Well? Were they right?

How do people still take her seriously when her """philosophy""" was literally btfo by a video game.

>Because sometimes having a 287 foot yacht isn't enough to warn people that you're a douchebag

Fuckin' got em

...

>dude what if we did [ideology] then zombies

you can do this weak shit critique with any ideology lol

the true way to btfo an ideology is to show it working as intended and have that be horrific

Honestly, as much as I despise ayn rand, I despise John Oliver even more.

>trying to BTFO one of the easiest targets in literature
>come across as an asshole
this is like picking on the weakest kid in the playground and losing lmao

Kek, Rand gets BTFO far better by a bunch of autistic retards on Veeky Forums every day

most people who criticize rand come across like the villains in her books. there's often this weird undercurrent of vengefulness. i'm not saying rand is perfect but it's just something i noticed

Well that was a shit video, it's like they read the wikipedia article once and did no other research. Even I could make better fun of that ideology.

/Thread

It's CURRENT YEAR!

How is ________ STILL A THING?!

a smarmy kike BTFOs another smarmy kike?

regardless of what you think of Rand, her ideology has had a massive impact on post-war America, especially in California and business.

>4 minutes of PURE ad hominem
Very impressive

i'm surprised they didn't mention that she relied on Social Security and Medicare during her last years

Why aren't you mentioning that they put a gun to her head and forced her to pay into it?

Sounds like a case of the pot calling the kettle black.

I wonder how much Johnny Boy pays his tax lawyers?

yeah but the whole thing is just a hit piece, why pull any punches?

People generally get angry when they see someone argue for egoism because it reminds them how spooked they are and causes uncomfortable cognitive dissonance.

>how is she still a thing

Just from that line I can tell I don't need to watch the video. The makers know nothing about economics, industry, or politics.

rand was spooked

>call objectivism being a selfish asshole
>she was pro abortion so that's good
Can't they see that killing your own children because it's convenient to your degenerate lifestyle is being a selfish asshole?

John Oliver made a lib kike media hitpiece on her?

This alone is reason for me to pick her up and see what shes about.

Came here to post this. I fucking despise John Oliver.

what a sad way to read.

john oliver is a piece of shit faggot and this sucks

but ayn rand is fucking shit

Calling a fetus a child with any certainty is just putting your own agenda onto your argument.

There is (obviously) a completely smooth transition from fertilization to birth. Defining when precisely human rights are gained is (obviously) a man-made definition.

why are they so sexist

>Get a personal recommendation to read Her by Johnny O

What do you mean?

>Defining when precisely human rights are gained is (obviously) a man-made definition.

That's only because you have decided that "human rights" are not imputed simply by virtue of being human. A fetus is a separate human organism from the mother, as is a zygote.

>(...) There are so many advocates Republicans could choose, like Donald Trump.

Deal.

Sure but only because societies decide humans have rights in the first place. There's no human rights gene.

If that society decides human rights are acquired after 28 weeks of gestation then a zygote has no rights by definition.

Then you aren't talking about human rights, are you? You're talking about something like a concept of "person," whereby some humans are considered the bearers of rights, whereas the humans you want to kill are designated as "nonpersons."

I use human rights and personhood interchangeably as the distinction is irrelevant to a discussion about abortion.

Whether nonperson human or person without human rights, the abortion justification is the same.

>the abortion justification is the same.

Yes, it is a collection or arbitrary qualifications, the substance of which is no different than that which could be applied to any other undesirable human population.

Well yeah. The point is holding to a "human rights at conception" definition is arbitrary too.

I personally don't think a clump of a few cells deserves human rights. I do think every human who has ever been born does deserve them.

By the same token that you deny them to the unborn others deny them to the born. At least you're aware it's the same thing.

By what token? You talk as if human rights being tied to human genes is the default.

You have your definition of personhood. I have mine. Under neither definition is killing of anyone born justified.

>John "The Fucking Shill" Oliver
OP discarded.

By the token of creating an arbitrary legal qualification by which some humans become killable nonpersons.

...

Are you trying to say abortion is a slippery slippery slope to killing adults?

Thats illogical and you know it.

The only humans which become killable are those which are unborn.

No court is ever going to allow you to kill a fully grown human under an abortion law.

And if someone tries to introduce a new law allowing the killing of gays or blacks or jews then I (and everyone else in the western world) would condemn and fight them.

You keep using the word arbitrary but any legal qualification of personhood is arbitrary. But im beginning to suspect you are ignoring that.

