Reading Atlas Shrugged for the first time, and am amazed just exactly how prescient Ayn Rand already is a few chapters in. The quasi control the government has over production, science, and economics has insane parallels to what we are seeing now. Highly recommend to any like me who have always had it on their list, but the size of it caused you to go to your next book.

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

It does have some slow spots but a very eye opening read. I was a sophomore at A&M when I read it. Have reread it a dozen times since then.

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

---

He?

And you can basically stop reading OP. She makes her point within a few pages...but drags it on for hundreds of pages longer than it needs to go...Plus "the speech."

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

---

Are you referring to the character or the author?

Author here:

Incredible book. And so relevant in this exact moment. The government/bureaucrat characters she depicts are truly evil. So much so, that when I read the book in college (in the 90s), I thought it was a little over the top. Seeing what is going on all around us now, however, I think she may have been a little to kind to them. Wait until you get to the speech. Truly fantastic. And Rand herself is a remarkable story. Fled Russia as a kid to get away from murderous Stalin who took over her father's business; came to the United States by herself; and became an amazing author. If you have not already seen Mike Wallace's interview of Rand shortly after the book was released, you should check it out.

Definitely Not A Cop said:

---

Reading Atlas Shrugged for the first time, and am amazed just exactly how prescient Ayn Rand already is a few chapters in. The quasi control the government has over production, science, and economics has insane parallels to what we are seeing now. Highly recommend to any like me who have always had it on their list, but the size of it caused you to go to your next book.

---

Had 11th grade English teacher recommend this book to me when I could not determine what book to my Jr. thesis on. Helped shape my libertarian leanings while I still maintain conservative social policies.

I went to Arlington Bowie in the 90s. I doubt anyone in the English department there today would recommend it. Different place.

The character referenced in the thread topic.

Whatever you do, don't watch any of the film adaptations.

Yeesh

My two favorite books: Atlas Shrugged and The Fountianhead.

The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are two of my favorite books.

Thread is good. We The Living should be a must read for any youngster in love with communism.

Galt's speech in Part III is better when listened to in an audio book.

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

The character referenced in the thread topic.

---

That's what I thought you meant. Galt's speech.

CyclingAg82 said:

---

The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged are two of my favorite books.

---

Another successful Texags hook-up!!!

I've read The Fountainhead, We the Living, Anthem, and Atlas Shrugged. While good for the most part, AS is a lot longer than it needed to be and I know I'll probably get flamed by the Rand folks here, but I thought the last 50 pages went off the rails in many ways from where most of the book was going. Don't ask me for details because it has been decades since I read it and I don't remember the particulars, but that's the impression I was left with. I think the anti-religion tones did it in for me.

Serious question--
So I recently read up on 'objectivism,' and I'll admit I guess I don't understand. (this is about the author, not the character in her book). But as I translate it, she was stating that it is morally wrong not to pursue everything in life that you desire. Surely, I'm not translating that correctly. Or am I?

Anyone care to enlighten me?

And to be clear, I am not a lib, leftist, or democrat. I'm just a simple peasant.

Reed McDonald 92 said:

---

Serious question--
So I recently read up on 'objectivism,' and I'll admit I guess I don't understand. (this is about the author, not the character in her book). But as I translate it, she was stating that it is morally wrong not to pursue everything in life that you desire. Surely, I'm not translating that correctly. Or am I?

Anyone care to enlighten me?

And to be clear, I am not a lib, leftist, or democrat. I'm just a simple peasant.

---

Dear Peasant - know that merely asking this question puts you on the list of people who qualify for confinement to gulag.

Yeah, I didn't finish the 60 page sermon. Great book. Would be cool if someone could do an accurate rewrite using tech industry instead of reailroads...

RM,

Google the interview I mentioned above. He asks similar questions and she answers.

The fountainhead gets the message across a lot more concisely.

Aggiehawk - thanks

aggie_wes said:

---

The fountainhead gets the message across a lot more concisely.

---

While Objectivism may be the blood running through the veins of both books, I believe that The Fountainhead is the argument for the protection of intellectual property while Atlas Shrugged is the argument against crony capitalism/fascism.

(Edit to correct the proper books.)

Reed McDonald 92 said:

---

Serious question--
So I recently read up on 'objectivism,' and I'll admit I guess I don't understand. (this is about the author, not the character in her book). But as I translate it, she was stating that it is morally wrong not to pursue everything in life that you desire. Surely, I'm not translating that correctly. Or am I?

Anyone care to enlighten me?

And to be clear, I am not a lib, leftist, or democrat. I'm just a simple peasant.

