Safe Mode: On
Ayn Rand on the Disabled

Charming lady...Hitler would have approved

Loading the player ...
Embed CodeSwitch Player
Plays: 949 (Embed: 0)

Added: Aug-21-2012 
By: ElegantDecline
In:
Politics, Propaganda, Nature
Tags: Ayn, Rand, New, Right, Lost, the, plot
Location: United States (load item map)
Views: 2725 | Comments: 119 | Votes: 1 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 0 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
'
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Inconsistent set of ideas. Rand has been elevated to a status that is entirely undeserved.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (4) | Report

  • I think she was saying that if a society continues to allow more and more funds and resources to be consumed by those who are unwilling or unable to contribute, that society will one day collapse.

    Makes perfect sense to me.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • Comment of user 'MrScabs' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • This was during the 20's when Eugenics became popular. So popular that many states had laws to sterilize the low end of society in an attempt to create a more superior race. California was one of them. Hitler just cut to the chase and killed them.

    Ayn had a few whack ideas, look up William Hickman for one, but it's not a reason to discount all her work.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

    • @meh88 I'm not aware of a logical argument against eugenics. Isn't that theoretically what evolution is supposed to be about?

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @TMoray1

      It "shallows" the gene pool. Also, Hitler.

      We don't even understand genetics fully, so trying to artificially alter it would have unforseen consequences.

      Imagine selecting breeding candidates on intelligence alone. You'd lack for all manner of other traits. Look at selective breeding in dogs, as an example. Different breeds have different genetic deficiencies because of selective breeding. They inherit the problems of their shallow gene pool.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @TMoray1

      True, but there is a balance. In a civilized society you have to at least feed the retards, you can't just let them die in the gutter.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (2) | Report

    • @meh88 Indeed. The hallmark of a civilized society is how it treats its weakest, least able members.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @jum_runky On the other hand, when you expand the gene pool you bring more bad traits in that were not there before.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • And? You do not agree with this claim? She does not say you must not help the disabled, she said that the government has no right to collect your money, from your fruit and labor, in order to support the disabled. If you want, you can do that voluntary. Every decent person would do that, still, by choice.
    You can see what happens today in US, citizens are forced to pay not only for their own citizens, but also illegal immigrants.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (3) | Report

  • This is the fruitcake that Paul Ryan is apparently devoted too...

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Regardless of what excuse you use, subjective redistribution of wealth is still theft. That´s not to say that those unable deserve to die in poverty.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @Kongored Not if its given willingly, and by laws enacted by a Democratically elected Govt

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ElegantDecline The problem with government giving it is there just a middleman - processing and shipping extra.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ElegantDecline

      Willingly demands consent. The consent in this form is the constitution.
      So since the government is restricted by the constitution and the politicians take an oath of office it actually should be impossible.
      Remember, America is not a democracy, it is not ruled by majority but by law.

      I mean see it from another point of view, what if the majority wanted your property?
      They elect some clown that takes it from you.
      Is that fair? Moral? What if they open up a hospital in your hou More..

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Kongored Sure I get that, but I'd still see consent as being a Democratic mandate, even with a Constitution that is VERY open to interpretation.
      After all Govts legislate.

      I think Orwell said 'Democracy leads to Socialism'

      But in this case, the disabled are like public pensions.
      The vast majority of educated people willingly want to contribute to a civilised society, which doesn't operate by the laws of the jungle

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ElegantDecline It should only be given willingly, and never forced on an individual. And just because a greater amount of people ok it, it does not mean it's not theft. It's just theft by a bigger gang.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • I used to date a woman that was a huge Ayn Rand fan. She gave me a book of hers to read. The woman is nuts....both of them.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • curious? has anyone here read Atlas shrugs? It's really about the consumption of industrial wealth by bureaucracies who create poverty and failure for everyone, it's quite prophetic for what is happening in America today. Yesterdays industrialist who provided jobs and wealth to the masses is todays monster, while the bankers and ruling class are pocketing the cash, killing the industries and telling lies to cover their tracks.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @edgenews It's a self-fulfilling prophecy, really. Conservatives read Ayn Rand. Conservatives become selfish, greedy psychos beholden to the wealthy. Conservatives widen the gap between poor and rich - the rich get richer, and the poor multiply. Poverty and failure for everyone. Well, except for the guys who have private islands.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (-2) | Report

    • @hellgremlin you don't get it! you don't understand how wealth is created and distributed. Gov't does not create any wealth at all, they only confiscate it from the productive and waste it on... people like YOU!!! Where do you work douche bag, How many tax dollars did you hand the gubmint last year bitch. YOU CAN'T GIVE ME AN HONEST ANSWER!!!!

      Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @edgenews Sure I can. My name is Tom Czerniawski. I'm a published fiction author, and a reporter/journo by trade. My work has appeared in the magazines E-ON: The Eve Online Magazine (www.eveonline.com/eon), Design Edge Canada (www.designedgecanada.com), Masthead (www.mastheadonline.com) and PrintCan (www.printcan.com). I've also been featured in PC Gamer and New Scientist among others. My online portfolio can be viewed at tomczerniawski.wordpress.com if you'd like a sample of my writing.

      Before More..

      Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @hellgremlin
      And this is true because everything on the web has to be true.

      Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Put the chronic welfare collector's and illegal Invader's into labor camp's.
    Problem solved.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

    • @Dave556 And the disabled?

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @Dave556 The problem with getting rid of the poor, is that the people who were slightly above poor, now become the new poor. Now you have to get rid of them, too.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @hellgremlin Man you nailed it! The poor today live better than much of the rich 100+ years ago! Air Conditioning, Cars, entertainments galore.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @dog64 That's... not at all what I was trying to say. Pretty much the opposite, in fact!

      The greatest trick the rich pulled on the poor, was convincing them they weren't poor if they had cars and air conditioning... trinkets, cheap mass-produced designed-to-fail garbage to grant the illusion of comfort.

      The Romans called this "Bread and Circuses" - give the poor the basic food and entertainment, and they won't revolt against the ruling class...

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @hellgremlin And if they had food shelter, and entertainment, what were they missing?

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

  • There is no virtue in force. All she's saying is that forcing people to help the disabled takes any virtue out of your actions.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (2) | Report

  • I don't agree with all of her beliefs but, The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are both interesting reads. She definitely comes off as superior and cold hearted here.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @SSSox88 Her books are garbage. She thinks she is superior to others.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @sdflyr People used to say the Commie's screwed up by not taking 'human nature' into account...Rand is even more laughable by trying to reduce us to being nothing more than 'selfish'

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @sdflyr I guess I should note that I read her books back in the late 90's way before the republicans embraced her as one of their own. My sister was a huge fan and gave both books to me. We're both liberals. I found Rand's style of writing to be rather impressive and Howard Roark's character to be interesting in the Fountainhead. That's the extent of influence it had on me. I think the Republicans have gone head over heals for her ideology cause they're desperate for intellectuals who represe More..

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @sdflyr Actually, Rand's philosophy is one in which no man is more superior than any other.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ElegantDecline What's wrong with being selfish? And do you know of someone who isn't?

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • She is right if the person has not paid disability insurance or is not contractually entitled to disability assistance. Veteran's who are disabled are contractually entitled to disability under the terms of their contract and citizen's who are disabled are entitled to the insurance benefits they payed for under FICA. Next.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @KOSMOPOLITISCH So your point is that you should get disability assistance if you are disabled and have filed the proper paper work...is that it?

      What about the moral question of whether disabled people deserve support from society at all?

      Try thinking...

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @ElegantDecline Your imperative should read, "Try feeling..." not thinking. At any rate, it's not about paperwork, it's about insurance premium and legal agreements... thus, a sustainable dynamic...

      Posted Aug-23-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • The Champion of socialist liberal progressives, George Bernard Shaw, said the exact same thing...big believer in Eugenics...listen for the crickets

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • "The proper method of judging when or whether one should help another person is by reference to one’s own rational self-interest and one’s own hierarchy of values: the time, money or effort one gives or the risk one takes should be proportionate to the value of the person in relation to one’s own happiness.

    To illustrate this on the altruists’ favorite example: the issue of saving a drowning person. If the person to be saved is a stranger, it is morally proper to save him only when More..

