• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

What If Atlas Shrugged?

A

Anonymous

Guest
What if the engine quit working
What if the Nat Taggart bridge collapsed
What if they were still hiding in Colorado
What if I told you I had a pack of smokes in my pocket labled simply with a
$

What if in fact Atlas has been shrugging for a verry long time with not a single care but his own content

what if THEY never come back

For those who know...You Know...
For those who don't...Hope and pray that it's not too late already

$
 
I'll buy one of those cigarettes....
It's funny how so many of those writers, Orwell, Rand, Bradbury; they seem like profits. And I don't mean funny in a HA-HA way. I mean funny like somthing smells funny. Off ...Out of whack.

On one side we have the Loony left with their NEWSPEAK.

On the other edge of the spectrum, the giant right wing behometh book-burning cencorship.

Some place up north lies the forked tongue, 'you scratch my back I'll scratch yours', politician; fearing only himself. Too stupid to know any better.

And then there are the SHEEP...
Flocking blindly behind their masters.
Deaf Dumb & Blind

Atlas is most certainly still shrugging.
And THEY aren't comming out of hiding for a long long time...

......................"$" I Like that
 
People shut their eyes. The walking Blind...
We cannot become one with the enemy.
We cannot go blind.
So many people on these boards laugh at conspiracy
laugh when you jab at a dying thought with a stick, and cry when you jab at them. Then they break out their blinders and stay on the straight path. Shooting insults at the thinkers, conforming. Trading individuality, for confidence in their surroundings. As they swim around in their sea of comfort, we, all people really, get sucked into the downward spiral.
That spiral, KingSlender, is a black whole.
Whole truth
Whole consequence
All we can do is sit holding our sign....


$
 
If Atlas were to Shug then Telemacus would Sneeze and Satan Repent (but then I've read far too much RAW for my sanity).

As a long time Conspiracy Theorist, for fun and prophecy, I concluded that the ultimate Conspiracy would be the open one, hidden by all the false theories that crowd our subconcious and concious minds. It's there, plain to see, if we were not so blinded by trying to connect JFK to the UFO's by way of Byron and Shelley. We try too hard to see the Fnords and thus our true target is obscured; One I closed.

We spend too much time on the nonsense which is why no illuminati would bother to even glance at our misguided scribblings. Which is a shame since most Conspiracy Theorists are motivated by jealously; they want so much to be a part of the conspiracies that they construct. "Would the All Seeing Eye please look my way."

Fact is, it's not conformist to disagree, or argue, or poke holes in the flimsy theories we vomit forth and parade as if they were gleaming jewels. For if it were a good sturdy, dare I say "realistic", theory it would survive it all. "For all evil needs to triumph is for good to do nothing." To do nothing, to say nothing is to Conform.

Oh wait I'm supposed to me making trite references to a particular book to make me look 'intelligent' :rolleyes: Sorry but that's one stereotype to which I'm not conforming, one among many.

So why should I not take this thread to Chat?
 
So, Niles, are we to assume that you are motivated by jelousy?
I'm really not sure how your post has anything to do with this thread, but it's there so it has to be observed.

I'm not trying to puff out my chest and look intelligent by pointing references in some book. Seems to me the way to show intelligence around here is to jump on any thought other than one's own and discredit it. To ramble on about self-importance in the feild of......whatever,......that's what make you smart here.

If making reference to Atlas Shrugged is so "TRITE" and used up, why have I seen no posts about it? Well, because it's not trite at all.

So there are no forums for book discussion here. I figured the dissappearence of vision and originality in todays industries, the arts, architecture, engeneering...etc., could be somewhat of a "conspiracy".

I've been reading these threads fo a few years and have never seen reference to Atlas shrugged.
I havn't seen 1984 in here either. Are you all that stand-offish to fiction? You don't seem to offended by Gerald Posner's fiction.

I just wanted to discuss the ideas behind the book. I wanted to know more about Objetivism.
I wanted debate.
All I got was a trite reply with over-used axioms.

