Ayn Rand on Israel and the Middle East

[The Goat]

So she sides with Israel because the arabs kill innocent civilians just like the Israelis. Great reasoning right there.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

Ayn Rand has done more for liberty than any of us will ever do in our lifetimes. Read about the formation of the modern libertarian party. Most of its founders began as objectivists, and her influence kept the early libertarian/anti-war movement from devolving into another leftist rebellion. We are better off today because of her.

Yeah, great job of her disciples establishing the Libertarian Party. Where would freedom be without it?

 

[UMULAS]

Yeah, great job of her disciples establishing the Libertarian Party. Where would freedom be without it?

At least she contributed to libertarianism in this country, a lot of people have libertarian views because of her, even though people tend to disagree on other stuff from her.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

At least she contributed to libertarianism in this country, a lot of people have libertarian views because of her, even though people tend to disagree on other stuff from her.

Bullshit. She didn't contribute to libertarianism, she routinely disparaged it. If it was up to her and her cult, libertarianism would be destroyed. This disgusting woman should not be promoted as a champion of liberty, that's for sure.

 

[UMULAS]

Really.

So Robert A. Heinlein, Leo Tolstoy, John Steinbeck, and Charles Dickens knew nothing about freedom........

Ayn Rand became good for co temporary history of libertarianism and caused more productivity from it.

Though Mises -> Rand -> Paul

 

[Danke]

She's always struck me as a frigid old fish that wasn't worth the time. .

I seem to recall reading she definitely was not frigid.

 

[UMULAS]

Bullshit. She didn't contribute to libertarianism, she routinely disparaged it. If it was up to her and her cult, libertarianism would be destroyed. This disgusting woman should not be promoted as a champion of liberty, that's for sure.

Maybe because there are anarchists who still call themselves libertarians, yet she helped libertarianism. Although I still believe that she had crazy fans that dressed up like her, that was not her fault nor the ARI's fault.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

Maybe because there are anarchists who still call themselves libertarians, yet she helped libertarianism.

I guess your warped mind is determined to come up with whatever excuses you need to make up to justify your God's blatently anti-libertarian positions.

 

[Occam's Banana]

Bullshit. She didn't contribute to libertarianism, she routinely disparaged it. If it was up to her and her cult, libertarianism would be destroyed. This disgusting woman should not be promoted as a champion of liberty, that's for sure.

Ayn Rand was one of the MAJOR contributors to modern libertarianism - utterly regardless of whether YOU or SHE or anyone else likes it or not.

Any claim to the contrary is unhinged from reality.

 

[UMULAS]

I guess your warped mind is determined to come up with whatever excuses you need to make up to justify your God's blatently anti-libertarian positions.

So because I don't support anarchism make's me an anti-libertarian?

 

[FrankRep]

So because I don't support anarchism make's me an anti-libertarian?

Is this another "I'm more Libertarian than you" thread?

ugh.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

So because I don't support anarchism make's me an anti-libertarian?

No, she didn't support libertarianism. Why are you deliberately lying?

Ayn Rand was one of the MAJOR contributors to modern libertarianism - utterly regardless of whether YOU or SHE or anyone else likes it or not.

Many libertarians like her books, which is unfortunate since she was an avowed enemy of liberty.

 

[Ender]

Ayn Rand became good for co temporary history of libertarianism and caused more productivity from it.

Though Mises -> Rand -> Paul

Heinlein & Steinbeck were contemporary with Rand; Heinlein was even more modern.

 

[Odin]

Ayn Rand was one of the MAJOR contributors to modern libertarianism - utterly regardless of whether YOU or SHE or anyone else likes it or not.

Any claim to the contrary is unhinged from reality.

"Money is the root of all good" - sorry but if you believe this you are a libertarian for the wrong reason imo. It matters why you believe something, and to be for certain policies that I agree with because you think that selfishness is MORAL and that's why you have a right to your property, then I'm afraid we aren't on the same page.

Do you believe that charity is EVIL for instance!? Because if not you aren't an objectivist.

 

[misean]

Heinlein & Steinbeck were contemporary with Rand; Heinlein was even more modern.

I've never heard of any libertarians becoming libertarian from any of those authors.

I've heard of many libertarians being influenced by Atlas Shrugged, Road to Serfdom, and/or Free to Choose. I left Mises and Rothbard off because I don't think most people are introduced to libertarian ideas from their books. Atlas Shrugged still sells hundreds of thousands of copies each year. Anyone who doesn't think Ayn Rand is hugely influential among libertarians is wrong and it isn't debatable.

 

[Occam's Banana]

"Money is the root of all good" - sorry but if you believe this you are a libertarian for the wrong reason imo. It matters why you believe something, and to be for certain policies that I agree with because you think that selfishness is MORAL and that's why you have a right to your property, then I'm afraid we aren't on the same page.

Do you believe that charity is EVIL for instance!? Because if not you aren't an objectivist.

What the hell are you on about? I haven't said anything at all about any of those things - and not one of them have anything whatsoever to do with the undeniable, incontrovertible fact of Ayn Rand's influence on libertarianism.

I don't care *what* anyone thinks about Rand (or anything she wrote or said) - love her, hate her, or regard her with complete indifference - the notion that Rand is not one of the major figures of modern liberarianism is blatantly absurd.

And for the record, I am not nor have I ever been an Objectivist. In fact, I think Rand was wrong about a good many things. (For example, that she was a hypocrite in her condemnations of collectivism is plain to anyone who watches the OP video clip.)

I would thank you not to make presumptions about what I think & believe when you have been given no warrant for doing so. (I happen to believe Adolf Hitler was a major influence on fascism - will you ask me now whether I approve of anti-semitism?)

 

[RockEnds]

I seem to recall reading she definitely was not frigid.

She just never met the right primitive barbarian then?

 

[Odin]

What the hell are you on about? I haven't said anything at all about any of those things - and not one of them have anything whatsoever to do with the undeniable, incontrovertible fact of Ayn Rand's influence on libertarianism.

I don't care *what* anyone thinks about Rand (or anything she wrote or said) - love her, hate her, or regard her with complete indifference - the notion that Rand is not one of the major figures of modern liberarianism is blatantly absurd.

Very well, though I don't really care who a major figure of the libertarian movement might be. However I'm just making the point that people can agree in terms of policy but not in terms of principle or philosophy. And Objectivism is a very poor philosophy on every level - metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, and politics. The only area where I have some agreement is in politics but my goal would be to have people accept the right policies for the right reasons, I think that is very important, and if we build our case on rotten foundations we won't get very high until it all comes crumbling down.

Btw I think you may have mistaken my use of the word 'you' to mean you in particular, when I was using it in a 3rd person sense.

 

[dillo]

Anti Zionism appears to be so strong on this board that even great minds like Rand are denounced and demonized for their support of Israel.

I for one agree strongly with her. We dont have to give money to Israel but in no one should be go on attacking and bashing it like some members of this board do. We are supposed to be against foreign interventionist policies not just against the current ones and for others.

Sampson option

 

[paulbot24]

It's moments like watching that video that make me appreciate Ron's unwavering stance on foreign policy and marvel at how he has been so consistently correct all these years. As time moves on and public opinion sways back and forth like the tides of the ocean, he has maintained the simplest and most elegant solution. We have enough on our plate to worry about over here, as always. You don't ever have to resort to name calling and pettiness when you're minding your own business and allowing others the same privilege. Doesn't it feel good to say, "I have enough to worry about and the way they do things over there is really none of my business"?