Just a reminder that Ayn Rand born Alisa Zinovyevna Rosenbaum was a Jew who was underwritten by Jewish billionaires to convince Goyim that Jewish billionaires had a right to control them and were better than they are.
It's amazing how many people fall for this and don't know that she was a Jew.
Her family was kicked out of Russia because they ran a fraudulent pharmaceutical company that sold b******* to people.
Edit.
Just to counter some of the common rebuttals I hear below I'm going to say I read several of her books when I was very young including Atlas shrugged and love them because I was too naive to see the bigger picture.
And that's what she counts on. She counts on you thinking it's an argument between capitalism or communism.
but that's not but she's arguing for. What she's arguing for is the idea that a certain group of people should own all the factories and all the means of production because they are inherently smarter. And when she's talking about a group of people what she doesn't say is it's jews. She's justifying the Jewish monopolistic ownership of everything.
And she does it with a big lie and the big lie is that the owner of the company is the one who invented the fantastic steel that changed the world.
And when you're young you think that's the way things work.
but when you get older and you get out in the workforce what you realize is Jews own the companies.
and they steal the inventions of the goyum who work for them.
because the Goyim are either too naive to know how to start their own company or don't have the funds or resources to do it and are debt enslaved from the beginning to be forced to work and give away all their inventiveness and creativity and smarts to a Jew that owns the company.
And what she subtly and covertly argues for is that jews are right to own that company and exploit all those people.
Now I want to make it clear that I am not for communism and it's not the same thing to say that Jews shouldn't own monopolistic control of all the golems inventiveness. That's not the same thing as arguing for socialism. Or communism.
What I'm saying is that the Jew atn Rand rosenbaugh created a fictitious circumstance that very neatly and covertly makes it difficult for a intelligent inventive goyim to argue politically that Jews should not have monopolistic control of all industry.
And she does this by creating a fake dichotomy that it's either Jews own all the businesses because they're smarter and they should or your for communism. And that is not the argument.
you don't have to be for communism to not believe that a single person shouldnt own all these industries or believe the nonsense that the single person that owns the industries owns them because they were the one who invented something.
Let me tell you if you get out there in the real world you go out there and you invent something and then you tell me how easy it is for you to start your own company and make a profit from that invention. What you'll find is it's the financiers and the money printers who will quickly gain control of all the Goyim inventions because it's the financiers and the money printers and the swindlers who for the most part with rare exception end up owning all the companies and if they don't own the company they'll put it out of business.
And that's what Anne ran is covertly putting in your mind that it's okay.
After reading the many reviews from mainstream publications on the back cover I picked up a free copy of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged from the poor box at the local library, I had never heard of her before and should have left it where it was, to my mind the book was totally unreadable on a level with Virginia Woolf's To the Lighthouse .. which is as far as she or VW for that matter ever got or ever will get with me.
To the Lighthouse. I'll read anything. Trash, great, bad, boring. I don't care. That piece of shit book was one of the very worst books on the planet. I couldn't even force finish it. I felt like she was trying to insult the reader by writing that narcissistic drivel shit pooh spit phlegm.
Not only that, but she aimed to convince the most responsible, creative, hard working goyim not to have kids and instead focus entirely on their careers and hobbies.
So she's a member of the race that runs the world, and had a chip on her shoulder when her own race spurned her.
What she says runs counter to the propaganda put out by the rest of her race, who come out against her and her ideas. Even conservatives are often against most of her ideas.
All this is a good reason to disregard the entirety of what she says, rather than learn anything from it.
Not to find anything wrong with her ideas themselves, the source of the claim is more than enough to justify ignoring her work.
Kind of like the anti-christians on here who tell us to reject everything within christianity with no more reason given then that (according to them) jesus was a jew followed by jews.
We aren't reasonable people, we are committed to being irrational and self-destructive because we are petty and blinded by pride (you know, just like the most insufrable of jews are).
If I were the establishment, I think I'd know how to sabotage this forum, anytime I see someone propose a good idea that could hurt the security of my power, I will just find a jew who said the same thing or something similar, then everyone on here would reject it in it's entirety without examination of the claim.
There have been jews that have supported every idea throughout history, so I will always be able to cite someone who would convince the forum here to toss out any of the ideas they may come up with.
They propped her right up into fortune alongside Jimmy Carson - on his talk show, even.
You wouldn’t be afforded that, goy. The best you get is Jerry Springer - and that’s if you also agreed, or have already arranged, a marriage to an ugly kikess.
So was she’s a jewish plan? A conspiracy? Or just someone who was self-promoting and got a j-pass where goys would not have? These are two different things.
They arent really taught that. Theyve been genetically selected for cultural manipulaion for thousands of years. Some people are just born to be good at it. Like germans are good at clock making.
