On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:36:38 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:34:48 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:32:13 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:26:00 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > >> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > > > >>
> > > > >> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages..
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > > > >>
> > > > >> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > > > > Good morning, Michael.
> > > >
> > > > > To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> > > > > and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> > > > > thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> > > > > BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> > > > > last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> > > >
> > > > > Thanks.
> > > > At least this thread was useful to you.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Please excuse me. Sometimes I get so full of myself
> > > that I am absolutely no good to anyone else until I buy
> > > new shoes, which I’ll be attending to later this morning.
> > > Thank you all for your patience, and have a pleasant day.
> > Great news, have a good day, Corey.
> >
>
> Clarks.

The name of the shoe store?

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:38:13 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:36:38 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:34:48 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:32:13 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:26:00 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > > > > > Good morning, Michael.
> > > > >
> > > > > > To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> > > > > > and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> > > > > > thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> > > > > > BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> > > > > > last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > At least this thread was useful to you.
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > > Please excuse me. Sometimes I get so full of myself
> > > > that I am absolutely no good to anyone else until I buy
> > > > new shoes, which I’ll be attending to later this morning.
> > > > Thank you all for your patience, and have a pleasant day.
> > > Great news, have a good day, Corey.
> > >
> >
> > Clarks.
> The name of the shoe store?

I’m going to a Clark’s outlet in Pennsylvania.
http://clarksusa.com/

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:41:27 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:38:13 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:36:38 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:34:48 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:32:13 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 8:26:00 AM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> > > > > > Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef....@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means.. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > > > > > >>
> > > > > > >> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > > > > > > Good morning, Michael.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> > > > > > > and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> > > > > > > thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> > > > > > > BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> > > > > > > last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thanks.
> > > > > > At least this thread was useful to you.
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Please excuse me. Sometimes I get so full of myself
> > > > > that I am absolutely no good to anyone else until I buy
> > > > > new shoes, which I’ll be attending to later this morning.
> > > > > Thank you all for your patience, and have a pleasant day.
> > > > Great news, have a good day, Corey.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Clarks.
> > The name of the shoe store?
> I’m going to a Clark’s outlet in Pennsylvania.
> http://clarksusa.com/

I don't think we have those stores down here.

On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 10:04:53 PM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-11-09 9:56 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 3:45:04 PM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
> wrote:
> >> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
> wrote:
> >>> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> >>>
> >>> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when,
> along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an
> Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an
> Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an
> active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> >>>
> >>> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the
> champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were
> the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they
> bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would
> certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political
> demagogue.
> >>>
> >>> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates --
> who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist,
> and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes
> who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere
> with their designs.
> >>>
> >>> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her
> a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down
> considerably.
> >>>
> Your opening with the essay adda a nice personal touch, which I'm sure
> some would like, but I find it distracting. There's nothing in those
> varied reactions that I think needs or deserves comment.

I don't think that one can examine the work of Ayn Rand without touching on the topic of her alleged Nazism.

My English professor isn't the only one who has called her that. For instance, a Google search for "Ayn Rand, Nazi" brought up the following article from "The Spectator"; it's title is "Ayn Rand’s books are deliciously anti-statist, but her philosophy is borderline Nazi." https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ayn-rand-s-books-are-deliciously-anti-statist-but-her-philosophy-is-borderline-nazi/

Consider also this excerpt from an article in "The Washington Post" entitled "Ayn Rand was Wrong":

"When Atlas Shrugged'was published in 1957, Whittaker Chambers wrote what is perhaps the most famous, and most negative, review that any Rand book has ever received. He spoke witheringly of the dollar-sign worship, and argued that her vision of a ruling elite lording it over the weaker masses conjured up a kind of fascist nightmare: 'From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard . . . commanding: To a gas chamber -- go! This review was published in William F. Buckley Jr.'s conservative National Review, but the same sort of charge had long been dogging Rand from the other side of the ideological fence. In those years, when the left dominated the haute intellectual scene, anyone who was as fierce an anti-communist as Rand tended to be dismissed as a fascist, and in her case the label stuck.'"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1996/08/25/ayn-rand-was-wrong/5fd96b67-1cab-44ec-8b95-cb9637a129b7/

The article dismisses such charges as entirely unfounded, but they remain a part of her cultural identity -- making her the poster girl for Right Wing extremists, Neo-Nazis and skin-heads.

Another reason why Rand cannot be discussed apart from Nazism is the obvious parallels that exist between her heroes and Nietzsche's Übermensch -- which was co-opted by the Nazis as part of their campaign for racial supremacy. "The Fountainhead" was published smack in the center of WWII, which makes her "borderline Nazi" philosophy take on the added dimension of intellectual propaganda aimed at converting American intellectuals to the Nazi cause. I don't believe she was attempting to do this (or that she had any sympathies for a fascistic form of government), however, her novel *could* have been used by others for such purposes. In "This Is My God," Herman Wouk argued that Nietzsche was partially responsible for the Holocaust -- even though Nietzsche would have most likely been appalled that the Nazis were using his philosophical writings to support their goals. His reasoning was that it is an author's responsibility to ensure that his statements cannot be taken out of context and twisted into a screed of persecution against any group of people.

