Wisdom From Ayn Rand-UPDATED AND BUMPED

I originally posted this Sunday, October 8, 2007. I posted originally because a passage (quoted below) “spoke” to me about how things are going today, particularly with the islam attitude toward the Great Satan (America) and how the dems are becoming more and more communistic in their attitude.

I had no idea today was the publishing anniversary of this work.

I also got some comments calling me delusional because I didn’t interpret the book the way the commenter thought I should interpret it.

Here’s the comment:

It’s clear that your attempt to use Ayn Rand’s work as an analogy to illustrate and substantiate your beliefs is extremely misguided.

Although you acknowledge that the book must be “read and absorbed, thought about and ruminated upon,” it’s clear you have not been doing that. The use of that ‘conditional’ passage beginning with “If” means that you absurdly contend that Muslims can survive only by destroying all non-Muslims! Either your reading ability is extremely deficient, or your belief system is so extreme you’ve become delusional and are no longer able to differentiate your delusion from reality.

It’s also clear that you have little or no knowledge of the philosophy of Ayn Rand and what she stood for. Ayn Rand opposed US involvement in every war of the 20th century; WWI, WWII, Korean War, and Viet Nam. Since her views, especially about war and religion, are in such direct conflict with those you advocate on your website, it makes no sense that you would associate your views with anything from her.

It seems you were just trying to impress others by saying you were reading the book of a famous, though dubious, intellectual. However, you should not even attempt to do that unless you really understand the material and the person that wrote it. Ayn Rand actually wrote about her views on what is true knowledge and understanding; when the truth of a subject and one’s belief about that subject overlap. You would be doing yourself a great service by working on that problem so you can become more objective and less delusional.

This commenter likes to post on Real Clear Politics, using “text message shorthand”. He got a tad irritated with me and decided to try to post something on RCP intended to denigrate me–however, when one clicked on the link for the article, it went directly to the Wikipedia entry on Ayn Rand. Real original, huh?

The purpose of thought provoking literature is it touches something in each person–no one person is going to have the same interpretation of it. To attempt to slam someone for their personal interpretation, including name calling, is outright childish.

I don’t agree with everything Ayn Rand stood for. What I do know about her is this–her formative years were spent in Russia during Russia’s upheaval from a monarchy to communism. She was definitely a product of her time and yet–she was also in her own way a revolutionary. The fact she was a woman living life according to her terms, with no apologies to anyone, during the time period she lived, was remarkable. She was indeed true to herself.

To even get your head around her literature you have to have some inkling of the woman and her background. Not an easy thing to get your head around, particularly in a country where freedom is taken for granted.

Her works are visionary and sometimes frightening. We often hear about Orwell’s 1984. Yes, I’ve read 1984 as well. I found Rand’s “Anthem” infinitely more chilling. And yet, how often do we hear something called “Randian” instead of “Orwellian”?

I often bemoan the fact her works are not required reading in high schools. They are timeless and they offer much for classroom discussion. They offer a point of view not often so starkly presented. I would much rather have studied her works than Lysistrata or Dante’s Divine Comedy (yes, those were on my high school reading list–of course, I was an honors student and Cliff Notes were forbidden). It would be wonderful to balance out the Greek classics with American classics such as this.

I’m still getting through this tome, and as I find passages I think are relevant, I will continue to post on them.

In the meantime, perhaps it would be prudent to take a look at your bookshelves and reading lists. Maybe, if you’ve already read Miss Rand’s works, you might wish to revisit them–particularly in this election cycle. If you’ve never read them, maybe it’s time to start–and give yourself plenty of time. There are too many layers to read these through quickly.

Who would have thought a book written by a woman in 1957, a communist/atheist woman who followed her own drum, during a time of McCarthy, would produce something so timeless? Something still giving insight and food for thought, 50 years later?

To still be able to challenge people to think for themselves? What better legacy can one leave behind?

My friend Spree over at Wake Up America asked me a few months ago if I had ever read “Atlas Shrugged”. I hadn’t, although it has been on my reading list for years. I HAVE read “Anthem”, and found it to be not only a quick read, but very thought provoking, even after having read the last line over 20 years ago.

