/lit/ - Literature

>If you don’t like this retarded ideology you believe some other crazy batshit ideas

Holy fucking shit go outside

>here come the: "Ok, now THIS is truly epic." posts

The OP has given a closer assessment of my character than I would care to admit.

>>12018972
Then you are unironically 23 also

Is that a bait?

>>12018934
If you like Atlas shrugged it is because you are a neckbeard permavirgin who will never know the pleasure if a female body. You also unironically believe that if corporations were given free reign you would somehow become fabulously wealthy and famous and take over the industry, instead of being a downtrodden slave, as would actually happen in such an event. You have a micropenis and as a teenager your Facebook profile picture was the snake that says "don't tread on me." You think babies are weak for dying in hot cars. Your name is David and your first cat was named Mrs. Fluffy.

Amazing how much you think can learn about someone when you make vast generalizations based on practically nothing.

>>12019030
>micropenis
>cant please a woman

>>12018934
>writer is shit
>"IF YOU DON'T LOVE THIS YOU'RE A COMMUNIST"
the book was shit

Communism > capitalism

>>12019089
>le salty zoomer instagram meme

>>12018934
>If you hate Atlas Shrugged it is because you are
n't jewish

No, it's because she's a mediocre with delusions of grandeur, and everyone with half a brain can tell.

>>12018934
Deep Objectivist here. Cringe.
You can also dislike Atlas Shrugged for the simple reason that many a person don't like being lectured. Even where warranted. Atlas lectures people heavily. Or you can be an AnCap who doesn't like minarchism and thinks (fallaciously mind you) that it doesn't logically progress it far enough into full anarchism. You can also (also fallaciously) think its lambasting of mysticism pulls all color and intrigue from the world. /x/fags love Nick Land but wouldn't ever touch Rand for instance.
Don't give mods an excuse stupid. I think that r/philosophy faggot mod is dead but I'm not 100% on that.

>>12019030
>Your name is David and your first cat was named Mrs. Fluffy.
Don't scare me like this

i hate atlas shrugged because it was written by a woman and i hate women

>>12018934
I closed it when she stumbled upon an abandoned perpetual motion machine and she immediately knows exactly what it is. Fucking bullshit.

>>12019030
You think corporations would enslave people with free reign? Just don't do business with them and try to start a better business to take their customers.

>>12018934
Anon the book is absolute fucking trash because it is written poorly.
>characters are lifeless billboards for ideologies
>pacing is bad
> "boohoo the gooberment is taxing me more that 2 percent"
>the ending is terrible

>>12020512
>>12018934
I liked it

>>12020529
You have bad taste anon. The halo books are better than all of rand's works. She is so bad at writing, her only appeal is "isn't capitalism great guys?" being the only thing worth thought she said.

>>12020544
I disagree. I liked the characters and plot, although it was a bit long. However I read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead twice while I was on a boat in Alaska for a month and a half, so the length wasn't a problem for me. I'm more of a libertarian, but I can see why someone who isn't or doesn't agree with those sorts of ideas just wouldn't like the book and therefore none of the characters since, and this critique I think is fair and true, they are mostly flat. There is some character development, but it is long drawn out and subtle, so those who don't agree with the themes of the book in the first place might not care for the characters through the book.

>>12020576
I implore you to read some analysis of what the state actually is and how it relates to the capitalistic mode of production. I can deal with people being dumb servile bootlickers to capital but not understanding how your own system of choice functions really grinds my gears.

>>12020627
Can you link any articles or essays on what you're talking about? I'm not interested enough to read a book on it as I have enough books to read right now.

>>12018934

I don't like Ayn Rand. Everything you are was created by other people. The idea that anything is done by one person is absurd: propaganda for the exploiters and their cult of selfishness to better excuse and cover their exploitation.

But Rand was never so dense as to mistake an exploiter, who takes credit for what everyone else did, for someone she would consider a superman.

Rand would shit out the puke puppets and shit salesmen of Entertainment, Wall Street, Military Industrialists, and every single Steve Jobs, Bill Gates, Charles Koch, Elon Musk, and Jimmy Diamonds of your consumer culture as so much undigestible fiber. She would flick away the Paul Ryans, and Mitt Romenys of your political propagandists like the ash of her cigarette.

She was wrong - humans are great together and weak by themselves. She mistook the exploiters of her Soviet Russia for the collective narrator when in practice they were no different than the selfish narrators of the elites of Capitalism, but I don’t think she’d approve of those who use her (frankly incipient) stories to further their selfish agendas.

>>12020576
Anon, me not agreeing with a person shouldn't factor in on if something is good or not. I don't agree with dostoyevsky, in fact i am not christian in the slightest, but he is an amazing writer and i love him for his writing.

>>12020239
I haven't read Nick Land but every time someone talks about him on /lit/ I'm reminded of something Ayn Rand said. I honestly wonder how much similarities they have.

>>12019030
based

>>12020494
Sure. Just try creating a business to fight amazon or google. What's that... the barrier to entry is too high? What's that successful startups are incorporated into the beast they are competing with or edged out?

oh...

