4 ms·

She had PTSD or something similar. Her "literature" was therapy. Born in the upper-middle class in tsarist Russia, her dad a business owner. Got thrown out in

She had PTSD or something similar. Her "literature" was therapy. Born in the upper-middle class in tsarist Russia, her dad a business owner. Got thrown out in the street by the muzhiks, along with the whole family. Had to wander through the country, nearly starving on occasion. Fled the place at the first opportunity. It's all in the books. The glorious, near superhuman entrepreneurs are echoes of Daddy. The welfare state is the masses who robbed her family of their wealth. She has a visceral hate of them because, well, they were the cause of her family's destitution in real life. And she is actively trying to construct an ideology which is in every way, every single detail, opposite to the ideology of the revolution that sent her life on a different course - opposite even when it makes no sense. Like someone who got raped and then is preaching how sex is bad for you. It's quite transparent.

arkis22 10y ago
You could belittle any author as "merely" the result of their upbringing and psychology to invalidate them. That's not productive or fair. The story that you gave and your reaction to it shows a distinct lack of empathy. If it happened to you I'd bet you'd bitch too.
- Florin_Andrei 10y ago
  The point is - is this true or not? I strongly believe my assessment is correct. As for the "lack of empathy" - I actually intended to add a coda, as to how the life of young Alyssa Rosenbaum was pretty miserable, and how I, as someone who grew up behind the Iron Curtain and actually lived and suffered for two decades under a stalinist-like dictatorship (unlike armchair libertarians who read Atlas Shrugged at Starbucks in a comfy western city, all decked up in turtlenecks and designer jeans), I sort of understand her visceral reaction to the horrors of that kind of regime. No, not "sort of"; I truly understand - again unlike western readers. But then I said to myself - this is the accidental "thought leader" of a movement, the rise of selfishness and base instincts, that - if left unchecked - would burn down the world and put a stop to the project that has started 6000 years ago in Sumer, and still going strong, that we call civilization. So pardon me if there's another side of me that says "screw Ayn Rand and her insane mumblings".
  - arkis22 10y ago
    I strongly believe you are incorrect. And your insistence at labeling the values she espouses as being simply selfishness is a shallow understanding of her ideas. If you'd like to expand your history I'm sure I could give an example of your animosity being the result of you overcompensating for something. Does that make it true?
    - Florin_Andrei 10y ago
      ...aaand we've finally arrived at the core boilerplate "argument" with any Ayn Rand supporter. I've seen this more times than I can count. It's as inevitable as the eye of the maelstrom. If you disagree, your understanding is "shallow". Or perhaps there's something wrong with you, psychologically. In other words, you're dumb or crazy. She would approve so much of this tactic, because she's used it a lot herself. And it's ironic because Ayn Rand herself was shallow as an intellectual, and her writings really were the attempts to overcompensate of someone whose mental equilibrium was in bad shape after living through horrors. It's called projection. And the answer is no. Have a nice day.
      - arkis22 10y ago
        Annnnd we've finally arrived at the classic liberal. I'm dumb, crazy, and there's something wrong with me. Why should your argument only apply to her and not you? You've listed no counter examples. Thank you, you too.
        goalieca 10y ago
        A few clicks into Google and I found many scholarly critiques on her work as well objectivism in general. There seems to be consensus on rejecting this philosophy. Basically, it has no supporters in the academic community.
        arkis22 10y ago
        There are scholarly critiques on everything. No philisophy is perfect. Capitalism and Socialism obviously have their scholarly critiques. Atlas Shrugged is a novel which happens to contain Ayn Rand's philosophy. You can learn from it or not. I think there's some truth to all kinds philosophy, you just need to be discerning. An analogy to this would be: "you can't seriously be a Christian. No academic thinks the Bible really happened." I can still learn from the Bible, or the Church, even if it's all a lie. If you're looking for a scholarly consensus on the "one true universal philosphy" you're going to be waiting awhile.
sevensor 10y ago
Indeed, and elsewhere in the thread I recommend We the Living if you really want to understand Rand in her own words. It's the least philosophically ambitious of her novels, and as a direct result it's the best read.

arkis22 10y ago

You could belittle any author as "merely" the result of their upbringing and psychology to invalidate them. That's not productive or fair. The story that you gave and your reaction to it shows a distinct lack of empathy. If it happened to you I'd bet you'd bitch too.

Florin_Andrei 10y ago
The point is - is this true or not? I strongly believe my assessment is correct. As for the "lack of empathy" - I actually intended to add a coda, as to how the life of young Alyssa Rosenbaum was pretty miserable, and how I, as someone who grew up behind the Iron Curtain and actually lived and suffered for two decades under a stalinist-like dictatorship (unlike armchair libertarians who read Atlas Shrugged at Starbucks in a comfy western city, all decked up in turtlenecks and designer jeans), I sort of understand her visceral reaction to the horrors of that kind of regime. No, not "sort of"; I truly understand - again unlike western readers. But then I said to myself - this is the accidental "thought leader" of a movement, the rise of selfishness and base instincts, that - if left unchecked - would burn down the world and put a stop to the project that has started 6000 years ago in Sumer, and still going strong, that we call civilization. So pardon me if there's another side of me that says "screw Ayn Rand and her insane mumblings".
- arkis22 10y ago
  I strongly believe you are incorrect. And your insistence at labeling the values she espouses as being simply selfishness is a shallow understanding of her ideas. If you'd like to expand your history I'm sure I could give an example of your animosity being the result of you overcompensating for something. Does that make it true?
  - Florin_Andrei 10y ago
    ...aaand we've finally arrived at the core boilerplate "argument" with any Ayn Rand supporter. I've seen this more times than I can count. It's as inevitable as the eye of the maelstrom. If you disagree, your understanding is "shallow". Or perhaps there's something wrong with you, psychologically. In other words, you're dumb or crazy. She would approve so much of this tactic, because she's used it a lot herself. And it's ironic because Ayn Rand herself was shallow as an intellectual, and her writings really were the attempts to overcompensate of someone whose mental equilibrium was in bad shape after living through horrors. It's called projection. And the answer is no. Have a nice day.
    - arkis22 10y ago
      Annnnd we've finally arrived at the classic liberal. I'm dumb, crazy, and there's something wrong with me. Why should your argument only apply to her and not you? You've listed no counter examples. Thank you, you too.
      - goalieca 10y ago
        A few clicks into Google and I found many scholarly critiques on her work as well objectivism in general. There seems to be consensus on rejecting this philosophy. Basically, it has no supporters in the academic community.
        arkis22 10y ago
        There are scholarly critiques on everything. No philisophy is perfect. Capitalism and Socialism obviously have their scholarly critiques. Atlas Shrugged is a novel which happens to contain Ayn Rand's philosophy. You can learn from it or not. I think there's some truth to all kinds philosophy, you just need to be discerning. An analogy to this would be: "you can't seriously be a Christian. No academic thinks the Bible really happened." I can still learn from the Bible, or the Church, even if it's all a lie. If you're looking for a scholarly consensus on the "one true universal philosphy" you're going to be waiting awhile.

sevensor 10y ago

Indeed, and elsewhere in the thread I recommend We the Living if you really want to understand Rand in her own words. It's the least philosophically ambitious of her novels, and as a direct result it's the best read.