Both Howard Roark and John Galt place themselves above the law, and above the collective opinion (democratic majority) of what is "right" and "wrong" -- following Nietzsche's philosophical theory set forth in his essay, "Beyond Good and Evil," wherein he argues that "good" and "evil" (a.k.a., "right" and "wrong") are relative terms: what is "good" for one person may be detrimental to another (or to many others); and that each of us must chose what is best for us. Rand echoes this theory in her essay on "The Virtue of Selfishness" as well as in Roark and Galt's speeches.

Was Rand a Nazi? No. But both espoused similar philosophies.

> >>> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her
> downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read
> Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of
> the plot which ran something like this:
> >>>
> >>> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual
> motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his
> employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the
> exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh
> on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing
> that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on
> "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his
> compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's
> group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian
> pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and
> torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding
> political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society
> based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free
> himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his
> dreams.
> This is so far off that I actually believe that you read the book years
> ago; I think if you'd cheated and quickly read through a CliffsNotes or
> SparkNotes (sp), you'd probably have a better understanding of it.

Based on your own summary, below, I'm surprised that I've remembered it as well as I have.

> First of all, Atlas Shrugged (at least the first part) is a mystery
> story. There are 3 mysteries:
> (1) "Who is John Galt", the question everyone keeps asking but no one
> knows what it means.
> (2) What's causing the collapse of the economy? Who's behind it?
> (3) In part 2, who invented this miraculous motor?
> And you gave them all away in your first paragraph on the book.

Should I have posted a "Spoiler Alert"?

The mystery was captivating... however, the explanation was a galloping disappointment.

> Your summary of what Galt did is accurate enough; he worked at a motor
> plant, where he invented a new type of motor, but ended up leaving his
> job to go on "strike" and dedicated 12 years to finding others like him
> to join him. But I'm afraid you don't remember, or novel got in the
> first place, what the novel's about. It's not just about a novel about
> events; it has a theme. And I'm afraid that your essay doesn't give any
> evidence of understanding that theme. As a consequence you can't make
> sense of what Galt did -- you know what he did, but not why -- and
> you've tried to fill in the holes with your own original thoughts and
> speculations, about the evil fossil fuel companies and the like.

I'm sure that I was able to follow the novel's political message at the time. Rand's use of symbolism has been described (accurately) as "ham-fisted," and her heroes break into lengthy speeches in case anyone had missed the point. Thirty-odd years later, I no longer remember the philosophical and political points outlined in Galt's 100-page speech. I do remember that I preferred Roark's speech over Galt's. Roark's was more sociopathically narcissistic and callously dismissive of the rights of the lesser beings around him. Galt struck me as having been tainted by a martyr complex.

> The novel's theme is the role of the mind in man's existence, and she
> was trying to show the connection between political and philosophical
> ideas, instantiated or embodied in her different characters, and their
> consequences.

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> >
> > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> >
> > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> >
> > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> >
> > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> >
> > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> >
> > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> >
> > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> >
> > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> >
> > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world).. In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> >
> > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> Good morning, Michael.
>
> To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
>
> Thanks.

You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.

I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.

Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.

While I naturally and obviously(being a far left wing, liberal, Progressive activist) disagree vehemently with Rand in regard to finacial issues, there is some common ground that can be acknoledged in regard to social issues... It may suprise some to know that Reagan refused to vote for Reagan, due to his anti abortion stance... Rand was adamently Pro Choice... also agreed with her position in regard to the military draft, that it was wrong.... and enjoyed "The Fountainhead" on a strictly plot oriented level, but nevertheless, for the most part, find her ideas WAY too harsh and dogmatic and hateful and mean spirited... Her comments were often gratuitously nasty... at best, she was a sui generes, over the top, somewhat fascinating, "character", Imo...

While I naturally and obviously(being a far left wing, liberal, Progressive activist) disagree vehemently with Rand in regard to finacial issues, there is some common ground that can be acknoledged in regard to social issues... It may suprise some to know that Rand refused to vote for Reagan, due to his anti abortion stance... Rand was adamently Pro Choice... also agreed with her position in regard to the military draft, that it was wrong... and enjoyed "The Fountainhead" on a strictly plot oriented level, but nevertheless, for the most part, find her ideas WAY too harsh and dogmatic and hateful and mean spirited... Her comments were often gratuitously nasty... at best, she was a sui generes, over the top, somewhat fascinating, "character", Imo...

