Ayn Rand, Objectivist Principles and Capitalism

Leonard Cohen. Ummmm..

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Too much Aristotle, too little Shakespeare, no Lao Tzu at all. And nothing admitted into consideration from any 19th or 20th Century intellectual field except engineering.

A derived political "ideology" (set of reactionary reflexes) in the US unable to handle the political aspects of scientific inquiry, artistic endeavor, childraising, agriculture, or ecological management - and with major political influence, in the persons of wealthy and powerful adherents self-justified in what would otherwise be visible ignorance and destructively misguided policies.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Unless The Marquis is Leonard Cohen or wrote this for him either he or Leonard Cohen is guilty of plagiarism.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bruce, do you think there is any chance that 'The Marquis' is 'Duchess Doughnut'? It's his new name on the cool music thread at RP’s.

 

Oh for.... Whole pages in her novels devoted to this very concept, and you somehow missed it.

Honestly, it's like watching a bunch of stoned hippies discussing fiscal policy.
Actually... I'm probably not far wrong there. Rand's detractors do have a tendency to belong to a certain... social subset.

 

"Archer" reference, actually.

 

And as for you... I can just see you there. You were the one in school who sidled up to the headmaster on a school trip to dob in the kids smoking down the back of the bus, weren't you.
It's be plagiarism if I claimed it as mine, you little worm. Everybody knows it's Leonard Cohen.

No wonder you hate Rand so much. Her heroes are something you could never be.
Ever noticed that? All the Rand detractors on this site are rather similar types, aren't they. So much anger. What about me, it isn't fair... and yet it manifests as... this.

Other than Tiassa, of course. That boy's Toohey, through and through. Almost frightening, because it's his type who have so much control now. I'd feel dirty being anywhere near them.

Question: Is someone of Tiassa's ilk an Alpha Male? something I've been pondering.

 

Man, seriously - you don't need to. I really don't think Rand was writing for you.

 

The main differences between capitalism and communism is with capitalism, money can concentrate into a fewer hands, but power is spread out to all via votes. With Communism, money may be spread out, but power will become concentrated into a few hands. Money and power control the world, with money having more in the way of natural checks and balances than power.

For example, if a fool was put in charge of a large pile of money via capitalism, he may not be able to compete, causing his money to redistribute to stronger capitalists. The system is self correcting back to the efficient. But if the same level of power is placed in the hands of fools, they can use their power to remain in power. If you look at North Korea, their leader may not be competent enough to create a first world culture, but you can't displace him with someone better, since he uses his power to regulate power.

In America, power can place the country in huge debt. This can't happen in the free market, since too much company debt will result in the changing of the guard. Apple Computer has been running high on the capitalist wave. All it takes is a bad decision on their part, of another innovation from another company and the new cream will rise.

I prefer the capitalist system, although not perfect, you can't institute poor products in the free market, since the free market will push idiots off the hill. But with power, this is not the case, since the idiot will controls the laws and armies and can institute stupidity and inefficiencies using these tools.

Ayn Rand was not thinking in terms of the masses, but in terms of the top levels of money and power.

 

Never was much like a hippie. The days when hippie culture peaked were before me. Besides, I've usually tended to find my own path not frequented by others.

I've never read her fiction and think she hasn't merited being read. There is so much important and informative non-fiction to read, so I haven't read fiction in a long time and haven't any plans to read it anymore.

Was fairness for her to let everyone do what they want, even if it hurts others? There are rather contradictory views on what fairness is, depending on different life experiences. Her life is known as one of reactionary opposition to communism. Maybe I wouldn't have little respect for her ideas if she had focused more on what could have been changed to make the ideal of sharing in society easier, rather than apparently focusing on the idea of every person for oneself. Humans depend on society to survive. Policy tending toward helping the weak is good for making society more effective and pleasant, and, such policy is generally good for the individual as well, since everyone has weaknesses.

 

@Marquis,

Come on, what is your fascination with Rand? If i applied her philosophy in my life I would be end up as nothing more than an egomaniac. Furthermore, as an individual Rand was rather disgusting in her treatment of those around her.

 

LOL, your act of plagiarism has nothing to do with me. It has everything to do with you. USING SOMEONE’S WORK WITHOUT CITING THEM as you did, IS PLAGARISM. And that fact is known by every secondary student. By the way, we don’t have headmasters in the US. And not everyone knows who Leonard Cohen is. He really isn’t that popular. Outside a small group, he is a relatively unknown. Most people have never heard of him, much less are familiar with his work. And none of that changes your obligation to cite him as the author when you use his material.

I don’t hate a dead woman. I think she was an idiot as evidenced by her work. It really is that simple. She had little or no knowledge or training in business, economics, history or anything else for that matter. And how do you know who I am? You don’t. You are making personal attacks in attempt to mask your biases and intellectual short comings.

By the way I do have an academic background in business and economics and a 30 year career in business in which I started two successful businesses in two separate industries and I retired a few years ago at age 57. I dare say, that is a hell of a lot more that you have done or ever will do.

Yes I have noticed a difference between Rand supporters like you and others on this site. Rand supporters are under educated, especially with respect relevant subject matter, unreasoned (e.g. heavily dependent on illogical argument), bellicose, gullible and a slave to their cogitative biases and unable to reason.

More ad hominem, if you were as knowledgeable as you seem think you are, let’s see it. If you are as reasoned as you think you are, then make a cogent argument and stop using illogical argument like the ad hominem you are so fond of using.

 

This is a good example of what I referred to in my response to The Marquis. You are illogically mixing political systems with economic systems. Russia, China, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Congo, and a number of others countries are not democratic but still practice capitalism. Just because a country’s economic system is capitalism, it doesn’t follow that it is also democratic. And with that simple fact, the rest of your argument falls apart.

