Monday, April 18, 2011

Assistant To the Quote of the Day

"When a film comes along and paints liberals as sinister cigar smoking fat cats, feasting on opulent dinners and in all ways acting like Libertarian corporatists until the revelation that their dirty backroom politics are for the good of 'the people' and 'the nation' and they won’t seemingly be getting much real gain out of it at all... I have to wonder: what the fuck were they thinking? Who seriously believes this shit? The only people who think that there really are a group of people out there who are altruistically evil are only going to see this if their meds don’t knock them out too early and the home their kids abandoned them in has a shuttle service... If you find a copy of this sitting around anywhere, do yourself a favor: set it on fire."

-- From Massawyrm's review of Atlas Shrugged at Ain't It Cool News

Incidentally, while it didn't exactly bomb, the movie did less-than-stellar numbers at the box office over the weekend. Guess its audience had "gone Galt."


Matt Osborne said...

My favorite comparisons so far? The Omega Code movies. I caught a tweet an hour or so ago that said it was "like Left Behind, only less realistic."

Nate said...

I went to see the film on Friday night out of pure curiosity. It was more interesting as a sociological experiment than as a film. The audience was almost entirely middle-aged and white (big surprise) and cheered loudly every time a character put a bureaucrat or liberal in their place. The world-view presented in the movie (and I presume the book) seems to be that businesses fail because they are too generous and altruistic when it comes to dealing with their communities.

For me, this illustrates that there is basically no common ground to be found between myself and the Randians.

Which brings me to a point I wanted to dispute in an earlier post this morning: If the President continues to appease the libertarians on most issues, while ignoring or marginalizing the left at every turn, then I feel no shame in voting for a third-party candidate come 2012. I do not agree that liberals are somehow obligated to vote Democrat just because the Republicans have moved so far to the right. The Democrats have been dragged along to become a center-right party and do not represent my ideals for this country. Voting for the lesser of two evils in every election cycle is part of what has gotten our country into such a mess. I will not continue to support candidates I don't believe in over candidates I believe in even less. To continue to vote Democrat is to acquiesce to the notion that the US is a center-right country and that my views as a liberal are irrelevant.

Alex said...

Well Nate in regard to your last paragraph all I have to say is, enjoy your future Republican president.

Chez said...

I agree with you in principle, Nate -- I really do. But reality is reality and there's simply no denying that a vote for a third-party candidate -- or abstaining from voting altogether -- may as well be a vote for the Republican candidate. And considering the thinking (or last thereof) of the current crop of GOP contenders, the kind of government you'll get as a result will be infinitely less ideal than the one you're protesting against.

Izar Talon said...

Objectivism tries to make the claim that altruism is inherently immoral and greed is the only correct moral choice. It is, literally, an attempt to rewrite human morality so that selfishness is Good and selflessness is Bad.

It is an EVIL thing.

And I do not use the label of "Evil" carelessly. This philosophy exists so that it's adherents can do anything they want in their own self-interest while still claiming to be morally upright, "Good" people. I remember first learning about Objectivism in one of my classes, and almost vomiting. While it honestly isn't good for very much else, majoring in Philosophy DOES leave you able to recognize Evil when you see it. And Objectivism is really the only systematic philosophy I know of that I would actually call outright Evil.

Helping others? It's really a greedy act because people only REALLY help others so they can feel good about being "Good" and so they can feel superior to those they help. Compassion doesn't really exist, and everything is about self-serving in some way or another, and no one really cares about the feelings of others in Rand's universe.

I honestly believe Ayn Rand was a sociopath. Her writings demonstrate a classic sociopathic mindset, where other people exist only to serve the interests of YOU. She actually advocates a sociopathic society, where everyone only looks out for themselves, and helping others is actually MORALLY WRONG. Where if you see an opening, you take it, and if someone else is hurt by your actions, well, it doesn't matter, because you were MORALLY OBLIGATED to go for it, and other people don't matter.

This is the thinking of a sociopath; to a sociopath, other people don't actually have feelings, and are just objects. The rest of humanity may as well be a set of robots placed on Earth to serve YOU. And Rand lays out this philosophy and tries to claim that it is morally GOOD, and we've all been doing it WRONG since humans fist banded together to help each other out of compassion for each other.

I'm sorry, but Rand REALLY makes my blood boil. The most Evil, selfish BITCH I've ever had the misfortune to read, and had the GALL to try to claim her vile shit was MORALLY GOOD. It makes me fucking SICK. When I meet someone online who claims to be an Objectivist it makes my eye twitch with rage... thankfully, I've never met anyone in real life who claimed to be one.

SmudgeTheCat said...

"I've never met anyone in real life who claimed to be one."

There is a talent agency in Toronto named "Fountainhead" the math.

e said...

I think Izar just summed that up nicely.

I always have to ask the people who are complaining about taxes and the government infringing on their rights... how much money do you need. After say 200,000 dollars a year, theres nothing truly necessary you can't afford.

As a fairly Liberal person, I don't get mad at republicans/libertarians for having a differing view on things. New perspectives always help clarify and refine positions, the problem is the questions that come from the right (actually politicians in general right now) are rarely discerning and useful, and most often just screaming.