Exactly. Remember these people all descended from merchants whose job it was to rip off travelers traveling through constantinople. And the ones who evolve genetically over many generations as the children of the most successful merchants and traders were the ones who evolved to be able to lie with a straight face and deceive those people who are coming through their town. This is the essence of their evolutionary pressure. It's completely contrary to The evolutionary pressure that was placed on Northern Europeans who had to have smarts and they genetic ability to cooperate for the greater good in order to survive the winters when things were harsh and an individual could not store enough or last long enough alone to survive. The evolutionary pressures between Jews and Northern Europeans or almost opposite. And The evolutionary pressures for the African man whose food walked by his village every day was only to steal the best food from his neighbor and literally run and move as quickly as possible and be as violent as and as intimidating as possible in order to steal the best food from his neighbors village. Those were the general evolutionary pressures of the three types of people that have survived in the world black Africans Jews and Northern europeans. Now I don't know what the hell happened with the Chinese cuz I'm not really familiar with them or the Asian groups but that's what the evolutionary pressures were for the northern Europeans and the Jews and the blacks.
Remember these people all descended from merchants whose job it was to rip off travelers traveling through constantinople
This might be controversial with some of the christians. But I think its because they were priests. A priestly caste will become parasitic over time, living off manipulating their flock. Most of their “special skills” make sense in this context. Catholics did themselves a big favor by banning priests from marriage.
Whites built countries, with excellent infrastructure and division of labor possible through high trust and cooperativity.
Jews don’t do that. They never had their own country because buiding countries isn’t their bag. They are alot like gypsies in their opportunistic behaviors. Neither gypsies nor jews are invested in the well being of their host country because they didn’t build it. They didn’t even build Israel. They dont build anything, or grow their own food.
They live off cultural institutions funded by other people. All their work products are abstract and subjectively valued. In essence, they live off of cultural disinformation. You think they are performing a service, but they are actually harming the host country. This is why their morals are upside-down. They are programmed with morals (aka instincts) which are useful for social parasites to have. Their morals will never lead to a efficient functioning economy. They have the cart before the horse in terms of their cultural values. They will always be against the ethnic cultural unity of their hosts, which is why they automatically favor the foreigner—any foreigner. They will always favor a lowering of conservative morals which ensure economic efficiency and a smooth running country. They are just not settled people. They truly believe the purpose of civilization is so that a jew can have a cushy bureaucratic job directing gentiles. They believe that in the way that wolves believe sheep are supposed to be dinner for wolves.
The evolutionary pressures for the African man whose food walked by his village every day was only to steal the best food from his neighbor...
I think the reason they are so violent is that the climate favored a plant based diet which women were the providers of. When women are providing 80 of the calories, paternity become less important and patrilineality goes out the window. In such a scenario (matrilineal polygamy), men “rent” wombs rather than buy them and they become reproductively successful by killing nearby males and stealing their women. In this sort of society, “strong black women” really are the backbone of the economy and men’s function is mainly to fuck and fight, not provide for the family.
Not so with cold climate Eurasians. Women couldn’t gather fruit in January. Patrilineality (ensured paternity) was critical if men were to hunt for their mate’s children, which is a high risk endeavor. Eurasians killed off almost all the megafauna in Eurasia because they were patrilineal meat based cultures . Eventually, the game ran out and Eurasians were forced to switch to animal husbandry and grain agriculture. Eurasian pastoralists tend to be patrilineal polyganist who are very violent like the blacks (though probably better organized). Presumably the agriculturalists are the most cooperative, and not coincidentally , the most “settled”. Wanderers have nothing invested in infrastructure they didn’t produce.
Now I don't know what the hell happened with the Chinese cuz I'm not really familiar with them
I believe the Northern Han, Japanese, and Koreans are all heavily descended from a culture of millet growers that arose along the Yellow River. The northern Han then started conquering and assimilating nearby societies to the south and west of themselves slowly over the last 2300 years or so. China is actually an empire, not a single nation. Not genetically. The notion that Chinese speakers are a single Han ethnic group belies the genetic analyses. There’s been some mixing, but the people south of the Yangtze are quite different, as close to Vietnamese and Thais as they are to northern Han. They just had their cultures and languages (mostly) wiped out by the empire. That’s why so many Chinese cities look as bad as Vietnam.
Interestingly, alot of the languages in southeast Asia came from south China. Vietnamese/austroasiatic, Burmese, Thai, Austronesian languages— all probably came from China and are still spoken there in some areas. The native people of the Malasian penninsula were niggers like the New Guineans. Basically we are looking at a pattern similar to western Eurasia— cold climates produce smarter more efficient people who migrate southward and take over shitskin lands, mix with shitskins, become degenerate and get taken over by another group from the north, over and over.
