41. AYN RAND: The question
Ayn Rand (1905-1982) was a Russian-American writer and philiosopher. She’s famous for her two novels, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, and creating a new system of philosophy called Objectivism. I didn’t know anything about her before adapting this quote but she seems to have lived a very interesting life. Rand grew up in Russia during the Russian Revolution and later moved to America where she worked as a screenwriter in Hollywood before gaining fame with her first novel, The Fountainhead. After success as a novelist she focused on philosophy and formed a new system called Objectivism, a way of thinking that places reason above everything else. Rand was a strong, out-spoken woman who definitely lived by the words in this quote. Anyone here recommend The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged? Thanks to Luciana for submitting the quote.
ABOUT THIS SITE:
MOST POPULAR COMICS
- 50. NEIL GAIMAN: Make good art
- 100. CARL SAGAN: Pale blue dot
- 98. ALAN WATTS: What if money was no object?
- 90: IRA GLASS: Advice for beginners
- 116. CAITLIN MORAN: We’re all dying
- 52. PHIL PLAIT: Welcome to science
- 104. MALALA YOUSAFZAI: I have the right
- 94. The Two Wolves
- 92. CHRIS GUILLEBEAU: 11 ways to be average
- 108. SOPHIE SCHOLL: The fire within
- 42. NEIL deGRASSE TYSON: The most astounding fact
- 60. ROBERT FROST: The road not taken
- 97. CHARLES BUKOWSKI: Air and light and time and space
- 17. FRANK HERBERT: Litany against fear
- 89. STEPHEN FRY: Ultimate self-help book
Best of the rest
- 106. CHRIS HADFIELD: An astronaut's advice
- 12. CARL SAGAN: Make the most of this life
- 33. EDGAR MITCHELL: A global consciousness
- 36. BRUCE LEE: There are no limits
- 56. HENRY ROLLINS: Who's the crazier man?
- 65. MARIANNE WILLIAMSON: Our deepest fear
- 73. MARK TWAIN: An educational journey
- 8. THEODORE ROOSEVELT: The man in the arena
- 83. HOWARD THURMAN: Ask yourself
- 91. BILL HICKS: It's just a ride
HOSTED BY:
love it!
^_^
Isn’t Rand the person that ultra-conservatives quote to justify the complete dismissal of social support programs?
Yes. She’s a darling of the Tea Party Republicans.
And I wonder how many of the conservatives who hold up Ayn Rand’s ideas (Objectivism) as a foundational philosophy realize that she was an atheist.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand
http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=faq_index
I have no problem with atheism, but I would have thought that conservatives might.
Which is hilarious, since atheism is the other major part of Objectivism.
Much more hilarious is that “objectivism” was first named “EGOISM”, however as egoism began to connotate a negative meaning, they moved to the later nomenclature.
Either way, if you do so much as watch an interview with Ayn Rand (available on netflix, un edited) you realize the woman was a self absorbed, callouse, and non-empathetic monster, which her writing embodies and personifies.
I read her over 20 years ago. I own everything she has written. I loved the fountainhead, as it was a bit more world aware. Her later works showed her true colors, including “Anthem”.
She is the personification of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and Anti-Social Personality Disorder COMBINED, and everything she has written celebrates pathological sociopathy.
It must be really easy to attribute psychological disorders to people who demonstrate confidence in their thoughts. If the recorded events of her life were in perfect accord with your image of an awesome person then would you have remarked similarly?
Answer that question and then ask who is disturbed.
The Fountainhead first. I found it far more enjoyable than Atlas Shrugged.
Cool thanks for the tip
Hey! Maybe I am indeed late! But I will warn you that you will like the other lesser depending on what you read earlier! If it’s Fountainhead, you won’t like Atlas Shrugged, and if you read the second first, you will not like the earlier. It is out of experience that I’m telling you. I read Atlas Shrugged first and have read it at least six other times, but I did not read Fountainhead more than once.
Rand’s philosophy exemplified thought of self over the group consensus. She believed that it is up to you to look out for yourself and that taking care of other deprives you of your ability to attain your maximum potential. Her arguments are used repeatedly by the ultra conservative right in the United States to defend the rights of the rich.
I love the quote and I used to like Ayn Rand but her philosophies are extremely rigid.
However that doesn’t stop me from loving this illustration, great work!
I knew she’s a hero to the right-wing but didn’t know why. Thanks for clarifying.
He didn’t clarify at all – just obfuscate. You could tell by the use of terms such as ‘ultra conservative’ (as if more moderate conservatives don’t find inspiration from Rand) and ‘rights of the rich’ (as if the rich have a different set of ‘rights’ than the rest of us).
The notion that mainstream conservatives find inspiration in Ayn Rand is largely exaggerated. (You’re thinking of Libertarians or the Tea Party movement, not conservatism). As a lifelong conservative, I can tell you that many prominent conservative thinkers of Rand’s time saw her and her movement as a joke. She was anti-family, anti-Christian, and in the end she despised Reagan and Goldwater (for not accepting her philosophy). She even hated Libertarians for not going far enough in their market absolutism.
“[Ayn Rand's] exclusion from the conservative community was, I am sure, in part the result of her desiccated philosophy’s conclusive incompatibility with the conservative’s emphasis on transcendence, intellectual and moral; but also there is the incongruity of tone, that hard, schematic, implacable, unyielding dogmatism that is in itself intrinsically objectionable, whether it comes from the mouth of Ehrenburg, or Savonarola, or Ayn Rand.”
— introduction to American Conservative Thought in the Twentieth Century by William F. Buckley
Ayn Rand was not a conservative, she was a broken woman who wrote books for teenaged misfits to latch on to and gain a false sense of power (that’s why admirers of Rand are so ubiquitous on the Internet.) A true conservative would never embrace the values outlined in her books.
ps. the two terms “ultra conservative” and “rights of the rich” are perfectly clear unless you’ve been living under a rock since 1969. They’re the antithesis to the terms “far left” and “welfare queen enabler”.
Hi
I’ve been checking out most of your posts and think they are pretty cool, but this one has really grabbed my attention. Probably because it just reminds me so much of my son. Maybe it’s the baby, but that was exactly him at the toddler age and I spent a lot of time stopping him (mostly for safety reasons). He still shows the same determination now he is older and I believe will have this determination as an adult, which isn’t a bad thing when it is moderated by thinking about how your actions might effect others.
Read fountain head first – Atlas shrugged is kinda of sequel. Not in terms of story but the central philosophy of the books.
Hi,
Recently started following your posts and their great..awesome work.. Truly inspiring. your illustration really add a whole new impact to the inspirational quotes..
Look forward for more..
Must read Fountainhead.
Also “We the Living”.
