Rand wouldn't let anyone make Atlas into a movie unless they included Galt's entire speech (all 2.5 hours of it) word for word - which is why no one made it into a movie while she was alive.
Navigation
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
More options
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
"atlas shrugged" will change the face of american politics
- Thread starter washamericom
- Start date
Rand wouldn't let anyone make Atlas into a movie unless they included Galt's entire speech (all 2.5 hours of it) word for word - which is why no one made it into a movie while she was alive.
- May 23, 2012
- 10,511
- 2,333
- 280
Ayn Rand went against her principles when it came to applying for social security and medicare... You're not automatically put on those programs that she despised so much, you have to apply. Same for Paul Ryan. He's been going against "Randian" loony philosophy his whole life. Taking survivors social security even though he didn't need it. He's been a government employee his whole life and gets first class health care. Those two hypocrites proved they couldn't make it on their own without government help. Obama ought to bring this up in speeches. McConnel, Boner, Ryan, the 2 Paul loonies, father and son, all standing in line waiting for government money every pay check including waiting for their cadillac retirement.
I read "Atlas Shrugged" in the 60's.. Really mediocre stuff.
I read "Atlas Shrugged" in the 60's.. Really mediocre stuff.
Last edited:
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Ayn Rand went against her principles when it came to applying for social security and medicare...
False.
This is one of the meme from the hate sites. But not only is it false, it's stupid.
I object to McDonalds having some clown hold a gun to my head and force me to buy a big mac.
That doesn't make me a hypocrite for eating the burger I bought.
- May 23, 2012
- 10,511
- 2,333
- 280
Nobody could knock down literary socialist strawmen like Ayn.
She was a master of creating easy targets for our contempt.
I remember reading AS in the early 60s and root root rooting for her team, too.
Of course I was like 14 or so, the ideal age to think like a libertarian.
Then you regressed.
8 is the ideal age to think like a socialist.
Is your daddy Obama gunna take care of you?
Sure, daddy Obama of yesteryear took care of Ayn Rand when the great free market wasn't working for her. She broke down and applied for Social Security and Medicare. Government at work. Works better for ordinary people than libertarianism.
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Sure, daddy Obama of yesteryear took care of Ayn Rand when the great free market wasn't working for her. She broke down and applied for Social Security and Medicare. Government at work. Works better for ordinary people than libertarianism.
When they train you drones, do they give you treats, like training a dog? I mean, not that you drones have the intellectual capacity of a dog, but is it similar? Or is it pheromones? I kind of envision you of the hate sites like a colony of termites. Mindlessly spewing idiocy based on scents emitted by the queen - who would be Barry....
Political Junky
Gold Member
- May 27, 2009
- 25,793
- 3,990
- 280
Rand underwent surgery for lung cancer in 1974 after decades of heavy smoking.[87] In 1976 she retired from writing her newsletter and, despite her initial objections, was persuaded to allow Evva Pryor, a consultant from her attorney's office, to sign her up for Social Security and Medicare.[88] During the late 1970s her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.[89]Sure, daddy Obama of yesteryear took care of Ayn Rand when the great free market wasn't working for her. She broke down and applied for Social Security and Medicare. Government at work. Works better for ordinary people than libertarianism.
When they train you drones, do they give you treats, like training a dog? I mean, not that you drones have the intellectual capacity of a dog, but is it similar? Or is it pheromones? I kind of envision you of the hate sites like a colony of termites. Mindlessly spewing idiocy based on scents emitted by the queen - who would be Barry....
Ayn Rand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Rand underwent surgery for lung cancer in 1974 after decades of heavy smoking.[87] In 1976 she retired from writing her newsletter and, despite her initial objections, was persuaded to allow Evva Pryor, a consultant from her attorney's office, to sign her up for Social Security and Medicare.[88] During the late 1970s her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.[89]
Ayn Rand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I object to McDonalds having some clown hold a gun to my head and force me to buy a big mac.
