Ayn Rand: engineer of souls

http://www.newcriterion.com/articles.cfm/Ayn-Rand--engineer-of-souls-4385 ^ | Anthony Daniels

[ventanax5]

Ayn Rand was never, in fact, much appreciated or very influential in Europe; at the height of her fame in America, where her books sold by the million, her name was not one to conjure with on the other side of the Atlantic. She was much read by middle-class young Indians of the time, however, as well as by Americans, and she is now coming back into fashion globally. I confess that enthusiasm for her is to me utterly mysterious, and the excellent new biography by Ann C. Heller does not clear up the mystery but, rather, deepens it.[1] Able and gifted people (not the least of them Alan Greenspan) were captivated both by her writings and her person, but the picture of Rand that emerges from Ms. Heller’s book is all the more damning because the biographer is obviously fair-minded and, indeed, something of an admirer of her subject.

[r9etb]

While I tend to agree with the author, his article is a bit hyperbolic for my tastes. Whittaker Chambers did a much better job of eviscerating her, with fewer words.

[668 - Neighbor of the Beast]

Where to begin. On 2nd thought why bother?
I got as far as the mention of Toohey’s childhood acquaintances before giving up on this review. And going that far was an ill-conceived act of altruism.

[saganite]

Whitaker Chambers claimed to hear echos of crematoria in her writings. Seems those echos mostly come from the left though.

[stripes1776]

Where to begin. On 2nd thought why bother? I got as far as the mention of Toohey’s childhood acquaintances before giving up on this review. And going that far was an ill-conceived act of altruism.

I should have know from the first sentence:

My copy of The Concept of Benevolence by T. A. Roberts, in the series New Studies in Practical Philosophy, was deaccessioned from a university library.

Deaccessioned? Now there's a word in everyone's vocabulary that will bring immediate clarity to the mind.

[saganite]

It appears to be an incorrect usage anyway. Unless, of course, the author imagines the book to be a work of art. de·ac·ces·sion   /ˌdiækˈsɛʃən/ Show Spelled[dee-ak-sesh-uhn] Show IPA –verb (used with object) 1.to sell (a work of art) from a museum's or gallery's collections, esp. with a view to acquiring funds for the purchase ofother works. –verb (used without object) 2.to deaccession a work of art from a museum's or gallery's collections. –noun 3.a deaccessioned work of art.

[Talons of Freedom]

Ms Rand had some interesting thoughts on what one might describe as a benign form of fascism.

[Raymann]

And what idea of her’s have anything to do with fascism?

[A.A. Cunningham]

The New Criterion

[stripes1776]

It appears to be an incorrect usage anyway.

Thanks for looking it up.

[Richbee]

Alan Greenspan???

Buwhahahahahaaaa

[Richbee]

REFUTING AYN RAND

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rSWzQuwhjc

[Talons of Freedom]

Rand believes in the natural aristocracy of the corporation as creator; she sees the worker as societal leech. I’m sure you must have picked up on this when you read her essays.

[r9etb]

Whitaker Chambers claimed to hear echos of crematoria in her writings. Seems those echos mostly come from the left though.

I dunno if there's a "right" or "left" to his observation. I think his point would be that Rand had her own brand of strident and uncompromising ideology, in which one was either right, or a "looter." She not only wrote that way, but actually lived that way among those who formed her personality cult (they called themselves "the Collective").

If you take that attitude into a position of political power, it's not a stretch to see that there's a ready-made class of undesirables, whose presence endangered the whole setup.....

Yeah, I can see where crematoria would come into that.

[Richbee]

It is so much worse!

Ayn Rand was a hypocrite who couldn’t live up to her own Philosophy!

Further, was Ayn Rand an Anti-Christ Satanist?

> snip

.....Satanism has far more in common with Objectivism than with any other religion or philosophy. Objectivists endorse reason, selfishness, greed and atheism. Objectivism views Christianity, Islam and Judaism as anti-human and evil. The writings of Ayn Rand are inspiring and powerful. If the reader has not yet experienced her power, try her novelette Anthem for a taste. You will almost certainly come back for more.

At the same time, Satanism is a “brutal” as well as a selfish philosophy. We do not hold, as do the Objectivists that the universe is “benevolent.” Satanists view the world as neutral, beyond the concepts of benevolent or treacherous, good or evil. Satanism enables the Satanist to codify his life beyond the ethical and metaphysical straightjacket which Objectivism unfortunately offers. This is not written to attack Objectivism but merely to clarify the areas of difference.

Satanism drew from Objectivism as even Rand drew from others. Both are, however, unique. Both are different from the other.

http://www.churchofsatan.com/Pages/SatObj.html

.