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 11:41:01 AM UTC-5, jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:
> While I naturally and obviously(being a far left wing, liberal, Progressive activist) disagree vehemently with Rand in regard to finacial issues, there is some common ground that can be acknoledged in regard to social issues... It may suprise some to know that Rand refused to vote for Reagan, due to his anti abortion stance... Rand was adamently Pro Choice... also agreed with her position in regard to the military draft, that it was wrong... and enjoyed "The Fountainhead" on a strictly plot oriented level, but nevertheless, for the most part, find her ideas WAY too harsh and dogmatic and hateful and mean spirited... Her comments were often gratuitously nasty... at best, she was a sui generes, over the top, somewhat fascinating, "character", Imo...
>

She disliked communists as well, so you're even.

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
>> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
>> >
>> > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
>> >
>> > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
>> >
>> > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
>> >
>> > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
>> >
>> > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
>> >
>> > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
>> >
>> > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
>> >
>> > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
>> >
>> > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world).. In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
>> >
>> > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
>> Good morning, Michael.
>>
>> To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
>> and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
>> thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
>> BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
>> last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
>>
>> Thanks.

> You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.

> I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.

> Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.

Something we actually agree on, Pendragon.

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 11:15:07 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > >
> > > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > >
> > > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > >
> > > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > >
> > > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > >
> > > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > >
> > > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > >
> > > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > >
> > > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> > >
> > > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > >
> > > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > Good morning, Michael.
> >
> > To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> > and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> > thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> > BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> > last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> >
> > Thanks.
> You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.
>
> I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.
>
> Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.

I’ll grant you that reading Rand makes for decent escapist entertainment,
but I’d rather look elsewhere for my philosophical and political sustenance.

jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> While I naturally and obviously(being a far left wing, liberal, Progressive activist) disagree vehemently with Rand in regard to financial issues, there is some common ground that can be acknoledged in regard to social issues... It may suprise some to know that Rand refused to vote for Reagan, due to his anti abortion stance... Rand was adamently Pro Choice... also agreed with her position in regard to the military draft, that it was wrong... and enjoyed "The Fountainhead" on a strictly plot oriented level, but nevertheless, for the most part, find her ideas WAY too harsh and dogmatic and hateful and mean spirited... Her comments were often gratuitously nasty... at best, she was a sui generes, over the top, somewhat fascinating, "character", Imo...

Well put, J.C... good day to you..!

jdcha...@gmail.com wrote:

>
> While I naturally and obviously(being a far left wing, liberal, Progressive activist) disagree vehemently with Rand in regard to financial issues, there is some common ground that can be acknowledged in regard to social issues... It may surprise some to know that Rand refused to vote for Reagan, due to his anti abortion stance... Rand was adamantly Pro Choice... also agreed with her position in regard to the military draft, that it was wrong... and enjoyed "The Fountainhead" on a strictly plot oriented level, but nevertheless, for the most part, find her ideas WAY too harsh and dogmatic and hateful and mean spirited... Her comments were often gratuitously nasty... at best, she was a sui generes, over the top, somewhat fascinating, "character", Imo...

Ayn Rand's thoughts on "The Creator" of art, poetry, music, and, of course, buildings (Howard Roark) have always struck me as being spot on, though:

http://www.nasonart.com/personal/lifelessons/fountainhead.html

"The creator originates... The creator faces nature alone.
The basic need of the creator is independence. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator, all relations with men are secondary... one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement." -Ayn Rand

And so it goes.

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 2:51:27 PM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 11:15:07 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > > >
> > > > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > > >
> > > > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > > >
> > > > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > > >
> > > > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > > >
> > > > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > > >
> > > > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project.. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > > >
> > > > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > > >
> > > > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> > > >
> > > > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > > >
> > > > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > > Good morning, Michael.
> > >
> > > To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> > > and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> > > thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> > > BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> > > last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> > >
> > > Thanks.
> > You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.
> >
> > I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.
> >
> > Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.
> I’ll grant you that reading Rand makes for decent escapist entertainment,
> but I’d rather look elsewhere for my philosophical and political sustenance.

Me too.

I initially thought that her Objectivist philosophy sounded great -- it certainly appealed to my ego. It was only when I read her "Romantic Manifesto" that I realized our philosophies were worlds apart in the most fundamental of ways -- her beliefs lacked any traces of spirituality, mysticism, imagination, synchronicity, and magick. Much like scientific Empiricism, her philosophy only pertained to the human experience at its most superficial level. Several years later, I discovered Schopenhauer, whose philosophies were much more in keeping with my own. Tellingly, Schopenhauer's philosophy, Subjectivism, is the opposite of Rand's Objectivism.