That’s the nearest she’s gone to writing an autobiography.
To understand her philosophy better without having plots/ storylines you should read ” The virtue of Selfishness”
And nowhere has she said that taking care of others deprives you of your maximum potential.
Surface readers usually don’t understand fully Rand’s philosophies and make comments like that.
And you do, because you are an academic expert on her philosophy? Honestly, I’ve read many comments on Rand’s philosophy, and all agree on the right of the individual to ignore the needs of the community. I don’t rule out that the right is doing to Rand what was done to Nietzsche by the nazis, that is, twisting her philosophy to suit their needs, but what I’ve read so far doesn’t point in that direction.
Sorry, but for me this cartoon has been a disappointment, after so many great quotes, here’s one that endorses being selfish, and ignore the rules we define to function as a society. This, to me, doesn’t sound as challenging oneself to improve, it’s about ignoring any authority.
Good point, J. Blanco. I think the cartoon does work well in that it represents the thought process of a clever little baby. As we grow, we learn the importance of helping others and our community.
“…here’s one that endorses being selfish, and ignore the rules we define to function as a society…”
This is not an accurate interpretation of her statement. One of the central tenants of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism (and yes, it meets all the criteria of a philosophy) is that a man’s life belongs to him. Not to a God, or a King or to Society. Therefore a man does not require permission to live his life as he’s sees fit (the “who is going to let me”) but only needs to be concerned about those who would seek to prevent him from doing so (the “who is going to stop me”).
Gavin,
Ayn Rand is a bit of a polarizing figure (as you can tell from these comments) and while this is a wonderful quote of hers, I do feel there are others which fit the “feel” of this website and better convey her philosophical beliefs. My favorite is the following:
“Do not let your fire go out,
spark by irreplaceable spark,
in the hopeless swamps of the approximate,
the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all.
Do not let the hero in your soul perish,
in lonely frustration for the life you deserved,
but have never been able to reach.
Check your road and the nature of your battle.
The world you desired can be won,
it exists, it is real, it is possible, it’s yours.”
And yet, what women did, they did as a group, and looking after the rights of “womanhood”. If they only cared about their individual benefit, maybe they would never have achieved what they did. I’m not talking about being selfless, or giving too much, I’m just talking about the limits that being part of a society imply, so your reference to “The Feminine Mystique” is a misunderstanding of what I said, as I never commented on that type of behaviour.
Actually, most social improvements come when A GROUP realizes that they are so, and not just individuals. So your example, in fact, reinforces my previous statement, and in no way contradicts it…
Yes, being selfish inside a society that has rules is a good thing for the individual, because that individual can expect support from that same society if anything goes wrong. Ever needed a hospital, or any emergency service? Good thing that they didn’t act selfish then…
And of course, I’m not arguing about the artistic quality of the drawing itself, just the quote contained in the cartoon. The cartoon is both drawing and text, and my comment was only about the text, not the image, so I really don’t get your opening remark about the virtues of the image.
@J. Blanco April 26, 2012 at 5:47 pm:
“This, to me, doesn’t sound as challenging oneself to improve, it’s about ignoring any authority.”
And what’s wrong with ignoring authority? Especially when they’re wrong?
Any “authority” figure is still just a person: subject to the same flaws, misconceptions, doubts, biases, prejudices, and deliberate deceits as any of the rest of us. Perhaps even moreso as they (ostensibly) have some modicum of “power” which they wish to retain. More power? The more they may do unethical things to keep it.
Just because an “authority” says “no” is no reason to believe them.
Its like the common problem with Nietche after Nazi party used some of his ideas in a twisted way…Right-wing (don’t mean to make a exact parallel here) uses her quotes (not even ideas) only as deemed useful.
And she has said herself that her ideas need to be structurated in a system to work and warned herself too about the dangers of doing it improperly, given communism as example that only really works as described on paper, not in daily life or her idea of “minarchy” (less state as posible) that she said herself that it can lead directly to a dictatorship if its simplified in a foolish way.
As I posted above:
Much more hilarious is that “objectivism” was first named “EGOISM”, however as egoism began to connotate a negative meaning, they moved to the later nomenclature.
Either way, if you do so much as watch an interview with Ayn Rand (available on netflix, un edited) you realize the woman was a self absorbed, callouse, and non-empathetic monster, which her writing embodies and personifies.
I read her over 20 years ago. I own everything she has written. I loved the fountainhead, as it was a bit more world aware. Her later works showed her true colors, including “Anthem”.
She is the personification of Narcissistic Personality Disorder and Anti-Social Personality Disorder COMBINED, and everything she has written celebrates pathological sociopathy.
DEEGANTO, finally found someone who makes sense of what he says.. thankyou for just that.
Sorry J. Blanco, but I have to disagree! You may not like the quote but as a *cartoon* this addition is beautifully drawn and fantastic in its use of colour! It also gives a playful twist to something a bit sinister-sounding (as you pointed out).
Personally, I think being a bit selfish or defying the rules of society can be a good thing. Being too selfless, all the time, just leads to feelings of emptiness from giving too much and not looking after your own emotional needs (I’m thinking here of “The Feminine Mystique” theory about unhappy 1960s housewives). Also, if women didn’t challenge social conventions, they would never have gotten the chance to vote!
Ayn Rand is definitely an evocative name – I was incredibly curious to see the quote once I saw the name. Thinking about the quote from the vantage point of her political beliefs helps the quote carry a bit more punch, I think.
I have read Atlas Shrugged. It’s a marathon of a read, but it’s a good story, even if you don’t agree with her philosophically and politically. While the story was not enough to sway me politically one way or the other, it did force me to really think deeply about what I believed and why. I would recommend it.
Years ago I dabbled with Photoshop – it was fun but I should keep my day job. This one reminds me of an entry I once made on Worth1000.
http://fx.worth1000.com/entries/299596/where-there-is-a-will
I admit I drew this just from reading the quote and not researching who Ayn Rand was. Regardless of her philosophy, I think it’s a great quote about willpower and determination which also ties in with the previous comic.
You don’t need to apologize for the quote. Even people with the worst of ideals can say something worth remembering sometimes.
Ignore the political folks who want you to remain ignorant. If you agree that her philosophy is central to people who disagree with you, then you should learn it to understand their perspective. If you only accept that her belief is frequently referenced, then you should understand it to learn how it is being misapplied.
Or you could be like me and read The Fountainhead simply because it’s a work that’s been highly praised by a good portion of the population over almost a hundred years. Whether or not you agree with the philosophy it is well written and gripping.
I have not yet read Atlas Shrugged though I’m fairly certain I shall at some point.