He's still shrugging
 
Nope, sorry no book-readers on this board :rolleyes:

There's been several threads on those weird paper things, and several more on philosphy and various conpiracy theories.

Jane.
 
:confused:

I'm going back to reading my Mills&Boon romance! :p
 
JG books do get discussed in Fortean Culture, sometimes.

I suspect that the reason that you're not getting much response on Ayn Rand on this side of the pond (UK) is that I don't think her books are particularly well known here, or easy to find except in US editions.

I've only read 'Anthem' and that was one I picked up in Morris Plains, New Jersey.

And I've only just realised that John Galt is a character from 'Atlas Shrugged'
 
Originally Posted By Timble:
I suspect that the reason that you're not getting much response on Ayn Rand on this side of the pond (UK) is that I don't think her books are particularly well known here, or easy to find except in US editions.
It may be high time Ayn Rand's crackpot, pseudo-philosphical, snake oil got an airing on the FTMB. After all she may have been the David Icke of her generation, only more influential.

And considering the catastrophic effects her 'philosophy' and her followers have had on the Global economy and infrastructure, it could be down dirty fun! :p
 
John Galt said:
I've been reading these threads fo a few years and have never seen reference to Atlas shrugged.
I havn't seen 1984 in here either. Are you all that stand-offish to fiction? You don't seem to offended by Gerald Posner's fiction.
Some Ayn Rand discussion and mention of 'Atlas Srugged' on the,
'Attention Fellow Evil Masterminds' thread.

Edit: for being just a bit too 'smart arsed.'
 
Catastrophic effects is right!!!! Through misinterpretation of Atlas Shrugged, the world has become poulated with Jim Taggarts and Oren Bolyes. If you think that todays Imperialistic Corporations are the same thing as Ayn Rands Industrialists, you could be right...sort of.
The one thing they hold in common is the power and glory they both share.

Todays businesses rely on political junkets to overpower their opponents

Ayn Rands Fictional Indutralists were to rely only on truely pure and adept means of production.

The horror of present day, is that the "catastrophic effects her 'philosophy' " are due only to the fact that her mission was ignored, or even worse; maybe todays CEO's want to be James Taggart. or worse

Robin Hood........
 
Never, ever trust anyone who lives their life by a single philosophy or, for that matter, philosopher. Which I suppose is simply a fancy way of saying 'do what thou wilt', which is in turn a philosophy in itself, leaving me trapped in an infinite regression with no hope of escape.

And of course it's too late. It's ten past nine and I haven't done any ironing yet. Global philosophies fail because they apply to individuals.

'Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean that they aren't paranoid too' - Faculty X

Please note, actual worthwhile content of post - 11%
 
John Galt said:
So, Niles, are we to assume that you are motivated by jelousy?
Oh no. I joined a conspiracy a while back so that's sorted. :D

ibid
I'm really not sure how your post has anything to do with this thread, but it's there so it has to be observed.

I'm not trying to puff out my chest and look intelligent by pointing references in some book. Seems to me the way to show intelligence around here is to jump on any thought other than one's own and discredit it. To ramble on about self-importance in the feild of......whatever,......that's what make you smart here.

If making reference to Atlas Shrugged is so "TRITE" and used up, why have I seen no posts about it? Well, because it's not trite at all.
I said the references were trite not the subject matter. The way you and KingSlender were going on you might as wel have been speaking in code to the uninitiated. Not a way to start a debate. I guess it's all in the semantics.

ibid
So there are no forums for book discussion here. I figured the dissappearence of vision and originality in todays industries, the arts, architecture, engeneering...etc., could be somewhat of a "conspiracy".
We have a Fortean Culture forum. As for the rest, may I suggest that you've closed your eyes to them as the contradict your world view. Or Rand's world view. Whatever.

ibid
I've been reading these threads fo a few years and have never seen reference to Atlas shrugged.
I havn't seen 1984 in here either. Are you all that stand-offish to fiction? You don't seem to offended by Gerald Posner's fiction.
You've missed both. As for Posner, I've not read him; JFK is too much of a skien for me to even begin to unravel although I favour the Joe Dimagio on the Grassy Knoll theory as I like it's sense of justice.

ibid
I just wanted to discuss the ideas behind the book. I wanted to know more about Objetivism.
I wanted debate.
All I got was a trite reply with over-used axioms.

