What does LeftyPol think about Ayn Rand and her fans?

Hate her?
Admire her?

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag
youtube.com/watch?v=_jedDzCkXKw
youtube.com/watch?v=1hK4Px4O8aE
dw.com/en/german-goes-to-trial-for-selling-anti-nazi-symbols/a-2187381
aclu.org/news/aclu-em-defends-kkks-right-free-speech
vocaroo.com/i/s1HNj5OcRh2S
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Shit overrated writer

Why do you make so many shit threads? At least learn to screenshot properly, retard.

...

Terrible knock-off of Stirner.

...

my bad

Too thick to read and boring.

Probably the best example of modern ideology. The message of Atlas Shrugged is precisely the opposite of what it purports to be, its individualism merely being a facade hiding a very authoritarian collectivist message.

Also, she seemed to be under the impression that socialists were religious traditionalists for some bizarre reason.

Probably one of the worst writers I have ever read, if not for her special snowflake ideology her work would be ignored as complete trash.

She liked cats. That is the best thing I can say about her.

As Zizek puts it, Rand displays the ruling ideology of capitalism so starkly that she is an embarassment.

I have great sympathies with individualism and egoism but I don't think you can can really claim that rand is an individualist, given the authoritarian undertones (and spooked to fuck adherence to private property).

Doesn't John Galt have a ridiculously long monologue in Atlas Shrugged? I heard it goes on for hundreds of pages and would basically take all day long for a person to actually say.

Sounds like some really pretentious shit.

It's moralfaggotry for people who claim to hate moralfags.

Rand was a complete idiot and shity writer she is a good read if you want to see how idiots rationalize the existing order.

In one of her books capitalism the unknown ideal she goes something like this


VS


So she basically goes from a
to

So something to ask her would be what is more important innovation or rights and if it would be demonstrated that there is more innovation if we limit other rights(more taxes, gov spending's) would she agree with this?

And you want to know 101% what he answer to this would be?


Randians refuse to actually debate or even talk about opposing ideas while every other ideology is


These people are the pinnacle of insecure, pseudo intellectual, pseudo arm chair philosophers who hide in their ivory towers and refuse even to talk about other ideas.

They make things like
look intelligent.

You forgot to take off your shitposting flag

She knows how to make a story sound awesome, but not how to get it to make sense on examination.

Her stories are shit and on the level of kindergartener shit.

Atlas shrugged = the government is in shit and wants to fined John Galt (who is Ayn Rands ideological superman) to make him the economic dictator of the USA (I'm not making this up, these are the words), they find him however he bravely refuses.

At this point you are asking yourself why you are reading this shit or can not stop reading and laughing at the absurdity and anyone over 10 taking this barney the dinosaur economics propaganda serious.

We get some more crap in a nutshell "the captains of industry" are blowing up their refineries and factories (why was the economy crap again? Was it socialism or these rich fuckers blowing up the infrastructure? Nice argument Rand! You fucked up!) and going to a hidden with super technology refuge town.

Then the novel concludes with the "brain dead to cheap for the most retarded propaganda"TM gov deciding to freeze the levels of production so that the next year you produce the same amount of the same book and the same shirts and this will the same forever to save the economy in their model whatever its supposed to be.

Its comically simplistic and the villains represent no one in particular fail because they are written this way and this is the end.

You want to know what the kicker is? She thought that her fictional work with fictional villains disproved socialism or collectivism or some shit like this. Pure comedy.

Nothing wrong with this if she wants to say something evil you can counter her simply saying that you disagree and that is the end of it.
Debate this now Rand! Debate vegans Rand!

Rand was comically wrong because:

////////////////////////////////

Its a freedom flag (there are countries where its illegal to have it so its about fundamental freedoms) and i put it on especially for this thread. Also I'm right wing and i thought you might fined it refreshing if some right winger shows up instead of the typical left circle jerk of Rand bashing.

Yeah, bullshit. Far right nationalism has fuck all to do with "freedom".
Nope. I can say with complete certainty that there is nothing "refreshing" about you or your ilk. You can head right back to >>>Holla Forums

Nice meme you have there.

Answer this is the Nazi flag illegal in some countries like Germany? YES/NO ?