Most likely a jewish plan. They try to control all sides of every debate for a reason. They will give you someone who promotes good ideas just to trick you into accepting bad ideas alongside them.
Those of us who are criticizing Rand (and Jesus) aren't saying you can't find some good things in their belief systems, but that you need to get those good things from somewhere else, because the good comes with a whole lot of harmful baggage attached.
What good does it do to adopt the meritocratic individualism of Ayn Rand if it teaches the most meritous individuals to separate themselves from society and stop having kids? I read Rand in college and unfortunately liked her work and let it influence me, and it's one of the reasons I wasted my 20s thinking I didn't want a family and that I should just have meaningless sex with sluts instead of a relationship.
You can find plenty of non-jewish thinkers who will promote hard work, creativity, personal responsibility, and meritocracy. Just like how most of the good parts of christianity can be found in Greek philosophy before the jew book was written and without all the crap about loving your enemies and giving everything you own to the lowest people in society.
Nobody is telling you to stop being responsible and hard working just because Ayn Rand said to do it. What we're saying is to find better people to tell you to be responsible and hard working without twisting that into a self destructive and anti-tribalist trap.
Ditch the bad and keep the good, I think it's best to critically examine anything you read piece by piece rather than accepting or rejecting it as a whole without entertaining any part of it.
You know my philosophy, I've been very vocal about it, I talked a lot about the imperative to reproduce, especially with those who you share common genetic traits with.
If I see something I will break it down into its parts and think deeply about each part, trying to take it to its ends, contradict it, etc. Just do a full analysis.
If it's good then I accept it, if it fails then I still take something away, I'm neither case am I having an experience I don't learn from.
I basically agree with this. Its a good policy not to allow jews to create our popular culture.
But also I think its naive to think that altruism is always bad and comes from jews. Buddhism has similar principles and it was created by a White guy not a jew.
It depends on what you mean by altruism and where you draw the line. Investing in young people who have a future is generally better for society than investing the same amount in elderly people who don't. Helping people with temporary problems who can be put back on their feet is far more effective than helping people with permanent problems who will never recover no matter what you do for them.
One of the big problems with a lot of jewish philosophers is they want to take every idea to its extreme. Marx and Jesus will take altruism to the extreme of saying you should always help all people starting with the most hopeless cases. Rand will take selfishness to the opposite extreme saying you should never help anyone unless it's a mutually beneficial exchange with someone who's capable and self sufficient. The correct position is to help people if they are likely to get back to a point where they can take care of themselves and help others, and not help people who are a lost cause.
Investing in young people who have a future is generally better for society than investing the same amount in elderly people who don't
Taking good care of your elderly is a benefit which attracts members. Nobody is going to join your society if you throw members away as soon as they have exceeded their usefulness. Thats what we do with dairy cows and laying chickens. I am for us advertising that most Whites who join us can expect to live to about 100. With excellent lifestyle habits, excellent healthcare and gero-protective drugs, we are basically there now or will be within a decade or two.
Retirement is a ridiculous concept. We should allocate less physically and intellectually demanding jobs to healthy old people. Social security and pensions are a major burden incurred on society and a major incentive of euthanizing old people. The notion of old people living separately from their children is also ridiculous and not cost effective.
The correct position is to help people if they are likely to get back to a point where they can take care of themselves and help others, and not help people who are a lost cause.
Why not just kill anyone thats no longer productive? Why are we wasting food housing and infrastructure on people over 65? They are more likely to be a burden than useful or self sufficient. Why waste medical resources on them?
Why not just kill anyone thats no longer productive?
People who can't take care of themselves and don't give others a reason to take care of them die perfectly fine on their own.
Retirement is a ridiculous concept. We should allocate less physically and intellectually demanding jobs to healthy old people. Social security and pensions are a major burden incurred on society and a major incentive of euthanizing old people. The notion of old people living separately from their children is also ridiculous and not cost effective.
This is valid and basically negates the need for killing them. If you're 80 but you can still do something useful, then you're still useful. If you're 80 and can't make yourself useful, you shouldn't be getting free shit at everyone else's expense. If your family wants to take care of you, that's on them, and if they don't, you'll die just fine on your own without needing to be killed.
I think there's a bit more to it than that. It's an attempt at pre-programming their plan of destroying our nations and moving all tech to zion, which we should of course have the humility to accept and submit to because they are our superiors and can better guide us.
Seems to me like the rich people she portrayed were all rich from noble non jew business endeavors that advanced civilization and all the people fucking them over were the jews.
Was she really a self hating kike promoting white male supremacy, or a subversive kike pretending to do that in order to convince the most noble white men to isolate themselves from society and stop having kids?
