Replies

You make a lot of rather ponderous insinuiations, so I'll try and keep up as best I can.

Inevitable?

Yes. Inevitable in the book, and inevitable in real life. Socialism, Marxism, communism... all lead to the eventual collapse of the system. By collapse I mean the gross redistribution of wealth, the collapse of education, public works, healthcare and the free market economy (and with it the destruction of personal and corporate wealth and the resultant end of desire for economic achievement), and most importantly the collapse of personal liberty and all the privileges of a free society.

But what about people like Eddie?

What about Eddie? You're making the mistake of imparting a belief that everyone should have an equal outcome, irregardless of the fact that Rand's philosophy was exactly the opposite.

Galt and Taggart didn’t believe in God, and neither did Rand. So when they perceived they were losing, they abandoned hope and assured the utter destruction of everything they had created.

Galt, Reardon, and the like never percieved they were losing anything; they chose to no longer partake in an endless downward spiral not caused by themselves; moreover, that downward spiral was caused by people whose could never take care of themselves but demanded that the likes of Galt and Reardon take care of them. They had never lived as slaves, and never would. Are you trying to say that you must believe in God to overcome the downward spiral of a civilization?

In the end, they were LOSERS because they had no source of hope, in either God nor the inherent nature of man to desire freedom.

Are you kidding? The created their own society BASED SOLEY UPON THEIR NATURE TO LIVE AS FREE MEN. Their steadfast, unconquerable hope was in themselves and their inherent ability and desire to achieve.

Through Taggart and Galt, Rand expressed her belief that man was content being a useless serf to a socialistic totalitarian nanny-state. And because of that belief, Taggart and Galt surrendered in the face of that nanny-state.

Dude... read the book. It is precisely this type of nonsense that makes me question you. Great job leafing through the Cliff notes, but you know precious little of the story or of Objectivism. I wasn't trying to imply that you were parroting anyone; I was implying that you do not know of what you speak.

Contrast their behavior, say, to Frodo Baggins’.

Bwaaaaaahaha (gasp! gasp!) BWWWAAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHA!

>> Dude... read the book. It is precisely this type of nonsense that makes me question you. Great job leafing through the Cliff notes, <<

Are you always so absolutely conformist that you can’t imagine someone can read the same book you did and not come to the same conclusion you did unless they just skimmed the Cliff notes? What’s so ironic about this, of course, is that you are pitching the party line, and I’m the one pointing out the inconsistency of it.