Oh well I enjoy hearing different perspectives and different positions and find it refreshing to hear a left win criticism of Ayn Rand (refreshing like new or unknown), looks like you disagree(are you not interested in hearing what right wingers think of Ayn Rand or find it interesting that they think she is stupid?), do you favor echo chambers?

A flag being banned doesn't make it a freedom flag.

If a country decided to ban all symbols of the Roman Empire, that wouldn't make the old slave society that Rome was any more about "freedom".

It's not so much that I disagree than that you idiots shitpost on here so often that it's hilarious that you think your views are in any way "refreshing" or "new" on this board. I'll call your views "refreshing" or "new" when they actually manage to become that way.

No, see above.

It's funny how one of the most famous icons of the American Right is a Russian atheist.

Actually It would make the symbols. I told you it has fuck all to do with hitler I'm not a hitler fan boy its about the act of banning a flag. And me ironically adopting it and displaying it in defiance of the restrictive German government and others.

And yes if Germany banned "symbols of the Roman Empire" I fucken display them, not because I'm obsessed with the Roman Empire its because of fundamental principles.

shit tier fiction
shit tier philosophy
shit tier egoism

So, basically, you're a racist liberal.

I add one thing the Free Speech Flag the whole phenomena and idea might completely escape some totalitarians who are removed from any human emotions.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Speech_Flag

Stirner for arrogant 14 year olds and/or rich kids oblivious of their own fortune

Google false dichotomy.

Don't simplify things which are not simple.

You are simple.

She was an opponent of fascism and communism and wrote…
"The basic political principle of the Objectivist ethics is: 'no man may initiate the use of physical force against others.' No man—or group or society or government—'has the right' to assume the role of a criminal and initiate the use of physical compulsion against any man. Men have the right to use physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use. 'The ethical principle involved is simple and clear-cut: it is the difference between murder and self-defense.' A holdup man seeks to gain a value, wealth, by killing his victim; the victim does not grow richer by killing a holdup man. The principle is: no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force."
“The Objectivist Ethics,” The Virtue of Selfishness, 32.

"Philosophically, 'Nietzsche is a mystic and an irrationalist.' His metaphysics consists of a somewhat “Byronic” and mystically “malevolent” universe; his epistemology subordinates reason to “will,” or feeling or instinct or blood or innate virtues of character."
“Introduction to The Fountainhead,” The Objectivist, March 1968, 6.

"The only proper purpose of a government is to protect man’s rights, which means: to protect him from physical violence.' 'A proper government is only a policeman, acting as an agent of man’s self-defense,'' and, as such, may resort to force only against those who start the use of force. The only proper functions of a government are: the police, to protect you from criminals; the army, to protect you from foreign invaders; and the courts, to protect your property and contracts from breach or fraud by others, to settle disputes by rational rules, according to objective law."
Galt’s Speech, For the New Intellectual, 183.

And who is to benefit from the protection of individual rights?
"There are no “rights” of special groups, there are no “rights of farmers, of workers, of businessmen, of employees, of employers, of the old, of the young, of the unborn.” There are only the Rights of Man—rights possessed by every individual man and by all men as individuals."
“Man’s Rights,” The Virtue of Selfishness, 97.

These "right-wing" anarchists did not take the foolish position that crime would disappear in the anarchist society. Yet they did tend to underestimate the crime problem, and as a result never recognized the need for a fixed libertarian constitution. Without such a constitution, the private judicial process might become truly "anarchic" in the popular sense.
-Are Libertarians 'Anarchists'? , by Murray N. Rothbard

I fucking love an-caps for their self contradictory beleaves, just dont call it a state! Call it the fixed libertarian constitution.

I'm right wing. Why don't you ask me my viewpoints instead of declaring to know them?

I love talking to leftist in my experience they never produce anything insightful and display some form of massive brain damage.
Image related.


Brilliant simply brilliant continue publicly humiliating yourself with every post.

How is me displaying "symbols of the Roman Empire" making me racist? Or are you talking about me displaying the swastika and the Nazi flag?

So racism is having a flag of certain colors? Or are you saying I'm racist simply because you don't like me? or my views? On freedom of having colors??!!!!???? Continue don't stop.

AHAHAHAHAHAHA WOW this is comedy gold.