>>12020702
>humans are great together and weak by themselves.
Ayn Rand never said to isolate yourself but to only be together with people that aren't shit. No one is great by being surrounded by complete idiots.

Absolutely based post. People who hate Rand are almost indisputably weak beta male faggots, in EVERY case.

>>12020473
It was a "pulls static electricity from the atmosphere" machine faggot. It needs said electricity to run in perpetuity and without it can't run in perpetuity.
She probably had a light grasp on what a rig pulling electricity from air might look light since she was previously interested at one point about this rad sci-fi topic.
Did you even read the book?

>>12020627
What you are alluding to is a Mixed Economy fallacy Rand demolished in C:TUI

>>12020746
People seem to think that advocacy of hyper-individualism means the inability to form limited collectives. They think collectivISM owns the entire concept of "collective" in all contexts.

>>12020710
Yes I see your point, but what I meant to say was that I thought the book was well written. I wanted to know what happened to the characters next, the Galt mystery intrigued me from the very beginning and there were plenty of unexpected things to keep me surprised, like the secret group in the mountains, the collapse of society, the strange acoustic weapon, and the development of the characters. At no point did I feel the book was bland or poorly written. Only at Galt's speech did I stop to check how long it went on for, because it is quite long, but I found it amusing, much like the Catalogue in The Iliad, and simply accepted it and enjoyed it. I enjoyed it, and I don't think I'm an idiot, so I think that something there is of good quality, whatever that may be in the elements of prose or plot. I'm not knowledgeable in that kind of writing, so I can't effectively make a case for Rand, but there have been plenty who like her work as well, so it's not like your conclusion is some universal one; likely just as much opinion as mine.

>>12020744
Wouldn't work right now because Google and many other large corporations are subsidized by the government and use regulations to strangle competition. I also quickly looked up whether private companies could lay their own fiber optic cables for internet service, but couldn't find anything right away; I'll try more in depth later since I'm interested now. If there was no government subsidies, regulations, and no laws against laying your own cable, then it's much easier for another option to come up. Even now there are plenty of alternatives to google and Amazon, though they aren't as extensive or polished, but you can still get phones, email, computers, etc. that don't use google, and can use ebay, craigslist, private websites, etc. Nobodies forcing you to use google or Amazon. There are other options to use besides them if you cared enough.

>>12020702
I don't think Rand ever said that people did things alone. She didn't expect anyone to drill their own oil, make their own powerplants, factories, and home individually. Only that the government and other groups shouldn't be corecing or tricking people into taking and destroying what isn't theirs. At least, that's the take away from the book.

Politics is gay shit.

>>12019030
Okay now this is epic

>>12020494
Except corporations today already own mass culture and most people's minds, which they can dictate at a whim. There's no such thing as economical trending towards superior products and meeting needs, when perception and knowledge of them is the core of marketing. Even if we wiped it clean, and tried to start with fairly balanced, small business everywhere. Even the smallest of them will wield greater power than an individual, power to ignore, displace, and coerce. And those small scatterings will quickly tend towards a handful of unknowingly huge gods that nothing can touch. If I want a better quality microprocessor, when there are many amongst underground small businesses, how am I to find them or accurate info on them, when another business owns the network I use to communicate and see the world? When that or another business owns the ships, shipping lanes, and bureaucracy that would deliver the microprocessor? Businesses and economies are not on equal terms, and individuals don't even register on the player field.

>>12020494
Summer of love you fucking brainlet

>>12018934
okay now go read The Great Gatsby to see what really happens to all the "I'mma get ripped and rich to get that bitch" guys

>>12021202
Corporations don't literally control people. They can advertise and influence people to buy their product, but if you really wanna claim that these huge corporations control culture and people's minds then prove it
>inb4 just open your eyes sheep!
and see this
>>12021168

>>12021212
what of it?

>>12020746
>>12021175

I was not implying she said to do things by yourself. I was pointing out that taking credit for any accomplishment, or judging people's worth by that credit is impossible. You cannot separate the smell from the rose, or a single human from human accomplishment.
We are a collective composed of collective individuals, and rewriting the story with a selfish narrator is a deception. Rand makes this error and the subsequent story of Objectivism that is written from this false premise makes the conclusion false.

>>12021247
What are you talking about? Can you give an example of this happening? Do you mean someone inventing something and taking credit, or something else?

>>12021247
Ayn Rand always shows that it's a team effort by people of great talent working together as equals. How people 'claim' anything is irrelevant. It's somewhat portrayed as such in The Fountainhead where it's just Roark designing a building and workers just mindlessly work on it until completion, but that's just to show the greatest of the person creating the structure of art or any accomplishment. In Atlas Shrugged, there's a lot of cooperation and people coming together. I'm rereading Atlas Shrugged right now and no one 'claims' to have be the sole person to take credit for the John Galt lane. Everyone contributed, put in their money, time and energy and made it happen. Sure, Dagny and Rearden put in the most effort intellectually because they were the ones that benefited the most, but other people also came to make it happen. And many times, Readen says 'I'll have this checked with my engineers'. But nowhere do either Dagny or Readen say that they have complete ownership of anything or that they alone did everything. They're just leaders, they take responsibility for choices to be made and tell others what to do. I also think that Ayn Rand has insane expectations for leaders, saying that they must have so much ground experience that they must know more than the workers themselves and then some. Everyone is characterized as a worker or a lazy shit. Leaders are just workers that take responsibility.

