post roll-off glovebox. Road warrior is as road warrior does as road warrior was done to do.
Check the Kierkegaard rearview mirrors for the que sera. Remember that the objects seen may well be closer than they appear, but not necessarily so. That letters & words are reversed left-right. That REDЯUM, no matter the color intensity of the lipstick used to scrawl it, ain’t nuthin’. That dull boy Jack coming at you with a sharp axe is somethin’. Sticks & stones words ain’t sticks & stones. Symbols ain’t the territory out there. Terror may be the terroir in there. When it is, words most magical is the projection-fermentation-distillation. Some people can stay inebriated their whole lives.
Discontented Winter of war was here in ’60, & seasonal adjustment paid the calendar chiropractic no mind. I was there for it. It was there for me. But the cold was layered with the hot. Iced grapes of wrath. Frozen fire. My pappy was a tactical arrowhead. A strategic bojangler, too.
But the weather out there passes thru, & effects of\responses to it vary according to the weather, stripping, insulation in there. Assimilation varies. How the synthesis is pieced together varies.
Easy mistake to make, confusing correlation & cause, but the hot & cold words never hurt, they merely possibly telegraphed the actions that did. Or might do. Or, more often than not, didn’t do. Can be hard to see from 12’ down, but “I’ve had a lot of worries in my life, most of which never happened.” (Peter principle applies to worries, too.)
That held from narrow hearth to wider earth. Eventually I was old enough to cut the wireless. To read the body language, the action, & disregard the mouth. And the pen.
Words are magic, until you see the sleight of faster hands. Then words are seen for what they are. Tricks.
Cartoon rabbits sell that sugary dreck to kids, who sell it to parents. But parents who are already pre-sold consumers are easy re-sells. Tradition retreads on the bus go round & round. & as GB Shaw described, the vaunted, by some, nuclear family furnace is just another tyranny ruled by its weakest member. (Ah, but we are all family. That’s a sister sledgehammer tune. And hammer time is miller time to many. Staying drunk prevents hangovers.)
Decentralization stopped short is still centralization…& the intelligence in that agency is that of dumb\servo prostheses, papier-mâché casts, atrophying exoskeletonism.
Layers & rows of social insectile dominoes. Old black Joe’s still pickin’ cotton for your ribbons & bows…jangles. Au contraire, tho, everybody doesn’t know. Everybody doesn’t want to know.
Aria Stark looks to me to have much in common with the bunny mama you describe. Just wait til she has kits of her own, eh?
Rotisserie’s gone rusty round here. Sous vide ascendant. Made jewish penicillin in the ‘instant pot’ last night. 13 minutes flat. Including the parsnips. Still working the grainy things-baked rhymes. Elevation, low humidity – sea level recipes do not comprehend, just wanna’ coast. Ha.
I painted a Nova like that one for my momma. But it was a hatchback. Not a driver error convertible. Candy-apple red. That was garage then. This is garage now. Still tinkering.
Still like Cher, the tune, tho.
I had forgot that movie from long a go one of the best
Thoroughly enjoyed this article from beginning to end … especially in light of yesterday’s “art” shitfest.
I consider myself well read but I’ve never finished a Rand book. Started more than a few times … but found her style tedious and repetitive, which led to boredom. Probably my loss …
Stuck, I had wonderful, smart English teachers. Did I mention they were white? Not one of them ever had us read Ayn Rand. We read age appropriate stuff like Catcher in the Rye. The classic high school book; Tale of Two Cities. Les Miserables, Red Sky at Morning, When the Legends Die, A Separate Peace, and Laughing Boy filled our bellies. Grapes of Wrath, Tortilla Flat and Of Mice and Men served as dessert.
The reading list is poor, I know. I was but a poor barrio boy (I hope Infidel doesn’t think it too ethnic to say that) and had other interests. In fact, I skipped school a lot. It was my way of protesting for a lost year – the last day of school was the traditional ‘ditch day’ – something you didn’t miss anymore than you missed appearing at an after-school fight. The principal said he would give everybody who skipped school on the last day, an F for the year. The motherfucker erased my A’s and B’s and I had to do the year over again. So, I skipped school often.