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @mdscorpio71 This from a woman who later drowned in debt, and went on welfare to save herself.

      Truly a hero for the Republican masses.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @hellgremlin First of all I am not a republican, never have been, never will be. secondly, Rand never went on welfare, she took social security and medicare.

      "The same moral principles and considerations apply to the issue of accepting social security, unemployment insurance or other payments of that kind. It is obvious, in such cases, that a man receives his own money which was taken from him by force, directly and specifically, without his consent, against his own choice. Those who advoc More..

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @mdscorpio71 Welfare, social security, and medicare, are three terms for the same thing - socially provided assistance funded by taxation.

      And honestly... people who read Ayn Rand, and don't immediately realize she is NO-ONE to be dictating morality... scare me a little. In her moral world, the poor SHOULD starve, and the rich should be freed of any obligation to anyone but themselves.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @hellgremlin You have completely misrepresented her philosophy - but believe what you want. Anyone who has read (and understood) Rand knows that she is NO-ONE to be dictating their definition of morality - we can each only define it ourselves.

      corrected definition: "inefficient and overpriced socially provided assistance funded by taxation."

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @mdscorpio71 Hahaha... corrected?

      If you want to talk about inefficiency, look at this:

      http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-ZlO6cOHUDrs/T78qmVVZM4I/AAAAAAAADDo/KPybJVnlWOY/s640/rate+of+return+of+stimulus.jpg

      That's the rate of return for different types of stimulus. It would seem that welfare is a whole fuckload more "efficient" than giving tax cuts to the rich...

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • Ayn Rand also collected welfare later in life, so, yeah...

    No credible philosopher takes her seriously -- only angsty teens and sociopaths.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • What a psychopath!

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • for the weeders out there.
    1ounce is one ounce and you have it from your own efforts; its not owed to me for any reason or misfortune, or lack of responsibility.

    Those that have fallen victim to their self worth do not equate to a fucking free ride, but must ride only when its free too.

    You cant live off the backs of those trying to live.

    evolution and that leads us to mans fault;
    Man faults evolution and thus himself.

    I jerk off to Ayn Rand :) can you tell?
    theLAB More..

    Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Ayn Rand's not for everyone.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Well, if Ryan was influenced by Rand's philosophy about the struggle between the individual vs the collective I'm ok with that. The rest of her tenants, not so much.

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • Born : Alisa Zinov'yevna Rosenbaum February 2, 1905
    Ethnicity : Russian Jew

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @KutKorners

      And?

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @jum_runky and learn about Judaism belief's about non-Jews, learn about Usury, the Law of the Stranger etc and then it is no surprise she has beliefs which show little compassion to those not as she is.

      Also, if she felt it important enough to hide then I find it important enough to mention.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @KutKorners

      I know plenty about Judaism. Most Jews are nothing like Ayn Rand.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (1) | Report

    • @jum_runky It's their belief, I'm highlighting some negatives but the negatives are there even without my highlighting them.

      I understand, like Catholics who disagree with the Pope, there are Jews who dont agree with the Torah or Jewish Law, but that does not mean the law is not what it is.

      Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @jum_runky
      And she came to America and wanted to be in movies, I think DeMille was her favorite, he hired her as a junior writer too. She was actually in a movie or two of his movies as an extra.

      Got married, became a US citizen, wrote wildly successful books.


      She became a citizen

      Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

      (0) | Report

  • A communist infiltrator?

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (1) | Report

  • The Left, as always, taking things out of context to suit their agenda.

    White liberals are the most racist, most intolerant, and most hypocritical of all.

    AND YOU KNOW IT!

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • Paul Ryan's mentor...

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • She hated both the Communists and the Nazi's.

    She said: charity is good if you do it for promoting your values non-sacrificially. Basically you help others but not at the expense of your own well being.

    She also said there is no reason why there could not be widespread charity, but because you WANT to give, not because the government forces you to give.

    You should be able to earn your own way, and no one should lay claim to what you have earned because of their "need".

    Posted Aug-22-2012 By 

    (0) | Report

  • huh. in another news... diablo 1.0.4 releases this afternoon!

    Posted Aug-21-2012 By 

    (0) | Report