You mean she was smart enough as a Jew just like all the Jews who made all the movies and made all the heroes look like chiseled white men because they were smart enough to know that that's who they had to appeal to to suddenly sell their messages of destruction? Or did you think that somehow authors and the publishing industry was somehow run by Jews but not smart enough to recognize what the Jewish movie Makers realize from day one. That they had to make their heroes be the white guys to sell the destructive medicine message to other white people? Have you ever thought of that? Would you have loved her book if she had flat out told you that the hero was an ugly jew? Of course not. Jews aren't stupid when they're selling propaganda.
Absolutely correct. Same thing they did with the 2012 Olympics ceremony about the pandemic, Back to the Future's 9/11 predictions, and the book of Revelations, among other examples.
libertarians think that she was the second coming of thomas jefferson but instead she was just another grifter that enchanted a few with some truth mixed with lies
btw, the libertarians love big big money. most libertarians are so because they want to do drugs
I guarantee you 8 out of 10 people weighing in have never read a thing she has written and have no clue what they're talking about. The best you can hope for is copypasta internet quotes and the hollow bravado of emotive reactionaries. Hers is a perspective I believe worthwhile to consider, irrespective of the nature of her identity. Fountainhead was rather insightful. Atlas Shrugged was dense, rhetorically strident, and overbearing, particularly the 80 page speech. Nonetheless, only a weak mind shuns knowledge; particularly if they consider it opposition or adversarial thought. It's the exact same rampant ignorance that prevents people from reading National Socialist texts. Read it all and allow the meritocracy of ideas guide your perspective. If the fear is that you will be misled, then you're afraid of your own inadequacy, not the content offered by the author.
Edit:
And while OP's interpretation of her work is certainly one particularly ideological-driven perspective, it is not fact. It omits that all of the antagonists in the book actually resembled the behavioral tropes of the jews while all of the protagonists embodied a strong White European ethic. The 'owners' weren't better, they frequently represented drivers of utopian corruption or embodied the mediocre; while the protagonists were the self-possessed workers, the builders, the creators, the innovators; the men, and woman - because Dagne, that were possessed of passion for the product of their labor and a belief that their dedicated cultivation of mastery and rational self-interest rather than any conception of greater good is what moved the engine of the world and bettered mankind.
Philosophy is not about creating adherents, that is the work of the evangelicals. Philosophy is the development of reason and learning how to think. Just because a message regarding rugged individualism has not proven a desirable state of existing does not justify the overwhelming social media push to be uncritical ideologues. I found National Socialism precisely because I've read every political treatise on the nature of capitalism, communism, the American republic, and the foundations of modern society. The fact is, I wasn't alive during the imposition of the Treaty of Versailles, I don't speak German, and I didn't enjoy Mein Kampf that much. It was a chore to read; that said I'm glad for those who enjoyed it but I'm not going to recommend it to just anyone.
The point being I understand why NatSoc offers a clear alternative to today's decay and what the dangers are of such a system once matured precisely because I've been exposed to the works of so many other philosophers - not because I excluded them. There is a very real push to make us all less educated, to make us voluntarily reject knowledge in favor or social media ignorance and we need to fight against it. I don't care if Rand is a jew, I care about the meritocracy of ideas. She has excellent observations that can and should be internalized; it does not imply you should become a jew. Marx had excellent criticisms of capitalism that I had never considered before reading that book of his. I would never have understood the hidden traps of communism if I hadn't read Rawls, and I wouldn't have understood a perfect counterpoint if not for Nozick... And Feder illustrated quite well the relationship between the two.
So fuck anyone who tells you to avoid knowledge, particularly when you're young. Read this shit when you're thirty? What faggotry is this? I didn't have half the free time at thirty as I did when I was in college. The fact is, if you're only going to read one fucking book in a decade, I would not recommend Rand, but if you're reading a text as imposing as Atlas Shrugged, you're likely going to read many others as well, and be better than most anyone you meet because of it.
We need to be better, more educated, than the leftist. We need more philosophers, less uneducated zealots.
Rugged individualism is a romantic trap. Rewarding merit is good, but too much individualism makes people easy to control with structured systems bigger than them.
No sportsball player can change the rules of the game unless he forgoes his individualism and engages in cooperation.
Americans are too enamored with the idea of living offgrid 100% independent of all other human beings, and never really think of making self-sufficient COMMUNITIES. The Amish are great as a guide for that purpose, but no one wants to give up their electricity.
Its a trap in that it is flawed and has tradeoffs. Rugged individualism however was not a trap designed by jews. Jews just follow their instincts they dont plan goyish ideologies 100 years in advance to contol goyim. Many of you guys fail to understand that jews dont know they are parasites. They are in earnest when they develo all these ideologies. They truly believe they are rehabbing the world, tikkun olam style.
I agree we need to adopt a higher level of collectivism.
