Communists BTFO. Holy shit this book opened my eyes on a lot

Pretty sure general consensus here is that it's top 5 of all time.

>>8403902
ebin

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

>>8403942
what

>>8404014
Fine, top 3. I was being conservative.

>>8404018
What

>>8404022
Jesus! It's the best book ever, ok. Calm down

>>8404026
FUCKING WHAT

The only book that I've ever dropped.

>>8404011
Jeez I know Ayn Rand was ugly but you don't have to call her names like that

File: image.png (595KB, 586x598px) Image search: [Google]

595KB, 586x598px

>>8404049
>>8404011

>>8403902
I have a lefty friend who's just started his economics major. I can't wait for him to get assigned this book and convert to libertarian master race.

It's pretty good. Hating became a meme on Tumblr a few years back and it's metastasized over to here.

>>8404011
Where have I read this before? I knew the twist as soon as you started

>>8404085
It's on the Wikipedia page for Atlas Shrugged. From the screenwriter of such classics as 'Catwoman' and 'Transformers'.

I know it's a meme but if serious question I enjoyed first while, if nothing else for the plot. But Jesus then Rand keeps drawling. It could be 250 pages shorter and still get her point across.

artistically worthless obviously but not without merit politically. The problem is it should have been a pamphlet and not a 1,000,000 work of fiction

>>8404076
Stay spooked my property.

>>8404101
She could've gotten her point across in a fucking essay

>>8404165
She did.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bibliography_of_Ayn_Rand_and_Objectivism#Non-fiction_books

>>8404076
they don't assign shit novels in economics majors, unless you took some shit module

>>8404198
Well I wouldn't know because I'm too poor to go to a university like my trust fund babby friends

Only entitled little cunts like this book and its philosophy, none of them produced anything. CEO types like to think everyone else profits from their labor when it's the other way around.

>>8404240
t. NEET

Ironically benefiting from the extortion of money from CEOs.

>>8404255

Care to elaborate?

I want you all to know that taxation is theft, and the national debt is really, really high.

Ok, have a nice day.

File: 1462594416523.jpg (82KB, 300x355px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 300x355px

>>8404261
State extorts money from productive people under the guise of taxation, these ill-gotten gains are pooled and distributed to non-productive types such as yourself. Not much elaboration needed to be honest.

>>8404273

Ah, to be in 9th grade.

>>8404281
Compelling counterargument. Have you considered writing sequel to Leviathan?

File: 1470629316053.jpg (48KB, 506x315px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 506x315px

>>8404273
taxation is part of a social contract you make when you choose to be a part of a society, if you don't want to be a part of that system you're free to leave any time

>>8404285

I can't be bothered, you're obviously a kid if you think CEOs pay taxes and that money goes to "unproductive people". I'm sure once you leave high school daddy will buy you a nice college ride and your frat buddies can jerk each other off while deciding which one of you is galt or rearden.

>>8404291
It's a reference to Pitt the Younger who invented most modern forms of taxation. I think he called income tax theft specifically.

>>8404291
1: Contracts require the explicit consent of both parties.

2: Contracts may not be signed under duress.

3: No-one may be a judge in their own cause.

>>8404076
>libertarian master race

Libertarianism is an intellectual baby cup. It is attractive because its principles are so simple that just about anyone can understand them, and appeal because they assert that you are in control of your own destiny, economically speaking. It feels good to be a Libertarian because you get to be selfish and have a moral justification for doing so, and you get to assert that you know better than the state.

What Libertarianism ignores the importance of politics. It imagines that the state could be decreased in size to the point where it doesn't become a burden on people's lives, and that will be that. They don't realise that the power will pass from the hands of the state to those of private companies, or perhaps some wealthy individuals. You do not free yourself from power, you transfer power.

