Desert Protocol - Atlas Shrugs

She wrote passionately in defense of a vicious killer, claiming that he was acting as a superior man, i.e., without regard to the petty laws of society.

I have no use for Ayn Rand, just as I have no use for night-before-the-execution interviews with killers.
 
originally posted by Jeff Grossman:
She wrote passionately in defense of a vicious killer, claiming that he was acting as a superior man, i.e., without regard to the petty laws of society.

I have no use for Ayn Rand, just as I have no use for night-before-the-execution interviews with killers.
Click to expand...

As I said before Godwins law applies equally to Ayn Rand. Jeff AFAIK no one was killed you completely miss the point. Godwins Law please.
 
Are you saying that all discussions of Ayn rand eventually end up with someone mentioning her defense of William Hickman? I am trying to parse your post to no avail.
 
I'm a little confused as well. No one mentioned the Nazis.

Most of the conversations/articles/tv shows about her eventually seem wind up at her sexual control of Nathaniel Branden (and that's just far weirder than her cigarette thing), not Hickman. Or with Alan Greenspan and bubbles and monetary policy. Pretty weird too, that.
 
As far as I can tell, Ayn Rand is the guiding light of Fox "News". Same objective, same strategies, same rationale. Different tactics for a different age.

Why do people worship her? Why do people worship anybody? Come on. Seriously.

That Fountainhead movie: poor King Vidor. One day you're working with Ben Hecht, the next Ayn Rand. Brrrrrrr.

Mature LdH Riojas of all hues can be lovely. And that Kalin ain't bad. The Egly-Ouriet VdV probably needed more time. I can't drink the Kacher stuff.
 
I like the Warren Buffett take on overwhelming material success. It's all just coincidence. Sure, some people are smarter than others, but wealth that is not luck comes in 2 forms:

1. inheritance,
2. harm to others.

Rand isn't taught as serious philosophy. I'm not sure where it lives on. Comp Lit? Poly Sci?
 
I don't think Rand's writing are directly taught anywhere. But the issue is that so many academics take her very seriously (i.e., Alan Greenspan, law and economics professors, many economists). Her influence thus subtly informs their writing and, in this indirect way, significantly shapes the debate in public policy.
 
originally posted by Cory Cartwright:
Are you saying that all discussions of Ayn rand eventually end up with someone mentioning her defense of William Hickman? I am trying to parse your post to no avail.
Click to expand...

My apologies Jeff, I was confused and I didn't know that stuff surfaced. I did once have dinner with Nathanial Branden, but I have not paid attention to those folks for 35yrs (more than one nut case).
 
originally posted by Yule Kim:
I don't think Rand's writing are directly taught anywhere. But the issue is that so many academics take her very seriously (i.e., Alan Greenspan, law and economics professors, many economists). Her influence thus subtly informs their writing and, in this indirect way, significantly shapes the debate in public policy.
Click to expand...

Really? I don't know any academics that take her writings seriously.

Greenspan is hardly an academic.

I've found it just the opposite. The kind of person who frowns on academics tends to like Rand.

That is totally anecdotal, BTW.
 
I thought Rand was particularly attractive to undergraduates. A clear philosophy that justifies their ego. At least it was that way during my undergraduate years.

But then if they're smart they should soon grow out of it.
 
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Joel Stewart:

Otto, my experience with the white Musars is pretty nil
Click to expand...

They can be stunning in every sense.

The '59 Chateau Musar white remains one of my highlights of forever.
Click to expand...

The '69 and '75 are pretty awesome, too. When I was last in Lebanon (2004 - must visit soon again...) the '75 was available for well under 50.

Thanks for all the explanations, confirmations and links on Rand.

And somewhat off-topic: But if I'm still interested in exploring US literature further than the few books I love (Richard Powers, Moby Dick), what should I be reading? DeLillo? Evan Dara? Gaddis?
 
originally posted by Otto Nieminen:
originally posted by Levi Dalton:
originally posted by Joel Stewart:

Otto, my experience with the white Musars is pretty nil
Click to expand...

They can be stunning in every sense.

The '59 Chateau Musar white remains one of my highlights of forever.
Click to expand...

The '69 and '75 are pretty awesome, too. When I was last in Lebanon (2004 - must visit soon again...) the '75 was available for well under 50.

Thanks for all the explanations, confirmations and links on Rand.

And somewhat off-topic: But if I'm still interested in exploring US literature further than the few books I love (Richard Powers, Moby Dick), what should I be reading? DeLillo? Evan Dara? Gaddis?
Click to expand...

Definitely William Gaddis. The Recognitions was a revelation.

Thomas Pynchon is also marvelous: The Crying of Lot 49, Mason & Dixon, and Gravity's Rainbow are all worth reading. Haven't read V. and the other books however.

Nabokov, if you consider him American. Lolita, of course, is a must read. His short story collection is wonderful as well.
 
originally posted by VLM:
originally posted by Yule Kim:
I don't think Rand's writing are directly taught anywhere. But the issue is that so many academics take her very seriously (i.e., Alan Greenspan, law and economics professors, many economists). Her influence thus subtly informs their writing and, in this indirect way, significantly shapes the debate in public policy.
Click to expand...

Really? I don't know any academics that take her writings seriously.

Greenspan is hardly an academic.

I've found it just the opposite. The kind of person who frowns on academics tends to like Rand.

That is totally anecdotal, BTW.
Click to expand...

I have a suspicion that many law professors, especially those who are followers of the law and economics school, are Randites. Probably some economists as well.

True, Greenspan was never a tenured professor as far as I know. Perhaps I was using the term "academic" more broadly than was intended. But he was definitely someone who had a huge impact on public policy and intellectual discourse (which, granted, has now been shown to be deleterious), probably more so than most university academics, so I included him in the definition.

But I do think it is true that Rand does have lots of pull with "academics" of his type, namely the think tank academics around DC (Cato Institute definitely. Heritage more than likely).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top