Posted by Guest (Post 539415)

Taltarzac72...YOU began this thread on Ayn Rand for a reason and I, for one, do not understand why. It "appears" to me that it is simply another way of demeaning the Republican candidate, in this case for VP.

Should I begin a thread titled "Saul Alinsky" I would be met with great anger and would be asked what that has to do with anything even though the President actually TAUGHT the Alinsky philosophy and how to implement those things.

You can begin any thread you want, but it is just not clear to me WHY you began this thread..as I said it is not just that Ryan likes the book because if that were the case, I wouldnt have scars from discussing the Presidents involvement with "Rules for Radicals" by Alinsky.

You even admit in this last post that you have not read Ayn Rand in 30 years.

I am just at a loss as to what was your motive here !

Thanks for listening !

Posted by Guest (Post 539427)

Ayn Rand has probably been dead 30 years or so. Never saw any real worth to her ideas when I read her fiction books. I read Shakespeare within the last ten days or so. His work appeared in the London Olympics because he has all those sophisticated ideas you find in deep philosophical works even though I doubt if Shakespeare read very much Plato or Aristotle.

I see nothing wrong with Alinsky. He looks like a Marxist of some sort. So what if a young Obama read some Marx and followed the teachings of a man on how to do community activism.

The problem with Mitt Romney's pick of Paul Ryan is that Ryan has embraced an author--Ayn Rand-- whose very values are the exact opposite of those you find in Reagan's Compassionate Conservatism as well as those you find in the Religious Right.

Many of the values of helping the poor you see in the work of Marx and neo-Marxists like Alinsky. I doubt if many Democrats have any kind of problem with Barack Obama and Alinsky.

Posted by Guest (Post 539437)

Well, I have probems with marxist radicals. If you think the Democratic party embraces that, which your imply in your last sentence then we need help in this country.

You have successfully avoided the question which was WHY did you begin this thread....your motivation. It makes no sense....you and as you say other Democrats embrace a radical marxist philosophy and embrace a man in the WH who did not just read it, he taught it and used those practices in his job.

Everyone to their own beliefs !!!!

Posted by Guest (Post 539393)

Atlas Shrugged. I probably read this book 30 years ago. It sort of rings a bell. Ayn Rand's philosophy is set out more in two nonfiction books-- The Virtue of Selfishness and Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology . Her philosophy is called Objectivism and sounds like she just does away with about 3000 years of very sophisticated philosophical debates by getting rid of God, the soul, free will, etc. by taking a very commonsensical approach. What's in the world are objects. People interact with objects during their existence. What is most important to the single person is his or her economic survival. The state is supposed to leave people alone while they pursue their economic interests. Not even sure why Ayn Rand needs a state in her philosophy.

What man is supposed to enjoy is art. She seems to see art as the only thing that human's should worship. There's no afterlife, no God, etc. in the work of Ayn Rand that I can see. No real morals, no real ethics. Rand's ethics are just that we should leave one another alone so that each can pursue his or her own economic interests. If another person uses violence to prevent someone else from pursuing his or her economic interest, then you can use violence in turn.

Abortions are fine in Rand's philosophy because a fetus is not a person striving for an economic interest. There is no God in Rand's work, no soul of a person so there is no argument coming from there that a fetus might have a soul.

I may be missing something though in Ayn Rand's work. I have two B.A.s and one of these was in Philosophy. We never studied Ayn Rand as I cannot remember anyone seeing her as a serious philosopher. I studied Plato, Aristotle, St. Augustine, Thomas Aquinas, Descartes, Hobbes, Newton, Locke, Burke, Hume, Berkeley, Kant, Hegel, Marx, Pierce, James, Freud, Popper, Wittgenstein, Kuhn, etc.

Posted by Guest (Post 539484)

You make Rand sound like a modern day liberal.

Posted by Guest (Post 539445)

I never said Barack Obama embraces a radical Marxist idea. He does not. He read a book by Allinsky who died in 1972 when Obama was 10. Alinsky was big on community organizing. Obama was a community organizer. Not much more than that.

Posted by Guest (Post 539604)

I am going to say this on more time and this time I hope you are listening....you seem to have a filter or something working there.....

OBAMA did not just read a book..........HE TAUGHT THE PRINCIPLES OF THE BOOK RULES FOR RADICALS...HE TAUGHT IT

To whom did he teach it....neighborhood organizers which he was one and practiced those principles.


THAT is much more than "read a book" !!!

Posted by Guest (Post 539677)

Community organizing is not radical. I will bet that various Republican community organizers use the same kind of approach as that taught by Obama. Ever hear of the Tea Party?

Posted by Guest (Post 539681)

I am sure that is correct...again Obama TAUGHT THE BOOK AND HOW TO UNDERSTAND AND IMPLEMENT RULES FOR RADICALS BY ALINSKY.

Posted by Guest (Post 539685)

Which also turn up used by the Tea Party. Who is Saul Alinsky, and why is Newt Gingrich so obsessed with him? - CSMonitor.com