I don't know if you are this level of brain damaged

Or if you realize how utterly you painted yourself into the corner and are avoiding the question to hide the fact that you are advocating hard core Stalinism with censorship and possibly all the purges and unpersons.

Idk about that poster, but you certainly don't know shit about politics if you think being a 'liberal' makes you left-wing, or 'not right-wing'.


You're making assumptions about the poster in the same vein you're criticizing them for doing about you here.
Also, pointing out that it's a false dichotomy makes a ton of sense here tbh. The point is that it's not illegal to have fucking nazi flags in germany, - otherwise museums would have to seek a permit - and it's not illegal to use the nazi flag on Holla Forums, you basement freedom fighter.
What's illegal about it - the way I understand it - is using it as a deliberate symbol of hate. It's not illegal to have a makeshift historical exhibition on WW2 on the street.
Meaning that if you're using it only because of these laws, you're contesting the fact that it's a symbol of hate, which it pretty fucking obviously is.

I don't know if you are showing AR positions or are a AR follower or displaying AR contradictions. Since the post is silly.


You or Ayn Rand does not understand what fascism is non of the quote applies. Learn what fascism is, hint go ask a fascist.

Yet AR did say that the USA government was A OK in taking the Indian land since Indians where all savages with no property rights.

She loves to throw accusations at people that are not based in anything
Whatever this is in the AR world. Unless these are pointless insults like "idiot" and "retard".

The image is funny if the guy in it is an AR follower since AR did say racism is irrational and mystical, she did love to use the word mystic a lot on everything.


AAA Jesus dude its painful, this last sentence, there is nothing contradictory about these quotes.

Also you really are humiliating yourself an-caps are different from libertarians and AR hated libertarians so you have 3 difrent ideologies that you think are the same.

Its like someone thinking anarchists, stalinist and communists are the same. I would never sink to misrepresentation in my arguments.

It tickles me that you are probably really smug about typing what you typed. I really do genuinely believe you honestly think that bunch of eye noise constituted a structured response to my critism of you reducing a complex question down to an arbitrary yes/no dichotomy.

How do you manage to be obnoxious without tone and inflexion? It's a real talent

This sentence makes no sense, I never used the word "liberal".


Bzz factually wrong lets have some examples:

Wolfenstein The New Order Censorship.
Its illegal to have a game where the bad guys you shoot have swastikas.
Yes its illegal to have a game where you shot Nazis.

youtube.com/watch?v=_jedDzCkXKw
youtube.com/watch?v=1hK4Px4O8aE

Also we have this gem where a "crossed-out swastika" get you into trouble see image for the pure comedy.

dw.com/en/german-goes-to-trial-for-selling-anti-nazi-symbols/a-2187381

Will you comment on these facts? Its good that you used the wording "the way I understand it" otherwise you look like a idiot congratulations on this one, we both can agree that you know little about the subject and the facts prove you wrong.

And you are ok with this? having symbols banned ? Because they are symbols of hate? So in your communist utopia or whatever your flavor of anarchism or marxism wants you will have a government who decides what is wrong think? Or what is hate? Is this your utopian wander land? Be honest if you say


It will be fine and i will not judge you for your views simply be honest. Be honest you keep dancing around the issue of answering what your views are, what is your utopia? Are you for banning symbols of hate? Whatever they are.

PS: how would you feel that every leftist symbol gets banned for promoting hate?

Just because you ignore my post doesn't mean you aren't retarded.

Oh I'm smug, your writings looked like incoherent gibberish and everyone who can think can see the bullshit stupidity in it.

Look up the laws do you need me to write you a detailed essay on them or can you look them up for yourself?


You known what forget it someone more intelligent then you mr "3 sentence response retard" might start arguing how some miniscule detail in this phrasing gives some technicality of bla bla bla.

Look up the laws stop derailing and wasting time.

I rephrase do you agree with the German laws about the Nazi flag? Elaborate you views?

The more defensive you are about your super secret position about flags the more pathetic and closet stalinist/totalitarian you look.

Answers please
Or
Or
elaborate your intriguing position on flags and symbols and banning them, like write/link to a elaborated essay that explains the intrigues of your super awesome position that is so intelligent and complicated.

