Why The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy is better atheist Libertarian lit Ayn Rand

I actually haven't read THGTTG yet... I've known of it and always been interested... and this article makes it even moreso... would you say that the message, description of governments, support for free markets and civil liberties and parodying of the antithesis of these things is consistently libertarian throughout the book?

Or does it get statist at points?
 
Hehe...the description of this book's (THGTG) story and characters reminds me of "underground" Soviet literature(which was largely publicly banned until roughly the Perestroika-Перестройка-period), especially Vladamir Pelevin-which is full of jabs at the absurdity of Soviet beaurocracy and state-worship. :D
 
Hehe...the description of this book's (THGTG) story and characters reminds me of "underground" Soviet literature(which was largely publicly banned until roughly the Perestroika-Перестройка-period), especially Vladamir Pelevin-which is full of jabs at the absurdity of Soviet beaurocracy and state-worship. :D

Wonderful. So I take it I would enjoy the entire series? :D
 
I have read it, and highly recommend it. To describe what is happening around us sans humor is to take a long walk though the dog poop deck on the way to the plank.
 
Here's my comment:

I disagree that Roark would have added more value to society had he gone with what the masses supposedly desired as that desire was mostly manufactured for nefarious purposes. I think that in the Fountainhead there was an insinuated control mechanism that the media used to push for mediocrity in order to try and maintain control over every other aspect of people's lives. You are probably confused as to how this was accomplished, so let me try and explain.

The Banner represented yellow journalism, a sensationalist media outlet who self-admittedly were able to sway the masses on a variety of issues. By adopting and keeping a consistent style of architecture, judgement of said architecture becomes more objective and less subjective. By lulling the masses into a more objective thought process, the other reviewers of architecture out there who write for other publications would then have to conform if they want their opinion to be validated. But wait, that's not the only reason they do it.

I think that ultimately Rand was hoping to show that in a free society we must be free thinkers and willing to accept new ways of doing things. Not only will this help us progress, but it helps to keep an established order from becoming predominant in society that can be used to control the masses through media outlets. The whole idea that anything, including architecture, should be a "certain way" is a psychological affront to free thinking and the very wealthy seem to be easily swayed into this trap. For one, it helps maintain a consistency in society that helps ensure that they are the ones who stay on top without having to innovate too much or worry about others who might innovate too much. This is unfortunate, of course, knowing what we know about economics in that overall everyone benefits the most from more innovation. However, it does kick some people off the top of the ladder who have invested a lot in older ideas.

I do agree that there is value to being kind towards others and don't agree with all of Rand's philosophy. I haven't read THGTTG but am very interested. Overall this was a good write-up.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top