Is her philosophy worth reading, /lit/? Is she some sort of radical

Mostly anti collectivism. This being the source of all evil

Are you serious? She literally doesn't even do philosophy and is easily disproven on all points.

I could debunk every thing she said, but that would be too easy. In fact, the only thing she ever got right was atheism, but she didn't even understand that atheism is necessarily humanistic.

What a joke.

>>8148607
>Is she some sort of radical capitalism advocate?
she's an autism advocate who believes the state should have a monopoly on force

She created a whole philosophy just to justify her greed. She spent the remaining years of her life on food stamps. She's a selfish hypocritical being. However, it can't hurt you to familiarize yourself with her so go ahead

>>8148703
more like she created a philosophy to get back at the commies who made her an exile
and their apologists she met in america

She also fled from stalinist russia to the land of the free because the soviets fucked her. Same as the rest of them, i'm sure

File: Top spook.gif (150KB, 245x320px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 245x320px

>>8148607

She's a shitty version of this guy.

>>8148736
rand believed in property rights to an autistic degree tho

>>8148744

Hence why I said, "shitty version."

>>8148749
what do they have in common then

>>8148736
You only say that because of the stirner thread where she's mentioned. You haven't read neither of them.

>>8148636
I in turn could debunk everything you have ever said, but too ezy. Lolrekt

>>8148607
She's very good at plot, poor at creating sensible characters and objectivism will either trigger you to death or blow your mind.
It's a polarizing author. I think she's worth reading.

>>8148636
>Prove
>Philosophy

>>8148636
>atheism is necessarily humanistic.
Please feel free to enlighten us about the secret humanistic efforts of Mao Zedong's or Stalin's regimes

>>8148636
well i could debunk all of your debunkings but that would be too easy