With every post you don't give your position you are embarrassing yourself and shown what dishonest trickster you are (you know your position will not sell so you try not to answer it) or you don't know what you are talking about and have no real position.

...

Needed time to write.
You did not make any points Mr. Black Flag only insulted me with no points.
Now answer my questions above.

...

WeweweweweweweweweweweweweweweW

I made the point that you reduced the question down to a false dichotomy.

It was then YOU who insulted me, instead of addressing this point.

I then insulted you BUT ALSO REITERAaTeD THE POINT

I adress a specific part of your project, the part where you reduced the question down to this yes/no. This is the creation of false dichotomy.

How can you be so oblivious to yourself that you literally deny what is in witting for everyone to see?

Yep I know.

Quick question is the ACLU racist ?
aclu.org/news/aclu-em-defends-kkks-right-free-speech
They defend freedom of speech.

You only keep embarrassing yourself.

I don't want to live in a country that has a government telling me what flags I can use.
Are you? Answer the flag question. You keep on evading.

And I love how you are 999% certain what I believe in while I'm asking and making extrapolations(and asking about them) of your believes while you scream
Keep on posting this conversation will be a blast to expose how honest and intelligent you people on the left are.

It is there in writing.

You didn't adress my point, you just babbled about me being brain damaged.

It is your dishonesty which shows, this is quite literally hilarious to me. It's a stark exposition of chauvinism so deeply ingrained that you will deny what is there right in front of you.

Answer the flag question.
What is your position on legality of flags and symbols.

Seriously these word squabbles are a waste of time.
Whatever maybe I phrased it wrongly whatever I admit my failure (even thou I don't agree) whatever, I want your opinion on the legality of flags/symbols in your utopia.

Write your essay on this position.

Don't obsess over some one wrongly phrased sentence this makes you look bad and dishonest.

Then why are you crying about free speech when your ideology rejects it in favor of Party line?

And once again another brilliant leftist knows 98567489579375% what my ideology is.

This is what I name objectively delusional and brain damaged.

How can you know what my ideology is?
Hint you can not.
You need to seek professional help and be institutionalized for your delusion of knowing exactly what other peoples ideology is.

This is some mental damage you have there, like for real.

Sure. Tell me all your beliefs that aren't pic related.

Yes. You are using a Nazi flag, implying that you're a racist.

You actually made Rand look good, Nazibol retard.

It's only an essay because you refuse to acknowledge that you tried to break the question down to a false dichotomy.

I wasn't questioning anything but that. Just because you may or may not have other points to make doesn't mean that on isn't wrong. I'll talk about your other points once you reply to my original one in a meaningful way.

Finally someone even begins to have a normal conversation.
Remember kids ask before you make assumptions.

My views a varied however I'm not a Nazi or a fascist or a racist however a lot of leftists like SJW love to throw this around so they might categories me to be racist in the eyes of a SJW or people like this.

I can be best summed up in the way I agree with the ACLU where I think its most important thing is the freedom of expression and no flag, symbol or book/film/writing/whatever can ever be banned by the government.

And there might be people who say:
If you define someone to be a fascist/racist/Nazi with a single question about banning the swastika your conclusion might be different.

I'm more in line with the ACLU and fundamental freedoms for the people take it for what you like, I'm not part of the KKK or a Nazi organization.

Now to you and answering your views on making flags and symbols illegal.

I can not decode what you are even talking about, whatever sorry I made some inappropriate word combinations.

Are you happy now? Or will you gripe on some semantic constructions that might be wrong? This is grammar nazi level of petty, are you like this in real life?

You know what we are talking about can you move this conversation forward about the flag? We are talking on the subject of government banning and you are obsessing over me using some wrong word construction.

I apologize if I ever constructed a logically false sentence ok.
I did this(apologized) over and over and over, you know what the conversation is about.

Now answer the flag question.

Can we ignore the notsoc and get back to Rand bashing please.

vocaroo.com/i/s1HNj5OcRh2S

I was all about the rand bashing before all of these leftists started obsessing over one icon on my posts.

I was here to debate Rand ideas and I decided to signal that I'm right wing by using a Nazi flag (self humor).

These leftists completely lost their shit and started obsessing, I'm all for continuing with the Rand conversation.