And so long as power exists, you will have the problems of interference and involvement. The Libertarian policy is usually to ignore these kind of issues. They view employment as an equal agreement between employer and employee, even though it is obvious that one of these groups is in a better negotiating position than the other. When you combine this with the dissolution of the welfare state and no means for the workers to negotiate then you wind up with something resembling tyranny.

Another problem I have with Libertarianism, and one which is not discussed enough, is that it is empty on moral terms. Beyond the rule of 'initiating force' and 'property rights' there is very little to go on, and it permits lavish excess and greed without recognising that there are consequences to accepting greed on a large scale.

It also has no serious answer to the problem of externalities, at least that I have come across.

Now compare all of this with Marxism: it's a complete fucking package with a number of different theories, a clear logical progression which leads to a conclusion... it has so much more in the way of content. Consequently, it is a superior ideology.

>>8404315

But how would the employer maintain that position without employees?

>>8404308
You're not only talking about a different kind of contract, they don't have to be explicitly agreed to either.

>>8404291
this is the most wrong thing i've ever heard in my life, and no, i'm not one of these idiots who thinks all taxes should be abolished.

>>8404308
1: You haven't read Crito

2: You haven't read Leviathan

3: You haven't read The Social Contract

>>8404273
The state owns all of its own money that it issues legally... you only temporarily possess it. You can't really form a good critique of extortion as illegitimate otherwise all land or other forms of "property" which was acquired from feudal modes of conquest and capitalized upon would be illegitimate. Taxation is just one of the various forms of control which underlies capitalism... taxation is really just a form of demand management... the state can always finance itself by expansionary monetary policy or other means.

Unearned income makes up the grand bulk of all expenditures so eliminating it would destroy the economy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unearned_income

File: Libertarianism.jpg (63KB, 401x482px) Image search: [Google]

63KB, 401x482px

>>8403902
It's the best just behind Looking for Alaska

>>8404315
>one of these groups is in a better negotiating position than the other
Yeah, the employee is

>>8404011
/lit/ likes its paraprosdokians.

When I was in High School, Atlas Shrugged was pretty good. Now I don't really like it. It gets too preachy, but I guess I give it some credit for making me think about what money actually is. That speech was a pretty tough sit though.

>>8404327

The onus is not on the employer, it is on the employee.

You need to work, because if you do not work then you do not have access to the resources required to live.

The employer will of course need to hire employees in order to operate, but this is relatively easy when you have more people looking for work than jobs available, and these people have to work to avoid starving to death.

>>8404568

Sure thing, I guess that's why the unemployment rate is so high, you imbecile.

>>8404348

It's not wrong though.

You do not have to participate in the economy if you don't want to. You could just go out into the woods and eat berries. Not much of a choice, but a choice nonetheless.

File: 1453944076074.jpg (141KB, 950x534px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 950x534px

>tfw you came to economic liberalism (economic conservatism here in 'Murrica) and social liberalism by means of very different philosophical methods than the libertarians but you still have to get lumped in with them and their nuttiness

And Ayn Rand makes me want to fucking kill myself. She's like that one immature friend you had back in grade school who copied what you did and said, but in a more edgy, less tasteful, and less self-aware way.

>>8403942
No. Most well educated people regard it as edgy trash for teenagers going through that phase where they think they know about politics and the world

File: heck.jpg (122KB, 532x529px) Image search: [Google]

122KB, 532x529px

it's funny how /lit/ despises rand's egotism but worship's stirner's egotism.

I know that rand might be a fool without the ability to put a coherent argument for her brand of egotism but to be honest, the core concept of egotism is shard with that of Stirner who might have argued differently and through a better method.

What about solipsistic egotism? Since you're sure only of your own consciousness to exist, the best you can do is serve it. Which is egotism.

What about egotism that arises from moral relativism? No absolute code exists to dictate your conduct so you 'naturally' conduct yourself which maximizes your utility which again is egotism.


I'm not justifying rand. Rand might be a shitty cunt who doesn't know how to write.
But Face it /lit/. Egotism is the only tenable consequence of the axioms that we're sure of.