On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 10:04:53 PM UTC-5, george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
> On 2022-11-09 9:56 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 3:45:04 PM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
> wrote:
> >> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
> wrote:
>
> >>> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> >>>
> >>> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when,
> along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an
> Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an
> Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an
> active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> >>>
> >>> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the
> champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were
> the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they
> bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would
> certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political
> demagogue.
> >>>
> >>> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates --
> who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist,
> and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes
> who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere
> with their designs.
> >>>
> >>> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her
> a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down
> considerably.
> >>>
> Your opening with the essay adda a nice personal touch, which I'm sure
> some would like, but I find it distracting. There's nothing in those
> varied reactions that I think needs or deserves comment.
> >>> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her
> downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read
> Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of
> the plot which ran something like this:
> >>>
> >>> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual
> motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his
> employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the
> exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh
> on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing
> that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on
> "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his
> compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's
> group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian
> pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and
> torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding
> political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society
> based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free
> himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his
> dreams.
> This is so far off that I actually believe that you read the book years
> ago; I think if you'd cheated and quickly read through a CliffsNotes or
> SparkNotes (sp), you'd probably have a better understanding of it.
>
> First of all, Atlas Shrugged (at least the first part) is a mystery
> story. There are 3 mysteries:
> (1) "Who is John Galt", the question everyone keeps asking but no one
> knows what it means.
> (2) What's causing the collapse of the economy? Who's behind it?
> (3) In part 2, who invented this miraculous motor?
> And you gave them all away in your first paragraph on the book.
>
>
> Your summary of what Galt did is accurate enough; he worked at a motor
> plant, where he invented a new type of motor, but ended up leaving his
> job to go on "strike" and dedicated 12 years to finding others like him
> to join him. But I'm afraid you don't remember, or novel got in the
> first place, what the novel's about. It's not just about a novel about
> events; it has a theme. And I'm afraid that your essay doesn't give any
> evidence of understanding that theme. As a consequence you can't make
> sense of what Galt did -- you know what he did, but not why -- and
> you've tried to fill in the holes with your own original thoughts and
> speculations, about the evil fossil fuel companies and the like.
>
> The novel's theme is the role of the mind in man's existence, and she
> was trying to show the connection between political and philosophical
> ideas, instantiated or embodied in her different characters, and their
> consequences.
>
> Rand, as you know, was an immigrant from Soviet Russia, which she
> despised; and during the 1930s and the 1940s she saw the same ideas,
> which she blamed for the collapse of Russian society, taking root in the
> U.S. That's particularly clear with this case: Galt left his company
> because the new employer, who'd inherited the company, held a meeting
> and announced that the company would now be run as in the /Communist
> Manifesto/ -- employers were expected to work according to their
> ability, and be paid according to their need. Galt walked out in the
> middle of the meeting, vowing as a parting shot to "stop the motor of
> the world."
> >>> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is
> John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that
> everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the
> economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or
> what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental
> railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the
> major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their
> executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank
> Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character)
> runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a
> seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> You're right that Galt comes in late in the book (at the beginning of
> the third section. Before that the focus is really on the female lead,
> Dagny Taggart (just as the focus in her earlier novel was on the female
> lead, Dominique Francon) And he's not as interesting a character as
> Dagny. Rand's heroines are her most "realistic" characters, because
> they're conflicted. All her other characters are much like those of
> Dostoevsky (one of her major influences). They instantiate different
> philosophical or ideological viewpoints, and their lives are meant to
> show the working out of those viewpoints in the characters' lives.
>
> So it's best to start with Dagny. She's the VP of a railroad, and runs
> it as best she can; the president is her brother, Jim, but he's
> incompetent, and afraid of responsibility; he'd rather leave the
> decisions to her, and simply take the credit for them later. It's not
> just him; Dagny is noting more people like that all around her, and the
> consequent disappearance of people willing to act on their own, make
> their own decisins, and take responsibility. So many are disappearing
> that she becomes convinced that there's someone she nicknames "the
> Destroyer" luring them away somehow. So she sets out on a quest to find
> and stop the Destroyer.
>
> That leads her to Minnesota, where she finds the motor in an abandoned
> factory, recognizes its potential, and spends most of her free time in
> Book II on a personal quest to find its inventor. Not that she has much;
> as more people disappear, the country continues to fall apart, including
> her company, and she has to spend more and more time just trying to
> prevent disasters.
> >>> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand
> introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story
> unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an
> interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz
> Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance).
> At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and
> exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political
> mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> In parts I and II, there are three mysteries:
> (1) "Who is John Galt," the slogan that everyone repeats, but no one
> knows what it means.
> (2) Who is the Destroyer?
> (3) Who is the inventor of the motor?
>
> Since you've spoiled the mystery, I don't mind saying that the questions
> all have the same answer. And yes, when those are solved the book's less
> of a page-turner. Rand does her best to make it dramatic -- Galt
> broadcasts a speech to the world, resulting in the strike going viral;
> the government arrests him, and tries to persuade him to cooperate,
> using everything from appeals to the greater good to torture. But
> nothing works, his friends break him out, and they fly back to Colorado
> and literally watch the lights going out across the U.S.A.
>
> The end. Literally. That's the end of the book.
> >>> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that
> a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own
> image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the
> genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was
> perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit
> of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted
> virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations,
> Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and
> starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order
> which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and
> powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will
> at least see prosperity again).
> Galt doesn't shut down any corporations -- he merely finds his kind of
> people (rational, egoistic, self-interested< self-responsible) and
> convinces them to walk away. He doesn't destroy any lives: if the
> businesses fail, they fail because of how the other kind of people runs
> things in practice.
> >>> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English
> professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic
> sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an
> endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of
> power in a Capitalist economy).
> Rand advocated a radically limited government: she supported the US
> Constitution, but saw it as something that could be improved. Her idea
> of government was one reduced to the core functions of protecting
> individual rights from force: police, courts, and a military, and
> supported without compulsory taxation. That's as far removed from
> Naziism as one can get.

