Is she worth reading?
>>67659412
OY VEY
>>67659412
She's a hypocrite who took social security and Medicaid on her deathbed.
No
>Aynus Gland
>worth reading
>>67659412
no it's delusional right-wing garbage. if you think stupid leftists are bad, wait till you see a stupid rightist
>>67659412
Hey Ahmed!
>>67659412
If youre a 15 year old fedora tipping redditor then yeah
>female """""""""""""""authors"""""""""""""""
>>67659574
> "goyim, regulations and social programs will only be exploited by the Jew and a tax on the rest of society"
> jew exploits social programs
Not a hypocrite at all.
Exactly what I though. Thank you.
>>67659574
No wonder conservatives love her so much. She's the ultimate hypocrite. No integrity whatsoever.
ITT: No arguments
>>67659412
She leaves no scope for imagination of any kind and explains even the mundane things with utter detail so if that's your thing then go ahead.
You'll feel dirty after reading though because you just gave shekels to the jew
Yes. Besides the fact that her work is required reading if you're going to study the American economy, The Fountainhead happened to be a damn good book.
>>67659412
NO
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_j56IiLqZ9U
>>67659412
Read Anthem (it's only 80 pages)
If you like that, then you can try to tackle her more serious stuff. If you don't like it, I'd pass.
>>67659412
I really liked what I read.
I now look at it as propaganda for an idea that has merit. She means the stuff 100% literally, but I find there is more need for collaboration between people to be successful.
You can kill yourself walking in the shoes of her protagonists. They are idealized, fictionalized, perfect heroes. They represent ideals to strive for.
But perhaps like Jesus and Christians, they/we would all fall short of those ideals.
This does not meant the ideas are merit-less.
>>67659412
no.
Go read Max Stirner instead.
>>67660275
Pretty much this. People dislike Ayn Rand because her philosophy hurts their feels.
>>67660275
The pro have arguments
The cons rely on feelings
Interesting
>>67659412
She contradicts herself on various points, like the notions of causation and free will. She mostly just asserts points without justification and has no philosophical rigor. Her works are also incredibly boring and drawn-out and have no literary merit outside of being vehicles for her "philosophy".
She's considered a joke amongst legit philosophers.
>>67661508
So it's like Rand told people: rational minds will think the same and the parasites rely on their whims and feelings.
>>67660162
So are all the leaves really this mapled up or is there a group of very dedicated shitposters
Maple mods deleting posts
No wonder the leaf posting has reached critical mass
>>67661950
Aren't legit philosophers these days mostly useless? They have argued themselves into logical corners that are mostly useless.
It's like professional literary people writing books that never get read shitting all over Steven King for writing book after book that people read and enjoy. I personally don't like his works as much since he got off hard drugs, but the point stands.
Rand's ideas are actually useful, and were formed by her experiences with communism. I agree with >>67661187 . I had no idea who she was until I stumbled across that book, and it blew my mind. Maybe it won't click with you.
>>67661310
nah not really.
Its just badly written, and full of inconsistencies.
Shes the one who actually keeps pushing for emotional appeals at every corner.
Like I said, if you're interested in a philosophical defense of individualism, go read Max Stirner, who is miles better than Ayn Rand.
I mean, Marx wrote a "critic" of his work, bigger than what Max Stirner ever wrote, filled with just ad hominems and no actual refutations
The end of the book has a hard working loyal guy get left to die by Rand's self insert
just play Bioshock to see what happens
>>67660275
>>67661310
>>67661959
I'm far right, but... Ayn Rand is a shit-tier.. 'economist'. She's not wrong but spends an inordinate amount of time discussing basic principles that everyone with half a brain already understands and only young idiots really find any novelty in.
She's like this idiot here that calls himself a "Laffer Curve Enthusiast"
> spicyeconomics.com/2016/01/03/laffer-curve-of-the-day-why-it-matters/
> spicyeconomics.com/2016/01/04/laffer-curve-of-the-day-2-tickling-the-curve-until-it-splits-its-supply-sides/
> ...
There's plenty more. Anyway, yes, in glorious 2016 where an individual bioinformatics engineer can design a ethnic targeting bioweapon to wipe out the Ashkenazim... yes, society must respect the individual -- and it does. We've almost perfected the art of keeping the John Galts and goyim happy while oppressing the goyim.
Point is... yes, God-King Obama does understand your plight, angsty objectivists, and he loves you because once upon a time -- he was just like you.
>>67662556
>Aren't legit philosophers these days mostly useless? They have argued themselves into logical corners that are mostly useless.
Yes. Thats mostly true.
It doesnt refute the fact that Ayn Rand contradicts herself all the time and is seriously lacking in her ideas.
There are several other authors that are a lot more interesting and much more consistent and intellectually valuable than her, that defend ideas similar to what she tried to defend
I thought The Fountainhead was a decent enough book, Atlas Shrugged was a load of shit that pissed me off to no end. Ayn Rand was a dumb bitch, but they are still probably worth reading as they have had influence.
>>67662661
Sounds like the American dream in a nutshell.
Let's see
>woman
>hypocrite
>supported extreme individualism
>shitty writing
I'd say no.
>>67659574
Ragnar encourages getting back money obtained through unjust government taxation through piracy if necessary. This is one of the heroes of Atlas Shrugged.
Getting even a sliver of what you payed into a system legally is not hypocrisy. She was getting a return on the investment of the taxes she had payed during her entire citizenship.
>>67662841
I appreciate your views and comments. I'll look into your good friend Stirner.
>>67659412
Sure, why the hell not. Her novella "Anthem" is like 75 pages and hits on her big themes.
>>67662981
Bonus points that he had the hots for Rand's self insert while she slept with everyone but him
Absolutely, as long as you don't treat it like gospel. In the very least it exposes you to some ideas you may or may not agree with. I personally took to heart some of what she had to offer, but not all of it.
>>67662841
What authors would you recommend over her?
>>67659412
>woman writer
>worth reading
great post, op
a top kek
>>67663039
By doing that she was being part of the system.
If you can put up with her tapioca prose, blatant self-inserts, and preachy tone sure.
Look, some of the ideas are interesting but on a purely artistic level she's weak.