Your life revolves around “axe wounds” which is why you are so resentful of me and mine. Youre an antisocial White which is about as useful as being a nigger.
Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats. Rand vs Marx is the same thing. But you know what all kikes and their golems hate? Hitler and National Socialism. I'd rather promote Mein Kampf than The Fountainhead.
Communism related to the same Bolsheviks that chased her family from their home and businesses to start over in America and resentment for them hand in hand with a nationalist love for America.
And then she went on to promote the miscegination and destruction of White countries...not kike countries or communist countries
She just lied about being "persecuted" so you'd feel sorry for her
fucking morons like you still buy into the "we are persecuted" lies
I hate Jews, but your if your brother can’t be better than a Jew, then fuck him. Jews are vile and decrepit and anyone who can’t be better than that needs to go in the Spartan bone pit.
If you're 30+ and have already read quite a bit of philosophy, it's fine to read her and consider what she got right and wrong. If you're in your teens or 20s, still young and impressionable, reading Rand will ruin you.
I've read Anthem and the Fountainhead and about half of Atlas Shrugged. Like Marx, she gets a few things very right - enough to rope people in and convince them of the things she's destructively wrong about.
All kikes are terribly dangerous. They can take the best of ideas and turn them into something ruinous.
I don’t think she was a jew conspiracy. Maybe she got a pass as a jew while other anti-communists were supressed into obscurity. I don’t really know objectivism well but she made some good points and probably overlooked alot of problems with naked capitalism and civic nationalism— but so did alot of White conservatives who had no love of jews. Ideally we should never raise up jews as cultural icons but she’s hardly the worst jew in the barrel. I did read one book by her a long time ago which I thought was pretty good at the time. I might read it differently now though.
[ + ] RoxannaHardbutt
[ - ] RoxannaHardbutt -2 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 20:38:22 ago (+2/-4)*
[ + ] yesiknow
[ - ] yesiknow 3 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:30:22 ago (+3/-0)
To the Lighthouse. I'll read anything. Trash, great, bad, boring. I don't care. That piece of shit book was one of the very worst books on the planet. I couldn't even force finish it. I felt like she was trying to insult the reader by writing that narcissistic drivel shit pooh spit phlegm.
It was worse than sitting through Dune the movie
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:36:59 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 4 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 20:53:14 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] DukeofRaul
[ - ] DukeofRaul 4 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:34:42 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] Nonanonanon
[ - ] Nonanonanon 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:35:20 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] DukeofRaul
[ - ] DukeofRaul 3 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 20:57:16 ago (+3/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist 4 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:12:00 ago (+5/-1)
What she says runs counter to the propaganda put out by the rest of her race, who come out against her and her ideas. Even conservatives are often against most of her ideas.
All this is a good reason to disregard the entirety of what she says, rather than learn anything from it.
Not to find anything wrong with her ideas themselves, the source of the claim is more than enough to justify ignoring her work.
Kind of like the anti-christians on here who tell us to reject everything within christianity with no more reason given then that (according to them) jesus was a jew followed by jews.
We aren't reasonable people, we are committed to being irrational and self-destructive because we are petty and blinded by pride (you know, just like the most insufrable of jews are).
If I were the establishment, I think I'd know how to sabotage this forum, anytime I see someone propose a good idea that could hurt the security of my power, I will just find a jew who said the same thing or something similar, then everyone on here would reject it in it's entirety without examination of the claim.
There have been jews that have supported every idea throughout history, so I will always be able to cite someone who would convince the forum here to toss out any of the ideas they may come up with.
You are a bunch of easily manipulated dullards.
[ + ] SumerBreeze
[ - ] SumerBreeze 2 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:38:06 ago (+2/-0)
You wouldn’t be afforded that, goy. The best you get is Jerry Springer - and that’s if you also agreed, or have already arranged, a marriage to an ugly kikess.
Dont be sad, niggerkikefaggot.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena -1 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:47:24 ago (+0/-1)*
[ + ] SumerBreeze
[ - ] SumerBreeze 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 02:52:03 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:26:22 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Crackinjokes
[ - ] Crackinjokes [op] 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:10:52 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 12:48:56 ago (+0/-0)*
This might be controversial with some of the christians. But I think its because they were priests. A priestly caste will become parasitic over time, living off manipulating their flock. Most of their “special skills” make sense in this context. Catholics did themselves a big favor by banning priests from marriage.
Whites built countries, with excellent infrastructure and division of labor possible through high trust and cooperativity.
Jews don’t do that. They never had their own country because buiding countries isn’t their bag. They are alot like gypsies in their opportunistic behaviors. Neither gypsies nor jews are invested in the well being of their host country because they didn’t build it. They didn’t even build Israel. They dont build anything, or grow their own food.