If you disagree then fight me you cunts. Tell me why it isn't.

>>8405965
Can you provide evidence for why you believe that egotism is the only tenable consequence of the axioms that we're sure of?

>>8405578

Which methods?

There's a total libertarian meme cabal in the UK atm run by the Institute for Economic Affairs and the Adam Smith Institute which has erased all my hope that libertarianism in its essentials is salvageable.

I think people who too often encounter natural rights and NAP libertarians might be tempted to believe that the problem is an obsession with anachronistic philosophies, but really the issue is that libertarianism is inherently trendy

Coming from a libertarian: this book is shit.

>>8405965
neither of those conclusions necessarily follow

i don't feel like explaining why, but just know that.

File: ayn rand.png (73KB, 723x408px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 723x408px

>>8405965
Rands Objectivism is a normative world view and is spooked as fuck. Egotism isn't just any form of hedonism.

File: disgust.jpg (40KB, 595x421px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 595x421px

>>8406016
>I have no legitimate argument to back my assertion so i'll just tell you that i don't feel like explaining and ask you to believe me.

>>8406084
I didn't ask you to believe me really, was just letting you know.

>>8403902
Every marxist little shit bernie supporting faggot needs to read this. Not the well read litizen brand of marxist the little shitlords.

>>8405542
>You could just go out into the woods

Which woods? If someone is an not a declared citizen of any country for that matter, where could they go?

>>8406124
>Bernie liberals
>Marxist

But yes they should read it so they either develop the skills to discredit it or die the intellectual death of becoming a right libertarian and then you have to deal with them

>>8406362
(you)

>>8406362
>discredit
lol

>>8404082
>Hating became a meme on Tumblr a few years back and it's metastasized over to here.

You have no idea what you're talking about. This book has been widely (not universally, of course, but widely) shat on for decades.

saw it the other day at a thrift store next to the other children's books. those poor, poor kids.

>>8404218
>Joke's on you, I'm not going to HAVE an education!

File: 1471311766295.jpg (3KB, 148x25px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 148x25px

>>8403942
It's an okay book but come the fuck on.

>trace symbol of dollar sign in the air with my finger
Bravo, what a way to end it.

>>8406648
It's also been hated on here (with good reason) from the start of the board. Fucking randposting should still be against the rules.

>>8403942
quality bait

>>8405965
>it's funny how /lit/ despises rand's egotism but worship's stirner's egotism.
>worship's stirner's egotism

does someone actually take the meme seriously?

>>8405965
why should I "naturally" do things which maximize my utility?

>>8404291

>social contract

I didn't sign shit.

>>8404315

>Libertarianism is an intellectual baby cup. It is attractive because its principles are so simple that just about anyone can understand them, and appeal because they assert that you are in control of your own destiny, economically speaking.

Sounds an awful lot like Marxism.

1) Proletariat = Good / Bourgeois = Good
2) Public Ownership of the Means of Production = Good / Private Ownership of the Means of Production = Bad
3) Public Property = Good / Private Property = Bad

Etc, etc. The one lesson we learn is that the more a philosophy concerns itself with economics, the more indistinguishable from a religion it becomes.

>It feels good to be a Libertarian because you get to be selfish and have a moral justification for doing so, and you get to assert that you know better than the state.

It feels good to be a Marxist because you get to be selfless and have a moral justification for doing so, and you get to assert that you know better than the individual. You also get to be selfless at the expense of other people's money.

See?

File: G L O V E S L A P.jpg (14KB, 347x252px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 347x252px

>>8407623

>Proletariat = Good / Bourgeois = Good

>>8403902
If that book opened your eyes, you're either too young to be visiting this website or grew up a spoiled brat.

>>8407634

You know what I mean.

File: You.jpg (17KB, 227x286px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 227x286px

>>8407623

>The one lesson we learn is that the more a philosophy concerns itself with economics, the more indistinguishable from a religion it becomes.