On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:31:32 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:13:44 AM UTC-5, NancyGene wrote:
> > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 3:03:15 PM UTC, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
> > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> > > >
> > > > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> > > >
> > > > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> > > >
> > > > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> > > >
> > > > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> > > >
> > > > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> > > >
> > > > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project.. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> > > >
> > > > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> > > >
> > > > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> > > >
> > > > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> > > >
> > > > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> > > I see the Trump image all over this.
> > >
> > > Vote tomorrow.
> > Is the book worth reading? At ~1200 pages, it sounds like a lot of flawed philosophy.
> It was certainly worth reading at the time. I practically worshiped Ayn Rand -- not at the level that I worshiped Poe, but she held a high place in the Pantheon. In retrospect, it seems a bit silly. I think it's a book for young men and women who are just setting out to take on the world.

I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.

Karen Tellefsen wrote:

> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:31:32 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:13:44 AM UTC-5, NancyGene wrote:
>> > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 3:03:15 PM UTC, blackpo...@aol.com wrote:
>> > > On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>> > > > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
>> > > >
>> > > > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
>> > > >
>> > > > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
>> > > >
>> > > > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
>> > > >
>> > > > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
>> > > >
>> > > > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
>> > > >
>> > > > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project.. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
>> > > >
>> > > > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
>> > > >
>> > > > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
>> > > >
>> > > > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
>> > > >
>> > > > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
>> > > I see the Trump image all over this.
>> > >
>> > > Vote tomorrow.
>> > Is the book worth reading? At ~1200 pages, it sounds like a lot of flawed philosophy.
>> It was certainly worth reading at the time. I practically worshiped Ayn Rand -- not at the level that I worshiped Poe, but she held a high place in the Pantheon. In retrospect, it seems a bit silly. I think it's a book for young men and women who are just setting out to take on the world.

> I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.

Hi Karen... great to see you again....!

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> >> > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> >> >
> >> > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> >> >
> >> > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> >> >
> >> > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> >> >
> >> > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> >> >
> >> > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> >> >
> >> > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> >> >
> >> > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> >> >
> >> > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> >> >
> >> > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world).. In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> >> >
> >> > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> >> Good morning, Michael.
> >>
> >> To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> >> and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> >> thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> >> BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> >> last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
>
> > You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.
>
> > I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.
>
> > Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.
> Something we actually agree on, Pendragon.

You wouldn’t have liked my high school.

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 4:02:04 PM UTC-5, ktell...@gmail.com wrote:
>
> I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.

Hello Karen, as I've written in the past, Ayn Rand's statements of the "creator" inspired me as a youth, and still does, mostly:

http://www.nasonart.com/personal/lifelessons/fountainhead.html

"The creator originates... The creator faces nature alone. The basic need of the creator is independence. The reasoning mind cannot work under any form of compulsion. It cannot be curbed, sacrificed or subordinated to any consideration whatsoever. It demands total independence in function and in motive. To a creator, all relations with men are secondary... one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution—or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement." -Ayn Rand

***

On 2022-11-10 4:02 p.m., Karen Tellefsen wrote:
> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:31:32 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>
>
> I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.

On 2022-11-10 4:02 p.m., Karen Tellefsen wrote:
>
> I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my
early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of
the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.
Hi, Karen; good to see you back.

I'm sure that's exactly how it went for you. I think it's a common
experience, and I've heard people, like Barack Obama (in the link) say
the same thing:

https://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.com/2012/10/obama-thinks-ayn-rand-is-for-teens-for_29.html

I understand the first part, Rand's attraction for teens. I first read
her books as a teen myself, at 19. The teenage years are a time when one
is trying to find one's own worldview, and Rand is providing a
completely integrated one to try on.

I've never lost my affinity for Objectivism, though I've modified it in
so many ways over the next 40 years that I can't call myself one. I've
grown, but I never "outgrew" Rand. That's the part I'm curious about.

I can see junking Rand's worldview in favor of a better one, but not
otherwise, but no one ever talks about that. I can't see there not being
a thing. You can outgrow the clothes you wore when you were younger, but
you still have to replace those with new clothes. In the same way, you
can outgrow your worldview, but you have to replace it with a new
worldview. So what did yoo reject the Randian worldview for, and why did
it fit better than your old one?

George J. Dance wrote:

> On 2022-11-10 4:02 p.m., Karen Tellefsen wrote:
>> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 10:31:32 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>>
>>
>> I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.

