ayn rand -- i think my head is about to explode

[Dustancostine]

She mentions corporations? The word itself? That's funny because CORPORATIONS as we know it are sanctioned and organized by the state itself corporations are not natural elements in free markets.

She does not talk much about corporations but here is some of here thoughts on the subject:

Ayn Rand on Contracts:

In a free society, men are not forced to deal with one anther. They do so only by voluntary agreement and , when a time element is involved, by contract. If a contract is broken by the arbitrary decision of one man, it may cause a disastrous financial injury to the other..... This leads to one of the most important and most complex functions of government: to the function of an arbiter who settles disputes among men according to objective law.

Leonard Peikoff (another objectivist) on Corportations:

A corporation is a union of human being in a voluntary, cooperative endeavor. It exemplifies the principle of free association, which is an expression of the right ot freedom. Any attributes which corporations have are attributes (or rights) which the individuals have-including the right to combine in a certain way, offer products under certain terms, and deal with others according to certain rules, for instance, limited liability.
An individual can say to a shopkeeper, " I would like to have credit, but I put you on notice that if I can't pay, you can't attach my home-take it or leave it:. The shopkeeper is a cooperative productive endeavor which gives a similar waring explicitly. It has no mystical attributes, no attributes that don't go back to the rights of individuals, including their rights of free association.


BTW: I have mixed feelings personally about corporations.

 

[Dustancostine]

and why does she qualify the secession to require to be from an oppressive state? Again, is this a libertarian imperialism featuring a monopoly on law? Why didn't she mention that she supports the secession of a 'province' from her 'libertarian state'?

I guess that if you had a truly libertarian state there would be no need to. If you are truly free what are you seceding from? Also if you are in a truly free society no one is going to really care if you do. But if you are seceding to impose your will on others then you have no right.

--Dustan

BTW: Ayn lays out an entire philosophy based on principles. Sometimes her applications of here own principles can be faulty (imo). Also I have a book that indexes all of here positions so read them carefully, I am probably blindsiding you some with such a reference guide.

Read Atlas Shrugged, it is incredible and well worth your time. It is also a philosophical book that is written as a novel. So you even get an entertainment value if nothing else.

 

[a_european]

I don't like her either. I always had the feeling she ignores one important part of beeing free: the caring for others. I think thats what Ron Paul gets, that classic-liberalism is the logical advancement of humanism.
I totaly agree with Joseph. Why am i for free markets and free people? Because it works! It's the best way to live. I don't care whats moral and about principles.
Mises to the rescue!

 

[libertarianguy]

test

 

[constituent]

wow. i had yet to air my distaste for Ayn Rand thinking it not worth the inevitable chit storm....


glad to see i'm not alone here.... phew.

Before joining these boards i'd only met one person my whole
life (and i'm an avid reader, and tend to know lots of others) who
actually enjoyed Atlas Shrugged. Its still on his shelf too, right next
to his "doom" story novels and just about his comic book collection.

But he's not an objectivist.

I'd probably be more interested in it myself
but that i'm so thoroughly disgusted by the
Rand Corporation, though I once considered
submitting an essay for a writing contest.

 

[Ridiculous]

Paul's son is Rand Paul. Paul is an Ayn Rand fan.

 

[Dustancostine]

I'd probably be more interested in it myself
but that i'm so thoroughly disgusted by the
Rand Corporation, though I once considered
submitting an essay for a writing contest.

The Rand Corporation has nothing to do with Ayn Rand. The Rand of Rand Corporations stands for "Research and Development".

-Dustan

 

[constituent]

oh.... hmmm... well i haven't read atlas shrugged since the eight grade,

so that fear assuaged (those bastards are evil), reckon i'll go pick a copy up somewhere...

thanks dustancostine!

 

[BillyDkid]

Rand was the first neocon

I find Ayn Rand to be extremely tedious, but that last thing she was is a neo-con. She is an individualist which could not be further from being a neo-con.