The only time I can think of where someone claims to have complete ownership is Rearden saying to the media he alone knows the formula for Rearden metal and that likely came from scientist he paid working together (which is shown the first time he is introduced), but I just see it as the narrative giving him the focus for his persistence to create something good.

If you think everything is created by other people, does anyone ever create anything? Creation is done by a working mind and the strength of will and muscles to make it a reality. I just think that no one is really credited enough in the world and Ayn Rand overplays the benevolence of creators and being naturally inclined to create for the sake of his own success and others (think Roark's speech where he just says that fire was casually invented by someone that was burned for his invention).

>>12021388
>If you think everything is created by other people,
>does anyone ever create anything?
NANI

>>12018934
Her books only seem to appeal to those scrawny pale computer programmer types who, slaves themselves, think we should all be enslaved and enjoy it. That's right libertarianism for you.

>>12018934
>hurr durr real communism never existed
Functional version of communism exists in Cuba, 60 year complete economic blockade due to still not having rotchild central bank does not mean that the economic model is dysfuntional. Usually it just fails because of the forces at the top and distortion of the ideology. And as always i am not going to discuss the topic further than that if you havent read Marxs theories of surplus value and actually visited Cuba (outside exclusively staying in holiday resorts).

And i support shia islam but i do not welcome refugees, the reason to refugee problem is not islam.

Also im not a die-hard communist, i personally i look up to Murray N. Rothbard when it comes to political ideology and literary preferences related to that.

You seem like an angry and poorly adjusted individual with very narrow perception of reality.

>>12019030
This poster listens to Death Grips.

grug no understand kant
grug angry
grug hate poor people

>>12022446
nobody understands Kant, he's a bullshitter who said nothing in alot of words

>>12019184
I disagree but respect your opinion.

>being so proud of yourself for finishing a big boy book that you make a post like this

>>12018934
>babbys first non-fictional book
Sorry, self-worship-promoting inhumane propaganda by rabid jewish cunt isnt exactly my cup of tea, but each to their own.

>>12018934
>if you love Atlas Shrugged it is because you were never loved by your parents and believe everyone else must suffer like you suffered for the sake of it and that you have the right to do anything you want for the simple fact that you can do it, even if the consequences will impact the life of other people in the present and in the future, too bad, it's their fault for not having secured all the necessary limited resources before you

>>12020494
>You think corporations would enslave people with free reign?
>what is google
>what is apple
>what is tesla
>what is amazon
One of these literally stole DNA samples from a public lab to further their mapping, just saying.

>>12023684
Hyperbole doesn't prove your point

>>12020512
>> "boohoo the gooberment is taxing me more that 2 percent"
Kek, do people really think like this? I would say about a 20% taxing is pretty fair. Of course if you get health welfare.

Ayn Rand was a weak little faggot though. She was a drug addict who exploited the welfare system the last few years of her life.

>>12023699
It does, though. Murrica needed to change the law because Apple wanted complete control over its customers, same with Tesla, except they can still use a loophole in the law.
The ultimate goal of every business is not profit, it's obvioulsy control. Why the fuck do you think Amazon now and the Japs in the 90's sold their shit below cost?

>>12022508
>nobody understands Kant

>>12023724
How do you know all corporations seek complete control? And why do you think government is the solution to controlling them, when they lobby governments for their interest all the time and make laws in their favor against their competitors. Also, a lot of big companies are subsidized by the government, including Google. If there was no government restricting smaller companies from starting then there'd be much more competition, so if you didn't agree with the practices of large corporations you could have some more viable alternatives. Even now though you don't have to use Amazon or Google. There's plenty of other emails and shipping services, although they aren't as extensive or of high quality, but if you really didn't like their practices you don't have to use them. Being hyperbolic and saying corporations enslave people is so far from reality and would only be worse with more govt. control

>>12023744
>How do you know all corporations seek complete control?
Cause they wouldn't have grown to be such huge conglomerates if it wasn't the cause? It's just impossible in a capitalist economy. Things don't fucking happen by chance. Don't tell me you really also believe people that aren't socio/psychopaths can be successfull corporation managers? It is what it is.

>>12023789
Well, government doesn't help it makes it worse

>>12023744
Not him, but the goal of every corporation is expansion. Even if there was no government around to lobby, corporations would find someone to bribe. Everyone has their price after all. The good thing about government is that even though corporations can effectively use it, so can the people. It's the only leverage we have. We can even modify it with campaign finance laws, anti-trust laws, etc.

People seem to believe that if government was gone corporations would have no power, or that there was this magical era the market was completely free and everyone was able to compete on an equal level. Corporations have always had a metric fuckton of power to wield. Look at the East India Trading Company.