> On 2022-11-10 4:02 p.m., Karen Tellefsen wrote:
> >
> > I liked "Atlas Shrugged" when I was 15, but outgrew Ayn Rand in my
> early twenties. I don't think she was a Nazi, but she seemed typical of
> the uglier side of Libertarianism and rugged individualism.
> Hi, Karen; good to see you back.

> I'm sure that's exactly how it went for you. I think it's a common
> experience, and I've heard people, like Barack Obama (in the link) say
> the same thing:

> https://gdspoliticalanimal.blogspot.com/2012/10/obama-thinks-ayn-rand-is-for-teens-for_29.html

> I understand the first part, Rand's attraction for teens. I first read
> her books as a teen myself, at 19. The teenage years are a time when one
> is trying to find one's own worldview, and Rand is providing a
> completely integrated one to try on.

> I've never lost my affinity for Objectivism, though I've modified it in
> so many ways over the next 40 years that I can't call myself one. I've
> grown, but I never "outgrew" Rand. That's the part I'm curious about.

> I can see junking Rand's worldview in favor of a better one, but not
> otherwise, but no one ever talks about that. I can't see there not being
> a thing. You can outgrow the clothes you wore when you were younger, but
> you still have to replace those with new clothes. In the same way, you
> can outgrow your worldview, but you have to replace it with a new
> worldview. So what did yoo reject the Randian worldview for, and why did
> it fit better than your old one?

As some here know, Howard Roarke directly inspired the Shadowville Mythos.

In The Fountainhead, I began musing over the notion of a "poetry skyline".

More on this later, possibly.

🙂

On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
>
> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
>
> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
>
> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
>
> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
>
> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
>
> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
>
> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
>
> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
>
> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
>
> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).

Atlas shrugged
Atlas shat
Atlas split
And that was that

Robert Burrows wrote:

> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail.com wrote:
>> "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
>>
>> So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
>>
>> Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
>>
>> Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
>>
>> That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
>>
>> "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
>>
>> John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
>>
>> The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
>>
>> This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
>>
>> Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world). In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
>>
>> Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).

> Atlas shrugged
> Atlas shat
> Atlas split
> And that was that

Good one, Robert, welcome back.

🙂

On 2022-11-10 11:10 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
> On Wednesday, November 9, 2022 at 10:04:53 PM UTC-5,
george...@yahoo.ca wrote:
>> On 2022-11-09 9:56 a.m., Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>> On Tuesday, November 8, 2022 at 3:45:04 PM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
>> wrote:
>>>> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, Michael Pendragon
>> wrote:
>
> I don't think that one can examine the work of Ayn Rand without
touching on the topic of her alleged Nazism.
>

I think that should be discussed. I just wqnted thought your personal
history with that (which we've all had) could all be cut out. I expect
we're going to end up exchanging mammoth posts, and I'd like to shorten
it down.

> My English professor isn't the only one who has called her that. For
instance, a Google search for "Ayn Rand, Nazi" brought up the following
article from "The Spectator"; it's title is "Ayn Rand’s books are
deliciously anti-statist, but her philosophy is borderline Nazi."
https://www.spectator.co.uk/article/ayn-rand-s-books-are-deliciously-anti-statist-but-her-philosophy-is-borderline-nazi/
>
> Consider also this excerpt from an article in "The Washington Post"
entitled "Ayn Rand was Wrong":
>
> "When Atlas Shrugged'was published in 1957, Whittaker Chambers wrote
what is perhaps the most famous, and most negative, review that any Rand
book has ever received. He spoke witheringly of the dollar-sign worship,
and argued that her vision of a ruling elite lording it over the weaker
masses conjured up a kind of fascist nightmare: 'From almost any page of
Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard . . . commanding: To a gas chamber
-- go! This review was published in William F. Buckley Jr.'s
conservative National Review, but the same sort of charge had long been
dogging Rand from the other side of the ideological fence. In those
years, when the left dominated the haute intellectual scene, anyone who
was as fierce an anti-communist as Rand tended to be dismissed as a
fascist, and in her case the label stuck.'"
>
>
https://www.washingtonpost.com/archive/lifestyle/1996/08/25/ayn-rand-was-wrong/5fd96b67-1cab-44ec-8b95-cb9637a129b7/
>
> The article dismisses such charges as entirely unfounded, but they
remain a part of her cultural identity -- making her the poster girl for
Right Wing extremists, Neo-Nazis and skin-heads.

Fair enough; the Nazi label is there. Much of that is just propaganda:
communists and other leftists routinely call non-leftists "Nazi" or a
"fascist". But just because something's propaganda, doesn't mean it's
not true. We have to look at that.