I concur Joel. Even Sun Tzu famously said in his “Art of War”
“It is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you will not be imperilled in a hundred battles; if you do not know your enemies but do know yourself, you will win one and lose one; if you do not know your enemies nor yourself, you will be imperilled in every single battle.”
See http://refspace.com/users//The_Art_of_War for more such quotes.
Ayn Rand is a very polarizing person. In America at least, I find that people love or hate her almost entirely because of their personal political philosophy. Conservatives love her and defend Objectivisim, Liberals loathe her and say that Objectivisim is crap.
The best quote I’ve seen about Objectivisim comes from a demotivational poster. It reads:
“OBJECTIVISIM – The Rich and Powerful Don’t Need Instructions on How to Be Self-Righteous Assholes” (http://www.motifake.com/58834)
Whether you think the quote is hilarious or completely shallow and unfair, it makes the main point about Objectivisim in American politics: The philosophies of Ayn Rand offer a convenient way for SOME Conservatives to justify a near-sociopathic lack of empathy. The whole concept of “Let the uninsured die in the street” stems directly from an Objectivist interpretation of the situation: The doctors have the right to be paid, and the hospital has the right to make a profit, so those who can’t afford care have no claim to it. If they die, they die, but that’s not the Doctor’s fault for demanding compensation.
Accurate? Yes. A reasonable solution to healthcare in America? Sure, as long as you don’t mind stepping over corpses on your way into the ER.
My (obviously biased) opinion aside, I would suggest an excellent article by John Scalzi. He offers a much more balanced view of Ayn Rand in his review of Atlas Shrugged: http://whatever.scalzi.com/2010/10/01/what-i-think-about-atlas-shrugged/
Generally speaking, I’d suggest reading a LOT of what Scalzi writes. He’s a very smart man.
“Let the uninsured die in the street” is a strawman.
Notice how insurance is not healthcare, doctors provide healthcare, insurance is just how one pays for it.
Socialist programs result in fewer doctors, fewer nurses, worse care care and fewer people getting treatment and living.
They result in panels determining rationing schema like waiting periods (let the people die in the streets waiting years for a treatment they need now) or declaring that women under 50 should not get mammograms and so on.
It’s not a strawman. I live in the bay area, I make five grand a year, I’m well below the poverty line and work darn hard and for the aforementioned darn little. Despite this and the affluent area I live in, there’s no dental care for what I need, and even the dental low-cost clinics are either full or simply tell me to “find a better job”. In this economy, and when the daily pain sometimes makes it hard to think, and interviews don’t wait for you to have a “good day” to come in looking for employment. The state went the conservative route to try and solve it’s debt problem, which meant slashing funding to health care, and where this “socialist” system before at least meant that you could be seen eventually, after the belt-tightening measures you’re not seen at all.
However if I go the randian path and take what I need, I’m a criminal. If I break into one of those wealthy homes, rob them of their wealth, sell it for the surgery that I need, and spend the rest on others who need it, I’d be arrested. However I would simply be doling out what was done to me, and by Rand it would be fine. I would have the will, the resources, and nobody’s going to LET me loot their places, the family itself would have to STOP me… which is why I’d go for the place when nobody’s home. Hey, by Randian law it’s their own fault, if they cared about their belongings, they should have invested in a security system worth its’ salt. By that token the police should be fine with me if I got away with it- in fact in a Randian world there should BE no police. You want compensation for what you do, and if my means are not enough to compensate you, I would seek the means to do so from those who can not defend their wealth. And yet when I pose this idea the moneyed sort in the area get all cagey, saying “That’s not the Objectivest way”. Ah, so it is only the objectivist way when you already have the power and funds? Interesting, interesting.
But the kicker? The most down and dirty socialist place I’ve ever lived? The most rotten commie-imitating corner of the globe? The most disgusting nanny state ever to rear it’s pinko-liberal-hippie-tree-hugger head? That? Would be the military base I spend a good chunk of my life on. You had a house, you had food and clothes you could afford, you had schools and public works and community events out the wazoo. You never needed to fear being sick- and the doctors weren’t the “I’ve spent a million dollars, so I’m right about whatever I say” sort, they knew they were human and fallible. You were also expected to have your house neat, obey laws which were downright stupid in some cases, and had less choice in the discounted products brought to you.
Strawman indicates that the argument has no merit. Well tell me, for it to have no merit then I’d be able to take the wealth I need from others if I still couldn’t find a better-paying job. Or who among the moneyed class would give me the 2500$ I need in return for the work I’ve done, and for the work I’d do to repay them?
Fura, you clearly know virtually nothing about Ayn Rand, or her philosophy. Your comment that “I go the randian path and take what I need, I’m a criminal. If I break into one of those wealthy homes, rob them of their wealth, sell it for the surgery that I need, and spend the rest on others who need it, I’d be arrested. However I would simply be doling out what was done to me, and by Rand it would be fine.” Nonsense! If you know her philosophy, then this statement is an outright lie. I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt, and assume that you don’t know her philosophy, and thus are simply mistaken, instead of a deliberate liar. Ayn Rand was a staunch defender of individual rights, and was quite clear in stressing that in order for your rights to be respected by others, YOU must respect their rights as well. According to her philosophy: NO! You may not violate someone else and break into their home and steal their property!
You also state “In a Randian world there should be no police.” You couldn’t be more wrong. Ayn Rand frequently spoke about what she considered the 3 proper functions of government: the military, to protect our rights from foreign aggressors; the police, to protect our rights from internal (criminal) aggressors, and a judicial system to settle disputes, both criminal and civil.
The quote used here is to illustrate determination and perseverance in the attainment of your legitimate goals – not your illegal ones. Misinterpretation is a risk when a quote is taken out of context. Still, the degree of malevolence exhibited in your comments, in an effort to denigrate Ayn Rand and her philosophy, makes me suspect that there is more to your grossly inaccurate statements, besides a simple misinterpretation.
Excellent work Gavin! And the cartoon content really puts an interesting spin on the quote. Love that it fits to the poster!
Anthem is a very good read of her’s as well. The crux of Anthem ties into her Objectivism philosophy very well, in my opinion, and helps to illustrate a little more clearly her stand on Objectivsm and altruism.
I tried reading Atlas shrugged & stopped sometime after page 100. It never rang true, it felt intensely contrived, & I was disagreeing with the writer the whole time.
But, that’s my personal take. I’d expect others to have different experiences.
I’m not an atheist, though I can see where the mindset comes from, Rand somehow felt as if she was trying to justify her every opinion to herself.
I never got far with any of Rand’s books, I have to admit. Like the commenter above me, I felt they were contrived. The quote rocks, though.
But I still have a book recommendation: Matt Ruff’s Public Works trilogy where Ayn Rand plays an important part (as a sort of ghost in a lamp). It’s a strange, hilarious book with much food for thought.