Yeah, we do have problems with lobbying, and unfortunately we're subsidizing a great deal of industries right now. But the solution isn't to take a fucking hacksaw and destroy everything, we need to modify the government, improve it. Stronger anti-subsidy laws.

>>12023809
Wrong. If it wasn't for the government Apple wouldn't let you repair your notebook, retard. How hard is it for you to understand this?

>>12019030
>micropenis
Funny way to spell clitoris, my dude

>>12018934
>Be me
>Writes a book praising corps and saying shit about the government.
>Becomes poor at the end of your life
>Depends on the same government that you said bullshit in your entire life, to provide health care and housing.
>Gets no help from the corps you praised.
>Makes your own life prove that you're wrong.

Instant karma

>>12022508
The thing with Kant is that you can't know the thing-in-itself. So it's impossible to know what Kant meant in of himself. Therefore no one can ever understand Kant :^)

>>12024038
Did you know that the Nazi liked Hitler.
Instant karma!

Iris murdoch is a better female philosophy/fiction whatever bitch.

at least she wrote some decent novels.

>>12024194
That's the most retarded hitler card I had ever seen.
Congratulations for being such a faggot.

We need more /fitlit

I've never actually read any of her books.

>>12024561
Are your noodle arms not up to the task of lifting Atlas Shrugged?

>>12024578
/lit/ tells me its bad so i have to do what they say

>>12024553
no..."we" really don't.
we need a /self-help/ board or a self-help sticky, much like the sticky on /fit/, to stop the newfags fucking up the board. We need decent mods and jans too

>>12024581
Don't do this shit anon, ffs.
If you want to understand economics, start with the classics first, that's all that you need for every single one of the subjects that you wish to study.

Go read some Smith (The Wealth of Nations), Mill (Utilitarism), Marx (Capital, you can read the summary by Cafiero if you think it's difficult), Keynes.

Than you go and read this bullshit of a book.

>>12023816
I'm pretty sure the primary goal, of any business, is profit, not expansion. Expansion is a means to profit, but there can be cases where it is unprofitable. And it can't be bribery unless they are buying something from someone that doesn't actually own what they are buying, that's just a voluntary transaction. An example would be bribing a CEO. The share holders technically own the company, but they can also fire the CEO if he does something they don't like. People seem to believe that if government was just done right then things would be much more fair. You don't need finance laws or the rest if there is no government to arbitrarily set rules on some and not others. How is it fair for 50.1% of people to tax some more than others, or to say what others can do? In a stateless society, a corporation, when it does something its customers doesn't like, they stop doing business with them; with a government, there are many cases where you can't or it's harder to. The East India Trading Company is also not a great example because I'm fairly certain they were subsidized by the British government, and they were given a monopoly on tea to the colonies, one reason while America rebelled. You can keep trying to make government work or you can be consistent in applying the principle that nobody should force anyone else to do something they don't want to.
>>12023826
Oh boo hoo, what would you ever do without Apple? If you don't like Apple's policies don't use their product.

>>12024038
Isn't this a kind of ad hominem? Don't criticize the person, but their arguments.

>>12024612
Fucking retard without legislation everyone would behave like Apple. Do you know the frog and the scorpion fable? Elementary school shit.

>>12024651
How do you know everyone would act scummy? Companies would be incentivized to not act scummy since you don't have to do business with them and there'd be more oppurtunities for alternatives. I'm not taking a fucking fairy tale as a good critique.

>>12024681
>life teachings are not good representation of life

>>12024619
No, this is a fact, she showed to everyone that she was wrong.

>>12024553
>>12024594
What’s harder to achieve?
>1/2/3/4
>Finish Infinite Jest
>1 gf

>>12024757
Your moms fat belly

>>12024708
It's not an argument, nor a rebutal. There's no proof.

>>12024715
It's ad hominem. You're criticizing the woman not her arguments. Just because she didn't apply them herself doesn't mean they're wrong.

>>12018934
Thanks for your Facebook reactions and feelings about things. I wish I could like, share, upvote, and subscribe to you just like on Facebook.

>>12024783
I'm not criticizing the woman, I'm stating that she proved that what she said was wrong.
Btw, what you are doing is falacy of the falacy, so if you don't have a better argument, fuck off.

>>12024831
What arguments did she show were wrong by using welfareand being poor?

>>12024844
You already had your chance, instead of creating good arguments, instead you just accused me of fallacies (ironically doing a fallacy yourself).

Fuck off.

>>12018934
I like Atlas Shrugged, it's unironically a good book with good characters and a fascinating plot. It is a horrible philosophy though. 10 times out of 10, the people that run companies have very little knowledge on how their product works, and are focused on sales and relations. I work for a printer. I wouldn't trust the CEO of my company to print jack shit, because he's a sales person, yet in Atlas Shrugged, he would be the fucking inventor of print with impossible knowledge of all things having to do with the industry. Not only that, but he would also be willing to work with other companies to promote society in general, instead of just work to destroy everyone else to increase company value. No, of course not. Business people care about society despite being selfish. Monopolies don't exist, poor working to improve bottom line don't exist. Businesses are only successful if they're innovative and provide need and value to society, I guess leeching businesses that destroy homes and peoples' lives don't exist either.