I'd look first at what Rand said about her work. She was reacting to,
arguing against, three ideas evil ideas that were mutually
self-reinforcing.
1) Collectivism: That while serving oneself is bad or wrong, while
serving a group is good and right. The group can be a tribe or a state;
the important thing is that, if there's a conflict between the
individual or the group, the group comes first.
2) Mysticism: That there's a superior knowledge, known through a
superior way of knowing, than the one's own knowledge gained through
reading and experience. That reinforces collectivism, since the
individual has nothing but his own mundane knowledge and reason, while
the collective has the allegedly better tools.
3) Altruism: That serving one's own interests is presumptively bad,
while serving the interests of others is presumptively good. "Others"
can be defined in various ways, but it's easy to see how it can be
defined as the collective.

The Nazis accepted and advocated all those ideas.
(1) They championed the state as the supreme collective; and added it to
it the idea of another, even higher collective, the race.
(2) They were thorough mysticists; some of them were Christians, some
Norse-god pagans, some just state-worshipper. But they all thought their
non-rational sources of knowledge were better than individual mundane
knowledge.
(3) They explicitly championed the collectivist version of altruism:
"The common good before the individual good" was one of their popular
slogans.

Even at this basic level, Objectivism and Naziism have nothing in common.

> Another reason why Rand cannot be discussed apart from Nazism is the
obvious parallels that exist between her heroes and Nietzsche's
Übermensch -- which was co-opted by the Nazis as part of their campaign
for racial supremacy. "The Fountainhead" was published smack in the
center of WWII, which makes her "borderline Nazi" philosophy take on the
added dimension of intellectual propaganda aimed at converting American
intellectuals to the Nazi cause. I don't believe she was attempting to
do this (or that she had any sympathies for a fascistic form of
government), however, her novel *could* have been used by others for
such purposes. In "This Is My God," Herman Wouk argued that Nietzsche
was partially responsible for the Holocaust -- even though Nietzsche
would have most likely been appalled that the Nazis were using his
philosophical writings to support their goals. His reasoning was that
it is an author's responsibility to ensure that his statements cannot be
taken out of context and twisted into a screed of persecution against
any group of people.

I'd agree with Neitzsche that the Nazis were using his writings, and I'd
say that's all they were doing. Those served a purpose: from giving
young people something noble and heroic to fight for, to attacking
Christianity. But the Nazis certainly were not Nietzcshean heroes, and
they didn't act like it. Most were good soldiers or bureaucrats, cogs in
a machine; some served the state wholeheartedly, some reluctantly, but
they all served it.

> Both Howard Roark and John Galt place themselves above the law, and
above the collective opinion (democratic majority) of what is "right"
and "wrong" -- following Nietzsche's philosophical theory set forth in
his essay, "Beyond Good and Evil," wherein he argues that "good" and
"evil" (a.k.a., "right" and "wrong") are relative terms: what is "good"
for one person may be detrimental to another (or to many others); and
that each of us must chose what is best for us. Rand echoes this theory
in her essay on "The Virtue of Selfishness" as well as in Roark and
Galt's speeches.
>

But the Nazis didn't place themselves above the law (which they
identified with their state): they represented the law, conformed to it,
and enforced it. I think it's unfair to Nietzsche, too, to associate him
with any of that. I also suspect, though I've read very little
Neitzsche, that they're misrepresenting what he meant by doing what was
best for oneself. I'm an egoist, and doing what's best for me is a
higher good. But that's different from doing whatever one feels like
doing; one has to use one's knowledge and reason to figure out what is
best. And that's something Rand did emphasize, repeatedly, throughout
her book. Calling her essay "The Virtue of Rational Self-Interest" would
have made a less catchy title (which is important to an author trying to
sell it), but it would have been a more accurate description.

> Was Rand a Nazi? No. But both espoused similar philosophies.
>

I see their philosophies as essentially different. Maybe it's a good
idea, given what I said about avoiding mammoth posts, to stop here and
continue the discussion of /AS/ in another post.

<snip>

On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>
> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
> >> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
> >> > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
> >> >
> >> > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
> >> >
> >> > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
> >> >
> >> > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
> >> >
> >> > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
> >> >
> >> > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
> >> >
> >> > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
> >> >
> >> > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
> >> >
> >> > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
> >> >
> >> > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world).. In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
> >> >
> >> > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
> >> Good morning, Michael.
> >>
> >> To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
> >> and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
> >> thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
> >> BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
> >> last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
> >>
> >> Thanks.
>
> > You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.
>
> > I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.
>
> > Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.
> Something we actually agree on, Pendragon.

Shut up, other Todd.