Gavin and commenters on Zen Pencils:
I recently discovered the site and must admit Im quite taken with it. I love it.
However I must say Im on the side of those that disagree with this drawing. After quotes from many intelligent and brilliant people I have to put up with Ayn Rand. The art is good in relation to the quote. Im not here to diss on that. But I must voice out that you should take down this particular post. In context with Rands philosophy this doesnt just advocate to willpower or a “bit of selfishness” whis is always good. Rand loves selfishness, and not just a bit, but a lot. Her novels are not worth reading if you look for literary value. They are popular because the Rand Institute has run a shameless promotion campaign of her work and philosophy for more than forty years; pushing huge amounts of money and forcing education facilities to use them. Anybody remember the damage that Alan Greenspans policies wrecked on the american economy? He is a faithfull devotee of objectivism. Im a postgraduate student of philosophy. I started researching Rand a couple of years ago and Im insulted that she is described as a philosopher. She isnt respected in serious circles of either philosophy or literature. She is a good icon for right wing propaganda. Nothing more. If you want to feel good about caring only about your interests and the wellfare of noone else but you…read Rand…drink of Rands juices. It will give you good excuses to leave your kids, couples, not to worry about the poor or the infirm and be a “hero”, not a “parasite”.
Also. To those that say that her work has been twisted by the right wing in the united states in comparison to Nietzsches work by the nazis…it hasnt…the only parts that have been altered are the atheism bit. She not only hated democrats and socialists, she hated everybody, she hated conservatives and libertarians. Look it up.
As a final remark to all of you Rand defenders, she isnt really relevant outside of USA and Canada.
Its true that great words can come out of vile individuals… but this quote, when undestood for what it meant when it was uttered its frankly just out of tune with the general vibe of your wonderful drawings.
“But i must voice that you should take down this particular post”
Translates to:
“I do not agree with something, therefore, no one should talk about it”
This is what can lead to an overall decline in the intellectual value of a culture. Ever heard of the “Index Librorum Prohibitum”? Hiding an opinion and rendering it impossible to access does not take away it’s validity. It is exactly because you don’t agree with something that it should be taken out in public and dealt with. Then you can show the rest of us WHY you don’t agree with it.
Now, I, for one, am interested in an honest discussion of her ideas instead of demanding them to be hidden and dismissed. Why don’t you agree with her writings Zen Lucifer? Please, enlighten us! Unless you simply want to use your argument by authority and claim once again that “she isnt respected in serious circles of either philosophy or literature” (implying that we should not respect her either). As a postgraduate student in philosophy, you should know that these arguments are worth less then nothing.
Wow. I’m sorry but I can’t let this post go unanswered in what is clearly an attack on Objectivism and on Ayn Rand personally. Objectivism IS a valid philosophy. Obviously one you do not agree with, but your opinion does not invalidate its status.
I wish I could do an adequate job of defending Ayn Rand and her philosophy, but I’m a physicist and words are not my strong point
Besides, you didn’t offer much in the way of an argument, just “Me think she stupid”.
My advice to those who haven’t heard much about her or are uncertain where they stand is to read The Fountainhead and decide for themselves.
“I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
-Ayn Rand
I have to agree with you (except on the part on taking the post down, debate is good) I only want to point out that I mentioned the Nietzsche part because, not being an expert, I was inclined to give the benefit of a doubt.
And regarding Brad’s choice of quote… Well, that works until you are in need of a public service, such as police, or firemen… You know, people that live for the sake of others
Just an small grain of sand: As any philosohpy it doesnt’t work quite well if you take it as a whole instead of think about what it presents to you by yourself and use it afterward as a tool.
Ayn Rand has some great ideas about altruism and how to help people without wasting resources on burocracy and corruption, i have met many people in my life that follow some of her ideas (on purpose or not) and all are deemed men and women of good, working hard to help people and being of excellence or even genius class at it.
“Objectivism” is the NEW name given to what was originally termed “EGOISM”
Essentially, if you watch Ayn Rand speak for herself, you realize her self absorption, her self aggrandizment, and, essentially her overly inflated EGO.
Everything she professes is a personofication of pathological narcissism and anti-social personality disorder.
In only a FEW of her writings does she seem altruistic (mostly the fountainhead) everything else clearly shows she is a self absorbed and very using person that does not recognize no accomplishment is truly accomplished alone.
Thanks everyone – I appreciate the thoughtful and critical comments. I won’t be making the mistake again of not researching the author of a quote before I adapt it.
I don’t expect everyone to agree with what I post, and I don’t want quotes that are all sunshine and rainbows. The fact that this has triggered such passionate debate on both sides has taught me a lot, not just about Rand but about how a blog can create healthy discussion, which is always good right?
Your art is fantastic, and we’re all the better for it. Personally, I think you nailed it. Some subjects are polarizing, and there’s never a need for an artist to please everyone.
True, thanks Oliver.
Totally agree.
I forgot the essential in my initial comment: Thank you! Art should make us think, and challenge our assumptions, and you certainly managed that.
And debate is quite polite here, considering what we all have seen elsewhere, so…
Gav,
As a newcomer to your site, I am glad that you are adding your excellent artwork to a variety of quotes and poems. Not all of us will like, or agree with each one, and that is as it should be. A quote attributed to Voltaire: “I disagree with what you say, but will defend to the death your right to say it.” Keep the variety (and discussions) coming!
If everyone believed in what we did/said/thought – what fun would that be??? It would be like playing blackjack and winning every hand.
XKCD on Rand The mouseover text pretty well sums up my problem with her writing.
You know, I was kind of annoyed that you adapted someone’s words without even looking her up first, but let’s be honest. Depicting Ayn Rand as a grabby, selfish, greedy baby is sort of perfect.
This is by far the BEST quote on the subject, even if it is an insult to babies.
It seems that while Rand railed against others receiving assistance, she took full advantage of the system when she needed help.
http://boingboing.net/2011/01/28/ayn-rand-took-govern.html
I’ll be buying this one Gav- Rand may or may not be an arsehole ( honestly never heard of her before this post) but this poster seems like a bit of a feminist manifesto to me. Love your work
Ayn Rand was a self-serving pig of a woman who used pseudo-intellectualism to justify not helping others. She was thoroughly convinced that only the self-reliant deserved to live, right up until she had to apply for Social Security benefits in her old age when she was broke. So much for discounting the value of social safety nets.
Further, your cartoon is apt. Yes, that child is ingenious, and yes, is doing something absolutely dangerous. If we’re each on our own, as Rand fantasized, then truly we are collectively doomed.