I say all of this as a conservative. Ayn Rand is not a competent philosopher. Anyone who looks at this book other than a decent piece of fiction and nothing more is retarded.

>>12024859
Just answer. How did she show herself wrong?

>>12024970
The thing isn't that Ayn Rand is describing CEOs as they are but as they should be.

>>12025231
That's exactly the problem. She describes this utopia of completely competent people who all selfishly work towards the betterment of society which is more unrealistic than raw socialism. It's craziness, I don't know why anyone takes it seriously.

>>12024612
In order to obtain more profit, a business needs to expand. Isn't that part of the point? Building capital? You can't grow as a business unless you obtain more facilities, and beat out the competition. Anyway, I'm not going to play semantic games here so I'm not going to argue over the definition of bribery. The point was, so long as someone has metric fuckton of money, they can use that money to pay people to do many things. They can pay them to be a private army for example. Battle of Blair Mountai, classic example. Look it up. Workers want to go on strike, there are no laws or government around to protect them. Corporation hires a private army to intimidate, assault, and or kill them and there is nothing the people can do to stop it. There are many ways the rich can gain power, they don't need the government in order to do that. Anyway, people don't need to believe government needs to be done right because there are examples of it being done right. There are countries with campaign finance laws, again, look them up. Plenty of examples of government done right. There are also plenty of examples of government done wrong. The point is government existing means it can be done right or wrong. We the people have the choice to make it right or wrong. We can choose to either corrupt it or not. We don't however have that same choice in lawless world. Unless you think we stand a chance against private armies. But again, you can look at the people getting slaughtered in Blair Mountain as an example of what happens when corporations have unfettered power. I'd love it if people lived in a world where nobody could force anyone to do anything, but we don't live in that kind of world. There's always going to be some sort of force, be it corporate or governmental.

>>12025474
Well, again, it's most a guide on how people should act rather than how people do act. She's saying CEOs should care for their own benefit to seek something they want accomplished and desire a quality product. Obviously this won't apply to all CEOs, and she does argue many do not fit that standards, but it is the ultimate goal to be reached. You're not supposed to take it as literal or a representation of how CEOs are.
The Fountainhead is more reasonable since it's the same idealism in terms of an artist but people can relate more to it since creative people feel that struggle.

>>12025543
Profit is based on supply and demand. If the market isn't large enough, a company can't expand, and private armies, really? If a large company really thought it would be profitable to hire mercenaries then people could just stop doing business with them and protect themselves if required, or band together to form a militia or hire other mercenaries against them. But this situation is so far from reality since companies for the most part want customers to be loyal, and forcing them doesn't do that. Your example doesn't help your case much either since both sides had weapons and were shooting at each other, not the corporation enslaving its workers.

>you can be a huge successful international company without systematic sociopathic behavior

How fucking naive are you people exactly? You're literally brainwashed by the media.

>people are defending this as a good novel

>>12018934
>a weak little faggot who believes society and the government have to spoon feed you everything.

Ayd Rand was on welfare her whole life.

>>12026020
Prove it. I'm not gonna take you on your word and I don't see sociopathic behavior rampant in companies.

Atlas Shrugged is one of the most poorly written pieces of literary schlock I've had the displeasure of reading. Characters drone on and on for dozens of pages about nothing in particular. Rand spent so many paragraphs painting a lame picture of an incredibly dull setting chock full of unsympathetic, non-human-feeling characters she spends virtually no time at all edging towards whatever point she was trying so doggedly to make about society. Leave it to a woman to write one of the most terrible and overly-long books ever in an attempt to promote an incredibly simple ideology.

>Objectivism in practice, ever

>>12027268
Prove the opposite.

>>12028637
Most people aren't sociopathic and companies are made up of people. The burden of proof is on you

>>12028637
The one that makes a claim is the one that proves it. If you do not prove it, it becomes arbitrary and dismissed.

>>12018934
Okay, this analysis fucking slaps

>>12024606
You don’t need to read any of that before Atlas Shrugged.

You can just read Atlas Shrugged or pick up some of Rands nonfiction like the Virtue of Selfishness. It’s TERRIBLE philosophy.

Not based within God

Not based within morally correct virtues.

Not very well written.

Terrible terrible shite

>>12022434
wew to whoever drew and propagated this image. imagine being such an incel that you think everyone is an incel. it's the male equivalent to that woman who felt so persecuted that she actually grew a weave and became black

>>12029087
>not reading The Fountainhead
Fucking pleb, it's idiots that go directly for Atlas Shrugged that are idiots.

>>12029290
Yeah I preferred The Fountainhead as well, but I enjoyed both.

