Does Veeky Forums fux with Ayn Rand?

she was incredibly influential in the USA though, especially in California/Silicon Valley

desu the idea is fairly profound even if its simple. though Nietzsche said what she did and much more in a far better way, he isn't as easily accessible as Rand is, especially for someone unfamiliar with German philosophy.

that's because she's in like her 50s in the first one and 20 something years older in that one.

Her philosophy does not deserve nor the hate nor the praise it gets
But her opponents are way more vocal than her defenders, they seriously get buttblasted if anyone dares compliment something of her ideas.
desu sometimes I pretend I'm a Randfag just to bait some idiots.

>Be failed screenwriter who starts writing books
>Have philosophy that everyone should be selfish and fuck idiots
>Create fictional universe where your philosophy can work
>Some people unironically think it will work in reality

bait

i would fuck her

t. Randroid who is triggered by reality

Hegelian dialectic in action

Her family that was doing well under the Tsar, got fucked over by the Commies, and she way over reacted as a result.

The funny part is she landed in the United States and literally cried seeing the New York skyline. Not realizing the United States is the synthesis of her ideology and it's antithesis.

She fails as a writer and as a philosopher. Her ideas on objectivism are absolutely retarded, ideolized fiction that works in nothing but her own imagination. It has zero bearing in reality and was nothing but fanwanked, pseudo-intellectual bullshit contrary to everything that was communist.

If you want an individualist, at least read Stirner. Rand is just laughable.

Russian Jew that was just angry about the Soviets taking her family's business and running them out of the country.

...

Not the other guy, but it's pretty hard to argue that Ayn Rand's philosophy is in any way profound or unique. Compare her works to those of a real philosopher like Hegel or even Nietzsche honestly and there's a huge difference in depth.

Because Ayn Rand promoted greed as a virtue. In every civilization greed (and merchants) were seen in a negative light. In feudalist societies, they disrupted the balance because they spited society and the fiefdom, for self-interests. The left-right dichotomy initially had capitalists and free-market enthusiasts on the left, while feudalists and monarchists were on the right. Not that Karl Marx has any shred of useful information, but he predicted that capitalism would slide into socialism and then communism through revolution. We can see evidence of this in modern liberals. Historically, liberals were in favor of free markets and less government; and now they want more government and handouts; just as Marx said, people became communists.

If capitalism would become communism, then it's safe to assume that capitalism is a shitty ideology anyway.

Sure, it provides the best and the most. But if one child who wears rags for clothes can be happy with what little scraps he has, then capital isn't needed for happiness.

In a feudalist society such as the European or Japanese models, people were content with their role in society, mostly because they'd be given a living wage. Merchants were always seen as a threat to society, which is why Jews were ostracized, because they were international elements who serviced their own self-interest. The anxiety of progress is why people are becoming greedy and degenerate. This anxiety is perpetuated by the merchant class which is ruling us today.