Great cartoon, love your work
Awesome wise words fosho
The Conservatives in America who quote Ayn Rand are for the most part as clueless about her philosophy as you people who are raging on about her being a greedy arsehole. One of her central tenets is rational self interest and rational selfishness, not greed. This idea does take the form in her works that if a man works for something, it is his, whether it be money, an idea, or whatever, and he shouldn’t HAVE to share it with anyone if he doesn’t want to. Those conservatives have missed that point, and what they are doing is nothing more than greed and exploitation, which is not what Objectivism is about. They are exploitative arseholes who missed the part in her works that people who work for themselves do offer value in some form, as a product or a service. The twits in America are not offering value in any form, just ripping people off, and in that sense they are a lot closer to the villians in Rand’s works.
There is a quote from the History Boys which goes something like this, “The best moments in reading are when you come across something – a thought, a feeling, a way of looking at things – that you’d thought special, particular to you. And here it is, set down by someone else, a person you’ve never met, maybe even someone long dead. And it’s as if a hand has come out, and taken yours.” I felt like that through most of The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Her characters may be one-dimensional in terms of their alignment, but they serve as vehicles to drive her philosophy through fiction.
If you want a more accurate version of Objectivism, read The Fountainhead, as it deals with artistic expression, and is thus less open to misquoting than Atlas Shrugged, which deals with capitalism and money, a touchy subject for most people.
love this one
I love your work! I draw comics myself.. and you are truly an inspiration!
Also, FOUNTAINHEAD changed my life … anyone who understands it completely will end up having a completely new take on life
(regardless of who Ayn Rand was, and what she believed in, etc etc etc).
Actually, If you want to start with Ayn Rand, I’d start with ‘Anthem’ Its shorter, and I believe the two other novels expand on Anthems’ premise…
I think my brain just got +15XP .
OMG! — I didn’t see it before– Thanks a lot for doing it! — I just LOVE that quote and I’ve already expressed what I feel about your work– it’s amazing and I absolutely admire you! —
Lovely piece!
Keep up the good work!!
Cheers,
Luciana
Oh god–I’ve just read some of the other comments ….
I didn’t reseach at ALL before I sent you that quote, so sorry, I just took it on it’s own and gave it my own interpretation–
seems to have caused a little bit of a commotion — so sorry —
next time promise to do my homework and research! —
Cheers!
Luciana
I read Ayn Rand many many years ago. I enjoyed her novels. I’m a left leaning conservative, anti-establishment, flowered hippy, and sacrificed to the 1969 revolution. But controversy still rules!
Knowing little of Rand other than that she is a dystopian author, this sounds rather sinister…
When I read Rand, I was fascinated by her ideas at first. But later I noted one weak point in her story. It never involved children. Only hero, heroine and their theories. When I tried putting a child in, I saw it never fit anywhere in that world. That i think is a loophole in whatever concept she developed.
Rand’s philosophy would be disastrous if actually implemented; unregulated capitalism ALWAYS rapes the Earth because its only god is profit.
Also, although Ayn Rand believed entirely on standing on one’s own feet and never asking anyone for anything, she died in poverty and dependent on Medicare.
Well, you’re half-right. Capitalism’s only god is profit.
As far as ALWAYS raping the earth goes, it kinda misses the point. Capitalism is like a tsunami or a flood: it moves in the direction a lot of subtle factors push it, but doesn’t have consciousness of its own to make an opinion. Government regulations are like breakwalls, preventing damage to important areas, but the rest of the time, it’s just better to let it go.
If the Nile didn’t flood twice a year, Egypt wouldn’t have a place to plant their crops, but that doesn’t mean we should let Cairo and the pyramids wash away.
My response to her would have been to set fire to her house and tell her to put the fucking fire out herself and don’t call the fire department and use my tax dollars to save your house.
There are two kinds of people.
Liberals who think they understand Ayn Rand.
And Conservatives who actually do.
Objectivism does not reject compassion, charity, or basic human decency. It rejects the notion that people have a “right” to demand these from one another. It rejects the Comtean notion of morality, that “selflessness” is the highest moral standard, that if something is done for a selfless end, that makes it righteous. Why? Because people have committed unspeakable blasphemies against other human beings and considered it morally justified because they did it out of “compassion.” “But It’s for the CHILDREN” is one recurring incarnation of that inhuman heresy.
Hi Gav!
I bought this print as a gift to my best friend. I’ve never heard of this quote, nor of Ayn Rand and her political stand! All I knew was that this drawing reminded me of my friend and his determination to beat the odds in his life. Needless to say, he absolutely loved the gift! Will send you a pic of it hung up on his wall : )
That’s great, thanks!
Wow. Just amazed by the unrelenting hate and bile spewed at Ayn Rand. Not surprised, just amazed. The one thing not mentioned here is how objectivism actually works in it’s design. It’s not about taking from others, it’s not about greed, or destroying other people’s ability to live. It is about the basic idea that “a man has the right to his own sweat.” Meaning that if you earn it, or make it, or build it: it is yours. That no one has the right to take from you what you have worked for against your will. If everyone thought that way, there would be no poverty. Because business owners would constantly hiring people to fill demand, or research new ideas. Because everyone would have a job to better their own lives. Payrolls would be higher and more competitive to lure the best workers to the companies that want them. The world would be a better place for everyone, because everyone would be working to make their part of it better. If you read Atlas Shrugged you will see that the only reason the Objectivist hero fails initially, is because Collectivists (liberals, socialists, democrats) do everything they can to make sure that he fails, because they believe that him succeeding where others have not is somehow unfair. The central plot of the novel concerns a man creating a new material called Rearden Metal (named after himself), which is lighter, stronger, more durable, more conductive, and cheaper to make than steel. The leftists in the government at first try to discredit it, then try to destroy his ability to use it, and then finally try to take it for themselves. Their actions push both Mr. Reardon and the rest of the nation deeper into debt and destitution. When, if they had just left him alone, Reardon Metal would have revived the rail industry, fixed the electric problems, and advanced aeronautics by decades. Not to mention created millions of new jobs and pulled the nation at least partially out of it’s depression.
That is what Objectivism tries to teach us, that true greatness in both society and business comes from allowing the exceptional to be exceptional. And not trying to limit or punish them for their success. That exceptional people make the world a better place for everyone, and that everyone has the right to pursue their own excellence, without fear of reprisal from those who value the easy way. The Atlas in Atlas shrugged is the innovators, inventors, artists, and creators that hold the world up. The Shrugged is when (in the plot of the book) the grow tired of being fined, overtaxed, overregulated and controlled by collectivists and quit. Just quit and leave the world to it’s fate. Which isn’t a very pleasant fate, because after all, what would the world be like if all those people left? A very timely question, considering that the Occupy Wall Street movement, and the Union War on Business has caused a few business owners to ask the question “Maybe John Galt had the right idea. Maybe Atlas Shrugged had a point. We don’t deserve to be called monsters in every public square just because we have money. Why shouldn’t we just leave?”