 

[kylejack]

Perhaps you guys don't know what neo-cons are.

Two major qualities of a neo-con:
1. Favors social programs
2. Favors wars of aggression

Both are absolutely anti-thetical to Ayn Rand's philosophy of individualism. She would consider both of these robbery.

 

[allyinoh]

I think anyone who says that people aren't in general selfish is out of their mind. It's in one's own interest to think about them self first and foremost.

I like her for many reasons. First, a lot of things she talks about people are thinking but don't say. I admire that. Also, I do care about my fellow man, but is my fellow man going to look after me and take care of me? Hell no. The only person I can count on is me, myself, and I.

I like most people however, if it came down to me or you going over that cliff, I'm going to make damned sure you go over and I'm the one left.

It's just human nature to want to survive.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

She does not talk much about corporations but here is some of here thoughts on the subject:

Ayn Rand on Contracts:

In a free society, men are not forced to deal with one anther. They do so only by voluntary agreement and , when a time element is involved, by contract. If a contract is broken by the arbitrary decision of one man, it may cause a disastrous financial injury to the other..... This leads to one of the most important and most complex functions of government: to the function of an arbiter who settles disputes among men according to objective law.

Leonard Peikoff (another objectivist) on Corportations:

A corporation is a union of human being in a voluntary, cooperative endeavor. It exemplifies the principle of free association, which is an expression of the right ot freedom. Any attributes which corporations have are attributes (or rights) which the individuals have-including the right to combine in a certain way, offer products under certain terms, and deal with others according to certain rules, for instance, limited liability.
An individual can say to a shopkeeper, " I would like to have credit, but I put you on notice that if I can't pay, you can't attach my home-take it or leave it:. The shopkeeper is a cooperative productive endeavor which gives a similar waring explicitly. It has no mystical attributes, no attributes that don't go back to the rights of individuals, including their rights of free association.


BTW: I have mixed feelings personally about corporations.

But she's using the wrong word lol

corporation: an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members.

the definition does not fit her own definition. She's defining companies, not corporations.

company: a number of individuals assembled or associated together; group of people.

 

[kylejack]

But she's using the wrong word lol

corporation: an association of individuals, created by law or under authority of law, having a continuous existence independent of the existences of its members, and powers and liabilities distinct from those of its members.

the definition does not fit her own definition. She's defining companies, not corporations.

company: a number of individuals assembled or associated together; group of people.

You mean...he?

 

[Ridiculous]

You mean...he?

Ayn Rand was a woman.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

You mean...he?

Ayn Rand was a woman.

 

[Ridiculous]

Ayn Rand was a woman.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_rand

 

[kylejack]

Ayn Rand was a woman.

Ayn Rand was a woman.

Where did Ayn Rand define a corporation incorrectly?

 

[drain]

I don't like her either. I always had the feeling she ignores one important part of beeing free: the caring for others. I think thats what Ron Paul gets, that classic-liberalism is the logical advancement of humanism.
I totaly agree with Joseph. Why am i for free markets and free people? Because it works! It's the best way to live. I don't care whats moral and about principles.
Mises to the rescue!

Why is caring for others an important part of being free? Objectivism is all about being the best person you can be without harming any others. If everyone followed this there would be no need to have to care for others (of course besides completely voluntary caring ie. family). Don't force me to take care of anyone else. Being selfish is not bad, it is actually the ideal.

adrian

 

[Edward]

But she's using the wrong word lol

You mean...he?

Ayn Rand was a woman.

Ayn Rand was a woman.

But Leonard Peikoff is a man... and the aforementioned quote regarding corporations was attributed to him.

 

[JosephTheLibertarian]

But Leonard Peikoff is a man... and the aforementioned quote regarding corporations was attributed to him.

Has nothing to do with gender. Fact is, she used the wrong word in this particular context. I think I know her intended mean but I guess she never bothered to look up the word 'corporation'.