You assume that capitalism and democracy are synonymous and they are not, per my last paragraph. And money, the wealth, of the magnitude we are discussing can last a very long time. Fools with this much wealth generally didn’t earn it and normally operate out of trust funds which protect them from their excesses. Again, you’re incorrectly mixing political and economic systems – a common fault of folks with your particular brand of ideology.

Kim Jong-un (i.e. North Korea) isn’t the only person to use regulation to secure his power. It happens all the time in the West – ever wonder why prescription drugs are much more expensive in the US than virtually anywhere else in the world?

Except yes it can, and it happens every day. Every day companies around the globe, operating in free markets, take on too much debt and you don’t have to look far to see it. Greenspan, a Rand fan, operated under similar beliefs. He thought bankers would never do anything so stupid as to take on bad debts and take on too much extraordinary risk, because it wasn’t rational. That is why he advocated repeal of Glass-Stegall and for the passage of the Commodities Futures Modernization Act – the laws that permitted banks to engage in the behaviors which created The Great Recession of 2007-2009. In retrospect, Greenspan has recognized his mistake. You have not. You are still clinging to the ideology which brought us The Great Recession and a near Great Depression 2.0. At least Greenspan has enough grey matter to recognize his mistake.

Well I think most people prefer the capitalist economic system coupled with democracy and rational economic and regulatory policies. Regulation is necessary as evidenced by The Great Recession. And there is no innate protection from stupidity in communism or capitalism or in democratic systems versus non democratic systems of governance. In the end, we are all human and as such are emotional and at times unreasoned individuals. CEO’s, investors, businessmen are not always rational actors and their goals are not always in line with that of the common good. You need to learn as Greenspan has and pick up a few subject matter texts. You not only have your facts wrong which is always the case with you, you have your logic wrong as well.

Obviously she wasn’t as evidenced by The Great Recession of 2007-2009.

 

Intelligent? Empathetic? Well read? Rands heroes were thugs and criminals

 

Well, they were maybe a little more than that - but i'll allow they were simple: types, rather than persons, like the masked characters in an ancient Greek tragedy.
She admired Aristotle and Bauhaus, with both of which I have conceptual quibbles (I don't recall reading what she thought of Skinner). But I can understand - and to some extent, sympathize with - a desire for simple, straightforward solutions to the human condition. Too bad you have to ignore two thirds of the actual human condition in order to make the system fit. Like most ideologies, it fails through what it decides to leave out.

Kochs or no, the philosophy is extremely seductive to some kinds of personality, notably the adolescent who is not as successful as he (mainly; a few shes) thinks he should be. It gives him an accessible explanation: other people are screwing up the world. It gives him an open-ended excuse for failure: other people are stealing his opportunities. It gives him a light at the end of the tunnel: once we move to the valley, I'll be the star I deserve to be. And while waiting for Galt, I can party instead of studying or working.

 

I agree, but want to use this truth, to emphasize why it is so essential that ALL get good educational opportunities, as is done in Scandinavia but unfortunately not in the US with its local funding of pre-college schools. Thus, too many US voters vote for: "Goodies Now, and send the bill to the not yet born." as they have near zero understanding of basic economics.*

I.e. schools in poor neighborhood are terrible - do not give their students the education they need to compete in the modern world. The girls mainly become maids, sales clerks**, or whores, etc. The boys mainly thieves or drug dealers, who eventually get caught and fill the prisons, dozens of times more on a per capita basis than in Scandinavia. There they cost society more than the average tuition at Ivy league schools.

* I think less than 5% of American can even tell you what the "present value" concept is and less than 1% can tell how it is computed.
** With ever more buying via the internet, number of these "sales lady" positions needed is declining.

 

Yes! Yes! Yes!

Yet all the talk on the campaign trail about fixing education has produced negligible results.

 

Well educated and well informed voters are the best antiseptics in the fight against stupidity, ineptitude, and corruption.

 

That is caused by fact the voters are so incapable of thinking for themselves (poor education again) and so brain washed against democratic socialism as practiced in Scandinavia that even mentioning that the fundamental problem with US educational system is "local funding of schools" is a "third wire" - touch it and your die as a Politian.

You can not expect the typical US voter to know that the average of the four main Scandinavian countries has:

Less than half the total health costs and medical care is essentially free to the user, compared to that in the US's "fee for service" system* and medical insurance costs.
That the life expectancies are approximately three years greater in Scandinavia than in the US.
That high quality education is essentially free to the student, even thru college.
That their debt to GDP is less than 50% instead of more than 100% as in the USA.

Etc. as Americans are drilled on saying: USA, USA, USA - We are the greatest.

* There the doctors are on salary in the public health systems. Can take as long as they need to in examining you with no loss of income. US doctors have assistants who let them keep contact time with you down to less than 6 minutes - Seeing 10 patients/ hour boost their income. Perhaps as important is the large cut the medical malpractice lawyers get. But most important of all is the US's most effective (with possible exception of gun lobby) AMA lobby. They have gotten it to be a requirement that opening a new medical school in any of the 50 states requires the AMA to certify it is "needed" - The best restraint of trade / price competition yet achieved in the USA.

Furthermore in countries with doctors on salary, the people who go to medical school do so because of a strong desire to serve the sick, not because it is one of the surest ways to become a multi-millionaire.

 

Many Americans even when shown these facts that you cited, will reject it outright, for them any hint of socialism is evil. What is it going to take to bring Americans up to snuff? We all keep screaming education, but look at the state of education in America, we cannot even keep States from teaching fairy tales and bad science to our children.