Watch the filmed interview with her and see if your rhetoric still holds water……
What a wonderful comic this one is. Reading through your entire collection (and I simply llove it!) and this made me smile. I guess what i really liked in the comic is that it reminded me of when i read and enjoyed Rand as a teenager figuring out my own philosophy in life. Sure she’s not 100% right but she makes some good points about livi for ourselves and not others. I also suspect if you hadn’t written her name, many commentators would have been praising you instead of expressing disappointment.
First of all, congratullations on your drawings, I love them. Althought I didn’t really liked the quote, the fitness folk here may find it interesting that ayn rands philosophy inspired mike mentzer’s whole training philosophy. Althought I hate the shit out of him, he was probably the most intelligent bodybuilder ever and certainly on of the most influential ones, at least in theoretical grounds.
Not a fan of Ayn Rand, she was a pretty awful human being. But taken apart from who said it, this is a great quote. Just goes to show that even a stopped clock is right twice a day.
omg i love this one!
“I doubt it was because of the merits of the novels. These books, especially the second one (and various essays), amount to a manifesto of a political view that promotes rational self-interest above anything else; in other words, extreme materialism. She scorned the concept of community and even depicted greedy capitalists as a persecuted group. Therefore she is often quoted by those who believe in “laissez-faire capitalism” (read “unregulated greed”).
Alan Greenspan, the influential Federal Reserve boss who engineered the dotcom bubble of the 1990s and the real estate bubble of the 2000s, was a lifelong fan.
In general, according to Rand, the only purpose of your life is your own happiness. Her “objectivism” basically rules out moral values. Whatever is good for you is also morally right. If you are an altruist, you are something akin to a genetic mistake and deserve to fail. Passages of her philosophical meditations read like footnotes to something that Nietsche (“the concept of man as a heroic being” sounds a lot like the ubermensch) or even Hitler (survival of the fittest race) could have written, minus the racist overtones. And her dogmatic tone frequently echoes the Lenin-Stalin kind of communist propaganda, but she probably didn’t know or it was common in her times to use that tone.”
http://ieet.org/index.php/IEET/more/scaruffi20120820
So does the western yoga community, westernized buddhism, neo-advaita, and my estranged polish wife.
See, our current social structure, how people act toward one another, it’s all “Objectivism” according to Rand’s beliefs.
Look around you, see the reuslts of the world NOW, and wonder if you still support Ayn Rand’s views on philosophy and life.
This comic is ADORABLE!!!
Do with Rand what everyone does with every great thinker – take what you will, take what is good, take the best of each sentiment, and embrace that. The Dalai Lama allowed the CIA to fund a covert guerilla force with the intent of retaking Tibet – that doesn’t make his observations on the absurdity of man’s pursuits less relevant. Che Guevara could be astonishingly ruthless – it doesn’t nullify his comment that the true revolutionary must be motivated by the greatest of love. Rand could be extraordinarily cold – but she also opened her home to a Japanese American family in need of a place to stay, and was extraordinarily generous in her private life in many cases. Take the good, discard the bad, ignore the rest.
Gravity.
One of Ayn Rand’s favourite sayings was “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed.”, probaby originated by Francis Bacon.
That cartoon seems like the US government’s scheming to get people into houses they could not afford, the whole scheme collapsed and hurt the very people they claimed to be helping – poor people.
I loved Atlas Shrugged. I hated The Fountainhead deeply. It presents lots of problems for me, and what Rand tries to showcase as virtue of integrity sounds like pure stubborness to me. Atlas Shrugged was, in my opinion, far better. Still has things I don’t agree with, but most of the time I did. With The Fountainhead, I wanted to slap half the casting, starting with the protagonist.
William Cain, I completely agree with you. Rand has a lot of good things to say. And a lot of nasty things go say, and a lot of stuff I disagree with. I understand where she came from, and even if I am a socialdemocrat in politics, I admire much of her philosophy.
Still, The Fountainhead was a horrible reading. Roark needs a bit of social skills. And clients who choose to buy what they like deserve respect for not wanting to live in LeCorbusieresque buildings.
I disagree, Fountainhead was better than Atlas as far as I’m concerned. Atlas just went on far too much. And yes, people should live in the buildings they like, but Roark saw buildings as an expression of peoples’ souls. He felt they could cage people as surely as a bad philosophy, and he wanted them to see what he saw. Was he right, wrong? That’s immaterial. The lesson of Fountainhead isn’t about architecture at all, it’s about remaining true to what drives you, not allowing it to fall apart because others disbelieve it. If you can find it in yourself to live this way, there is an oddly freeing and joyful moment to it. I live this way. I gave up a free ride at college because I couldn’t stand the philosophy it presented to me. I had to live my life. I have given up much – money, comfort, the ability to do things.
But in my years since this choice, I have traveled from North Carolina to California. I have fought for peoples’ rights to get married no matter their gender. I have written and contributed to writings denouncing the horrible things people can do to people in the name of conformity. I have lived, and I wouldn’t trade it for anything.
Roark probably could have used some social graces. But in his words to Toohey, “But I don’t think of you,” I found a weapon that freed me from a lot of the crushing weight this world had put on me. The fear of what my parents would think if they knew I am a gay, atheist, secular humanist? It’s gone. I’m out to my family on both of these points, and I am safer and happier for it.
Can everyone do this? SHOULD everyone? Not really. We have to do what is best for us, first and always. That’s the message to take. I have given up much for this cause I have embraced, because that’s what my mind needed. I wouldn’t be alive at all if I hadn’t, of this I’m sure.
So take what you need, take what you can. I disagree with your reading of Roark, but I experienced Fountainhead at a very different place in my life.
Social Democrats aren’t too bad, honestly. We agree with the ends, it’s the means we’re working out. We’ll find the best way together eventually.
As for the claims Rand came crawling back to the system when she was broke, that’s nonsense. Her books were highly successful even toward the end of her life, and she lived well. there is indeed some evidence she took medicaid or medicare (not sure which), but this is not inconsistent with her value system. She said repeatedly that if the government has required you to contribute to a system, and you later qualify for that system, there is no shame in using it if it is available. Is it ideal? No. But there is no moral failing in it. She had a very lovely home and staff to work it even toward the end of her life, and the estate she left behind was able to start what became the Ayn Rand Institute, so to suggest she was somehow destitute is simple ignorance of even the most cursory look at the facts.
As for entirely self-serving, again hardly. She allowed people who were down on their luck to live with her for extended periods on several occasions, I believe. She had an intensely generous nature, one that was tempered by bitterness over the frankly hateful reactions she received to some of her work.
Gav et al.,
I have read both Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged multiple times. I think it is unfortunate to declare that there is nothing of value in her works based on the fact that there are flaws. For that matter, Newtonian physics is also flawed, but do we throw it out because it breaks down under certain circumstances? No, we learn it as one of a gamut of tools we have for understanding our world. We throw it into the mix with Quantum Physics and Relativity and Rheology and we apply the correct theorem to the correct circumstance. A single idea, theory, philosophy, or theorem has yet to apply to every single known (and unknown) circumstance in this world.
I was not raised well off, personally, and have been supporting myself since I was 14. Ayn Rand’s philosophy has always helped me get up and keep going another day, and I have clawed my way up to being an engineer with a steady (modest) paycheck and a happy family. Rest assured, I do not take these possessions for granted. Nor do I take for granted that it was social programs in many instances that helped me. No person ever truly achieves anything all on their very lone. Ever, there are communities behind us that help us. Rand presents a lot of concepts all jumbled together, so her communication is poor for anyone who is not on the same wave length. Yes, she does value self fulfilment with an eye toward long term happiness. She is also heavily in favor of a separation between state and individual interests. However, saying that an individual is free to do whatever they like with their time and wealth and then saying that they cannot give to those they wish to give to is a contradiction, and she would not have liked that. Faced with the concept that a person who earned their keep was truly happy about giving the value they worked for to another, she would be forced to admit that she had no control over how the money was spent because it was not her own. Ayn Rand had a rough childhood. Some of us never eat another vegetable because our parents forced them on us, and we forgive this of individuals as a society. Ayn Rand and her family were FORCED to participate in a communist state where her individuality was NEVER a higher priority than that of the community. This might have left a bad taste in her mouth, kinda like vegetables, and it’s unfortunate that some of us abstain from things like that because vegetables can be tasty and giving to others is good for the soul.
Applying objectivism blindly as your only philosophy will tear you to ruin because it is flawed. However, using it to find pride in your work and yourself, using it to value your money and your time no matter who you are, and using it to say to yourself that your own brain is the equal of any other man’s and therefore your opinions and decisions are your own, is extremely powerful.
This applies however small your work is. I know Ayn Rand is touted as a champion for the well to do, but read her works and find that she is a champion for anyone who wants to take pride in a job well done, and read her works and discover that this pride becomes a kind of humility, because the most moral of her characters would rather work for a pittance at menial tasks when destitute and earn what they have than accept charity. This is a reasonable expectation of able bodied, able minded people.
How many of us, if we lost our jobs tomorrow, would be willing to go flip burgers to pay the bills? Is this because the work is hard, or is it because when we go from something like Project Management or Market Research to working at McDonald’s that we feel less valuable as people? Many people would rather accept unemployment, quietly, privately, than admit that we had lost something we gained and take pride in building it back from scratch. We would forgive ourselves the transgression of letting a power bill or two slip or charging it to a credit card, using false value, rather than face the alternative of stocking a store shelf to create immediate value. I have watched both my parents refuse good jobs and good money and live in even greater poverty rather than put in the hard work of doing the job that was readily available tomorrow. They decided that it was beneath them. I think that is a tragedy. Because of that point of view, a subtle, mild caste system persists in the US today, and it would not have to. If we truly valued opportunities for everyone, then we would not look down our noses on those who are working for minimum wage, we would ask them how their feet feel and how their babies are. These are the things that make us human, and Ayn Rand’s philosophies can help you see past position, possessions, etc, and value a person for the work they do and the value they create.
To me, Ayn Rand teaches that we each truly have the ability, regardless of how we start, to achieve something grand. To me, she teaches that we are all valuable, no matter what we do for a living, and that we should all expect to be valued, that we are all peers by original capacity if not by achievement.
Great comment, thank you Sydney
Given the amount strong opinions i won’t add much opinion. Am commenting on this thread for this Original Comment is what i find most similar.
Anyway, if you still** haven’t read her book, my suggestion is to instead subscribe to her fb page or some other stream of regular quotes and then pick a book out of which quote you like most.
Like somebody else mentioned i read Atlas Shrugged before Fountainhead* and think it is more rigorous(in character depiction) of her ideas and principles than Fountainhead and would recommend that.
* — I haven’t read anything outside. Did try reading Anthem but gave up.
** — because this comic is a year old, no other insinuations intended
OOps forgot the fb page link here it is .. https://www.facebook.com/AynRandInstitute/posts/10151605920137534
Note this on Rand’s commitment to those who do good work, no matter how small, Gav: in Atlas Shrugged, there is a character who is a simple fishwife who dedicates herself to being a fishwife (and I think a mother, but don’t hold me to that, some time since I read thebook). this character is held up as Dagny’s moral equal despite not being super wealthy or economically accomplished. Rand herself said this character represents HER in the book. Not Dagny, not any of themain characters, a totally humble fishwife.
I loved reading Atlas Shrugged, even though I disagreed with a lot of what was said.
She is very persuasive. It will make you think twice about neo-socialism.
Ayn Rand is definitely controversial both in her times and still. And I’m sure you can see the pattern of the controversial unappreciated outspoken person who later turns out to be right but no one listened to her except a few. And the same pattern exists around the figure of Ayn Rand.
And also, what she was saying wasn’t new. She just did it in an amazing way, in two books that had extreme depth as well as the cheesy allure of a soap opera. I became ensnared by her two books and I’ve read them about 5 times each. And every time I re-read those books, I could do nothing but be insanely involved with them and can barely put the books aside till I was finished.
What she was saying was what the founding fathers of the United States were saying about individual rights and liberty. Well, not all the founding fathers, even back then we had the left and the right idealogical factions. Maybe that’s just how it’ll always be, like yin-yang, the two opposite forces constantly swirling around one another but never fully coming together, yet each has some aspect of the other within them. That’s an interesting idea, imagine thinking of government politics as just another unavoidable consequence of the Tao.
Anyways, here are some more Ayn Rand quotes which I think you might find interesting:
“A creative man is motivated by the desire to achieve, not by the desire to beat others.”
“The smallest minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities.”
“Achievement of your happiness is the only moral purpose of your life, and that happiness, not pain or mindless self-indulgence, is the proof of your moral integrity, since it is the proof and the result of your loyalty to the achievement of your values.”
“To say ‘I love you’ one must first be able to say the ‘I’”
“People create their own questions because they are afraid to look straight. All you have to do is look straight and see the road, and when you see it, don’t sit looking at it – walk.”
“Money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver.”