That doesn't make me a hypocrite for eating the burger I bought.
Immanuel
Gold Member
- May 15, 2007
- 16,828
- 2,269
- 183
The Book has been a fool proof indicator of intelligence. Idiots hate it. Nuff said.
LOL Actually, it's just the opposite. It is not a book that is valued by literary scholars or by serious philosophers. Neither her novel, as a literary work, nor her philosophy are taught at university level because they are not sophisticated examples either artistically or philosophically of what is worthy of university level studies. I suppose you're going to say that all the intelligent people are actually not at universities: funny stuff that.
You mean her writing wasn't liberal enough for the universities?
Immie
Esmeralda
Diamond Member
The Book has been a fool proof indicator of intelligence. Idiots hate it. Nuff said.
LOL Actually, it's just the opposite. It is not a book that is valued by literary scholars or by serious philosophers. Neither her novel, as a literary work, nor her philosophy are taught at university level because they are not sophisticated examples either artistically or philosophically of what is worthy of university level studies. I suppose you're going to say that all the intelligent people are actually not at universities: funny stuff that.
You mean her writing wasn't liberal enough for the universities?
Immie
No. It has nothing to do with politics. The limitations of a mind that thinks only in those terms is one reason why you might admire her work and why her work is not generally admired by scholars. Her novels do not have strong literary merit. Literary merit is a combination of style and meaning. It is artistic merit. A painting with artistic merit has levels and complexity of meaning, it is also painted with great style and technique. Literature is also art. Rand's fiction has simplistic meaning, only one level essentially, and her style is pedestrian. None of this has to do with her point of view on social, political or economic issues.
Last edited:
Give Back? Yes, It's Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1%
Harry Binswanger, Contributor - 9/17/2013
I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.
...
Well, maybe there isin the other direction. The shoe is on the other foot. It is the community that should give back to the wealth-creators. It turns out that the 99% get far more benefit from the 1% than vice-versa. Ayn Rand developed the idea of the pyramid of ability, which John Galt sets forth in Atlas Shrugged:
When you live in a rational society, where men are free to trade, you receive an incalculable bonus: the material value of your work is determined not only by your effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the world around you.
When you work in a modern factory, you are paid, not only for your labor, but for all the productive genius which has made that factory possible: for the work of the industrialist who built it, for the work of the investor who saved the money to risk on the untried and the new, for the work of the engineer who designed the machines of which you are pushing the levers, for the work of the inventor who created the product which you spend your time on making . . .
In proportion to the mental energy he spent, the man who creates a new invention receives but a small percentage of his value in terms of material payment, no matter what fortune he makes, no matter what millions he earns. But the man who works as a janitor in the factory producing that invention, receives an enormous payment in proportion to the mental effort that his job requires of him. And the same is true of all men between, on all levels of ambition and ability. The man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him, but gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time. 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. Such is the nature of the competition between the strong and the weak of the intellect. Such is the pattern of exploitation for which you have damned the strong.
For their enormous contributions to our standard of living, the high-earners should be thanked and publicly honored. We are in their debt.
Heres a modest proposal. Anyone who earns a million dollars or more should be exempt from all income taxes. Yes, its too little. And the real issue is not financial, but moral. So to augment the tax-exemption, in an annual public ceremony, the years top earner should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Imagine the effect on our culture, particularly on the young, if the kind of fame and adulation bathing Lady Gaga attached to the more notable achievements of say, Warren Buffett. Or if the moral praise showered on Mother Teresa went to someone like Lloyd Blankfein, who, in guiding Goldman Sachs toward billions in profits, has done infinitely more for mankind. (Since profit is the market value of the product minus the market value of factors used, profit represents the value created.)
Instead, we live in a culture where Goldman Sachs is smeared as a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity. Thats for the sin of successful investing, channeling savings to their most productive uses, instead of wasting them on government boondoggles like Solyndra and bridges to nowhere.