Mr. Ponder caught me in the hood one day, he pulled up in his little convertible sports car (he was a small man physically, but hugely popular, a teenage girl described him as a ‘little Richard Burton’. He was divorced, so he had the mandatory pussy mobile. He’d told us once that his ex accused him of being intellectually conceited because he did crossword puzzles with a pen. Anywho, he pulls up to me and my buddy and he says, Coyote, (not my real name) you have what, an A average? You should show up to school more.
Sorry, I caught the last train to Pottsville, the nostalgia express.
Mr. Ponder never considered that you had an A average because you skipped school? Not a very logical man.
A very smart man, he was being kind. It was a question and I started to correct him about that ‘A average’ but he didn’t want to hear the answer. The wily fox treated me like he knew I was capable of an A average.
Treat a person as you you have him be and all that…
You know, for someone who wrote as many words as she did, you could boil it all down to this- No one has a right to the product of your efforts.
If what we think, say, write, build, create, raise, invent, compose, maintain by our own hands is not ours to do with what we wish, how could any other claim a right to it?
Not sure how any reasonable human being could find disagreement with that premise.
I would add that one owns one’s own body.
The Commies will say maybe you did but the state owns it and we will take it so be happy we don’t kill you
I used to be an unabashed Rand fan, but her philosophy has two major flaws. One, no one can convince even a simple majority of people to use logic and reason to run their lives. All of our decisions are emotionally based. The perfect example? In Atlas Shrugged, each man in the succession of them who bedded Dagny Taggart used reason to understand why he had to stand aside so she could achieve her highest value. Not a single one went over and punched the other guy in the mouth so he could have the woman. Does this sound remotely like something that could ever happen on earth? And two, Rand was an atheist and missed or dismissed the simplest of arguments against it (as in, the Soviet Union was officially atheist and yet murdered 50 million people, so that didn’t work out so well). As Dostoyevsky taught us, if there’s no God then anything is permissible. Which is another way of saying that man cannot be the ultimate, absolute moral arbiter. Without an absolute moral standard outside of man, everything is just one man’s opinion versus another, with the winner being the one who can muster the most violence to ensure his morality is encoded and enforced.
Dagny Taggart slept her way to the top. I really did love the character Francisco D’Anconia, though. By far he’s my favorite. John Galt was rather boring as was the (completely unbelieveable) pirate.
All those “moral standards” have done little to stop the killing, the abuse of power, the immorality of human beings except that for a great many fearing the wrath of God does get them to behave somewhat.
Force and fear just don’t get the job done and religious differences have made violence common throughout history whatever the “absolute moral standard” that prevails. Why is that so?
“Virtue is for the few,” Aristotle said. Virtue is taught to children by parents and these children are virtuous by habit. They are not all the time thinking about choices and their ramifications. They, by habit, just do the right thing each and every time without thinking about it. Why? Because to live a virtuous life is to life without moral conflict and therefore it is in the self-interest of the virtuous person to do the right thing. No force, no fear. Self-interest happens to be conducive to having good relations. You treat your wife well and she does the same for you, for example, if you both are virtuous. And if only one of you is by habit and by self-interest virtuous, that one still is better off treating the other person well unless the relationship devolves into a morass of conflict at which point self-interest demands abandonment. In the end it is self-interest that creates good relationships while it is moral codes, which are inherently full of conflict (force and fear), that create bad relationships.
That was great. I don’t think I have ever considered that perspective in my life and it makes complete sense.
Spenglarian.
I am not good at philosophy but here it goes…
As long as truth is not known can there ever be virtue?
You start with a false premise, that truth is unknown, Pilate in NS.
Have you never heard that truth is beauty and beauty is truth?
I have heard. But have seen some ugly urns, too. Ode to Billy Joe:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xYIkOyooATY
Yeah, well, there are ugly wimmens also. Does that mean L’Oreal is not the truth?
I’ve known some beautiful ugly women. It’s true. So’s the vice versa. Beauty can be deforming. Won’t be surprised if ADA expands to cover it. Supermodels & actresses will be parking closest. Both genders, or however many, of course.
Varmit ya got me to thinking…
sum scribes what is the gist of philosophy for me…
Looking for answers invariably ends with another question…
and it doesn’t matter where you start..
So Praise Odin!
Keeping with the religious theme of that last video here is another…..
She was a jew and thats what they are believed
Yeah, but some have been convinced that convincing others is an unconvincing philosophy. It’s really just philately. Stamped, sealed, delivered – I’m yours. Will you be mine? haha. (The tell in philly that matters, relates, is that cracked bell….)
Logic & reason w\o emotion is Spock, some bygone baby doc. And aren’t all baby docs duvaliers in their own ways? Ayn was the Duvalier Derailleur in her sprocketing orbit, for sure.
Fiction exaggerates to make a point? Unheard of! (☻) Impermissable! (☺) Is there an editor-arbiter in the house?
No? Then let us invent one. We need its opinion. So we can be winners. Because those editor-arbiters never, ever, exaggerate to make a point…or score points…or paint pointillist pictures from pigments squeezed from their pointy-headed pandered to’s. Right?
Its been nearly 35 years since I read “Atlas Shrugged”. I have no intentions of ever reading it again. However, I will defend Rand on one very important principle. She came out and said directly that the individual is the owner and ruler of their own self and life. She made no bones about it. I consider this principle of individual self-ownership to be the cornerstone of my personal world-view and is the basis of every aspect of my life and, in particular, my strategic long-term life choice.
I will never, on my life and love of it, ever entertain for a nano-second any philosophy, religion, or ideology that conflicts in any way, shape, or form; with this concept of self-ownership. My life is my own, period. Nothing will ever change my mind on this. I would honestly say that my personal constitution is such that I am psychological incapable of accepting any belief system that does not accept the principle of individual self-ownership.
There are two points where my world-view differs from that of Rand. One, I do not believe money is the measure of all value (Rand was very emphatic that it was). I do believe that all interpersonal relations are inherently contractual in nature and that they are based on the mutual exchange of value. However, that value is most certainly not limited to money. I also believe that morality itself is purely contractual as well. I reject any and all world-views that do not accept this assertion. Two, Rand never considered pioneering a primary value in its own right. I believe very strongly in pioneering. Indeed, I believe very strongly that pioneering is the real basis of spirituality. Spirituality not based in pioneering is a null value.
My personal world-view can be considered an amalgamation of Rothbard, Rand, and Heinlein.
I will say something else about my world-view and why I am so convinced it is correct. I “derived” or invented it purely through empirical observation on my own (actually in considerable detail) on my own while in high school. It was some years later while in college that I learned that my insights were not unique, but that there was even a label for it. That label is libertarianism. The fact alone that I was able to derive its essential point on my own (as a teen) without any previous knowledge of it makes it obvious that it is purely empirical and, therefor, cannot possibly be wrong.
I will also add that I have no desire to sell you on or to “convert” any of you to my world-view. Being Heinleinian includes the insight, among other things, that most others do not share my world-view. As long as I am free to live my life on own terms, what the rest of you believe in is irrelevant to me (and is actually none of my damn business).
Living life on your own terms is the only way to live it.
Ironically, as with thermodynamics, sometimes it first takes an action by an outside force to activate the kinetic energy in the system. That is followed by the equilibrium of the Second law.
Contracts are what they are on paper. I’m old school and believe in the Word as in Honor and Bound (for life), but the legalese is all good too. Element-ary, as in school, or physics or chemistry, I suppose. H-I-H-o-Ag. The “lone ranger” would be proud. Or maybe laugh at a bad joke? Maybe the hiccup is just in the transition or the lack of clarity – as in hi-ho-silver. Sophomore high school chem teacher taught me that one. Silly rabbit, I know.