“the hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody had decided not to see.”
These are all quotes from just those two books, and there’s more. Almost every paragraph is full of some deep wisdom/truth that you naturally see as truth but never realized it was so until someone said it for you.
I personally believe that her philosophy and she herself had many faults. And those faults might be less forgivable because she was the ultimate advocate for non-contradictory reason. And so when you find things about her that is contradictory, or things that you wouldn’t consider as the views of a “good human being” then your heart sinks a little because it’s like finding a flaw in something that you wished desperately was perfect.
But I and very many still find her to be one of the most valuable people in their lives. What I think happened is that she wrote all this stuff in a time where the entire world was trying out the socialist experiment. Even while FDR was denouncing communism in Europe and Asia, he was establishing the same principles here with the great deal and the creation of the welfare state. Ayn Rand escaped from Russia after seeing the horrific results of Communism on people’s souls and lives and came to this country that she considered as a safe haven from all of that brute forced establishment of brother love and sharing that was going on in an entire nation. She came here and she was seeing the beginnings of the same ill-conceived notions and she wanted to warn everyone of the dangers and ultimate consequences of the socialist agenda.
But the US was too busy hating the enemy that it itself was slowly becoming.
And now we’re having banking crisis and wasteful use of ecological disasters and large corporations scheming with politicians to get away with stupid harmful legislation that harms the individual but puts more money into people’s pocket, people who are trying to seek self-worth from their money.
It’s scary when you read Atlas Shrugged how much of what she says is very similar to what’s going on right now and will keep continuing to go on.
I love your stuff, thank you for creating something so wonderful.
MMISLAM101, and others, please do more research on the author you are idolizing…
I too was entranced by Ayn Rand when I first read the Fountainhead. I had never read a more powerful affirmation of the moral reason behind self-interest and self-expression. I read the book straight through in a few days… I couldn’t put it down except to eat and sleep.
I think part of the fascination was that I had been raised in a home where I was always taught to suppress what I wanted in favor of what others wanted. My parents, teachers, religious leaders, older relatives… all had more of a right to decide my values, thoughts and how I spent my time than I did. So I think I desperately needed a reason to feel that I could decide who I was and what I wanted without guilt. (Does any of this sound familiar to you?)
The one thing that bothered me was the violent rape scene between the supposed hero and heroine…. but oh, well, she “wanted” it so it must have been OK.
Fast forward a few years and I got around to reading Atlas Shrugged. This was less engrossing. A much slower start, for one thing, less developed characters, and a less interesting female lead. Much more about politics and world events. Which would have been fine, until the ending. The “heroes” of the book rebel against the current system, which is fine… but in the process they simply kill anyone in their way! Not just those who threaten them, but those who simply work for the old system… they are “not men” and not deserving of life. The heroes kill them without a second thought, and the author makes it clear she does not think they are killing human beings.
Sadly, a little more research revealed that these supposedly small glitches in her moral code were much, much worse than I suspected. Rand was a sort of a cult leader, with tremendous power and control over her little band of followers – even though she said there is no one lower than “the man who goes after power.” Even worse, though, she was also an ardent admirer of a complete sociopath, William Edward Hickman.
I won’t go into all the details of Hickman’s crimes, nor the extent to which Rand gushed over him and praised him. You can google their names and easily find that. Suffice to say, Hickman kidnapped and murdered a 12-year-old girl, tricked her father into thinking she was still alive, then took the ransom money and dumped the hacked-up pieces of the child in front of the horrified father. His capture and trial fascinated many people, among them, Ayn Rand. She said this murderer was the inspiration for more than one of her heroes, that she admired him for having “no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred… the true, innate psychology of a Superman.” Because he cared nothing for any other human being, she said he had “a “genuinely beautiful soul.”
Given that Rand herself said that you can judge a person’s soul by what she loves, admires, and is drawn to… and that her philosophy was the deepest expression of her soul… what do you suppose her admiration of Hickman says about her?
Rand dressed up her philosophy to make it seem noble, sort of, if you squint and blur some of the grimy parts. I think this allows many of her readers, who are idealistic and searching, to project their own morality onto her. She herself had no empathy, or integrity. She has many quotes, (like the one used in this adorable cartoon) that seem admirable when taken out of context. But her philosophy as a whole is a horror. From the cult members whose lives she twisted, to Alan Greenspan, to all of the Republican Tea Party idiots who worship her, those who embrace her ideas too enthusiastically seem to endorse the worst kind of human behavior. If you’re going to read her work, (and I did, and still enjoy some parts of it), take away the good bits – but leave the rest behind. She was a sociopath, writing for sociopaths.
GAV, sorry for the length of this post… I do love the cartoon above, and I love all the work on this site – it’s truly amazing! I was especially moved by the long Bill Hicks quote, and the response from his brother. You have phenomenal taste in quotes
my objections to one author notwithstanding. Thanks so much for creating such an inspiring site.
Thanks for the comment
Oh man you captured this quote perfectly. I read Atlas Shrugged as a form of escapism during my Physics MSc 3rd Year finals, and it was a lifesaver.
Rand is definitely a controversial figure as can be seen by the flood of comments about her, but I can still wholeheartedly recommend her works. Atlas Shrugged completely changed my perspective of money, and reaffirmed my conviction to become an entrepreneur.
I’d suggest Atlas Shrugged! It’s a long, but good read.
It is terribly amusing that so much vitriol in this flood of comments is spewed out towards an author who spends 1,200 pages in Atlas Shrugged telling people “Check your premises” and more generally “Think for yourself”, while espousing the values of half the Founding Fathers of the U.S. (the Jeffersonian, rather than Hamiltonian sorts), and asserting that not a single person is born with a saddle on their backs, destined to be ridden for the ease of others.
Rand was far from being perfect as a human being, (a trait shared by ~100% of the politicians those who hate her admire so much), but her central “sin” was not being “mean”, but having the annoying habit of constantly pointing out that all ideas have foundations — and that the prettiest and most beguiling idea in the world is simply an airy-fairie castle in the clouds, if the premises that it is based on are false in reality.
In the abstract, Rand is hated most because she had a very annoying way of asking “What’s behind that curtain, over there?”, or “It’s a lovely statue of a horse, but has anyone thought to ask why they gave it to us, or why it has a trap door?”
Rand, on questioning:
“The moral cannibalism of all hedonist and altruist doctrines lies in the premise that the happiness of one man necessitates the injury of another.”
“Freedom is the first requirement of ‘the public interest’…achievements rest on that foundation—and cannot exist without it.”
“Contradictions do not exist. Whenever you think you are facing a contradiction, check your premises. You will find that one of them is wrong.”
“Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a gun [compulsion] begins.”