My nigga.

>>8407248
Damn right.

File: Ayn-Rand-.png (346KB, 451x451px) Image search: [Google]

346KB, 451x451px

The first 300 pages are pretty good. Up until the end of Part 1 where Dagny goes all ''fuck you, fuck everything, I'll go save this fucking goddamn company on my own and don't let anyone stop me''. It felt like this hooray moment that encapsulates her philosophy well into that moment.
The problem is that everything after Part 1 is boring to shit. And when John Galt shows up, he's this boring vanilla shit without a single personality to him. Dagny was a decent female protagonist until Galt shows up and she just wants to desperately want to hum his leg endlessly. And the main feeling you get out of her is simply that she's a slut and it's kinda weird.

The main speech by Galt at the end is long and tedious but if you switch parasites for what people consider to be SJW who use marxist collectivist rhetoric, the entire speech makes sense.
The real problem is that the whole speech is preachy, talking down to a group of people that seems imaginary. However, everything clicks when the individualistic themes of the speech is used against SJW collectivism.

I also find it cute that there's a retard among the evil collectivist group trying to destroy the world that everyone tells him to shut up and that his ideas are bad. But once shit gets so bad for them, they listen to him because his insanity is equated as taking responsibility. I always found that cute.

There is some good in the book but there is a looooooot that is bad. There's a lot to unpack and most people misread or misunderstand her book.

>>8404076
>leftist friend majoring in economics
What?

>>8404082
Ideological bullshit aside the writing is absolute shit. Middle grade, at best. Not to mention completely too long for it's purpose. It reads like a first draft.

>>8404269
Taxation is not theft, and the level of total national debt is irrelevant. You don't belong on a literature board.

>>8404315
>Now compare all of this with Marxism: it's a complete fucking package with a number of different theories, a clear logical progression which leads to a conclusion... it has so much more in the way of content. Consequently, it is a superior ideology.
I was with you until this part. You're a fucking moron.

>>8405542
>unemployment rate is so high, you imbecile.
It's not though...

>>8405965
It's almost like they're different people who said different things in different ways.

>>8406362
>Bernie liberals
>Not marxist
u wot?

>>8408247
Yeah, I don't know either. He believes in Bernie's economic policies but is also willing to set aside his political beliefs in order to get a lot of money.

Libertarians?

More like libertardians am I right?

>>8408446
You should probably tell him that economics won't get him shit.

>>8408446
>Economics Student
>Believes in Bernies economics
Not for long anon...Not for long.

>>8404568
>Yeah, the employee is
lel, if you're a native-born Saudi or Swiss then maybe. Most places you need to work to live, and there are not enough jobs for everyone.

>>8408556
Believe me, I have. He switched to economics from civil engineering, and nothing I say will convince him that it was a mistake.

>>8408574
I told him that, as well.

>>8405965
Because Stirner is an excellent writer who's theory is waterproof, Rand is a shit writer who's theory is BTFO by Stirner's. Just because they both deal with self-interest doesn't mean they're the same ideas.

>>8408282

Do you dispute that it's a complete package? Or do you dispute that it's a superior ideology?

The fact that it is more comprehensive is what makes it a superior ideology. You can apply Marxist thought to all manner of things, which you cannot really achieve with Libertarianism.

If you don't think being comprehensive is good... why not?

Important to note that I am not saying that all products of Marxist thought are good or useful. Just the fact that it can be applied in such a wide range of areas makes it better than Libertarianism.

If you don't agree... well, the floor is yours because I'd like to know why.

>>8408287

So the average company is so desperate for employees that they will pay to have you educated, will offer you a higher salary to dissuade you from going elsewhere, immediately bow before any threat of strike action...

I don't think so. Unemployment may be lower than it has been for a few years, but the idea that the employee calls the shots is absurd.

