Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    10 Jan '11 20:52
    While chatting with our resident Rand worshipper Wajoma in the "Gabby" thread, it came up that one of Rand's books, We the Living was on Arizona shooter Jared Loughner's list of favorite books. Wajoma wasn't too crazy (please don't use that part of the sentence out of context) about that work preferring the more well know Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged but did praise the "eye searing clarity and logic" of Rand's non-fiction.

    Well in looking through articles on Rand I found some interesting pieces discussing her admiration for 1920's child killer William Edward Hickman, who was the serve as a model for the main character in one of her novels (which, thankfully, was never finished). She wrote extensively regarding Hickman in her journals. One writer summarized these writing as follows:

    The best way to get to the bottom of Ayn Rand's beliefs is to take a look at how she developed the superhero of her novel, Atlas Shrugged, John Galt. Back in the late 1920s, as Ayn Rand was working out her philosophy, she became enthralled by a real-life American serial killer, William Edward Hickman, whose gruesome, sadistic dismemberment of 12-year-old girl named Marion Parker in 1927 shocked the nation. Rand filled her early notebooks with worshipful praise of Hickman. According to biographer Jennifer Burns, author of Goddess of the Market, Rand was so smitten with Hickman that she modeled her first literary creation -- Danny Renahan, the protagonist of her unfinished first novel, The Little Street -- on him.

    What did Rand admire so much about Hickman? His sociopathic qualities: "Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should," she wrote, gushing that Hickman had "no regard whatsoever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. He has the true, innate psychology of a Superman. He can never realize and feel 'other people.'"

    This echoes almost word for word Rand's later description of her character Howard Roark, the hero of her novel The Fountainhead: "He was born without the ability to consider others."

    http://www.alternet.org/books/145819/ayn_rand,_hugely_popular_author_and_inspiration_to_right-wing_leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killers

    There is another longer piece with many excerpts from her journals considering the character she was modelling after Hickman. It contains this rather eye popping statement about society's reaction to his crime i.e. kidnapping, murder and dismemberment of a child:

    "The first thing that impresses me about the case is the ferocious rage of a whole society against one man. No matter what the man did, there is always something loathsome in the 'virtuous' indignation and mass-hatred of the 'majority.'... It is repulsive to see all these beings with worse sins and crimes in their own lives, virtuously condemning a criminal...

    "This is not just the case of a terrible crime. It is not the crime alone that has raised the fury of public hatred. It is the case of a daring challenge to society. It is the fact that a crime has been committed by one man, alone; that this man knew it was against all laws of humanity and intended that way; that he does not want to recognize it as a crime and that he feels superior to all. It is the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who really stands alone, in action and in soul."

    http://michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm

    Does anybody think these "observations" of Rand are notable for their "eye searing clarity and logic"? Is the reaction of society to someone who commits such terrible crimes really as objectionable as Rand finds it? What "worse sins and crimes in their own lives" have the majority committed which make their indignation at the thought of such criminal acts "loathsome"?

