Just read first 100 pages. >everyone who agrees with my philosophy is attractive and smart (+blonde and blue eyed)

Just read first 100 pages
>everyone who agrees with my philosophy is attractive and smart (+blonde and blue eyed)
>everyone who disagrees with my philosophy is ugly and dumb
>also train autism
Does it get better?

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

Yakub: World's Greatest Dad Shirt $21.68

Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14

  1. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The protagonists (The fricking avatars of objectivism) are a bunch of Mary Sues and are for sure unrealistic and annoying, but the antagonists aren't stupid. She did her homework when understanding these people and it's easily my favorite part of the book.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Dagnys brother is a fricking moron+pathetic moralgayging cuck and reardans brother is this but 3x worse

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Indeed, but they have an agenda and reasons for it. I see a lot of parallels between these characters and some real people.

  2. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The only parts that you need to read from this book are Francesco‘s speech about money and the story of the 20th century motor company. Skip Galts speech and pick up The Fountainhead.

  3. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    ayn rand is right but doesn't understand why. if reincarnation is real then taxation is just stealing from your other incarnations, which only hurts yourself

  4. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I want to read it bros
    >man you know what'd be awesome? if it was serialized in a bi-weekly libertarian magazine, so I can read 50 pages a month without getting bored or burning out
    >surely that's how it was published initially
    >nope
    ...
    rather puzzling how a novel fit for such 19th century serialization and blending with other libertarian issues had been issued as a brick only autists have the patience to read 🙁
    are there even libertarian or classical-liberal periodicals out there? help me out I feel a depression looming

  5. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    No - not really. The Fountainhead is much better.
    Rand's problem is that she is both a mediocre writer and a mediocre philosopher, but she WAS smart enough to preach an ideology that embodies "good news about your worst qualities." Maladjusted pseuds eat it up.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      but the fountainhead has a decent movie (the one from 1949) while atlas shrugged only had a mediocre transposition (the second part, from 2012 is actually worth seeing, although the first one has a cute but strong Samantha Mathis playing Dagny... I digress)
      so it's more about "which one is worth reading" than "which one is better"

  6. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >train autism
    I will have to read this now.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/caiNE5D.jpg

      Just read first 100 pages
      >everyone who agrees with my philosophy is attractive and smart (+blonde and blue eyed)
      >everyone who disagrees with my philosophy is ugly and dumb
      >also train autism
      Does it get better?

      >Frank Sinatra had an entire building (transformed from a railroad car...) dedicated to his model railway
      be careful whom you call an autist anons

  7. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The first third where Dagney builds the rail line is the best part of the book. If you're never going to read Ayn Rand again skim Galt's speech before you DNF and you'll have a general idea of what she was about.

  8. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The characters are written that way on purpose, and yes it does get better. Be forewarned, once you fully acclimate to Rand's verbose style of storytelling and prose(it'll happen around page 200 or so), other works will feel very truncated. It's a very unique book.

  9. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    I do not understand the hatred for this book.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      The people who hate it are James and Robert Stadlers

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      I am liking it so far but its objectivly poorly written.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        That sounds highly subjective.

      • 4 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        *objectivistly poorly written

  10. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    How could it be better?

  11. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Ayn Rand developed her philosophy specifically because she was so ugly that even in the shitstorm of the Russian Revolution neither her israelite daddy nor the inbred alcoholic Bolsheviks were interested in raping her. She coped by convincing herself that this is due to socialism repressing the healthy and natural instincts (to rape Ayn Rand) in men, and men should act as selfish as possible (i.e. finally rape her). In her books, tall selfish men with big arms are constantly raping her self-insert character. She completely misunderstood men, as it always happens with women.

    >A real man is a living antithesis to Objectivism. As a human male, I cannot act in my own personal interests since I naturally have none, so instead I rape women out of selfless kindness, as all men do.

    >If Ayn Rand ever met me, I would rape the Objectivism out of her to absolutely no benefit of my own (there can be no personal gain or profit from raping Ayn Rand tbh), and that would collapse her world-view on a metaphysical level. It would become indisputably self-evident to her that she kept writing books because despite all of her efforts she never got a good rape. She never got a good rape because the only men she interacted with were Objectivists who fell for her books - books written by a women dreaming of being raped, about a woman dreaming of being raped. The only men who can enjoy her books are women in male bodies, inherently incapable of raping her, and instead hoping that she would rape them, that she would incarnate as a the man she dreams of, the Messiah hiding under the skin of the Prophet. She would see why all of her relationships with men were such disasters, both of them eagerly waiting for the other to rape, waiting to no outcome. She would love me and my kind dick selflessly in return despite all her will, leaving her with absolutely nothing to ground her ideas anymore, finally feeling true freedom - freedom as an absence, as a flight with no land holding your feet, as hers would be dangling high above. The dreams of an Atlantean man of self-interests would evaporate from her head with the moisture of my cum drying in her scruffy hair. She would sing praises to Lenin whenever her mouth is not taken by selfless work on my wiener and balls.

    >All would be better, and more free in the world.

  12. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    460 pages in, ama

  13. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    It's very clearly more than just Rand's treatise on objectivism, as there is no other way to explain the romantic sub plots beyond her just venting horny femcel frustrations.
    That being said, I enjoyed it up until the whole rich guy commando death squad bs at the end.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >there is no other way to explain the romantic sub plots beyond her just venting horny femcel frustrations

      460 pages in, ama

      is me
      The romantic subplots seem to be Rand’s preferred method of humanizing the main characters without giving them le ebin heckin flaws that undermine their roles in the story as ultra-competent industrialist ubermensch. It’s an opportunity to get inside the characters’ heads and understand how they think from a different and more intimate angle. But yes it was also because she was horny.

    • 4 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >there is no other way to explain the romantic sub plots beyond her just venting horny femcel frustrations
      Many such cases

  14. 4 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    who agrees with my philosophy is attractive and smart (+blonde and blue eyed)
    who disagrees with my philosophy is ugly and dumb
    holy shit, rand originated the chad vs virgin meme

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *