# Ayn Rand's philosophy on the middle and working classes **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 11, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381 "2009-02-11T16:26:02Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![martu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e0b2c6/32.png) [@martu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/martu)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 12:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/141 "2009-02-13T12:50:58Z")
> [@Madgolf](#): > > Collectivist and doomed to never own a Corvette or compose a sonata. > > Humans are not monkeys and Rand addresses this in ‘The Virtue of Selfishness’. > > Humans may have been monkeys at one point but we have evolved. No we are still Apes and evolution hasn’t created Randroids: [Gary Marcus on Charles Darwin’s ‘Survival of the Fittest’ - WSJ.com](http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123431527821470987.html) ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/142 "2009-02-13T12:53:20Z")
> [@AtomicDog](#): > > Hmmm. Your example sounds more like the [Justice Lords](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Justice_Lords) to me. They would work, too. I did qualify my example by saying “if” the Superfriends ruled, it would be like the system of leadership in Atlas Shrugged - a fantasy world ruled by ubermensch, which doesn’t really seem like a true meritocracy to me. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 1:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/143 "2009-02-13T13:43:41Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > The idea that humans can’t be compared in any way to other animal societies because of our rational abilities is an Objectivist myth. You know, I’m pretty sure that idea didn’t start with Ayn Rand. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/144 "2009-02-13T13:56:03Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > (And I’ve never really figured out why **Rand thinks that a modern steelworker should be individually entitled only to the standard of living of a medieval blacksmith,** with all additional benefits being a “gift” from “the men of the mind”, while a modern scientist should be individually entitled to much more than the standard of living of a medieval scientist. Sure, the accumulation of scientific and technological developments since medieval times artificially enhances the productivity of today’s steelworker, but it artificially enhances the productivity of today’s scientist too.) The language you quoted doesn’t say this. It says nothing about a steelworker is entitled to or what he deserves. The language you quoted just says that the reason the modern steelworker gets paid more than the medieval steel worker is that the modern steelworker is more productive (i.e., able to produce more steel). The reason that the mordern steelworker is more productive is that Hank Rearden invented a new kind of metal and devised new processes for making metal. Also, not only does this language not say what \*\*you \*\*are saying above that it says, it definitely does not suppot Stranger On A Train’s idea that Rand believes “they should be happy to be serving the elite leadership and fall in line with whatever self-proclaimed visionaries demand of them.” ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 1:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/145 "2009-02-13T13:59:31Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Ms. Rand’s “philosophy” is a marvelous system for adding machines. But not for monkeys. Which we are. Monkeys are collectivist. Family, tribe, clan, nation, all the essential units of monkeyness are collective. Can you define the terms “collectivist” and “collective” as used above? Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/146 "2009-02-13T14:02:56Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Is it fair to say that to be a Randian (or perhaps an Objectivist), you have to be a brooding adolescent or moderately autistic? Is it fair to say that one should not post insults outside the Pit? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/147 "2009-02-13T14:23:40Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Is it fair to say that one should not post insults outside the Pit? Oh, there’s no direct personal insult in what I posted. I’m sure, however, that there are other valid explanations for the misanthropy of Ayn Rand’s philosophy than I posited there. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 2:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/148 "2009-02-13T14:44:10Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Oh, there’s no direct personal insult in what I posted. > > I’m sure, however, that there are other valid explanations for the misanthropy of Ayn Rand’s philosophy than I posited there. Ayn Rand’s philosophy is not misanthropic at all. The looters’ philosophy in AS was misanthropic. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelQReilly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/df705f/32.png) [@MichaelQReilly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelQReilly)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 2:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/149 "2009-02-13T14:59:16Z")
> [@Madgolf](#): > > Wolves eat available animals and fight each other for alpha status to secure stronger-gened partners then go off to spread the species. This is supposed to be an argument that humans are different than wolves? I don’t think you’ve been paying very good attention, because you pretty much just proved the other side’s point. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/150 "2009-02-13T15:12:59Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Ayn Rand’s philosophy is not misanthropic at all. The looters’ philosophy in AS was misanthropic. Reality testing time: “the looters” and “the moochers” are part of Rand’s philosophy, not external realities. The fact that she proposes that such large categories of people exist is misanthropic. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/151 "2009-02-13T15:18:17Z")
By that definition your own political views, and those of most liberals is equally misanthropic. My own definition of misanthropic would be more along the lines of hating ALL humans or human society, not just segments of both. The Earth First types would fall into this category IMHO…but Rand (and the liberals, etc etc ;)) would not. However, you have been freely defining things based on your own definitions this entire thread, so I guess you should just keep running with it. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Duke](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/e8c25b/32.png) [@Duke](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duke)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/152 "2009-02-13T15:34:55Z")
> [@Rand\_Rover](#): > > Ayn Rand’s philosophy is not misanthropic at all. Yeah, that’s got to be why she referred to the working class as being possessed of “hopeless ineptitude” and suggested they’d starve without the firm, guiding hand of the creators at the top. Yep, that’s got to be it: > [@](#): > > The man at the bottom who, left to himself, would starve in his hopeless ineptitude, contributes nothing to those above him, but receives the bonus of all of their brains. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/153 "2009-02-13T15:37:44Z")
