Kinda like Hermann Hesse in a way, the notions of a special breed of superior people, avatars of excellence who pass amongst we of the grubbenproles. But unlike racism, its not localized in a particular branch of humanity…not white people, more like smart people, but more than just smart, more alive, more assertive, more engaged.…
Did they presage the arrival of The Cecil and the dawning of the SDMB? We cannot know for sure, but perhaps the brilliance of our light penetrated even the dark veils of time itself…
This sidetrack about whether or not Rand embodied her philosophy is pretty pointless. Because Rand herself would have been the first to tell you she didn’t have the opportunity to do so. She didn’t live in the objectivist utopia she called for. She lived in what she viewed as the flawed American political and economic system. So the issue of whether she died rich or poor is moot as far as it reflects on her philosophy.
given the fact that plenty of other authors made a lot lot lot more money than she did, we have no choice but to declare Rand an utter failure, in terms of her “message” and living up to it’s standards.
Then it would still come down to an impossible to keep secret, since as I stated earlier, this valley needs to be supplied with food, water, electricity, labor, luxury goods, etc; and all of that would be impossible to hide over time.
A year or so ago wasn’t there a proposal to dump all the very rich people on a boat and send it adrift into the far seas, cunningly disguised as an opportunity for them to live on an exclusive luxurious floating Galt’s Gulch away from the common looters and low knaves who would tax them beyond misery ?
I think it’s remarkable how many people criticise (and viciously so) Rand and her philosophy but have neither read any of her books nor have any intention of doing so. I’ve been in a debate on this MB where some posters ascribed ideas to her which they are entirely unwilling(and, since I’ve actually read the books, I also know they’re unable) to cite. Instead, they fall back on arbitrary mockery. The intellectual dishonesty displayed in most criticism of her is pretty telling.
I made the comparison to David Icke earlier. His political philosophy is based on the idea that the world is being run by a race of alien lizards who are masquerading as human beings.
Icke has written several books outlining his theory. Have I read these books? No. Do I plan on reading these books? No. Do I nonetheless feel confident in dismissing his theory? Yes.
If the milk smells bad, you aren’t obligated to drink it to be sure it really is bad. You just throw it out based on the way it smells.
[QUOTE=Little Nemo]
Icke has written several books outlining his theory. Have I read these books? No. Do I plan on reading these books? No. Do I nonetheless feel confident in dismissing his theory? Yes.
[/QUOTE]
Sure. But do you equally feel confident debating the finer points of his book(s), including extrapolations of various concepts? If you are just going to dismiss everything as bunk then WHY DEBATE THE SUBJECT AT ALL?
That’s what I don’t get about these threads. You have folks who chime in who have never read the book, folks tearing imaginary plot holes in the story that they have never read, and then you have 'luci expostulating on gods know what…and all for a book that 90% of the posters in this or most other threads despise and basically haven’t read at all (or claim to have read while displaying a startling lack of understanding of the basics). What’s the point? Why chime in? What is it about this subject that pulls the posters out of the wood work to dis on a book that most people haven’t bothered to read or understand?
And yet, here you are, discussing it. Come on…you got to admit, this is funny as hell, especially for a site that claims to be about fighting ignorance. The only thing funnier at this point is Chimera attempting to tear holes in the plot of a book s/he has admitted s/he has never read, and clearly doesn’t know the first thing about.
Little Nemo is saying that since he didn’t read Thor Hyerdhal’s Kon Tiki, there is no reason for him to read Mitchener’s Hawaii in order to criticize the latter.
we are talking about the book where all the really talented people moved to a secret town of their own so all the takers and leeches would quit dragging them down, right?
I’ll take that as a no. It was not a quote. I asked you for a quote to substantiate your claim. In response, you made something up. This forum is called Great Debates; not Great Things You Make Up.
But even if that were correct, how does that prove that “we have no choice but to declare Rand an utter failure, in terms of her “message” and living up to it’s standards”
And yet, here you are, discussing it. Come on…you got to admit, this is funny as hell, especially for a site that claims to be about fighting ignorance. The only thing funnier at this point is Chimera attempting to tear holes in the plot of a book s/he has admitted s/he has never read, and clearly doesn’t know the first thing about.