He's still shrugging
Oooh bitchy. :p
Discuss and debate away, just do it in a language that we can all understand, not just the Acolytes of Rand. I'll pick up a copy of Atlas when I've finished the Air Loom and give it a shot. I'll also stop paraphrasing Illuminatus! at you. Of course the problem with overused axioms is that they're frequently true, hence the use.

BTW you might want to pick up a copy of the Illuminatus! Trilogy as it contains a parody of Atlas in the form of Telemachus Sneezed (the eighth trip).

TTFN
Niles "What is John Guilt?" Calder
 
Ok. Who's Ayn Rand? I read a lot and i've never heard the name. Are we talking serious thinker or silly paranoid conspiricist?
 
The Yithian said:
Ok. Who's Ayn Rand? I read a lot and i've never heard the name. Are we talking serious thinker or silly paranoid conspiricist?
As I understand it, yes.

For some reason, that I do not understand -- at least in part due to not having read her work -- she is held in high regard by many American intellectuals of a particular type.

There is another group who say she was a bad writer with an extremely unpleasant world view.

As I said, I haven't read it myself, and, due to comments made by people whose taste I generally respect, I don't intend to any time soon. I am fascinated by her as a cultural phenomenon, though.
 
fanks

Cheers Anome.

Has anyone who has read her work got any extra-input. I'm preparing to pigeonhole her mentally under 'crackpot' in a particularly non-Fortean style unless i hear objections...
;)
 
Is no kind soul going to drop back and enlighten me?
Have i killed this thread just by asking a question?
Is Ayn Rand in league with Lizards?
Is this the end?
Am i alone?

Its getting dark in here :( ...


bumpety-bump
 
"BTW you might want to pick up a copy of the Illuminatus! Trilogy as it contains a parody of Atlas in the form of Telemachus Sneezed (the eighth trip)."

Thanks...See...those are books I know little about. I know they (or it) shouldn't be hard to find. But when I'm in the bookstore wandering around, and I think to pick up that book....It's never there.....
I was wondering what a monk in Italy sneezing had to do with Atlas.....Maybe soon I'll know......

"Has anyone who has read her work got any extra-input. I'm preparing to pigeonhole her mentally under 'crackpot' in a particularly non-Fortean style unless i hear objections..."

That's a tough wall to climb Yithian-----Her ideas and what you perceive them to be might be two different things. Not sure I would ever call a writer a crack-pot without having first read their work.

Her philosophy, basicaly put is.... Big fish should eat little fish. Little fish with Sharks as friends shouldn't be allowed to gobble up the big fish. Little fish who grows large on his own should be able to eat what he wants.

I know it's a childish point... But aren't kids great!!!!!
 
John Galt said:
That's a tough wall to climb Yithian-----Her ideas and what you perceive them to be might be two different things. Not sure I would ever call a writer a crack-pot without having first read their work.

I know, i wasn't going to write her off on in advance, that was the winking smilie was for.

Thanks for the fish analogy. :)
 
Ayn Rand and Objectivsm: a summary

Originally posted by Anome
she is held in high regard by many American intellectuals of a particular type.

Yep, the particular type called "pseudo-intellectuals". :D Sorry, can't ever resist a straight-line like that...

Ayn Rand espoused a philosophy called Objectivism. She once summarized it thus:
From Rand 1962, p.35
1. Metaphysics: Objective Reality
2. Epistemology:
Reason
3. Ethics:
Self-interest
4. Politics:
Capitalism
From "Why People Believe Weird Things" by Michael Shermer, Ch. 8 "The Unlikeliest Cult", p. 115
In other words, reality exists independent of human thought. Reason is the only viable method for understanding reality. Every human should seek personal happiness and exist for his own sake, and no-one should sacrifice himself for or be sacrificed by others. And laissez-faire capitalism is the political-economic system in which the first three flourish best.