    Rand's contempt for society and the will of the majority is well-known, but aren't these comments almost pathological in nature?
  2. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    10 Jan '11 21:32
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    Rand's contempt for society and the will of the majority is well-known, but aren't these comments almost pathological in nature?
    If it looks like a poison dwarf and shrieks like a poison dwarf ...
  3. 10 Jan '11 22:58
    Ayn Rand was a sad loser with zero education whose family was robbed by commies and in an absurd leap of logic, she assumed that such unjustice would be prevented by the extreme opposite of the philosophy of those who robbed her family. It's not surprising that other sad losers with zero education would subscribe to her "ideas".
  4. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    11 Jan '11 00:07
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    While chatting with our resident Rand worshipper Wajoma in the "Gabby" thread, it came up that one of Rand's books, We the Living was on Arizona shooter Jared Loughner's list of favorite books. Wajoma wasn't too crazy (please don't use that part of the sentence out of context) about that work preferring the more well know Fountainhead and [ ...[text shortened]... , but aren't these comments almost pathological in nature?
    Very interesting. If only I had known all this during my infamous debate with Dr. Scribbles. I can see, though, why Rand-bots are not too eager to spread that information around.
  5. Donation rwingett
    Ming the Merciless
    11 Jan '11 00:14
    Originally posted by KazetNagorra
    Ayn Rand was a sad loser with zero education whose family was robbed by commies and in an absurd leap of logic, she assumed that such unjustice would be prevented by the extreme opposite of the philosophy of those who robbed her family. It's not surprising that other sad losers with zero education would subscribe to her "ideas".
    Part of the process of growing up from infancy is learning that there are other people in the world whose needs and desires have to be taken into consideration. You eventually learn that you can't get your own way all the time. It sounds like Rand wanted to regress back to an infant state where she was once again the center of the universe, where her own desires were all that existed.
  6. Subscriber AThousandYoung
    Poor Filipov :,(
    11 Jan '11 03:10
    ...the secret priests would take great Cthulhu from his tomb to revive His subjects and resume his rule of earth....Then mankind would have become as the Great Old Ones; free and wild and beyond good and evil, with laws and morals thrown aside and all men shouting and killing and revelling in joy. Then the liberated Old Ones would teach them new ways to shout and kill and revel and enjoy themselves, and all the earth would flame with a holocaust of ecstasy and freedom.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cthulhu
  7. Subscriber FreakyKBH
    Acquired Taste...
    11 Jan '11 05:10
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    While chatting with our resident Rand worshipper Wajoma in the "Gabby" thread, it came up that one of Rand's books, We the Living was on Arizona shooter Jared Loughner's list of favorite books. Wajoma wasn't too crazy (please don't use that part of the sentence out of context) about that work preferring the more well know Fountainhead and [ ...[text shortened]... , but aren't these comments almost pathological in nature?
    Makes you wonder what would have happened in Rand's development, had Ms. Parker been armed with a gun with which to thwart Mr. Hickman's attempt at self-realization.
  8. 11 Jan '11 08:15
    Originally posted by rwingett
    Part of the process of growing up from infancy is learning that there are other people in the world whose needs and desires have to be taken into consideration. You eventually learn that you can't get your own way all the time. It sounds like Rand wanted to regress back to an infant state where she was once again the center of the universe, where her own desires were all that existed.
    Laissez faire capitalism tends to concentrate wealth and power into a small, aristocratic elite. Perhaps that's what she wanted to move back towards, being a former member of that class. Fond childhood memories, maybe.
  9. Subscriber Wajoma
    Die Cheeseburger
    11 Jan '11 08:32
    How come shavmiester isn't over here yet.
  10. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    11 Jan '11 10:47
    Originally posted by rwingett
    Part of the process of growing up from infancy is learning that there are other people in the world whose needs and desires have to be taken into consideration. You eventually learn that you can't get your own way all the time. It sounds like Rand wanted to regress back to an infant state where she was once again the center of the universe, where her own desires were all that existed.
    Could that be the basis of certain mana figures' charisma -- the promise of license?
  11. Standard member Bosse de Nage
    Zellulärer Automat
    11 Jan '11 10:48
    Originally posted by Wajoma
    How come shavmiester isn't over here yet.
    Do you agree with Ayn Rand on the subject of William Edward Hickman?
  12. Subscriber kmax87
    You've got Kevin
    11 Jan '11 13:12 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    ...and that he feels superior to all. It is the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatever for all that society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who really stands alone, in action and in soul."
    .....thanks for the heads up on the Wajomista condition no1. Never again will I strain incredulity by wondering how anyone could think it okay to free-ride the system and still have the ethical philosophy of one who lives in a cave...It all makes sense now!
  13. 11 Jan '11 19:11
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    While chatting with our resident Rand worshipper Wajoma in the "Gabby" thread, it came up that one of Rand's books, We the Living was on Arizona shooter Jared Loughner's list of favorite books. Wajoma wasn't too crazy (please don't use that part of the sentence out of context) about that work preferring the more well know Fountainhead and [ ...[text shortened]... , but aren't these comments almost pathological in nature?
    I am a bit curious about Rand at the moment because I'm in the middle of her book Fountainhead. I choose to read it purely based on high reviews.

    It's main character, Howard Roark is in stark contrast with other characters. So far, I've suspected that Roak is being held up as some sort of ideal.

    While his opposites are plenty distasteful, I am not finding the main character particularly admirable either. I'm not sure if he will triumph in the end, or reach some sort of epiphany such that he turns into a character I would actually admire. Either Rand is going to have to produce a very clever twist for the ending, or I will be sorely disappointed in this book.
  14. Subscriber Sleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    11 Jan '11 19:29
    Originally posted by techsouth
    I am a bit curious about Rand at the moment because I'm in the middle of her book Fountainhead. I choose to read it purely based on high reviews.

    It's main character, Howard Roark is in stark contrast with other characters. So far, I've suspected that Roak is being held up as some sort of ideal.

    While his opposites are plenty distasteful, I am not ...[text shortened]... o produce a very clever twist for the ending, or I will be sorely disappointed in this book.
    I think the point is that good old Howard has already had his epiphany, i.e. to pursue his craft in his own personal way, without compromise to convention or anything else.

    He is completely self centered, and that's supposed to be a good thing.
  15. 11 Jan '11 19:41
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    I think the point is that good old Howard has already had his epiphany, i.e. to pursue his craft in his own personal way, without compromise to convention or anything else.

    He is completely self centered, and that's supposed to be a good thing.
    Wow. This is a 30 hour audio book.

    I'll probably finish it now, but this is truly sad when self centeredness is elevated to a virtue in an epic length novel.