They live off cultural institutions funded by other people. All their work products are abstract and subjectively valued. In essence, they live off of cultural disinformation. You think they are performing a service, but they are actually harming the host country. This is why their morals are upside-down. They are programmed with morals (aka instincts) which are useful for social parasites to have. Their morals will never lead to a efficient functioning economy. They have the cart before the horse in terms of their cultural values. They will always be against the ethnic cultural unity of their hosts, which is why they automatically favor the foreigner—any foreigner. They will always favor a lowering of conservative morals which ensure economic efficiency and a smooth running country. They are just not settled people. They truly believe the purpose of civilization is so that a jew can have a cushy bureaucratic job directing gentiles. They believe that in the way that wolves believe sheep are supposed to be dinner for wolves.
I think the reason they are so violent is that the climate favored a plant based diet which women were the providers of. When women are providing 80 of the calories, paternity become less important and patrilineality goes out the window. In such a scenario (matrilineal polygamy), men “rent” wombs rather than buy them and they become reproductively successful by killing nearby males and stealing their women. In this sort of society, “strong black women” really are the backbone of the economy and men’s function is mainly to fuck and fight, not provide for the family.
Not so with cold climate Eurasians. Women couldn’t gather fruit in January. Patrilineality (ensured paternity) was critical if men were to hunt for their mate’s children, which is a high risk endeavor. Eurasians killed off almost all the megafauna in Eurasia because they were patrilineal meat based cultures . Eventually, the game ran out and Eurasians were forced to switch to animal husbandry and grain agriculture. Eurasian pastoralists tend to be patrilineal polyganist who are very violent like the blacks (though probably better organized). Presumably the agriculturalists are the most cooperative, and not coincidentally , the most “settled”. Wanderers have nothing invested in infrastructure they didn’t produce.
I believe the Northern Han, Japanese, and Koreans are all heavily descended from a culture of millet growers that arose along the Yellow River. The northern Han then started conquering and assimilating nearby societies to the south and west of themselves slowly over the last 2300 years or so. China is actually an empire, not a single nation. Not genetically. The notion that Chinese speakers are a single Han ethnic group belies the genetic analyses. There’s been some mixing, but the people south of the Yangtze are quite different, as close to Vietnamese and Thais as they are to northern Han. They just had their cultures and languages (mostly) wiped out by the empire. That’s why so many Chinese cities look as bad as Vietnam.
Interestingly, alot of the languages in southeast Asia came from south China. Vietnamese/austroasiatic, Burmese, Thai, Austronesian languages— all probably came from China and are still spoken there in some areas. The native people of the Malasian penninsula were niggers like the New Guineans. Basically we are looking at a pattern similar to western Eurasia— cold climates produce smarter more efficient people who migrate southward and take over shitskin lands, mix with shitskins, become degenerate and get taken over by another group from the north, over and over.
[ + ] SumerBreeze
[ - ] SumerBreeze 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 12:22:37 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 8 monthsAug 25, 2023 20:57:25 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:18:25 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:46:26 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:49:50 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:24:49 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Anus_Expander
[ - ] Anus_Expander 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:45:06 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:17:17 ago (+1/-0)
What good does it do to adopt the meritocratic individualism of Ayn Rand if it teaches the most meritous individuals to separate themselves from society and stop having kids? I read Rand in college and unfortunately liked her work and let it influence me, and it's one of the reasons I wasted my 20s thinking I didn't want a family and that I should just have meaningless sex with sluts instead of a relationship.
You can find plenty of non-jewish thinkers who will promote hard work, creativity, personal responsibility, and meritocracy. Just like how most of the good parts of christianity can be found in Greek philosophy before the jew book was written and without all the crap about loving your enemies and giving everything you own to the lowest people in society.
Nobody is telling you to stop being responsible and hard working just because Ayn Rand said to do it. What we're saying is to find better people to tell you to be responsible and hard working without twisting that into a self destructive and anti-tribalist trap.
[ + ] AntiPostmodernist
[ - ] AntiPostmodernist 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:49:13 ago (+1/-0)
Ditch the bad and keep the good, I think it's best to critically examine anything you read piece by piece rather than accepting or rejecting it as a whole without entertaining any part of it.
You know my philosophy, I've been very vocal about it, I talked a lot about the imperative to reproduce, especially with those who you share common genetic traits with.
If I see something I will break it down into its parts and think deeply about each part, trying to take it to its ends, contradict it, etc. Just do a full analysis.
If it's good then I accept it, if it fails then I still take something away, I'm neither case am I having an experience I don't learn from.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:33:14 ago (+0/-0)
But also I think its naive to think that altruism is always bad and comes from jews. Buddhism has similar principles and it was created by a White guy not a jew.