> [@xtisme](#): > > By that definition your own political views, and those of most liberals is equally misanthropic. My own definition of misanthropic would be more along the lines of hating ALL humans or human society, not just segments of both. The Earth First types would fall into this category IMHO…but Rand (and the liberals, etc etc ;)) would not. > > However, you have been freely defining things based on your own definitions this entire thread, so I guess you should just keep running with it. > > -XT Misanthropy is of course not only hatred, but also dislike and distrust of humanity, by most common definitions. I say again that concieving that most of humanity can be segmented into simplistic negative categorizations is a dislike for humanity (even if there is a special segment, perhaps “people like me” who you reserve some liking for). You have to be able to break out of concrete thought based on the content of the book and consider Rand’s philosophy from the outside, or objectively, for a moment. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/154 "2009-02-13T15:39:40Z")
[QUOTE=Duke] Yeah, that’s got to be why she referred to the working class as being possessed of “hopeless ineptitude” and suggested they’d starve without the firm, guiding hand of the creators at the top. Yep, that’s got to be it: [/QUOTE] You should go back and read that quote in context…she wasn’t referring to the entire working class there. I think at this point I’ll bow out. This is turning into the standard 'dope circle jerk type debate. If you guys want to bash on Rand then go for it…there is certainly a lot of stuff you can criticize her works for, including her writing style and philosophy. There really isn’t any need to make stuff up though…there is plenty of ammunition in what she ACTUALLY wrote, especially if her philosophy is opposed to your own. -XT ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/155 "2009-02-13T15:40:21Z")
> [@Duke](#): > > Yeah, that’s got to be why she referred to the working class as being possessed of “hopeless ineptitude” and suggested they’d starve without the firm, guiding hand of the creators at the top. Yep, that’s got to be it: My reading of that is different than yours. I don’t think that “the man” is “the working class.”. Rather, she is saying that those people who are hopelessly inept benefit from those who are smarter. ---
**Author:** ![Madgolf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d6d6ee/32.png) [@Madgolf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Madgolf)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/156 "2009-02-13T15:40:56Z")
> [@MichaelQReilly](#): > > This is supposed to be an argument that humans are different than wolves? I don’t think you’ve been paying very good attention, because you pretty much just proved the other side’s point. That is the absolute most advanced behavior and capabilities wolves are capable of. Humans possess advanced behavior and capabilities. Extremely advanced. You are guilty of evading reason (the preferred objectivist term). ---
**Author:** ![Kimstu](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/ecd19e/32.png) [@Kimstu](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kimstu)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/157 "2009-02-13T15:41:31Z")
> [@RickJay](#): > > > [@Kimstu](#): > > > > The idea that humans can’t be compared in any way to other animal societies because of our rational abilities is an Objectivist myth. > > You know, I’m pretty sure that idea didn’t start with Ayn Rand. Heh, point well taken. However, in modern times it seems to be the Objectivists (and maybe creationist Christians too) who are most ardently clinging to that idea. Most other people seem to have adjusted reasonably well to the now-standard biological concept that humans are simultaneously a unique species with unique cognitive abilities **and** a closely linked relative of various other species with many psychological and social traits similar to ours. I see why the creationists reject this view, but I’m not sure what the Objectivists have against it. Maybe it’s on account of their idealization of rationality and extreme claims of individual psychological autonomy? They seem to reject the possibility that any non-rational “brute animal” characteristics are in any way fundamental to the human psyche. > [@xtisme](#): > > By that definition your own political views, and those of most liberals is equally misanthropic. 😕 ?? How ya figure? Sure, liberals acknowledge that greedy and selfish and parasitic people exist, but we don’t try to argue that **most** of humanity is greedy and selfish and parasitic. (On the contrary: aren’t conservatives always accusing liberals of being too trusting and optimistic about human goodness?) The reason **Hentor** ’s calling Rand misanthropic is because she classifies almost the _whole_ of human society as “looters” and “moochers”, save for the small band of liberated visionaries who are tasked to rescue the world. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/158 "2009-02-13T15:41:31Z")
> [@Duke](#): > > Yeah, that’s got to be why she referred to the working class as being possessed of “hopeless ineptitude” and suggested they’d starve without the firm, guiding hand of the creators at the top. Yep, that’s got to be it: My reading of that is different than yours. I don’t think that “the man” is “the working class.”. Rather, she is saying that those people who are hopelessly inept benefit from those who are smarter. My reading is sopported by the fact that lots of her characters in AS were working class and yet were not hopelessly inept. ---
**Author:** ![Rand\_Rover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/db5fbb/32.png) [@Rand\_Rover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rand_Rover)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/159 "2009-02-13T15:45:45Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > 😕 ?? How ya figure? Sure, liberals acknowledge that greedy and selfish and parasitic people exist, but we don’t try to argue that **most** of humanity is greedy and selfish and parasitic. (On the contrary: aren’t conservatives always accusing liberals of being too trusting and optimistic about human goodness?) > > The reason **Hentor** ’s calling Rand misanthropic is because she classifies almost the _whole_ of human society as “looters” and “moochers”, save for the small band of liberated visionaries who are tasked to rescue the world. The plot of the book only works if the looters take over. That’s why there are alot of them. I don’t think this should be read as Rand saying that most people are looters or moochers. ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [February 13, 2009, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381/160 "2009-02-13T15:45:50Z")
> [@Kimstu](#): > > Heh, point well taken. However, in modern times it seems to be the Objectivists (and maybe creationist Christians too) who are most ardently clinging to that idea. Maybe I didn’t spend enough time on Fidonet back in the day, but there just aren’t that many Objectivists around, and in any case I’m sure many of the few who really dig Ayn Rand do have some basic understanding of biology. If you want to know who’s clinging to the notion humans are different from animals, fundamentalists are pretty much 99.9% of that group. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ayn-rands-philosophy-on-the-middle-and-working-classes/485381.md?page=9)