Workable Objectivism (Ayn Rand)

[Altherion]

38 minutes ago, HoodedCrow said:

Didn’t Ayn Rand die in poverty, and on some sort of government assistance?

Yes and no. She signed up for Social Security and Medicare in her 70s, but she was not destitute and in fact left her estate (including the copyright to most of her works) to her favorite disciple who kept the books in print and set up an institute to promote her ideas.

[Kalbear]

15 minutes ago, Altherion said:

Yes and no. She signed up for Social Security and Medicare in her 70s, but she was not destitute and in fact left her estate (including the copyright to most of her works) to her favorite disciple who kept the books in print and set up an institute to promote her ideas.

Wait - she both took government handouts AND granted someone else her earned value without them giving her anything in return? 

Seriously, her nepotistically rewarding someone after her death is the most special antiobjectivist stance I've ever seen. Kudos to her on being her own best counterargument.

[Altherion]

I wouldn't say she didn't get anything in return -- she got the posthumous promotion of her ideas. Given that we're still talking about them decades after her passing, I'd say she got the best of that bargain.

[Br16]

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Planning for your next job as soon as you get your current job is a great way to be involuntarily accelerated to that next job.

Not if you're discreet. It's a free market, and every employee at the top of their game does it. 

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

Your first paragraph seems to suggest that people shouldn't ever get comfortable enough to buy a home or have a family. What a bleak and shitty way to go through life.

It's a simple reality, if you accumulate heavy obligations but serve at someone else's discretion, you're already courting crisis. The moment you realize this, the less bleak your life will be as more disciplined choices could be made.

2 hours ago, DanteGabriel said:

I guess I'm just a sucker that I believed our Mighty Capitalist with a Bold Vision when he reassured us repeatedly about the health of our company. I should have worked out the kind of high level connections and info sources that would have allowed me to know that our paycheck was going to bounce and that he'd stopped paying our health insurance premiums weeks before. And surely in your Randian Utopia, similarly misled and hoodwinked workers will have a way to press their grievances against a duplicitous owner.

You need to read between the lines. The moment he started reassuring you repeatedly of company viability (most likely without offering any verifiable proof), it was already over and all his promises were no longer reliable. 

Moreover, the health insurance provider is a third party, so querying them directly to gleam some info on the status of your company policy is always a good idea when things are in doubt. You might not get a response, or they might not be allowed to say, but chances are it might be revealed to you that the premiums have stop being paid. It was blind trust that ruined you, so in the future, spend more time discreetly asking around.

I understand you are at peak anger right now, and this thread probably feels like rubbing salt into old wounds- I knew it was going to be contentious- and I'm very grateful for your willingness to share your personal experiences to further the discussion.

 I strongly believe that your particular skill set is valuable in our digitalizing wold, and that with a bit of creativity, a lot of ambition and calm rationality, you may be a successful business owner in a few years, and you'll have all you ever wanted. Just understand that you have the opportunity to go from servant to master, something few have ever had in history no matter how talented they were.

[Br16]

@Altherion

Another thing is that she paid into both social programs. So it's not hypocrisy as some imply, she was only taking back what she paid in.

[DMC]

33 minutes ago, Altherion said:

she got the posthumous promotion of her ideas.

I'm not sure how much gain or "return" this is to an avowed atheist.

[maarsen]

6 hours ago, Altherion said:

I wouldn't say she didn't get anything in return -- she got the posthumous promotion of her ideas. Given that we're still talking about them decades after her passing, I'd say she got the best of that bargain.

Some people still argue the world is flat. The amount of time an argument has been around has no bearing on its legitimacy. 

 

 

 

 

[Larry of the Lawn]

7 hours ago, Br16 said:

 

 I strongly believe that your particular skill set is valuable in our digitalizing wold, and that with a bit of creativity, a lot of ambition and calm rationality, you may be a successful business owner in a few years, and you'll have all you ever wanted. Just understand that you have the opportunity to go from servant to master, something few have ever had in history no matter how talented they were.

 Just out of curiosity, what do you do for work?

[The Anti-Targ]

Job interview:

"So, Br16, how long have you been in your current job?"

"About 6 months"

"6 months you say? Why are you leaving?"

"Your job pays better."

"So does that mean if we hire you and you find a job in 6 months that pays better you'll leave?"

"Yes, of course, all employees at the top of their game do this. And I'm at the top of my game."

"OK, thanks for coming. I would say don't let the door hit you on the way out, but it seems you are an expert at using the exit."

[OldGimletEye]

11 hours ago, larrytheimp said:

 Just out of curiosity, what do you do for work?

Probably not for a real actual corporation. If he did, he'd probably know the C suite ain't always the ever wise and smart Randian super heros of his imagination.

[HoodedCrow]

Cersei was quite successful in some of her goals and made it to the top. Would you want to work for CEO Cersei? If we knew you would, it would not suggest great things about her employees. Isn’t she rather Randian?

I’m speaking as someone who is quite familiar with small, medium and large companies, and is a part owner currently. There were lots of dummies, lots of mistakes, recklessness or rigidity; shady guys no one would want to work with, unless your goal was to launder money, some who made it and blew it out of arrogance or illegality, and some really good guys , not supermen, who people like to work for, or make deals with, because they are known to be kind or fair to their employees, and trustworthy.

Some people are only good at start up, and some are better at maintenance. There were varied backgrounds, from mathematicians and programmers, to musicians.

Then there are CEOs who rip off employees, and make it off daddy’s money. There are vulture capitalists. Lay off situations can cause a lot of suffering. 

Also, a mature functional team is hard to replace, even if the labor seems cheaper.

This hooded crow has been around the boardroom.