There is indeed a vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity: the Internal Revenue Service. And, at a deeper level, it is the monstrous perversion of justice that makes the IRS possible: an envy-ridden moral code that damns success, profit, and earning money in voluntary exchange.
An end must be put to the inhuman practice of draining the productive to subsidize the unproductive. An end must be put to the primordial notion that ones life belongs to the tribe, to the community, and that the superlative wealth-creators must do penance for the sin of creating value.
And Ayn Rand is just the lady who can do it.
Give Back? Yes, It's Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1% - Forbes
Harry Binswanger, Contributor - 9/17/2013
I defend laissez-faire capitalism, using Ayn Rand's Objectivism.
...
Well, maybe there isin the other direction. The shoe is on the other foot. It is the community that should give back to the wealth-creators. It turns out that the 99% get far more benefit from the 1% than vice-versa. Ayn Rand developed the idea of the pyramid of ability, which John Galt sets forth in Atlas Shrugged:
When you live in a rational society, where men are free to trade, you receive an incalculable bonus: the material value of your work is determined not only by your effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the world around you.
When you work in a modern factory, you are paid, not only for your labor, but for all the productive genius which has made that factory possible: for the work of the industrialist who built it, for the work of the investor who saved the money to risk on the untried and the new, for the work of the engineer who designed the machines of which you are pushing the levers, for the work of the inventor who created the product which you spend your time on making . . .
In proportion to the mental energy he spent, the man who creates a new invention receives but a small percentage of his value in terms of material payment, no matter what fortune he makes, no matter what millions he earns. But the man who works as a janitor in the factory producing that invention, receives an enormous payment in proportion to the mental effort that his job requires of him. And the same is true of all men between, on all levels of ambition and ability. The man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him, but gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time. 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. Such is the nature of the competition between the strong and the weak of the intellect. Such is the pattern of exploitation for which you have damned the strong.
For their enormous contributions to our standard of living, the high-earners should be thanked and publicly honored. We are in their debt.
Heres a modest proposal. Anyone who earns a million dollars or more should be exempt from all income taxes. Yes, its too little. And the real issue is not financial, but moral. So to augment the tax-exemption, in an annual public ceremony, the years top earner should be awarded the Congressional Medal of Honor.
Imagine the effect on our culture, particularly on the young, if the kind of fame and adulation bathing Lady Gaga attached to the more notable achievements of say, Warren Buffett. Or if the moral praise showered on Mother Teresa went to someone like Lloyd Blankfein, who, in guiding Goldman Sachs toward billions in profits, has done infinitely more for mankind. (Since profit is the market value of the product minus the market value of factors used, profit represents the value created.)
Instead, we live in a culture where Goldman Sachs is smeared as a great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity. Thats for the sin of successful investing, channeling savings to their most productive uses, instead of wasting them on government boondoggles like Solyndra and bridges to nowhere.
There is indeed a vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity: the Internal Revenue Service. And, at a deeper level, it is the monstrous perversion of justice that makes the IRS possible: an envy-ridden moral code that damns success, profit, and earning money in voluntary exchange.
An end must be put to the inhuman practice of draining the productive to subsidize the unproductive. An end must be put to the primordial notion that ones life belongs to the tribe, to the community, and that the superlative wealth-creators must do penance for the sin of creating value.
And Ayn Rand is just the lady who can do it.
Give Back? Yes, It's Time For The 99% To Give Back To The 1% - Forbes
I love the book and am now reading it again. I hope the message of the book comes through and is not hijacked by the liberal left that seems to be too prominent in Hollywood. Next to the bible I think this is the best book ever written.
Don't worry, they made it every bit as tedious as Ayn Rand wrote it...
Which is why it DIED in the theatres...