>>8407623

If they were not similar, then I probably wouldn't have made a comparison between them, would I?

But you're mistaken about the formation of Marxism versus the formation of Libertarianism. The former used an approach of making observations about economic trends and theorising their eventual outcomes, while the latter takes a moral principle and applies it to the economically "artificially".

They are completely different to one another in this regard.

The comment about them both being like religions is just trite. I could have asked someone who knows fuck all about either Libertarianism or Marxism and got the very same answer, and here you are thinking you've said something clever. You disgust me.

>>8408247
Why do people seem to be under the impression that economics are necessarily right wing? It's apolitical in essence, you can just as easily make up an economic model for the left as you can for the right. A lot of econ professors are lefties, I don't know why people seem to believe that a leftie going into econ will somehow finally realise "how the world really works(tm)", if anything he will simply keeps his views while actually knowing what he's talking about.

TAXATION IS THEFT

I DO NOT CONSENT

>>8403902
>what's /lit/'s opinion on it?

It's responsible for unspeakable harm towards the American working classes.

File: 1330987959993.jpg (24KB, 250x332px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 250x332px

>>8407617
Nobody asked you to.

>>8404568
Ahahahah dude what the fuck are you even saying how can someone be this wrong

>>8405542
>You do not have to participate in the economy if you don't want to. You could just go out into the woods and eat berries.
You can't actually, it's illegal. Just about every single square meter of land on the globe is claimed by some country.

>>8408740

Yes, you will probably be born on land which belongs to a state, but that does not mean you must participate in the economy of that state.

Besides, it's not as though Libertarianism would offer any escape from this problem as you would still be constrained by private property.

>>8408753
>that does not mean you must participate in the economy of that state.
It does actually, you literally have no choice.

>>8408760

But you are not involved with the currency at any point, so you do not (and cannot) pay taxes.

>>8404396
Yes I have. You have not read an enquiry regarding political justice.

>>8408772
Then you can't survive as you'd need a permit to hunt, farm and sometimes even gather, let alone build shelter.

>>8408672
Sure is pure ideology in here today.

>>8408707
There have been plenty of recent strikes. Airlines, Verizon, public works employees. You're just uninformed about the happenings around you. Furthermore, marxist theory is incomplete despite what you may think. It has the same shortcomings relating to power vacuums as Libertarianism.

>>8408717
You're just an idiot.

>>8408861

I don't live in the US.

Even if all the strikes you mention have been successful, it is missing the point. Yes, strike action can disrupt a company when all its employees take a united stance but that is limited in effectiveness.

As I mentioned before, in a Libertarian society there would be no state provided healthcare or provisions for striking workers, and consequently their bargaining position is reduced even further. Going on strike becomes even more of a risk, and employers are able to punish people for going on strike far easier.
And even if they're successful, it only goes as far as one company.

What it all comes down to is, can you explain how Libertarianism would be good for the worker or employee?

>>8408861
>economics is inherently right wing

I bet he thinks that Von Mises was influential.

>>8408910

>how Libertarianism would be good for the worker or employee?
They could smoke weed and would not be drafted to the slave army. These two things alone make it worth it.

File: 1471445719507.jpg (23KB, 439x290px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 439x290px

>59 posters

I'm willing to bet no more than 5 of you have actually read anything written by Rand.

I read the Fountainhead first, in high school, because my middle name is Roark- after Howard Roark, the main character. That book was great, and it was the first thing to make me actually THINK. Kind of babby's first philosophy. Except that one was actually about the story, not about explaining objectivism- which makes it way better than Atlas Shrugged. I loved the Fountainhead, but Atlas Shrugged is the only book I've ever dropped halfway through. After a while I just didn't give a fuck anymore.

>>8409878
Best post

>>8403902
If you're not just meemeing to have a taste of what you think it's acceptance; you might also like The Republic, luckily for you Plato's prose is as smooth as Rand's. And it's just 300 pages. Do it and meem Plato

>>8409923
>Plato's prose is as smooth as Rand's

Do you have a brain tumor?