[DanteGabriel]

I've come to realize @Br16 is either running an elaborate troll job or his armor of condescending bullshit has been constructed to Trumpian specifications. I'd like to know how he's applied these Randian principles to his own life and profited by it, since he makes it sound so easy.

Go on, @Br16, I've used examples from my own life, let's see what you've got.

[Heartofice]

Interesting that it’s the same group of people who dogpile on someone they disagree with and immediately go for the personal insults. I’m not in agreement with  @Br16 on this topic but they at least seem to want to discuss the matter with dignity and respect.

[OldGimletEye]

I don't know. Kind of reminds of wealthy people that spout Randian nonsense and then when people push back against Randian nonsense, those same wealthy people turn around and complain about "class warfare" when the truth is that Rand's philosophy is one of the biggest pieces of class warfare ever.

Pushing Randian nonsense might be politely stated. But, it is an insult to millions of people. That they might get a bit hot about it, should not be surprising.

[Larry of the Lawn]

17 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

Interesting that it’s the same group of people who dogpile on someone they disagree with and immediately go for the personal insults. I’m not in agreement with  @Br16 on this topic but they at least seem to want to discuss the matter with dignity and respect.

Funny how it's the same bs points of view that need to hide behind sea lioning.  It's also a entirely predictable result of trying to start a thread dedicated to discussing what might be good about Ayn Rand's ideas...which is absolutely nothing.

[Heartofice]

10 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

I don't know. Kind of reminds of wealthy people that spout Randian nonsense and then when people push back against Randian nonsense, those same wealthy people turn around and complain about "class warfare" when the truth is that Rand's philosophy is one of the biggest pieces of class warfare ever.

Pushing Randian nonsense might be politely stated. But, it is an insult to millions of people. That they might get a bit hot about it, should not be surprising.

The guy believes what he believes, might be naive and dumb to some people, but either ignore it or show them why they are wrong. 

Not surprising that it’s the same crowd who indulge in the odd spot of internet aggression and bullying. Not surprising at all.

[OldGimletEye]

4 minutes ago, Heartofice said:

The guy believes what he believes, might be naive and dumb to some people, but either ignore it or show them why they are wrong. 

Not surprising that it’s the same crowd who indulge in the odd spot of internet aggression and bullying. Not surprising at all.

When people like Paul "Numbers Guy" Ryan (a Randian fanboy) talks about the world being simply one of "makers and takers" that is pretty insulting to lots of people, particularly if you found yourself in an unemployment line right after the GFC. Ryan's language might not have had one f-bomb in it. It might not have contained one god dammit in it. It might have been stated very "civilly". But, in reality it was a pretty nasty thing to say about lots of people.

[Rippounet]

2 minutes ago, OldGimletEye said:

Pushing Randian nonsense might be politely stated. But, it is an insult to millions of people. That they might get a bit hot about it, should not be surprising.

Yeah, was about to post the same thing as OGE. Rand's "philosophy" is quite insulting to most people, and @Br16 hasn't exactly tried to nuance it.

It's a much milder version of the white supremacist being censored and/or punched in the face and then complaining about people not being "civil."
The core of the problem is that some ideas are inherently violent and that whatever dignity and respect the people defending them exhibit on the surface, the ideas themselves are still aggressive and will lead to proportional responses.

Rand's "philosophy" is that most people are parasites leeching off the super-geniuses of this world. How are the people described as parasites supposed to react exactly? To be fair, most people initially reacted by trying to joke about it. But @Br16 didn't take the opportunity to back off, so people are gearing toward a different kind of lesson.

Because what is the weakness of Randian "thought" ? People need each other, and human societies take that into account: the respect and influence a given individual can muster is not dependent on their material success alone, but also on what kind of person they are, i.e. how smart, how generous, and how kind they can be. In others words, one's social position is determined not just by one's personal competence, but also by one's ability to use that competence for the common good. Few people will give much respect to the Rand super-genius since said genius is very likely to show themselves to be an asshole. Because of that, Randian thought isn't a receipe for success, it's the kind of pride (/hubris) that is best hidden from everybody else. More importantly, I believe it's crucial for the future of our species for things to stay this way. Any attempt to reject human interdependence threatens our species as whole.

1 minute ago, Heartofice said:

The guy believes what he believes, might be naive and dumb to some people, but either ignore it or show them why they are wrong.

This belief also happens to touch upon the value of individuals. It's not just "naive and dumb," it can be summed up as seeking to demean other human beings.

 

 

[Heartofice]

5 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

It's a much milder version of the white supremacist being censored and/or punched in the face and then complaining about people not being "civil."
The core of the problem is that some ideas are inherently violent and that whatever dignity and respect the people defending them exhibit on the surface, the ideas themselves are still aggressive and will lead to proportional responses.

The guy seems to be polite and wants to engage with the subject and get outside ideas from what I can see, and congrats to anyone challenging his ideas.

By equating his ideas with violence you are just excusing poor behaviour from others and encouraging the nasty remarks seen upthread.  

Anyway I’ll duck out and leave you to it , i was interested in seeing Randian ideas challenged, I’m less interested in seeing personal bullying and mudslinging 

[OldGimletEye]

12 minutes ago, Rippounet said:

Yeah, was about to post the same thing as OGE. Rand's "philosophy" is quite insulting to most people, and @Br16 hasn't exactly tried to nuance it.

Yeah, let me elaborate on this a little further. Rand's philosophy goes beyond just arguing that free market economics is the best because it promotes economic growth or is the best in promoting human welfare.

It gets into basically arguing that there is something morally or ethically defective about all poor people. And that is insulting and not justified. And is very insulting even though nobody got called a mother fucker or an asshole or whatever.

So, I have really no problem telling Rand or her disciples to go jump in a lake.