As far as Rand, some have Roefully distorted/contorted the self-rule principle for fetally fatal selfish ends. There are always hairs to split and that is one where I split with Rand and the concept, but only by means of its distortion. Of course, she didn’t have to parse eugenics the way they parse living bodies today. Gotta take care of those tots. Don’t know why they aren’t foreseen. So many simpler ways to avoid such a brutal death. Unless “they” are hurting me or mine, then all bets are off, gloves too. Protective nature takes over at a primal level and unrelenting level. It burns things nearly to the ground.
Would be an interesting debate to have with Rand. My guess is that she’d side with life. Not that she would have any objection to or even with death. It is part of the cycle. Not necessarily relativistic, just natural and sometimes necessary. The enemy of my enemy is still my enemy, I just keep a closer eye out on him and my 6. I don’t know, maybe its all philosophy or physics, its heir. I’ll self-determine to keep my morals at home where they belong.
Just can’t abide nutjobs hurtin kids and old folks. That brings out those rabid rabbit instincts. Is that relativistic? Probably. Funny how flexibility works. For better or worse, that protective instinct runs strong. Sort of like the sheep with horns or dens and briar patches with thorns.
Have a stack if Heinlein on my shelf. Most half read – out of time, not desire.
Money is the least of all things, and not even a value, but it does tend to pay the bills. An honest days work for an honest days pay is a pioneering concept; for Rand, too.
There are digits in equations, but not in desire or agreement. Whatever will be will be. But if there is room, homeostasis is good or as close as one can get, e[special]ly when you are a month or [g]enerally les[s] from bringing in a 15.3 pounder on one if those rare “special” rate[ed] fishing reels. They are true workhorses with the awards to prove it.
I know those patented reels are more expensive than others, but there are reasons for it. They work harder and smarter and will not fail you once you figure out how to operate them.
Just look at all those multiple medals/awards they paste all over the handles. Should be some proof as to their quality, skill, years of testing, quality control, and experience in the field. They are definitely not run-of-the-mill. A quick patent database search will show the breadth and scope of what these things can do and that is just on paper, or at least in binary bits.
Like fine wine and quality fishing reels, pioneers and pioneering can be/are underappreciated. Pioneering, however, is one place where I think it is good to be underappreciated. The trick with it, having done it, is the transition of actually get back to making your own milk and cheese, which I used to do-by hand. No milking machine here. Interferes with bonding time and my Jerseys and I always had an understanding. No hobbles. Just a staunchion and a bucket of feed. Learned old school ways from the old timers. Something I am passing along, as well.
The challenge of both old and new is the greater joy. Grid up or down, I’m good either way. Headgames and hard work, both.
Plus, the flavor is better when you eat what you kill. You take responsibility and own the kill, the cleaning, and the cooking. It gives you skin in the game. My philosophy has always been if you screw up, own up, fix up, and try not to f-up again. It’s called responsibility and I’ve got an overdeveloped sense of one. Sad to see it’s not in fashion right now in many places.
I learned long time ago the world is money and if you don’t have it no one listens to you
Atlas, Anthem, Fountainhead … the commenters miss the point of the underlying message in all of them. Rand was an educated Jewish girl whose family saw the first hand effects of communism. She didn’t just pontificate about the creeping oppression and ratcheting of totalitarian screws. She lived it.
Yes, like everyone, she wasn’t perfect with her personal life (some odd IMHO views there) and she could be long winded, but her Theses in these works was consistent. Government, and communism/socialism in particular, has no right to subvert or undermine the free will of a human being to express themselves. A person deserves to be compensated for their labor. It does not belong to the collective. Galt’s Gulch in Atlas was her “utopia” – one in which every one did what they did best of their own free will and was compensated for the work that they did in turn.
Rand also has the consistent Theses in her works that there is a difference between a free society that respects opinion even if it differs from your own and a society that is intolerant to (insert flavor de’jure). The Galt’s Gulch / Dabney Taggerts seek life – not only defined as “living,” but also creating/innovating.
Dabneys brother James represents death. He is lazy, lacks self control, is a user, and a taker. There is no equal or just (as in justice) quid pro quo with him.