---

I am no expert, but I think the argument goes more along the lines of 'there is no such thing as altruism'. All actions are motivated by self-interest so there must be moral value in doing so if there is moral value at all. Altruism is therefore an illusory construct to provide a framework for the appearance of selflessness.

It is an interesting concept and a very good topic for argument. I think that religious beliefs and practices argue otherwise which is why she seems to attack it so savagely in the end.

TheEternalPessimist said:

---

Reed McDonald 92 said:

---

Serious question--
So I recently read up on 'objectivism,' and I'll admit I guess I don't understand. (this is about the author, not the character in her book). But as I translate it, she was stating that it is morally wrong not to pursue everything in life that you desire. Surely, I'm not translating that correctly. Or am I?

Anyone care to enlighten me?

And to be clear, I am not a lib, leftist, or democrat. I'm just a simple peasant.

---

Dear Peasant - know that merely asking this question puts you on the list of people who qualify for confinement to gulag.

---

This is why I love the General board! I was prepared for this. Cast me away!

Thank you all for your serious and (hopefully) not serious answers. I'll watch the interview now...

AH,

I believe that is not quite accurate. Some people think it is virtuous to place another's happiness above their their own. For example, continuing to date someone who no longer brings you joy but you don't call it off for fear of upsetting the person. That is altruistic and in Rands view- a philosophy that leads to misery. That's her basic point. .

Their is a new set of books called the Aristillus series by Travis J. I. Corcoran that has been written in the last few years that are pretty damned good. They are both Prometheus award winners (for Libertarian Science Fiction books... Ayn Rand was their first Hall of Fame inductee)

Book one is The Powers of the Earth and book two is Causes of Separation. Book three is on the way.

They are basically about a group of people who left Earth and created their own Galt's Gulch on the moon. They don't mention Any Rand's books at all, but that is the premise. Unlike Atlas Shrugged which spends most of the time building up to Dagny Taggart leaving for Galt's Gulch, this is more about what happens after they already left and the politics on both sides as they prepare for war.

If you like game of thrones for the political part and are into technically detailed discussions about engineering, rockets, orbital mechanics, etc. Then this is a good set of books to read or listen to on Audible.

Also the primary protagonist is from Texas which revolted and started the whole thing.

It's pretty damned good

maroonblood said:

---

AH,

I believe that is not quite accurate. Some people think it is virtuous to place another's happiness above their their own. For example, continuing to date someone who no longer brings you joy but you don't call it off for fear of upsetting the person. That is altruistic and in Rands vies - a philosophy that leads to misery. That's her basic point. .

---

I agree that is her point and I was careless with that simplified characterization. But having said that, her objection to "altruism" for lack of a better term was still influenced by her experiences living through the Russian Revolution and the nearly ten years after it. Taking from one to provide for another under communism was wrong, in her view.

Agree with that assessment

And to add to it, she has the same issue with religion, which is why a lot of republicans are not fans.

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

---

Ayn Rand was a he?

Also, for what it's worth, Ayn Rand did not like Libertarians at all and denounced them as "anarchists".

eric76 said:

---

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

---

Ayn Rand was a he?

Also, for what it's worth, Ayn Rand did not like Libertarians at all and denounced them as "anarchists".

---

I've already clarified earlier in the thread that I was referring to the character John Galt, as referenced in the thread title.

And Ayn Rand is required reading for all libertarians. Please don't be obtuse.

Reed McDonald 92 said:

---

Serious question--
So I recently read up on 'objectivism,' and I'll admit I guess I don't understand. (this is about the author, not the character in her book). But as I translate it, she was stating that it is morally wrong not to pursue everything in life that you desire. Surely, I'm not translating that correctly. Or am I?

Anyone care to enlighten me?

And to be clear, I am not a lib, leftist, or democrat. I'm just a simple peasant.

---

Ayn Rand was a fan of William Hickman. William Hickman kidnapped a little girl, killed her, disemboweled her, then put her in his car with her eyes propped open to convince her father that she was still alive so that he would pay Hickman the ransom.

It is said that Howard Roark in The Fountainhead was somewhat based on William Hickman.

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

eric76 said:

---

Guy on a Buffalo said:

---

I read it cover to cover while working for the 2010 census bureau. I was stationed at a library and needed to pass the time.

He gets a bit wordy in his 60 page speech, but otherwise it was pretty fantastic.

Welcome to the libertarian club!

---

Ayn Rand was a he?

Also, for what it's worth, Ayn Rand did not like Libertarians at all and denounced them as "anarchists".

---

I've already clarified earlier in the thread that I was referring to the character John Galt, as referenced in the thread title.

And Ayn Rand is required reading for all libertarians. Please don't be obtuse.

---

That didn't stop Ayn Rand from despising Libertarians.