Why all the hysteria over Ayn Rand?

Altruism means "serve everyone but yourself" when the logical thing to do from the utilitarian perspective is to serve everyone including yourself.


The basic principle of altruism is that man has no right to exist for his own sake, that service to others is the only justification of his existence, and that self-sacrifice is his highest moral duty, virtue and value.
Do not confuse altruism with kindness, good will or respect for the rights of others.


Ayn Rand meant selfishness in the sense of standing up for yourself. There are many real life examples of where the traditional roles of selfishness and altruism are overturned, where selfishness is good and altruism is evil. For instance if you're being bullied the altruistic thing to do would be to sacrifice your own personal gain for others, by sitting there and taking it like a little bitch. The selfish thing to do would be to gain pleasure at the expense of others, escape, tell your bros then jump them the next day, spraying them up with mace and beating them with phone books.

I don't agree with Ayn Rand on everything, I believe the "common good" as a concept has been abused, not that it is invalid. The common good should ideally be democratic concerning groups and include individual rights when the group is at odds with the individual.

http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/altruism.html
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/common_good.html

However I have never heard anyone criticize Ayn Rand on these legitimate points and issues, only ever "hurr durr selfish randroids derp".

>>119
But srsly; Do you really need to be told all this? Do schools in your country suck that hard?
I've never attended school. Got my education from teh Internets.

Even the news media feature "watch what you put on facebook and here's why"-type sections from time to time, like slow news seasons.
I don't watch TV. I get most news from imageboards.

>>120
Shalom hymie, there's nothing skewed about any of his views, they are so much more succinct and poignant than your jewish propaganda bullshit, Nikita is more informed than 99% of the world. Eat a dick and fucking die you dirty kike.

>>122
Sup, Nikita?

>>111
Wait, what?

>>105
I also have imageboard mentality, so I see nothing wrong with child porn
That's funny, because before you railed against child porn when you first came around these boards. A little slip in consistency for your paid character act, perhaps? Yes, you came here as a paid forum disruptor because legitimate anti Zionist postings have been going on here for years, and you've been placed her to make the common person equate that with outright and unashamed antisemitism. I see right through your scheme, Nikita (if that's even your real name).

>>125
1. I just find it silly to protest against bits and bytes, especially when they expose the problem.
2. If you want to stop child porn - kill Jews, who make it and abuse kids. And that isn't joke, because child porn producers are real Jews (some with Israeli citizenship), having surnames ending in -sky and -berg. Stop treating symptoms - start "treating" Jews.
3. If child porn would be easily available to pedophiles, there would be no black market and Jews would lose money.
4. You should ban normal porn too, because by your logic it increases number of rape incidents.

>>126
Only jews are pedophiles, you would just be abusing children for the benefit of jews.

>>126
Just a thought, you seem to be defending child abuse, so you must be a jew. Yes?

Shalom asshole!

>>127
so masturbating to https://encyclopediadramatica.se/Loli-chan makes me a Jew?

>>118,121
That explains rather neatly why you never had a job, and most likely never will. Thread over.


n00bguide: Whether you like it or not, this world is made up of human beings. You need to be able to socialize with them, in person (not just over tha webz).
Which is the main reason home-schooling is generally a bad idea: You don't get to form much of a social network, much less those connections and friendships that is the real driving force in society.

>>130
I will become a serial killer, raping lolies. That way I will get my revenge, and if police catches me, they will have to keep me alive for the rest of my life.

>>129
>>131
I find it laughable you choose to live like this.

>>132
it wasnt my choice.

>>126
No. All I'm saying is you haven't exactly been consistent, not that it's a surprise or anything like that.

>>133
Oh yeah, that'll make for a valid defense in court /sarcasm

>>129
Ah, Loli-chan. People kind of dislike her new pics, but I think she filled in nicely, to be honest.

Why are all these trolls trying to derail this thread?

The fact remains, criticism of Ayn Rand is warranted however Ayn Rand was in fact right about quite a lot of things that upset middle class sensibilities and the establishment to some extent.

>>136
No trolling here, but Loli-chan is definitely sexier than your Ayn Rand.

>>137
You're trying to steer the conversation away from Ayn Rand with a controversial topic.

>>136
Why are all these trolls trying to derail this thread?
Because honestly it has outlived its usefulness.

>>135
Does she looks good or is she now an ugly landwhale? It seemed she would suffer from overweight when she grows up.

>>139
Then you start a new thread, and leave the old one alone.
Allowing those that have something relevant to say, to not be drowned in shitposts.

How hard is that, really?

>>141
[i]Relevate [b]this[b]![/i]
*grabs dick*

>>140
Does she looks good or is she now an ugly landwhale?
I think she still looks good and still has that charm about her, although it's not *quite* the same as before due to the fact that she's now older, but no complaints from me. Her new pics were posted somewhere on Chansluts last time I visited there.

>>141
I'll readily admit that this is due to my own bias, but seriously, fuck Ayn Rand. Her ideology has been responsible for influencing Reagan/Thatcher, right-wing dictatorships, military juntas and neoliberalism run amok. Seriously, no. Also, this thread has outlived whatever usefulness it had and whatever point needed to be made about Rand have already been over and done with.

>>142
hurr durr
ftfy

"Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted - and you create a nation of law-breakers - and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with."

"All animals are equal, but some are more equal than others"

>>143
Hence the question the thread was supposed to be about:
Why do people still —to this day— seem to think she's some kind of genius guru?

