Mark Gardner
@mcjevans #AynRand’s essay titled “What Is #Capitalism?” (1965) beautifully explains the connection. You can read it for free here: https://ari.AynRand.org/issues/government-and-business/capitalism/pov-what-is-capitalism/
If you prefer listening, that page also links to audio and video presentations of the version she edited down as a lecture.
You can also find it in print in the 1966/67 anthology “Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal.”
Let me know what you discover!
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Ayn Rand's "moral" defense for #capitalism is complete garbage. She posits that it's the only moral social system because it allows individuals to act according to their rational self-interest, as if that's a good criteria for determining what is and isn't a moral social system, not by whether the social system helps its citizens and ensures they have everything they need to survive, but by whether people can be as selfish as they want and the poor and suffering be damned.
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
Can we not send each other YouTube videos to prove our points and instead explain why our points are valid and why the others aren't? If there's an argument in the video you sent me that proves my position wrong, you can just tell me the argument. Not only would it be faster to just tell me, but if the argument is valid, then it shouldn't matter whether I see it in the video or read it in your post.
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom @mcjevans I’m sorry about your projections of things that aren’t true. https://youtu.be/cTgYWcViJk0
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
My "actual interest" is to have a conversation with you about Objectivism. I want to hear your arguments about why I'm wrong about Objectivism, not the arguments of the person who made the video you sent me. If I wanted to argue against the person who made the video, I'd seek out that person and proposition them to debate, but I didn't. I commented under *your* post, which any rational person could easily tell means I want to hear what *you* have to say.
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom @mcjevans Why should I do that? It sounds like a waste of my time.
If you're interested, you'll watch it. If you think it's a waste of *your* time, then we can draw our own conclusions about your actual interest.
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
In this video, Ayn Rand said, "I don't hate the poor, I just don't think they're the best thing in life, and that one should tailor everything to their convenience."
Earlier, you accused me of projecting things that aren't true.
What I projected was that Ayn Rand didn't care about poor people, which is the exact sentiment that Ayn Rand expressed in the video you sent me, so the video proves my point.
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom “The person who made the video"?
It's a one-minute clip of Ayn Rand *herself* answering the question. "What do you reply when someone says to you, 'You hate the poor and disadvantaged, don't you?'"
It's a primary source. Why settle for my interpretation?
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
How the hell can you interpret that to mean she does care about poor people? She basically made a proclamation against any kind of social welfare for poor people.
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom Thank you for watching the video. That's an interesting interpretation.
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom Yeah, she did. Why would she be against social welfare? https://courses.AynRand.org/lexicon/welfare-state/
(I'm getting tired of doing your research for you.)
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
That doesn't answer my question at all. You said my analysis of her quote from the video was "an interesting interpretation," implying that my conclusion from the quote that she doesn't care about poor people is only one way to interpret that quote, implying that there's a way to interpret the quote in a way that would suggest that she does care about poor people. What is the other interpretation that would suggest that she does care about poor people?
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
So, you can't answer the question because there is no way to interpret Ayn Rand's quote to mean that she actually cared about poor people because she famously didn't?
Mark Gardner
@Radical_EgoCom I'm muting this thread now as I mutter something about an argument with someone who buys electronic ink by the barrel.
Sordid Amok!
@Radical_EgoCom @mjgardner @mcjevans Individuals acting according to their rational self-interest is another way of saying "every man for himself".
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
@LordCaramac @mjgardner @mcjevans
Marxism succeeded in solving the problem of capitalism, at least theoretically. Marxism accurately explains how capitalism exploits workers with Marx's Labor Theory of Value and Concept of Surplus Value and lays out what needs to be done to eliminate this exploitation, that being a proletarian revolution. 1/2
Lord Caramac the Clueless, KSC
@Radical_EgoCom @mjgardner @mcjevans Furthermore, it's virtually impossible to understand how Capitalism actually works (and why and how it is always on the brink of collapse and needs to be artificially stabilised by the state) without the findings of Karl Marx. While Marxism failed at solving the problem of Capitalism, it is absolutely impossible to understand said problem without the political economics of Marx. The entire idea of isolated individuals is complete bullshit, we're all just interchangeable parts of the big machine which is the economy, and which role we play depends on how much capital we own (if any).
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
@LordCaramac @mjgardner @mcjevans
The implementations of Marxism, however, have failed for many reasons, including problems in leadership, internal reactionary and revisionist conflicts, and aggression and sabotage from capitalist states. 2/2
☭ 𝗖 𝗔 𝗧 ☭
@LordCaramac @mjgardner @mcjevans
Well, Marxism can be implemented, so it isn't worthless. It's also the working-class ideology that has had the most success at challenging capitalism, which places even further from being worthless.
Lord Caramac the Clueless, KSC
@Radical_EgoCom @mjgardner @mcjevans Theoretical solutions are worthless if you can't implement them. So far, Capitalism has prevailed. I fear that the only possible course keft to us the the complete and utter collapse of the global market economy, which will probably cost billions of lives.
GNU social JP is a social network, courtesy of GNU social JP管理人. It runs on GNU social, version 2.0.2-dev, available under the GNU Affero General Public License.
All GNU social JP content and data are available under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license.