The antagonists controlled by the state, especially Mouch, showcase the gradual decline in values (moral/social) that are central themes of oppressive regimes. These folks represent death. Everything they do is about death. There is no “life,” no creation, no honesty, no loyalty, no kindness/compassion to any of what they do. They are not abstract in their soulessness. It is very concrete. They live their cult of death and try to take everyone else down with them.
In the end the lights go out because they have to in order for the process of rebuilding to begin.
The prose of Atlas was long, but I have yet to see a more compelling correlation (almost an exact roadmap) of what we are living in TODAY!
Maybe y’all should try the audio version of Atlas? It is great background while you work on mundane tasks (house cleaning, etc) and much more instructive and honest than TV or MSM “news.”
The movies were disappointing, but only because the books were so good.
BTW, even though Thomas Jefferson had slaves he was one of the most incredible people I’ve run across, living or dead. He was a polymath – architect, scientist, engineer, statesman, author, researcher, thinker, and humanitarian (in the true sense of the word).
Point being – you can’t discount a someone (anyone) because they have some difference or “flaw” from your point of view. In doing so you introduce a bias, which is fine to have – we all have them, which can pleased to the loss of very valuable information.
Didn’t I just read: “it was too long,” or “too boring” (not exciting enough), or “she” (author) had some bias/flaw so I’m going to discount her work(s).
Most people use their bias as a content filter and limit their exposure to others based on that bias. That is why and how they are “dumbed down.”
Hard work, stick-to-it-I’ve-ness, and gutting things out can result in important epiphanies.
I think, as a society and sometimes as individuals, we miss out on a lot by taking short cuts, not doing the hard work, not sticking things through, not trying to solve the puzzles (even if they seem hard or we think we are wandering aimlessly in the dark), and we are fearful (for whatever reason).
But, that is where education and socialization has driven us.
My 2 year olds are learning the lessons of Ayn Rand by learning to share/take/or not.
Saw a great (few months old) pic today of Donald Trump Jr’s daughter with her Halloween candy. He was teaching her about socialism by taking it. THAT is the SAME thing Ayn Rand teaches in her books, especially Atlas. Plus, no one is too young to be taught the evils of socialism.
…Hope she got her candy back in the end.
One more sidenote on Ayn Rand, the old Fountainhead movie was very good and did follow the book.
And we are in the Fountainhead now
Everyone is expressing a wide range of interesting personal insights into Ayn Rand but remember the title of the post. It is not about her or her philosophy. It is about two people who hold wildly different world views holding a peaceful and thoughtful conversation. They both know a lot about the subject and they both can hold forth on their perspective without harming the other. No offense offered…none taken. Please do watch the video. And please continue to support TBP with your thoughts and insights. We all benefit from the action of taking part in the conversation.
I wasn’t arguing against thoughtful conversation between folks with different viewpoints. That would be wonderful. Today, unfortunately, you’re required to have a Marxist/atheist viewpoint or you’re Hitler/racist/sexist/otherist and thteatenened with violence. Peaceful discourse seems to have passed us by.
So very true and very sad
Zach,
I agree with your posts above. But the point of watching the video is that they discuss that very issue and present the argument that it is not in your personal best interest to behave immorally. You may think that you can get over on your wife but it won’t work out well in the end. You may think that you can steal from others, but eventually they will catch on and you will suffer.
I would argue that his philosophy is naive because he presupposes that people don’t make their decisions for immediate gain. Many do. The are happy to live in the big house and eat fancy food until the rest of us catch up with them and then they sit in prison remembering the good times. Happy that they got what they got through immorality. Rand’s philosophy does not appear to deal with people like that.
Read both “Atlas” and “Fountainhead” at 15 without stopping for a break in the former and only one in the latter. Thought they were fantastic. Went to a few Nathanial Brandon Institute meetings at 16 (Alan Greenspan present!). Then I began reading Zen stuff and decided Ayn Rand (whose prose was often boring, yes indeedee) was as full of shit as the Christmas goose (anyone remember those?) and never looked back until I forced myself to do so a few years ago. Sometimes teenagers aren’t as stupid as I’d thought.