Sign into an existing account

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.

Stupid shit,. He;s confused industrialists with jews

This. Im for free enterprise within strict limits. We can never again allow some CEO to have 10,000 times the wealth and power as the average worker. Even if they’re a goy.

Why do people choose to become employees in the first place, rather than being their own person?

Tesla is such a good example about how the Jew finance controlled business World treats actual innovators.

Here we're his last words.

https://youtube.com/shorts/ZpL7nGG6hLs

Rand is also not helpful in promoting freedom because it creates confusion about what should be the right values of voluntaryists/anarcho-capitalists. Because it's easy to confuse objectivism/egoism as being adjacent to vol/ancap.

In Rand's system there is no value besides the self. In her view charity is immoral because it is placing something above the only true moral, the self.

This can lead some, including some ancaps themselves, to think that the ancap model is pure selfishness if people mistake Ayn Rand as being a useful thinker in the ancap space.

The better vol/ancap view is that all values are important but that government or any power structure that isn't voluntary will always pursue them impurely. And that only the self can serve real values through direct human will and action. A healthy anarcho-capitalist community is composed of people who are not psychopaths and posses full social and emotional development.

Ancapistan probably can't be made from emotionally broken people like Ayn Rand who have lived through any communism. It might not even be possible if most of the people had an institutionalized childhood being raised in public schools. Those people are too mis-developed.

This is why even as an ancap I do recognize there is some pipe-dreamism involved. For me it is a social and moral ideal. Practically it takes the highest developed sort and ceases to work with enough of the wrong sort. It assumes a population that is universally above 100 IQ, doesn't have a reflex to violate the NAP, is self governing and considers the externalities of their actions themselves, and everyone cares enough about philosophy to have a pretty deep understanding of right and wrong for themselves and doesn't require a central body to dictate that for them.

That's just not the population we have. Even among whites it's hard to get those characteristics universally. And the world is getting less and less white. Where would a black who cannot self govern for shit and will just automatically steal everything fit into ancapistan? Not that I want to express myself as a supremacist over many of you, but I really think ancapistan is only possible with a purely Scandinavian population. Anarcho-capitalism is basically the system they had in antiquity. Even when there was eventually a king of Norway that king had no real control or say over the day to day lives of anyone. The king was a purely military power that just offset someone else declaring themselves king (and unfortunately there were some taxes/tribute involved from the population). But the king had no real governing power.

So we know that anarcho capitalism does work with Scandinavians because they have done it. But that's a population that has a high degree of empathy, sense of fairness, and a very uniform high intellegence.

This is also why I am a eugenicist. I think having ancapistan eventually is morally requisite. So I care if our laws, which I view as being immoral to begin with, also happen to have a Rand is also not helpful in promoting freedom because it creates confusion about what should be the right values of voluntaryists/anarcho-capitalists. Because it's easy to confuse objectivism/egoism as being adjacent to vol/ancap.

In Rand's system there is no value besides the self. In her view charity is immoral because it is placing something above the only true moral, the self.

This can lead some, including some ancaps themselves, to think that the ancap model is pure selfishness if people mistake Ayn Rand as being a useful thinker in the ancap space.

The better vol/ancap view is that all values are important but that government or any power structure that isn't voluntary will always pursue them impurely. And that only the self can serve real values through direct human will and action. A health anarcho-capitalist community is composed of people who are not psychopaths and posses full social and emotional development.

Ancapistan probably can't be made from emotionally broken people like Ayn Rand who have lived through any communism. It might not even be possible if most of the people had an institutionalized childhood being raised in public schools.

This is why even as an ancap I do recognize there is some pipe-dreamism involved. For me it is a social and moral ideal. Practically it takes the highest developed sort and ceases to work. It assumes a population that is universally above 100 IQ, doesn't have a reflex to violate the NAP, is self governing and considers the externalities of their actions themselves, and everyone cares enough about philosophy to have a pretty deep understanding of right and wrong for themselves and doesn't require a central body to dictate that for them.

That's just not the population we have. Even among whites it's hard to get those characteristics universally. And the world is getting less and less white. Where would a black who cannot self govern for shit and will just automatically steal everything fit into ancapistan? Not that I want to express myself as a supremacist over many of you, but I really think ancapistan is only possible with a purely Scandinavian population. Anarcho-capitalism is basically the system they had in antiquity. Even when there was eventually a king of Norway that king had no real control or say over the day to day lives of anyone. The king was a purely military power that just offset someone else declaring themselves king (and unfortunately there were some taxes/tribute involved from the population). But the king had no real governing power.

So we know that anarcho capitalism does work with Scandinavians because they have done it. But that's a population that has a high degree of empathy, sense of fairness, and very uniform high intellegence.

This is also why I am a eugenicist. I think having ancapistan eventually is morally requisite. So I care if our laws, which I view as being immoral to begin with, also happen to drive a dysgenic result further pushing us away from that necessary goal. I have absolutely no problem requiring people to be sterilized to receive welfare.

i make my own ideology. i might take some inspiration from her words at times. but my ideas are distinctly my own. i think all acts are selfish and so i can justify charity by pointing out all the ways in which the giver gains by giving, even though he loses financially. i also argue that the joy gained from giving is not meaningfully distinguishable from the happiness acquired in any other way, and posit is one of the only four possible motivations for human decision making, the other emotion being misery (or sadness, sorrow, etc.), and the last two being the physical sensations of pleasure and pain.

Never actually liked that book

Your only fault is not calling the demon its real name.

Alissa Rosenbaum

The worst lesson in this jews books was that there was no room for innovation; that the best concertos were already written, the best business practices were already in motion, that there would be no new revolutionary technology that would disrupt any of this.

Then computer technology and later the internet completely changed everything. Ayn Rand was a retarded puppet of jew supremacist suppressors, and it’s too bad the idiot never had the chance to publicly acknowledge that!

She also tried to encourage the best and brightest white minds not to have children because children were a distraction from the self, rather than a continuation of the self. I also used to like her books but saw through them once I figured out the jews.

my god, the writing is just terrible.

and there are all these idiots here saying "oh I loved it so much"