File: 1435016213127.gif (227KB, 600x600px) Image search: [Google]

227KB, 600x600px

>>8403902
>Rand actually believed if the capitalists left society would collapse.

File: aqq.png (634KB, 1041x791px) Image search: [Google]

634KB, 1041x791px

>>8410110

She was correct.

File: Venezuela_Export_Treemap.png (64KB, 961x749px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 961x749px

>>8410130
Yes I should have known that a country with a privately managed economy that put it's sole stock on one commodity is the reason to not criticize the Bossman.

This thread is just people calling each other morons. I hate people.

File: no philosophers here.jpg (115KB, 1000x499px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 1000x499px

Why anyone ever cared about her fan-fiction trying to juxtapose her misinterpretations of Aristotle, Adam Smith, and Friedrich Nietzsche I'll never know. "Atlas Shrugged" is nothing but a collection of stiff, uneven prose about trains. It does not even function as literature, let alone philosophy. Her idea of climaxes are long, tedious, boring monologues. She will be hardly a footnote in history. All she tried to do was invent a new way to justify being a narcissist. You can peddle your fascism lite elsewhere, boy.

>>8409878
It is great if you want a book about literal anarcho-capitalism, in that he is a baby who commits acts of terrorism when he doesn't get his way. She literally wrote idiots to be dumbfounded by Roark. "The Fountainhead" is a book devoid of election funding, lobbyists, public relations, the CIA working for American enterprise, agricultural subsidies, environmental problems, religion as a Right-wing rather than Left-wing force, et cetera. Not only that, but the pure ideal of capitalism she describes is obstructed by all manner of humanist, universalist, and egalitarian forces. In addition, she ignores all of the forces on the Right which would forestall her ideal. It is rather dishonest to exclude one's own supporters.

>>8404082
Hating it became a meme when the book came out, keep trying though.

Glad to hear all the hate.

One of 3 christmases I have celebrated in my lifetime was the winter after my parents had been arrested for being meth cooks. My aunt and uncle took me in under the guise of giving me a better life and, while torturing me with middle class societal norms, occasionally provided me with rare experiences. Such as christmas.

Their daughter, my cousin obviously, had gone to college and become one of those girls that says everything as if it's a question and "like" has replaced far too many words in her vocabulary. She married this college wrestling star who was this "emotionally in touch" irsh guy who liked to appear well read without actually knowing what that meant. For this christmas, about a year and a half after my first encounter with Rand that ended with my first book burning, I stared down in horror as I unwrapped my second of only two gifts. While irish pug had this dopey smile on his face and the rest of the family crowded around, knowing I liked to read and had gotten into an elite academic program and that this was a rare christmas for me, I could not escape the overwhelming and obvious pressure to act more grateful than they had ever seen a human being act over this clearly hole-in-one gift.

And yet, in my hands was an entire Rand collection, featuring, in limited edition, the only book I have ever hated enough to this day to actually desecrate. (I mean, intentionally. I've torn up plenty of books through simple neglect.) I could not rationalize my overwhelming hatred when it met with my unstoppable sense of obligation and so I stared, slack jawed, lips moving but no sound coming out like a fucking special needs case while my family erupted in cheers. Apparently, I had delivered on their expectations.

That's almost what reading Rand is like. Being patronized by family members who just don't get it and will make that fact as painful as possible for you.

>>8408910
Fucking strikes? If libertarianism ever becomes a thing, it'll be the fucking Pinkertons all over again.

File: lindsay222.jpg (7KB, 202x250px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 202x250px

>>8404011

always makes me laugh because it is so true

>>8410023
Did you struggle with Plato?

>>8404082
What are you talking about? I feel most intelligent people have been hating on Atlas Shrugged since it dropped. It's not some new tumblr trend.