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:40:58 ago (+0/-0)
One of the big problems with a lot of jewish philosophers is they want to take every idea to its extreme. Marx and Jesus will take altruism to the extreme of saying you should always help all people starting with the most hopeless cases. Rand will take selfishness to the opposite extreme saying you should never help anyone unless it's a mutually beneficial exchange with someone who's capable and self sufficient. The correct position is to help people if they are likely to get back to a point where they can take care of themselves and help others, and not help people who are a lost cause.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:26:01 ago (+0/-0)
Taking good care of your elderly is a benefit which attracts members. Nobody is going to join your society if you throw members away as soon as they have exceeded their usefulness. Thats what we do with dairy cows and laying chickens. I am for us advertising that most Whites who join us can expect to live to about 100. With excellent lifestyle habits, excellent healthcare and gero-protective drugs, we are basically there now or will be within a decade or two.
Retirement is a ridiculous concept. We should allocate less physically and intellectually demanding jobs to healthy old people. Social security and pensions are a major burden incurred on society and a major incentive of euthanizing old people. The notion of old people living separately from their children is also ridiculous and not cost effective.
Why not just kill anyone thats no longer productive? Why are we wasting food housing and infrastructure on people over 65? They are more likely to be a burden than useful or self sufficient. Why waste medical resources on them?
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:04:57 ago (+0/-0)
People who can't take care of themselves and don't give others a reason to take care of them die perfectly fine on their own.
This is valid and basically negates the need for killing them. If you're 80 but you can still do something useful, then you're still useful. If you're 80 and can't make yourself useful, you shouldn't be getting free shit at everyone else's expense. If your family wants to take care of you, that's on them, and if they don't, you'll die just fine on your own without needing to be killed.
[ + ] SumerBreeze
[ - ] SumerBreeze 2 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:33:02 ago (+2/-0)
Then computing came into the scene and showed us that everything can indeed be improved - constantly and with many updates and rearrangements.
She was a sad lunatic that had convinced lazy unintellectual slobs to keep slave waging for meaningless tasks.
[ + ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod
[ - ] BlueEyedAngloMasterRaceGod 1 point 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 21:54:08 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] ilikeskittles
[ - ] ilikeskittles 0 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 22:22:11 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:19:24 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] AtomicForeskin
[ - ] AtomicForeskin 5 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 22:30:16 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 4 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:24:08 ago (+5/-1)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:09:33 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:07:03 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Crackinjokes
[ - ] Crackinjokes [op] 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:06:54 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 14:11:04 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:18:13 ago (+1/-1)*
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:10:20 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted -1 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:44:34 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] dosvydanya_freedomz
[ - ] dosvydanya_freedomz 0 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:03:29 ago (+2/-2)
btw, the libertarians love big big money. most libertarians are so because they want to do drugs
[ + ] x0x7
[ - ] x0x7 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:28:11 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 06:16:01 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 5 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:13:30 ago (+5/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:27:51 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] Indoctrinated_USA
[ - ] Indoctrinated_USA 8 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:22:53 ago (+10/-2)*
The best you can hope for is copypasta internet quotes and the hollow bravado of emotive reactionaries.
Hers is a perspective I believe worthwhile to consider, irrespective of the nature of her identity.
Fountainhead was rather insightful.
Atlas Shrugged was dense, rhetorically strident, and overbearing, particularly the 80 page speech.
Nonetheless, only a weak mind shuns knowledge; particularly if they consider it opposition or adversarial thought.
It's the exact same rampant ignorance that prevents people from reading National Socialist texts.
Read it all and allow the meritocracy of ideas guide your perspective.
If the fear is that you will be misled, then you're afraid of your own inadequacy, not the content offered by the author.
Edit:
And while OP's interpretation of her work is certainly one particularly ideological-driven perspective, it is not fact. It omits that all of the antagonists in the book actually resembled the behavioral tropes of the jews while all of the protagonists embodied a strong White European ethic. The 'owners' weren't better, they frequently represented drivers of utopian corruption or embodied the mediocre; while the protagonists were the self-possessed workers, the builders, the creators, the innovators; the men, and woman - because Dagne, that were possessed of passion for the product of their labor and a belief that their dedicated cultivation of mastery and rational self-interest rather than any conception of greater good is what moved the engine of the world and bettered mankind.
Philosophy is not about creating adherents, that is the work of the evangelicals. Philosophy is the development of reason and learning how to think. Just because a message regarding rugged individualism has not proven a desirable state of existing does not justify the overwhelming social media push to be uncritical ideologues. I found National Socialism precisely because I've read every political treatise on the nature of capitalism, communism, the American republic, and the foundations of modern society. The fact is, I wasn't alive during the imposition of the Treaty of Versailles, I don't speak German, and I didn't enjoy Mein Kampf that much. It was a chore to read; that said I'm glad for those who enjoyed it but I'm not going to recommend it to just anyone.