Michael Pendragon wrote:

> On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 4:20:27 PM UTC-5, Will Dockery wrote:
>> Michael Pendragon wrote:
>>
>> > On Thursday, November 10, 2022 at 6:26:06 AM UTC-5, Spam-I-Am wrote:
>> >> On Monday, November 7, 2022 at 9:45:08 AM UTC-5, michaelmalef...@gmail..com wrote:
>> >> > "Ayn Rand is a Nazi!"
>> >> >
>> >> > So proclaimed the head of my university's English department when, along with two of my fellow classmates, I suggested that we include an Ayn Rand novel in our curriculum. I should explain that this was an Honors Program class wherein the students were supposed to be taking an active in deciding what the curriculum would be.
>> >> >
>> >> > Needless to say, I was shocked at his reaction. Wasn't Ayn Rand the champion of rugged individualism? Yes, Howard Roark and John Galt were the personification of the Nietzschean Übermensch, but as such, they bowed to no authority -- including that of the state. Such men would certainly never raise their hands in obedient salute to a political demagogue.
>> >> >
>> >> > Ayn Rand was a literary hero to me and several of my classmates -- who had actually introduced me to her works. As a self-centered, egoist, and mild sociopath, I fully identified with Rand's self-absorbed heroes who would take on the world at the drop of a hat if dared to interfere with their designs.
>> >> >
>> >> > That was back in 1989 or 90. And, while I still don't consider her a Nazi, my opinion regarding Rand's books, and ideas, has gone down considerably.
>> >> >
>> >> > "Atlas Shrugged" is both Rand's literary magnum opus and her downfall as a serious novelist. It's been 32 or 33 years since I read Rand's novel, and I no longer remember many of the ridiculous details of the plot which ran something like this:
>> >> >
>> >> > John Galt, an ingenious, self-centered loner invents a perpetual motion engine which he dreams will revolutionize the world. However, his employers, viewing his invention as a threat to a world based on the exploitative use of fossil fuel, see it as a threat and put the kibosh on his project. Galt, therefore, sets out to convince (and, failing that, to terrorize) the world's industrial leaders into going on "strike" -- shutting down their businesses and joining him at his compound where they worship the Almighty Dollar (literally). Galt's group of economic terrorists includes a billionaire turned Scandinavian pirate! Eventually the remaining evil corporate heads capture and torture Galt, who spends approximately 100 pages making a grandstanding political speech calling for a hybrid Meritocratic-Oligarchic society based on Capitalism. Somehow, when all seems lost, he manages to free himself from his captors and to bring about the brave new world of his dreams.
>> >> >
>> >> > The novel starts out brilliantly by posing the question "Who is John Galt?" The answer is that no one knows. It is a saying that everyone has adopted, and use a fatalistic acceptance of the economically worsening times, without understanding either its origin or what it actually means. Dagny Taggart, who runs an intercontinental railroad, struggles to keep her railroad afloat, even though all of the major corporations are going bankrupt, closing down, and their executives disappearing off the face of the earth. Her boyfriend, Hank Reardon (his initials suggest that he is another Howard Roark character) runs a major steel mill, and they stand together in the face of a seemingly inevitable, failing world economy.
>> >> >
>> >> > This makes for an exciting, dystopian mystery… until Rand introduces John Galt (about midway through). Not only is Galt's story unbelievable, but the focus of the story shifts from Dagny Taggart (an interesting heroine) to Galt (an idealized version of Dr. Heinz Doofensmirtz achieving his longstanding dream of Tri-State Dominance). At this point the story has deteriorated into palpable nonsense, and exists solely as a platform on which Galt will become Rand's political mouthpiece for a 100 or so pages.
>> >> >
>> >> > Nevertheless, it appealed to me at the time, because it showed that a lone individual could shut down, and reinvent the world (in his own image, of course), provided that he possessed the will (and had the genius) to accomplish it. It also taught (albeit implicitly) that it was perfectly fine to destroy the lives of countless others in the pursuit of one's own, selfish goals (selfishness and egoism are much-tauted virtues in Ayn Rand's world).. In shutting down the world's corporations, Galt renders countless blue-collar workers unemployed, homeless, and starving in the street… but he's doing it to bring about a New Order which will benefit everyone (well, it will benefit the rich and powerful, but in a pre-Reaganomic "trickle down" theory, the masses will at least see prosperity again).
>> >> >
>> >> > Looking back on it, I'm inclined to agree with my English professor: Ayn Rand was a Nazi. She was an advocate of a Darwinistic sociopolitical system wherein the geniuses teamed with the wealthy in an endless pursuit of the Almighty Dollar (money being the ultimate form of power in a Capitalist economy).
>> >> Good morning, Michael.
>> >>
>> >> To be perfectly honest, I think Rand was a bit of a loon, a hack writer,
>> >> and I have zero interest in discussing Atlas Shrugged, which I haven’t
>> >> thought about seriously since it was required reading in high school,
>> >> BUT (please note the big but) I thoroughly enjoyed reading this thread
>> >> last night, as I was suffering a bit of insomnia and this really did the trick.
>> >>
>> >> Thanks.
>>
>> > You must have gone to a fun high school. I'm jealous.
>>
>> > I agree that Rand's writing skills leave much to be desired. And I also agree that she was a bit of a loon. It's that latter quality that makes her writing interesting.
>>
>> > Right or wrong, visionary or delusional, Rand's books provide escapist entertainment while giving readers a good deal of philosophical and political food for thought.
>> Something we actually agree on, Pendragon.

> Shut up

Not likely, Pendragon.

🙂