Oh, I see. The courts will never do it and if they do the freedom fighters will stop them, lol. Surely such a thing would never happen in this world. Not at all. Here's one for you: mentally disabled people who are incapable of self-care. I'm sure they'll always be protected by the sacred courts of the west.

Well I guess that debate's over.

If it is your opinion that the only thing preventing court-sanctioned killing of mentally disabled people is a staunch adherence to personhood at conception and that allowing the termination of early-stage pregnancies would open the floodgates to the killing of groups of adults then theres really nothing more to argue about.

No. The only thing right is that idiots loved what she preached and therefore that makes her wrong. She preached idealized master morality and idiots thought it was justification to be irrational and do whatever for selfish greed without integrity.

It's because they can't argue rationally. I don't love her by any possible measure, but when you just meme as your arguments it's rather baffling how you can think you've said anything.

>Can't they see that killing your own children because it's convenient to your degenerate lifestyle is being a selfish asshole?
Yeah, so?
>you're being an asshole to someone who's not even born
Are you being an asshole by not having sex? Or using a condom? Is every path you chose not to commit condemning someone who hasn't been born to not live?

Ayn Rand only saw it immoral to destroy the life of those who could experience consciousness of reality and existence. A baby with no consciousness of the world before it is born is not killing.

Admittedly, people should take responsibilities for their actions, but Ayn Rand argued that having a child can largely fuck up your life and having the state force upon such a burden was immoral.

Haha, nearly!

>arguing about a female author

We already had this conversation before, these all belong in the trash.

There's a reason in England he was a literally who yet got a huge following as soon as he went to America.

>in England he was a literally
Hey don't be so dismissive, he had about three lines in Green Wing.

That's a surprisingly bad critique of Rand when there's much material out there to such an end. All the video does is point out that American right wingers don't take Rand wholesale as if that's some malicious contradiction (should we disbelieve the theory of gravity because Hitler believed it?) while making sure to point out the mean things she said about Native Americans which is sure to offend modern sensibilities (which are predicated upon a similar sentiment of Rand's anyway). This is what passes for American intellectualism? Shallow would be an understatement.

>Why is this still a thing?

Muh right side of history

I'm an American and I think our culture is just completed retarded. Not just the hollywood type kardashian shit but the "fake smart" political commentary, it's all just a bunch of horribly unfunny ad-homs and emotional appeals. American sensibilities are just so unlikable because we expect everything to be so dramatic.

Do HeLa cells have human rights?

This. I literally don't see how you could fuck it up so bad.

The fact that the only counterpoints he mentions are her pro-choice, anti-establishment and atheistic views, ratter than her undeniably significant impact on 20th century america, is pretty retarded.

Knowing that people actually form their opinions from John Oliver makes me super depressed about our future

The worst part is when he uses the "just a comedian" defense despite professors forcing us to watch his shit.

This was painful to watch, I hate americans

>le picking quotes out of context
>history of people I disagree with should be erased
Current year media

And they hate you

>professors forcing us to watch his shit.

Are you american?

Even if he were "just a comedian" he should at least back up his actual opinions when they are challenged. But the whole point is unchallenged beliefs, while they mock other people for the same flaws. I honestly can't believe I used to enjoy Colbert back in the Bush years seeing where the people involved in it have gone now

True, but she also rejected some big spooks in a bold enough way to piss people off.

I'm pretty sure the laughter is canned

>professors forcing us to watch his shit.

Bullshit, no college professor would show their students John Oliver. I would need to see some evidence of that before I believe such an absurd claim.

I'm at binghamton university which is like Berkley's political climate with more retarded students and worse professors, so maybe it's just a testament to that but my freshman polysci teacher showed us the episode on voting restrictions in the south and the brexit one.

Not as high an academic standard but my AP government teacher in high school had us watch a ton of these as well.

John Oliver mocking Ayn Rand is like a $50 prostitute calling a $100 prostitute a whore

How is this thing I don't like still relevant I mean c'mon guys it's current year just stop talking about it haha are you retarded?

I've got an English professor showing me Lemonade by Beyonce in a couple weeks, I'm hyped

>cultural marxists don't exist

>How is she still a thing?
ASTROTURFING

Haha wow. Why is an HBO comedy show supposed to be "American Intellectualism".

They weren't "critiquing" it they were mocking it as one would expect of a half hour cable comedy show.

Get over yourself.

>hahaha I'm just a fake news outlet nothing I say is serious, and no-one takes it seriously
right

The fact that people rag on Ayn Rand so much makes me want to read her work.