>>145
The public transport corporation over here makes more money punishing fare-dodgers than by selling tickets. Which explains why they don't do more to get more passengers to pay up.
Now I see where they got that idea.

i guess the problem i have with these might is right / new age Machiavellism. is that its mostly bullshit and like a lot of things the good is found some ware in the middle. if you go to far to the right of this, selfishness idea you get social Darwinism, and Hitler. to far to the left of the altruism, and you get nothing, nothing at all, and become a door mat. i cant really think of historical example of this. cuz i think true altruism is also bullshit and no human would practice it. thus the reason for no example.

>Her ideology has been responsible for influencing Reagan/Thatcher
I don't think Rand can take credit for the longest serving prime minister ever, since Thatcher was more conservative than libertarian but okay.

>right-wing dictatorships, military juntas
lolwut? How do you even? You might want to read this book Rand wrote, she's got some pretty strong opinions on dictatorships and military juntas.

>neoliberalism run amok
This is retarded. You wouldn't blame a champion of socialism for North Korea, you'd blame the people actually responsible for North Korea.

>>150
(not >>143, but I see you missed a few vital spots)
Rand influenced Reagan/Thatcher
I think not, Thatcher was more conservative than libertarian
You don't have to keep a gun to someone's head and make them march to precisely the same drum as you, to influence them; it's enough that you say something they like. Just saying.

right-wing dictatorships, military juntas
nope
neoliberalism run amok
This is retarded
So you're saying you don't have expressions like "more Catholic than the Pope" where you're from?

So $REVERED_GURU leaves behind a legacy, said legacy takes off, and some people take the legacy to its logical extreme. Only then it's somehow not the Revered Guru's fault. Hmm.

I'm not saying $REVERED_GURU holds all blame, I'm saying to look at inspiration and where it leads (and who it is that takes it there). This is how Jesus gave us the Inquisition, Marx gave us Soviet¹, and social Darwinism gave us Hitler.

(¹ I vaguely remember something about Marx feeling it would do more harm than good for some backwards place like Russia to be the first place to pick up on his ideas. Hard to argue that one in hindsight…)

>>151
>Only then it's somehow not the Revered Guru's fault. Hmm.
Yeah, it's a funny idea but I tend not to blame people for things they didn't do. It leads to all sorts of stupid shit that belongs in the dark ages like, sons being blamed for the debt of their father.

>>150
she's got some pretty strong opinions on dictatorships and military juntas.
Yeah, and it entirely depends on whether or not said dictatorships and military juntas are jew-run and gentile-subjugating.
Fuck off dirty kike.

>>152
Between «be-all-end-all-Messiah that can do no wrong» and «be-all-end-all-Satan-Judas than can do nothing right», there are a few little things called «nuances». Just saying.
Like «This guy's got some good points, maybe we should listen to him. Just keep your head on, he's still only human.»

If it gets easy to take your teaching to logical extremes and end up in NK, then there are flaws in it, and you should add a caveat or two.
«Not a religion, do not worship!» would be a good place to start.

Haven't been around in a while to reply, here goes.

>>147
Why do people still —to this day— seem to think she's some kind of genius guru?
People who are massively uninformed (sadly, the majority of the population in any given country) think that someone who is seemingly non-conformist is some kind of genius, irregardless of whether or not their ideas are actually good or not. There's this fixation with some people where they need to be part of a bandwagon and worship an idol. I never understood such silliness, honestly.

>>150
Thatcher was more conservative than libertarian but okay.
They're more or less cut from the same cloth (similar spectrum of thought) Libertarians do like the "progress" that Thatcher had made, but often criticize that she didn't go far enough. Thatcher and Reagan were bad enough, we don't need to go further in the direction of insanity.
lolwut? How do you even? You might want to read this book Rand wrote, she's got some pretty strong opinions on dictatorships and military juntas.
Rand may not have directly advocated such things, but her philosophy and idea were put into place via undemocratic means. Chile under Pinochet is a good example of this.
You wouldn't blame a champion of socialism for North Korea
Depends. Like libertarianism, socialism comes under a spectrum of moderation and extremism. I certainly wouldn't blame a common social democrat for NK, but certainly would have some words to say for a Marxist-Leninist/Maoist especially one who defends North Korea no matter what (even though the DPRK doesn't follow Marxism-Leninism anymore and replaced that ideology with "Juche").

I have yet to find anything that works better in practice than non-neoliberal mixed economies, and while they're not the best, there's literally nothing better that doesn't require a complete distortion/destruction of the democratic order, followed mostly likely by a massive body count. As for the rest, >>151 & >>154 pretty much nails it.

>>155
someone who is seemingly non-conformist is some kind of genius,
Rand was very conformist. It is just that Rand's conformist expresses as the loyalty to Jewish community, which greatly profits from wrecking nations. I.e. if Rand succeeds with her propaganda, America gets destroyed and consumed by some rival state (like China or Europe), which has stronger army and economy (remember Might is Right).

In fact, it was likely that Rand served USSR and had hidden agenda of deregulating American economy, so that USSR could have easily attacking America. I.e Ayn Rand was a secret commie.

Looks like you ran out of argument for this >>156 one too, what a surprise. Keep failing hymie.

>>157
oy vey! the chutzpah of these goy! it's like a second shoah on newpol!

oy...