>>12018934
The love triangle was shit and dagney was a clear self insert by an ugly jew wanting to be a german aryan
Her writing was good but it rambled a lot

>>12029634
>muh aryans
Never gonna make it

>>12020494
i came up on objectivism so i have that in my philosophical DNA, but we can easily see that even today businesses like amazon/google/facebook/twitter have way too much pull over ordinary people. it definitely has something to do with their involvement in liberal politics but theres no "superior products" on amazon, everything thats highly rated or suggested is all chink shit that falls apart. you end up having to dig deep to find something that is actually quality on amazon. and lets not forget that they are buying up brands to put themselves front and center in the chink shit selling arena and enhancing their supply chains. im so sick of buying products and seeing "made in china" i take a lot of time and expense seeking out products just to avoid this from happening

>>12029634
Yeah it's pretty clear Dagny is Ayn Rand.

>Dagny, I'm so sorry. So so sorry, please forgive me. I know you came here wanting to end things with me, but I am the one apologizing because I put you in a bad position. Yes, please, fuck John Galt, please he's perfect for you. It would make me so happy if you stopped this love affair with me so you can fuck John Galt because he's so much better than me and YOU deserve him. You Dagny, it's all about you, yes you! DAGNY TAGGART!!! Oh how I need to make you happy

117 replies /lit/ easy as ever to troll i see

>>12020746
>only be together with people that aren't shit
Nobody is great unless they're lifted up by others.

>>12029024
>>12028658
People that make decisions at big companies are ALL sociopathts, if they weren't the companies wouldn't be successful. It's just that easy.
All the Timmies (like you) that work for those companies that don't even understand what the fuck they're doing and the consequences of it don't matter.

>>12029634
>>12030010
Kek. Sounds like some Nurutu fanfiction written by a hambeast.

>>12018934
I may not like the woman herself, but every once and a while she said something that cannot be refuted.

>"What were they [the Amerindians] fighting for, in opposing the white man on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence; for their “right” to keep part of the earth untouched – to keep everybody out so they could live like animals or cavemen. Any European who brought with him an element of civilization had the right to take over this continent, and it’s great that some of them did. The racist Indians today – those who condemn America – do not do not deserve to live"
Ayn Rand on the Native American question, and its final solution.

>plebs vehemently defending corporations
i will never understand american indoctrination

>>12030594
When you're livestock goyim that gets manipulated all your life into serving your overlords it's only natural to react violently when your certanties get shaken by the free and enlightened, when they propose you a different world view it's a shoking revolution of the world you've known until that moment.

>>12030563
>dude, historical ignorance and racism lmao

>>12030563
Bullshit, none of the Europeans came with the intention of elevating the indigenous civilization. They fought for their freedom, not for their "wish to continue a primitive existence".

>>12019030
>You think babies are weak for dying in hot cars. Your name is David and your first cat was named Mrs. Fluffy.
I'm fucking dying over here

>>12030540
Prove that claim. You have any facts to back that up?

>>12030594
I defend freedom from tyranny

>>12031212
Their success.
>>12031214
The irony.

>>12031215
So you have to be a sociopath to be successful? Prove that. And are you implying corporations are tyrannical, and moreso than government? How can you even support that belief?

>>12020512
I agree with everything you've said, anon. But there are quite a few "good" works with characters who are lifeless billboards for ideologies:

>The Hamlet by Faulkner
Will Varner, Mj. De Spain
>A Fable by Faulkner
the military leaders
>Fathers And Sons by Turgenev
sitnikov, kukshina, arkady's father
>One Day In The Life of Ivan Denisovich by Solz
>The Jew of Malta by Kit Marlowe
>The Merchant of Venice by Shakespeare
>Timon of Athens by Shakespeare
>Blood Meridian by Cormac McCarthy
>Outer Dark by Cormac McCarthy

Rand's style is grating. Not many people like it. That's nine tenths of the problem right there.

>>12031242
No, you have to be a sociopath to be a successful company/corporation, not business. The larger the scale of your success, the less human you are. Of course this is true only if we measure success by economical standards.
There are countless successfull business that are the result of hard work by amazing people, like for example Cucinelli. But Cucinelli could never be a corporation because it'd be a contradiction in its nature.

>>12031260
You haven't proven you have to be a sociopath in a corporate envirnoment to succeed. You keep claiming that without any evidence to back it up. And there's nothing significantly different between a corporation (which is a kind of business) and some small business which would require you to be sociopathic to succeed, unless you have evidence to the contrary.

>>12031254
So basically you've got to be as great as Faulkner, Shakespeare or Turgenev to really pull it off.
Similar to writing a 1000+ page time detailing your world view. If you are Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, even Dickens, it's maybe allowable, because your literary talents are such we will bear with you as you digress. If you ain't that good, get an editor who is

>>12031351
That's not what I said, I said you don't have to be a sociopath to have a successful business, not that no owner of a small business is one. On the contrary it's systematically impossible in 2018 in a developed economy for a company/corporation to not be sociopathic.

Yes, of course I haven't proven anything, because it's one fo those things that are self evident, I don't think it needs to be proven.

>>12031375
It's not self evident. I don't see corporations acting sociopathic.

>>12031375
>>12031351
I mean, look at marketing, it's basically a science that studies how to make people have the percetion and the subsequent emotions you want them to have, independently from reality.
If that's not sociopathic I don't know what is.