There are worse philosophies. Indeed, once Rand embellished and detailed her views, her basic ideas aren't actually bad at all: there are worse ideas in common acceptance. She wasn't espousing a philosophy of "Do as you will", as it might appear at first glance, but in her more expansive writings emphasized individualism, personal responsibility, the power of reason and the importance of morality. All of which sounds fine. On paper.

Real life is another matter.

In no time at all, Objectivism took an all the hallmarks of a cult.

Rand became an object of veneration; Objectivists came to believe her incapable of error in her views; her every utterance -however trivial- became part of what you needed to believe if you were a true Objectivist; her followers used persuasive techniques to recruit followers and reinforce beliefs; the exact nature of Objectivist beliefs were obscured to new recruits to give them something to work towards; the inner circle -'The Collective" as they called themselves- kept their activities secret from the rank and file; there was financial exploitation and assertions about sexual exploitation; Rand's views were promoted as Absolute and Final Truth; and Objectivist morality was deemed a moral code applicable to members and non-members alike, regardless of their own views. It became a cult, and Rand's beliefs on everything became their dogma.

Any additional comments, anyone?
 
Re: Ayn Rand and Objectivsm: a summary

Zygon said:
Yep, the particular type called "pseudo-intellectuals". :D Sorry, can't ever resist a straight-line like that...
Well, if you want to be all tactless, like that. I didn't want to offend any that might be reading.

What is it they say about people who say "Sorry, couldn't resist"? They're telling two lies?
 
Re: Re: Ayn Rand and Objectivsm: a summary

anome said:
What is it they say about people who say "Sorry, couldn't resist"? They're telling two lies?
No lies, only the omission of the words "be arsed" before the "resist", and the omission of "-ing" after it. :D
 
This is a quote from billderburger in another thread...(attention Evil Masterminds)



"Her brand of "philosophy" contains a certain element of self justifying superiority and righteousness which appeals to those who already feel they have the right to such emotions. Her "philosophy" provides the insects who believe her nonsense with an "intellectual" justification for their unsociable tendencies.

I would seriously say that some of the most odious people I have ever met are Ayn Rand fans - I don't think Ayn created them - I just think her brand of "morality" appeals to those who look for an "intellectual" reason for their immorality.?"

Just like the christians on crusade.... You don't blame christ or god... You blame the people who tortured and murdered in the name of christ. ...

No I'm not comparing rand to christ... I would compare that book to the bible though... Both Gravely misinterpreted. By huge numbers.... I think even Rand and her Society have got it all wrong. They think everything is peachy right now...
They are proud of corporate america.

Are you guys following me?


Have you ever written a poem with one intention,... but after months of sitting in a desk drawer, the poem reveals itself as being about somthing entirely different or opposite?

Well just think if you never caught on to what you were really writing about... just think of being a voice, and never knowing what you say.

I don't think she evn knew what she was writing about. She wanted so badly to be the light, that she forgot to pull up the shades...
 
Altruism Shrugged
The unforgiving morality of Ayn Rand’s forgotten novel
BY ELIZABETH BRUENIG


Ayn Rand had a hard year in 1934. Her debut novel, We the Living, had gone through a string of rejections from various publishers. Night of January 16th, her first play, had not yet found a producer. Her two greatest works, The Fountainhead (1943) andAtlas Shrugged (1957), had yet to be written; with no literary success to her name, her savings were running out.

That year she completed, but shelved, another novel. Perhaps chastened by the indifference of the publishing world, she decided to give it some time to marinate.