I haven’t had much time for personal reading lately; I’ve been in a very intense study group. I have a break until after Halloween; then I have to hit the textbooks again. So thought I would FINALLY read “Atlas Shrugged”.

While it “reads” quickly, it’s not a book one can whiz through. It has to be read and absorbed, thought about and ruminated upon.

One passage today stood out. To me, it illustrates exactly the divide between those that recognize the true nature of the islam tide and the fact they mean EXACTLY what they say they mean regarding the annihilation of Israel and the United States–and eventually world domination under sharia law and those that want to pander to our enemies, trying to “negotiate” and use “diplomacy” with them (Read: the right who fully supports our troops, their mission and the fact our troops are protecting us HERE by fighting them THERE and the left who hasn’t got a clue, preferring to live in a fantasy world with purple skies and cotton candy colored clouds).

The passage in question takes place between Dagny Taggert, Operations Manager of the Taggert Transcontinental Railroad and Dan Conway, owner of the Phoenix-Durango line, immediately after the National Alliance of Railroads has voted to abide by the “Anti-dog-eat-dog” legislation in which Dan Conway will be “punished” for being successful where the other lines are NOT succeeding.

Dagny’s brother James is a major proponent of the “common good”–and everyone has to work together with some being sacrificed–punished–along the way for being successful. Sound familiar? Think Hillary’s quote:

Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. [Emphasis mine]

And:

The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to find alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence! [Emphasis mine]

We are RIGHT THERE in this election and with the left’s ideas toward socialism.

Here is the relevant passage:

“If the rest of them can survive only by destroying us, then why should we wish them to survive? Nothing can make self-immolation proper. Nothing can give them the right to turn men into sacrificial animals. Nothing can make it moral to destroy the best. One can’t be punished for being good. One can’t be penalized for ability. If that is right, then we’d better start slaughtering one another, because there isn’t any right at all in the world!”

That about sums it up. We ARE on the road described in “Atlas Shrugged”. The real question is, of course, how many people are going to recognize it and fight it and how many are going to follow along the left’s path to the slaughter?

Advertisements

Wisdom From Ayn Rand-UPDATED AND BUMPED

I originally posted this Sunday, October 8, 2007. I posted originally because a passage (quoted below) “spoke” to me about how things are going today, particularly with the islam attitude toward the Great Satan (America) and how the dems are becoming more and more communistic in their attitude.

I had no idea today was the publishing anniversary of this work.

I also got some comments calling me delusional because I didn’t interpret the book the way the commenter thought I should interpret it.

Here’s the comment:

It’s clear that your attempt to use Ayn Rand’s work as an analogy to illustrate and substantiate your beliefs is extremely misguided.

Although you acknowledge that the book must be “read and absorbed, thought about and ruminated upon,” it’s clear you have not been doing that. The use of that ‘conditional’ passage beginning with “If” means that you absurdly contend that Muslims can survive only by destroying all non-Muslims! Either your reading ability is extremely deficient, or your belief system is so extreme you’ve become delusional and are no longer able to differentiate your delusion from reality.

It’s also clear that you have little or no knowledge of the philosophy of Ayn Rand and what she stood for. Ayn Rand opposed US involvement in every war of the 20th century; WWI, WWII, Korean War, and Viet Nam. Since her views, especially about war and religion, are in such direct conflict with those you advocate on your website, it makes no sense that you would associate your views with anything from her.

It seems you were just trying to impress others by saying you were reading the book of a famous, though dubious, intellectual. However, you should not even attempt to do that unless you really understand the material and the person that wrote it. Ayn Rand actually wrote about her views on what is true knowledge and understanding; when the truth of a subject and one’s belief about that subject overlap. You would be doing yourself a great service by working on that problem so you can become more objective and less delusional.

This commenter likes to post on Real Clear Politics, using “text message shorthand”. He got a tad irritated with me and decided to try to post something on RCP intended to denigrate me–however, when one clicked on the link for the article, it went directly to the Wikipedia entry on Ayn Rand. Real original, huh?

The purpose of thought provoking literature is it touches something in each person–no one person is going to have the same interpretation of it. To attempt to slam someone for their personal interpretation, including name calling, is outright childish.

