That must be it! A conspiracy! These beautiful revolutionary ideas that could turn the world into a Libertarian Utopia are being kept down by the Government Teacher Cabal! It has nothing to do with the pedestrian writing and hackneyed philosophy, as some claim! IT’S THE TEACHER CONSPIRACY.
Can you imagine trying to keep students awake when they’re trying to read the John Galt speech? Even I couldn’t make it through that drivel.
(I chose my user name before I read the book, so don’t blame me!)
You could always ask the mods to change it to JohnGaltSucks or something like that.
I find it interesting that several in this thread (including me) said that we had to read at least some Rand in school and have yet to get an acknowledgement from the OP of that.
I’ve always found Rand very similar to Marx. They’ve got different ideologies, of course, but both of them are good at pointing out the flaws in the economic system they live in, but very bad at proposing a viable alternative.
And the Ayn Rand Foundation and some other organizations send out free copies of her books to high schools specifically so that they can be taught there. Low-income schools may tend to teach her books more often simply because they can’t afford to be buying other books, or at least would rather spend the money elsewhere.
Yes, dammit.
True. I read the sacred text in High School English but they never taught the philosophy.
His philosophy is sounder as well.
The book is useful - she could always be taught as a bad example.
We were never taught Rand, but in 8th grade we were taught Velikovsky(!) in a manner that seemed to be entirely serious. Having that presented in a school environment as fact seems much more damaging than doing the same with Rand.
It is taught in high school. At least it was in my senior year English class. I don’t see why anyone would think that Ayn Rand should be an established part of every school curriculum across the country, if that’s what you’re asking.
For starters, a lot of people find her rejection of altruism and promotion of selfish self-interest above all other concerns to be morally repugnant and contrary to their own viewpoint.
Also, as seen in the recent Marion Zimmer Bradley threads, a lot of people don’t want to disseminate the works of people whose personal lives or beliefs they find objectionable or even criminal. So, the anti-abortion people don’t like her, homosexuals and those sympathetic to them don’t like her, a lot of people find her belief that it was OK for the Europeans to take away the lands, livelihoods, and everything else from the natives of the Americas repugnant, she signed up for social security and Medicare when she got sick late in life which makes her a hypocrite, and there are those skeeved out by her interest in the murderer William Edward Hickman. That leaves quite a few people who find reasons to exclude her without ever needing to crack open a book.
Finally, a lot of people who have read her books say they’re poorly written crap (I’ll have to take their word for it, I haven’t read anything by her). It’s understandable that people would prefer students read well written quality over badly done manure.
It’s hardly a conspiracy. Why would public schools teach the philosophies of people who oppose public schools?
Is it a coincidence that I learned what a great man Horace Mann was in, like, fourth grade, but never heard of Rothbard, Rand, Mises, Bastiat, etc., at all?
So you believe that the people who develop public school curriculum got together and said “Let’s not teach anything that might rock the boat and call into the question the value of public schools. I mean we all know what side our bread is buttered on, right?!”
Is it a coincidence that I went to public school in a notoriously liberal city, and we read Ayn Rand and I have no idea what Horace Mann did to get a local high school named after him?
In a word, yes. Yes it is. Neither of our two anecdotes suggests that there either is or isn’t an effort to deprive public high schoolers of the glories of Ayn Rand’s mellifluous prose.
“There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged . One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
― John Rogers
I read The Fountainhead for 11th grade English. I thought I was Howard Roark. It’s good to let the kids get it out of their system early so they don’t grow up to be Paul Ryan.
If you can call a 1,000-page manifesto facile, then we’ve got a lively discussion to look forward to.
No, the discussion 16-year olds are likely to have about it will be facile.
Aren’t like 200 pages of that one single monologue? I’m sorry, but if the best way you can come up with to convey your ideas is a 3-hour-long monologue, then you have failed as a writer on an almost phenomenal level. And googling “200-page monologue” gave me this, which is awesome: http://www.jerkcity.com/jerkcity546.html
Some of the best discussions I have ever had were in eleventh-grade US History when discussing whether the Industrial robber-barons “owed” anything back to the society that gave them so much. I think you under-estimate young minds as well as the potential depth of Rand’s libertarian philosophy.
There is no depth to libertarianism. It’s a puddle of “thought” that wouldn’t drown a caterpillar.