I know she’s a jew…and I know she misses a lot…but I really like her philosophy. It boils down to “do the best for you without screwing over others.” Or “do your best without being selfish.”
I know - they have to "tell" us what they're doing and how it is being done, lest their belief in "free will" gets obliterated by forcing people to go down their path.
And it’s such a one way street. Any attempt to counter their position and you’ suddenly become a ____ist.
Entirely consistent with satanic ethos.
being selfish is based tho
Being selfish is more Jewish than based
Edit to clarify: I think it’s important to draw the distinction between what she refers to as selfish and what I interpret as selfish. She seems to define it as an absence of altruism - doing what’s best for yourself. I think of it more as a lack of backstabbing, or destructive of others in pursuit of bettering yourself.
A good example is Walmart. Initially, under Sam Walton, he strove to provide products to the middle class at reasonable prices. He put competitors out of business along the way, and absorbed others, and he became rich doing it. But his goal was mutually beneficial with the public.
When his heirs took over, they became more parasitic; they used lawyers and unscrupulous contracts to take over their vendors’ businesses. They fired workers for being there too long and making salaries they didn’t want to pay.
In my opinion, I think Ayn’s vision is seen in what Sam Walton did and practiced - it was beneficial to everyone because he provided a service that they needed, and he was compensated and grew rich doing so. His heirs were selfish and took it too far - turning it into a parasitic relationship.
This is turning into more of an essay than I’d intended, but I guess one area that Ayn doesn’t fully comprehend is one that Aldus Huxley did: propaganda. And it is with that propaganda that companies like Walmart …or Amazon, Microsoft, etc. thrive. The masses aren’t intelligent or aware enough to know they’re being duped and led to the slaughter. So it’s not that they have a choice of which product to buy….
I thought her philosophy was do the best for yourself , and fuck everyone else.
She objected to the common use of the word "selfish," and used her own definition. So she would (and did) say that you should be selfish, but in the way that she defined it.
Yes and no. It certainly was "do what is best for yourself." As far as "fuck everyone else," that's where the change in era makes it more nuanced.
Imagine you've got a company that makes $X in profit. I think her position is that your company should strive to make the best product possible, so you take your profits and put some back to R&D to improve it so you can sell more. This would be done as opposed to giving it to taxes to help others that "can't help themselves." Your entire purpose as a business is to create the best product to sell the most to make the most so you can sell more so you can make more money for yourself.
Today's bastardization of that is not in line with what she proposes as an ideal state. Today, companies use a portion of the $x in profits to hire lawyers and propagandists to manipulate the playing field such that only they can exist. I think that's where she is lacking in her position - the affect that propaganda has on the market.
I see where you're coming from but in my opinion any ideology being pushed by a jew cannot be a sustainable one. You can't trust them.
I'm okay with accepting ideologies that make sense. We have a bad habit of putting those who we agree with on a pedestal, though, and that's where things begin to fail. With Ayn, she's right in much of what she says about business and government: Businesses should do what's best for them and government should butt the fuck out. Beyond that, though, her views on religion and women are not right. The retarded masses expect her views to be 100%, and she gives equal weight to all her positions, which is where it breaks down.
Another more recent example of this Kyle Rittenhouse. We all agreed with his position that we should defend our communities, then people where shocked and let down when he said he supported BLM.
Over and over this happens, and we never learn. We need to get better at saying, "that's a great point," and leaving it at that.
Doing that, I think Ayn Rand has a great point, but I don't trust her (or anyone) enough to give credence beyond what I see on the surface.
(post is archived)