I don’t agree with everything Ayn Rand stood for. What I do know about her is this–her formative years were spent in Russia during Russia’s upheaval from a monarchy to communism. She was definitely a product of her time and yet–she was also in her own way a revolutionary. The fact she was a woman living life according to her terms, with no apologies to anyone, during the time period she lived, was remarkable. She was indeed true to herself.

To even get your head around her literature you have to have some inkling of the woman and her background. Not an easy thing to get your head around, particularly in a country where freedom is taken for granted.

Her works are visionary and sometimes frightening. We often hear about Orwell’s 1984. Yes, I’ve read 1984 as well. I found Rand’s “Anthem” infinitely more chilling. And yet, how often do we hear something called “Randian” instead of “Orwellian”?

I often bemoan the fact her works are not required reading in high schools. They are timeless and they offer much for classroom discussion. They offer a point of view not often so starkly presented. I would much rather have studied her works than Lysistrata or Dante’s Divine Comedy (yes, those were on my high school reading list–of course, I was an honors student and Cliff Notes were forbidden). It would be wonderful to balance out the Greek classics with American classics such as this.

I’m still getting through this tome, and as I find passages I think are relevant, I will continue to post on them.

In the meantime, perhaps it would be prudent to take a look at your bookshelves and reading lists. Maybe, if you’ve already read Miss Rand’s works, you might wish to revisit them–particularly in this election cycle. If you’ve never read them, maybe it’s time to start–and give yourself plenty of time. There are too many layers to read these through quickly.

Who would have thought a book written by a woman in 1957, a communist/atheist woman who followed her own drum, during a time of McCarthy, would produce something so timeless? Something still giving insight and food for thought, 50 years later?

To still be able to challenge people to think for themselves? What better legacy can one leave behind?

My friend Spree over at Wake Up America asked me a few months ago if I had ever read “Atlas Shrugged”. I hadn’t, although it has been on my reading list for years. I HAVE read “Anthem”, and found it to be not only a quick read, but very thought provoking, even after having read the last line over 20 years ago.

I haven’t had much time for personal reading lately; I’ve been in a very intense study group. I have a break until after Halloween; then I have to hit the textbooks again. So thought I would FINALLY read “Atlas Shrugged”.

While it “reads” quickly, it’s not a book one can whiz through. It has to be read and absorbed, thought about and ruminated upon.

One passage today stood out. To me, it illustrates exactly the divide between those that recognize the true nature of the islam tide and the fact they mean EXACTLY what they say they mean regarding the annihilation of Israel and the United States–and eventually world domination under sharia law and those that want to pander to our enemies, trying to “negotiate” and use “diplomacy” with them (Read: the right who fully supports our troops, their mission and the fact our troops are protecting us HERE by fighting them THERE and the left who hasn’t got a clue, preferring to live in a fantasy world with purple skies and cotton candy colored clouds).

The passage in question takes place between Dagny Taggert, Operations Manager of the Taggert Transcontinental Railroad and Dan Conway, owner of the Phoenix-Durango line, immediately after the National Alliance of Railroads has voted to abide by the “Anti-dog-eat-dog” legislation in which Dan Conway will be “punished” for being successful where the other lines are NOT succeeding.

Dagny’s brother James is a major proponent of the “common good”–and everyone has to work together with some being sacrificed–punished–along the way for being successful. Sound familiar? Think Hillary’s quote:

Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We’re saying that for America to get back on track, we’re probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We’re going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good. [Emphasis mine]

And:

The other day the oil companies reported the highest profits in the history of the world. I want to take those profits and I want to put them into a strategic energy fund that will begin to find alternative smart energy, alternatives and technologies that will begin to actually move us toward the direction of independence! [Emphasis mine]

We are RIGHT THERE in this election and with the left’s ideas toward socialism.

Here is the relevant passage:

“If the rest of them can survive only by destroying us, then why should we wish them to survive? Nothing can make self-immolation proper. Nothing can give them the right to turn men into sacrificial animals. Nothing can make it moral to destroy the best. One can’t be punished for being good. One can’t be penalized for ability. If that is right, then we’d better start slaughtering one another, because there isn’t any right at all in the world!”

That about sums it up. We ARE on the road described in “Atlas Shrugged”. The real question is, of course, how many people are going to recognize it and fight it and how many are going to follow along the left’s path to the slaughter?