>>12031395
It's exactly that, marketing. You want to convince people to buy your product, and that's the logical extension of that. Is debate any more sociopathic than advertising? It's just trying to convince you to buy something. Of course, marketing is much more subtle, pulling more from psychology to influence people, but it doesn't force anyone to do anything, nor damage them in any way.

>>12031458
Rethoric is NOT debate lol, it's the exact opposite. You can say it's "for the greater good" but it's still a very sociopathic behaviour.

And yeah, you can force people to do stuff they normally wouldn't do manipulating their emotions. That's exactly what sociopaths do.
Corporations don't want people to be able to make educated decisions and inquire beyond the marketing facade they put up.

>>12018934

>>12031375
Nothing is self-evident.

>>12030500
Says you, I lift myself up and made my own fortune.

>>12033092
Who do you learn what you know from? Even if it's a book who do you think wrote that book? Who do you think published that book? Who do you think printed that book?
Fucking idiot.
>>12033084
Yeah, no.

>>12033123
>Yeah, no.
It's self-evident that nothing is self-evident.

>>12033123
>Who do you learn what you know from?
Nobody, I made my fortune on the stock market with my own money.

>>12033142
Where did you get the knowledge on how to make a profit on the stock market?
Again, fucking idiot.

>>12033153
>Where did you get the knowledge on how to make a profit on the stock market?
Nowhere lol, I looked at a company, invested in them and made my money.

>>12033160
Where did you learn how to read?
Stop being a faggot and acknowledge reality already.

>>12033172
I knew how to read a priori and I know all languages by learning the platonic language in the sky.
>he wasn't born with all the knowledge in the world

>>12033172
He's obviously a self-taught reader and your homophobic slurs won't deter him!

>>12033177
>>12033178
Yeah, exactly.

>>12033188
Either way, the point is that I was not dependent on anyone to achieve my own fortune and wealth. I used my own money, risked it and achieved what I wanted.
And it's self-evident that capitalism is the best system because it allowed me to succeed in life :^)

>this retarded conversation

>>12033214
You're still going at it after being demonstrated how retarded your way of thinking is? You owe a lot of stuff to a lot of people, everyone does.

>>12033226
>owe people
lol I owe nothing. You're implying I am in debt to people. Do you 'owe' anything to people you pay for goods and services? You're just trying to win an semantic argument. For example, I do owe my parents for raising me but the processes of obtaining knowledge with my own time, money and energy is my own and I do not 'owe' anything in that regards.
It's very slave morality to think you owe anything by virtue of interacting with people. Do you owe me anything if I tell you you're wrong?

>>12033247
What and arrogant twat. Not like you have much to offer anyway.

>>12033247
‘Owe’ isn’t necessarily a concept expressed in material exchange. It might be that you owe a moral debt to certain institutions or people for the agency they’ve bestowed upon you, which you ‘earned’ simply by accident of birthright. There exists in the world few to no truly self-made men; all people get some help from some quarter throughout their life. Those numbers can’t be expressed on a ledger, but they’re real enough.

>>12033357
If you really have to explain such a simple concept to someone then you already know he won't comprehend it, why bother?
Let the twat revel in his egomaniacal fantasy.

>>12033311
See, that's why you need to value self-esteem or else idiots think they 'owe' people and can never be proud of their accomplishments.

>Not like you have much to offer anyway.
Yes yes, keep that high mighty slave morality attitude of yours, as if you have anything of value. Honestly, because of my financial success I'm able to spend my time writing as a hobby, and people enjoy my work. Trying to shame me into thinking I 'owe' anything just shows underhanded idiotic ideology more than anything regarding the truth or proper ethics. I'll be as arrogant as I want. Don't make me use Stirner on you and say 'owing' is a spook you little bitch.

>>12033357
I don't disagree with you. As the example I gave, I owe my parents a lot for properly raising me and I always help them whenever I can. But, as far as I know, there are no institutions that have helped me out of sheer grace, so it is not as though there is an unpaid debt, which is what 'owe' tends to mean. However, he is implying that I 'owe' in the way of debt to literally everyone for creating everything, akin to literal servitude and self-imposed shame. I won't lie and say being a self-made man is common, but I've made my own success by my own effort and trying to undercut it with semantic bullshit like a self-imposed debt to people or institutions when they never interacted with me is just ideological and very slave morality.

>>12033420
There's only honor in giving. No "slave" or "shame" or ideology bullshit.
>I'll be as arrogant as I want. Don't make me use Stirner on you and say 'owing' is a spook you little bitch.
I hope you realize how pathetic you sound right now.

>>12033420
Also, just because someone gets paid to do something it doesn't mean that's why he's doing it. You'd probably consider him a stupid, I suppose. That kindergarten teacher you had that does her best to raise kids, so fucking stupid of her to not acquire a more remunerative skill and acquire wealth.

>>12033439
>There's only honor in giving. No "slave" or "shame" or ideology bullshit.
There's honor in being proud of your own accomplishment and only giving to those that deserve it, not just giving indiscriminately.