Rand underwent surgery for lung cancer in 1974 after decades of heavy smoking.[87] In 1976 she retired from writing her newsletter and, despite her initial objections, was persuaded to allow Evva Pryor, a consultant from her attorney's office, to sign her up for Social Security and Medicare.[88] During the late 1970s her activities within the Objectivist movement declined, especially after the death of her husband on November 9, 1979.[89]
Ayn Rand - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I object to McDonalds having some clown hold a gun to my head and force me to buy a big mac.
That doesn't make me a hypocrite for eating the burger I bought.
Wow, what a silly analogy...
“Two novels 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 involves orcs.”
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Don't worry, they made it every bit as tedious as Ayn Rand wrote it...
Which is why it DIED in the theatres...
Much to the tears of you Marxists, both of the first two films have found moderate success on Netflix. Both have recouped production costs and turned a profit. Pt. 3 is complete and will be in theaters in August. It will do poorly in theaters, as the first two did, then go to DVD and Netflix, to again find a moderate level of success.
Uncensored2008
Libertarian Radical
Two novels can change a bookish fourteen-year olds 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 involves orcs.
Both are lightyears beyond the intellectual grasp of leftists.
- Aug 10, 2009
- 168,037
- 16,519
- 2,165
- Banned
- #1,317
Sigh. No, the OP failed.
Don't worry, they made it every bit as tedious as Ayn Rand wrote it...
Which is why it DIED in the theatres...
Much to the tears of you Marxists, both of the first two films have found moderate success on Netflix. Both have recouped production costs and turned a profit. Pt. 3 is complete and will be in theaters in August. It will do poorly in theaters, as the first two did, then go to DVD and Netflix, to again find a moderate level of success.
Neither Part I nor Part II recouped their production costs, neither came close to making a profit, and Part III managed to somehow do worse than either of the previous two.
I question where you're getting your information from.
I bump this thread only because I hadn't even realized that Part III had even been released until looking at year-end lists.
How'd it do on "changing the face of American politics"?
- Apr 1, 2011
- 170,017
- 47,208
- 2,180
Don't worry, they made it every bit as tedious as Ayn Rand wrote it...
Which is why it DIED in the theatres...
Much to the tears of you Marxists, both of the first two films have found moderate success on Netflix. Both have recouped production costs and turned a profit. Pt. 3 is complete and will be in theaters in August. It will do poorly in theaters, as the first two did, then go to DVD and Netflix, to again find a moderate level of success.
Neither Part I nor Part II recouped their production costs, neither came close to making a profit, and Part III managed to somehow do worse than either of the previous two.
I question where you're getting your information from.
I bump this thread only because I hadn't even realized that Part III had even been released until looking at year-end lists.
How'd it do on "changing the face of American politics"?
Part III hasn't even been released yet, so you're obviously just making shit up.
Don't worry, they made it every bit as tedious as Ayn Rand wrote it...
Which is why it DIED in the theatres...
Much to the tears of you Marxists, both of the first two films have found moderate success on Netflix. Both have recouped production costs and turned a profit. Pt. 3 is complete and will be in theaters in August. It will do poorly in theaters, as the first two did, then go to DVD and Netflix, to again find a moderate level of success.
Neither Part I nor Part II recouped their production costs, neither came close to making a profit, and Part III managed to somehow do worse than either of the previous two.
I question where you're getting your information from.
I bump this thread only because I hadn't even realized that Part III had even been released until looking at year-end lists.
How'd it do on "changing the face of American politics"?
Part III hasn't even been released yet, so you're obviously just making shit up.
See what I mean? It made such a little impact that even you didn't know it had come out.
It came out on Sept. 12th...
Atlas Shrugged Who Is John Galt 2014 - IMDb
Similar threads
- Replies
- 34
- Views
- 411
- Replies
- 6
- Views
- 104
Latest Discussions
- Replies
- 1
- Views
- 27
- Replies
- 5
- Views
- 16
- Replies
- 84
- Views
- 477
- Replies
- 2K
- Views
- 35K
Forum List
-
-
-
-
-
Political Satire 8069
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
ObamaCare 781
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Member Usernotes 471
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-