Fun part is remove the flag and some sentences about my right wing views there is nothing to differentiate my posts from any other user.

I'm like this in real life love my swastika shirt and shirt with Hitler face its a great conversation starter.

No I'm not why is my having this shirt wrong?
OK no argument however Stalin did kill more, why is it OK for people to walk with hammer and sickle T-shirts and not swastika shirts if Stalin is a bigger mass murderer then Hitler?

They usually are stumped and if I explain the hypocrisy and how I'm anti censorship and ACLU they understand me.

I also love to use the Nazi symbols to describe myself, for the left everything right wing is Nazi, they think its a magical word if they say you are a racist/Nazi they will silence you I can give them a nice
Back to show that their childish insults have no power over me, I believe what I believe regardless of anything you think Hitler advocated.

Guy with the freedom flag, what are your beliefs? Non-foaming at the mouth lefty here.

A laughably inept writer whose stories contradicted the supposed morals they were supposed to be teaching.

This is Randianism in a nutshell:
Personally, I'm only a NEET because I'm on strike from being a successful, wealthy thinker and builder.
I refuse to be a successful, wealthy thinker and builder because of all the freeloaders.

...

Generally, using a fascist flag makes people think you're a fascist
Then take it to a German board. Using it here makes you look like a Nazi because flags are used primarily to identify your ideology.

That's not really an ideology. You're not going to find many people here who are opposed to civil liberties.

I have written them here:

Basically ACLU and anti censorship.

That is, once again, not really an ideology.

I don't even see how you define yourself as right-wing.

kys

I'm right wing, the right wing is caricatured to be all Nazis. I think the closest thing to a all right wing symbol is the swastika.

Yet it is a massive part of my belief system.

Ooo "civil liberties" I never did talk about "civil liberties" and how about you answer if you are pro censorship for example banning the swastika like in Germany now.

Its so strange no one will ever talk about their beliefs on censorship, its like the impossible to answer question and a nice
Not some mysterious
whatever they are and if they even include anti censorship in your definition of the world since my belief system is not a ideology according to you ;P

What is a ideology according to you?

And can someone finally answer the question about censorship and banning of swastikas?

I did say it before and i will repose it:


Quick question is the ACLU racist ?

aclu.org/news/aclu-em-defends-kkks-right-free-speech

Right but it's not about forming of sentences, because he sentence was clear.

It was about reducing the argument to an arbitrary yes\no dichotomy. I have said this in every post I really couldn't be clearer

what would zizek say about this

And it's got nothing to do with grammar it's a basic fallacy to create a false dichotomy.

Also you didn't apologise once. In real life I'm an extremely amiable person, I get on well with people, even people who I would rather not.

You are being extremely defensive and lashing out, this leads me to believe you know you're wrong. Save us all some time, admit it, then ill talk about the flag stuff. I'm on an 8 hour bus, I have time.

Whatever I apologies if I did anything wrong.

Did you get this or do you need 104865892749283472893659724832 posts before you finally get this?

I apologies for anything I did do wrong!
This includes any "arbitrary yes\no dichotomy" or whatever!

Now can you answer the flag question?

Your ideology can't begin and end with "I'm against banning the Nazi flag"

An ideology is some system of ideas and ideals, generally based on some general concept of how society functions.

How about anti censorship? Where the Nazi flag and the banning of it is one example only and the best known and loudest one?

Oh I'm against other forms of censorship all of them in fact, no book banning and the list continues.
Do you want me to give a link to the ACLU where you can read their mission statement on freedom of speech to know my position in detail?

Can you tell me what your position on the banning of symbols is?

Like non of these leftists will ever answer it. its like I'm exorcising a demon with holy water they are shifting in every direction to never answer the question.

What is so super secretive about their position on censorship?
Not one did answer it.

Ok how about you tell me your ideology and your society since your society seams to not even mention the existence of censorship or your position on censorship? Is your position on censorship not part of your ideology? Lets talk about this.

You know I never expected a bunch of leftists evade the answering of a simple question like this.
WOW simply WOW.
Even SJW will say
You see this is what we name a answer.
SJW at least are honest you are something different… mentally twisted and insane demagogs who are hiding their true views.