The point being I understand why NatSoc offers a clear alternative to today's decay and what the dangers are of such a system once matured precisely because I've been exposed to the works of so many other philosophers - not because I excluded them.
There is a very real push to make us all less educated, to make us voluntarily reject knowledge in favor or social media ignorance and we need to fight against it.
I don't care if Rand is a jew, I care about the meritocracy of ideas.
She has excellent observations that can and should be internalized; it does not imply you should become a jew.
Marx had excellent criticisms of capitalism that I had never considered before reading that book of his.
I would never have understood the hidden traps of communism if I hadn't read Rawls, and I wouldn't have understood a perfect counterpoint if not for Nozick...
And Feder illustrated quite well the relationship between the two.
So fuck anyone who tells you to avoid knowledge, particularly when you're young. Read this shit when you're thirty? What faggotry is this? I didn't have half the free time at thirty as I did when I was in college. The fact is, if you're only going to read one fucking book in a decade, I would not recommend Rand, but if you're reading a text as imposing as Atlas Shrugged, you're likely going to read many others as well, and be better than most anyone you meet because of it.
We need to be better, more educated, than the leftist.
We need more philosophers, less uneducated zealots.
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 8 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:29:37 ago (+9/-1)
[ + ] TheYiddler
[ - ] TheYiddler 4 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:21:57 ago (+5/-1)
No sportsball player can change the rules of the game unless he forgoes his individualism and engages in cooperation.
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:24:09 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:57:10 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Razzoriel
[ - ] Razzoriel 0 points 8 monthsAug 25, 2023 18:04:09 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 25, 2023 20:53:39 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Indoctrinated_USA
[ - ] Indoctrinated_USA 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 03:42:50 ago (+1/-1)
But that does not mean there aren't a great many philosophical considerations offered in her books.
They are worth reading.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:21:46 ago (+1/-1)
I agree we need to adopt a higher level of collectivism.
[ + ] BushChuck
[ - ] BushChuck -2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:46:09 ago (+0/-2)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:53:48 ago (+3/-1)
[ + ] BushChuck
[ - ] BushChuck -1 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 10:56:59 ago (+0/-1)
Why are you here? Fuck off, already.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:00:39 ago (+2/-1)
#I’m never fucking off.
[ + ] BushChuck
[ - ] BushChuck -1 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:01:03 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:05:01 ago (+2/-1)
#Lol
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 11:07:17 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] TheBigGuyFromQueens
[ - ] TheBigGuyFromQueens 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 02:01:33 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:03:54 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] AryanPrime
[ - ] AryanPrime 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 05:19:29 ago (+2/-1)
And then she went on to promote the miscegination and destruction of White countries...not kike countries or communist countries
She just lied about being "persecuted" so you'd feel sorry for her
fucking morons like you still buy into the "we are persecuted" lies
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 4 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:42:56 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 7 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:25:10 ago (+9/-2)*
[ + ] TheBigGuyFromQueens
[ - ] TheBigGuyFromQueens 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 02:03:40 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:06:25 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] AryanPrime
[ - ] AryanPrime 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 05:20:33 ago (+2/-1)
kikes are vile, they are not the chosen people of God, you lie constantly on their behalf when you call them jews
kike filth, you fool no one
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:03:09 ago (+0/-0)*
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:05:14 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] NaturalSelectionistWorker
[ - ] NaturalSelectionistWorker 3 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:01:38 ago (+3/-0)
All kikes are terribly dangerous. They can take the best of ideas and turn them into something ruinous.
[ + ] deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:14:10 ago (+2/-1)*
[ + ] Stonkmar
[ - ] Stonkmar 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:01:56 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] prototype
[ - ] prototype 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 09:01:51 ago (+0/-0)
Likewise in the style of trump, and pass it around facebook.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 8 monthsAug 23, 2023 23:39:37 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 00:47:34 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:28:48 ago (+2/-1)
[ + ] TheBigGuyFromQueens
[ - ] TheBigGuyFromQueens 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 01:59:43 ago (+1/-1)
[ + ] AryanPrime
[ - ] AryanPrime 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 05:21:19 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] boekanier
[ - ] boekanier 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 03:14:23 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] aboutime
[ - ] aboutime -2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 03:59:09 ago (+0/-2)
[ + ] bonghits4jeebus
[ - ] bonghits4jeebus 0 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 06:14:46 ago (+0/-0)
I read the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. The Internet made more of an impact on me than the actual books.
[ + ]deleted
[ - ] deleted 2 points 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 08:25:12 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] goatfugee12
[ - ] goatfugee12 1 point 8 monthsAug 24, 2023 08:37:58 ago (+1/-0)