>I hope you realize how pathetic you sound right now.
You call me arrogant yet think I care how I sound? You know damn well I'm right in using Stirner. Did you think I couldn't use him to call you out on your bullshit? I don't particularly like Stirner but the concept of spook has its usage as an anti-concept against slave morality ideas.

>>12033462
>Also, just because someone gets paid to do something it doesn't mean that's why he's doing it.
You're right, kindergarten teachers obvious do their job because they hate their job and enjoy living in misery. But no, I just assume that either they enjoy being with children and it was their chosen career path or they ended up there accidently and did not move on with their lives. I'm not going to call it stupid, just an outcome in life from indecision. I don't see any shame in being a kindergarten teacher. Why do you?

>>12033491
Nanos gigantum humeris insidentes. We stand on the shoulders of giants.
That's why you can be wealthy. Fuck off with your retarded yuppie shit, trying to justify it with Stirner, as if he was the infallible divine gospel.

>>12033553
Maybe other people do, but I stand on my own legs. I'm wealthy because I invested in a good company and acted as an angel investor at its foundation and profited from it.

>justify it with Stirner
HA. Did you forget what thread you're in? I'm justifying it with Ayn Rand! I'm just using Stirner to say that the concept of 'owing' is a spook. The rhetoric and argument for why I don't owe shit nor should I feel ashamed for not owing falls in line with Ayn Rand and Nietzsche. Stirner is just the most direct way to tell you to fuck off. Again, I don't like Stirner, but as an anti-concept idea, spook has its usage.

>>12033602
You think you do but you don't. It's called ignorance. Or delusion.

>>12033637
Or it's truth, which you are unable to see due to ideology. Either way, I don't care.

>>12033637
It's called survival of the strongest, anon. If you're too weak to survive on your own that's your fault.

You're gay and retarded goodbye

>>12033833
>due to ideology
Fuck Zizek Peterson and co. for memeing the cancer that this is a valid criterion of assessment by itself.
Ideology can influence for good or ill *in what context(s)*?
Pure distilled idiocy.
The left thinks I'm fucking stupid. Philosophize "ideology" as inherently volatile and state that current order and manner of events is a baseline to reference and return to when things go wrong. Say that their advocacy of the current cultural-philosophic paradigm is "not ideology" and any creed subscribed to with enough, not even conviction but, consistency is in "ideology".
Like I don't know what you're doing you fucking faggots.

>Ctrl f
>"ideology"
>13 results.

>>12018934
>can't enjoy the book without self associating with her ideology
Hmmmmmmmhmmm

>>12034267
One of the times I cringe at a fellow O'ist desu

>>12019030
I had just finished getting a blowjob from the Mrs when we sat down to watch the simpsons ( she loves the simpsons) and they had an episode with Maggie doing a parody of Fountain Head. She ended up reading and liking Atlas Shrugged after that, what now cunt?

Also corporations dont exist without the government you spastic, lookup corporate personhood, the history of the pty ltd corporation and what a limited liability corporation is.

>>12033995
Funny how people don't like it when the ideology of ideology is used against them, huh?
Ayn Rand argued that ideology is just a bullshit synonym for philosophy.

>>12034267
it's an old /lit/ troll tactic post ayn rand and watch leftists sperg amazing is still works after all these years

>>12034267
>book is completely dependant on its allegory, story is otherwise hot garbage
>why you can't simply enjoy it for what it is!
>>12034745
>Also corporations dont exist without a corrupted government
Fixed that for you, buddy.
>>12035487
>it's an old /lit/ troll tactic post a pic of a hot latina/black and watch rightkuks sperg amazing is still works after all these years

>>12035487
You barely need to troll. The left are all so butthurt that this Russian ladyjew came out of nowhere and solved all their philosophical issues, proved them all wrong, (and sold loads more books too) that they still pretend she didn't do it and refuse to teach her in college

>>12035615
I'd generally refuse to teach any English literature at all if was up to me. Except maybe Steinbeck.
Can you imagine teaching Tolstoy and Rand in the same classroom? Even putting them in the same sentence gives me chills.

>>12035603
>85 iq posting

>>12035635
Tolstoy really didn't give a fuck about his wife so fuck that advice lol

>>12035696
It's all jewish propaganda baka.
>>12035673
Watch him sperg.

>>12035977
Your argument is invalid, your mother was a whore and your father smelled of elder berries. before he died

>>12036042
Look at the perfect individualist being, look at him and laugh!

No but seriosuly, what's the difference between Marvel comics and Ayn Rand books?

>>12036278
One is written for children and features ridiculous characters, silly plots, and laughably simplistic cod-philosophy

>>12018934
No, I don't like Atlas Shrugged because I find Ayn Rand physically unattractive.

A healthy mind resides in a healthy body. To find a kindred soul in literature one must read exclusively the works of authors he is physically attracted to.

>>12037244
BASED AND MISHIMAPILLED

although maybe to an extreme degree

>>12036323
And the other has the hulk.

>>12036271
Laughing at people is a sign of insecurity. My dick however is heuuuuuge.

>>12018934
Ayn Rand is fine but you're a dumbass