She reworked it into a play, Ideal, that went unproduced for roughly 60 years, but finally found a home at the Melrose Theatre in Los Angeles. Its delayed arrival did not precipitate a benevolent welcome. Writing about this 1989 Los Angeles run, the Los Angeles Times’ Ray Loynd knocked the play’s “clunky structure,” and noted that Rand never really did have a flair for dramatic literature. Roughly 20 years later, the play appeared again, this time off-Broadway, where it was similarly panned. “The show’s clumsy mix of long bursts of theory and a laborious plot would test the endurance of even Alan Greenspan,” wrote The New York Times’ critic, Jason Zinoman. And Greenspan was a “famous Rand admirer and veteran of long, boring meetings.” Frank Scheck at the New York Post was likewise disenchanted, calling it “a stinker that well deserves its obscurity.”

Now, for the first time, the original novel has been released, thanks to Leonard Peikoff, heir to the Rand estate and founder of the Ayn Rand Institute, an organization aimed at evangelizing for Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. After discovering the novel among the late philosophizer’s papers, Peikoff and a cadre of Rand enthusiasts made the Promethean decision to present it to the world. “It is a common practice,” Peikoff writes in Ideal’s introduction, “to bring out [a deceased author’s] juvenilia, his early, faltering attempts ... if he has become an immortal in his field whose every word, early or late, is avidly consumed by a large body of readers and growing number of scholars.” Rand fits this bill, and it is purely on her devotees’ account that Ideal has been released. ...

https://newrepublic.com/article/122...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer
 
Last edited:
What if the engine quit working
What if the Nat Taggart bridge collapsed
What if they were still hiding in Colorado
What if I told you I had a pack of smokes in my pocket labled simply with a $
What if I told you I wore a watch with no face and possessed a tarnished signet ring of curious design that guaranteed me sanctuary in any embassy in the world?

What if I told you a certain renowned network of elderly antiquarian booksellers are not at all who they seem? Are indeed not even human?

What if I told you the Earth is honeycombed with immeasurably ancient tunnels through which continually rush ornate and silent trains carrying the world's most dangerous men to assignments even they dare not speak of?

What then my friend?
 
What if I told you I wore a watch with no face and possessed a tarnished signet ring of curious design that guaranteed me sanctuary in any embassy in the world?

What if I told you a certain renowned network of elderly antiquarian booksellers are not at all who they seem? Are indeed not even human?

What if I told you the Earth is honeycombed with immeasurably ancient tunnels through which continually rush ornate and silent trains carrying the world's most dangerous men to assignments even they dare not speak of?

What then my friend?

I would say you've just been possessed by Stuart Certain. runs off to grab holy water...
 
Interesting article about Rand, Objectivism and her modern day acolytes.

The Bad Idea That Keeps on Giving
By Scott Timberg
JULY 27, 2018

SOUNDS GREAT on paper.” That’s a phrase I heard a lot as a kid in the late ’70s, usually when my parents and their friends were talking about communism. Certainly an earthly paradise as depicted in the writings of Trotsky or Lenin, but — shame, isn’t it? — communism did not seem to actually work in real life.

The notion that something could sound smart in theory and not work out in practice applies just as well to another product of early 20th-century Russian thought: the individual-over-the-masses, market-worshipping libertarianism philosophy that comes from Ayn Rand. It’s been carried on, after Rand’s 1982 passing, by American acolytes including Alan Greenspan, Ron Paul, House Speaker Paul Ryan, and, probably, someone you went to high school with.

The fact that the libertarian wonderland of absolute sexual and economic freedom only ever worked in Rand’s melodramatic novels and helium-voiced Rush songs — that her philosophy of “Objectivism” has never been successfully applied to actual governance — does not seem to cross the minds of libertarian true-believers. And to many of them, it seems not to matter: a fealty to Rand, to heroic ideas of intellectual superiority and capitalism’s grandeur, is more important than what puny mortals consider political or intellectual reality. If you try arguing sense with them, you’ll quickly wish you hadn’t.

https://lareviewofbooks.org/article/the-bad-idea-that-keeps-on-giving/#!
 
Back
Top