I apologize. Being a teenager, I had to get that off my chest. Hopefully I'll grow out of it before I start understanding complex ideas. Ideas that cannot be fully grasped by those unable to force themselves through books without pictures.
I believe the last time I called someone a "mean-spirited crackpot" I was either talking about Billy Bob Thornton or Charlie Sheen, although I cannot remember exactly.
But I digress..
It is clear that the reviewer does not understand Ayn Rand's philosophy, as Rand was cleverly able to categorize Mayshark years before he even thought about texting during a movie. His article resembles something that would be published in "The Banner," a fictional paper run by a Mr. Gail Wynand in The Fountainhead. The paper, filled with articles written by "journalists" who know nothing about their subject matter, symbolizes the poor taste of society for biased and inaccurate media. How could a writer of "ludicrous potboiler stuff" accurately portray her critic? Obviously it must have been the crack.
Whittaker Chambers, while I deeply admire his early endeavors in espionage and the communist underground movement, had a perfect reason for "shunning" Ayn Rand's ideals. He, like Mayshark, did not understand her message. And he actually read the book! Or so he said...
Jason Lee Steorts, writer for "The Harvard Crimson" says it best about Chambers's comments: "The basic error is to say that Rand wants her own species of Big Brother to “solve and supervise” the problems of complexity and instability. This simply is not so. It is true that her “prime movers” withdraw from society in order to effectuate the collapse of the “looters”; in this sense they “do battle” with the “socializing elite.” But they fight precisely against the idea that any person or persons should be granted Big Brotherly responsibilities. They oppose, precisely, the “suprevis[ion]” of a “managerial political bureau.” Their message throughout, to borrow Rand’s formulation, is: 'Hands off!'."
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
SwimMan writes:
"You're not the boss of me!"
I apologize. Being a teenager, I had to get that off my chest. Hopefully I'll grow out of it before I start understanding complex ideas. Ideas that cannot be fully grasped by those unable to force themselves through books without pictures.
I believe the last time I called someone a "mean-spirited crackpot" I was either talking about Billy Bob Thornton or Charlie Sheen, although I cannot remember exactly.
But I digress..
It is clear that the reviewer does not understand Ayn Rand's philosophy, as Rand was cleverly able to categorize Mayshark years before he even thought about texting during a movie. His article resembles something that would be published in "The Banner," a fictional paper run by a Mr. Gail Wynand in The Fountainhead. The paper, filled with articles written by "journalists" who know nothing about their subject matter, symbolizes the poor taste of society for biased and inaccurate media. How could a writer of "ludicrous potboiler stuff" accurately portray her critic? Obviously it must have been the crack.
Whittaker Chambers, while I deeply admire his early endeavors in espionage and the communist underground movement, had a perfect reason for "shunning" Ayn Rand's ideals. He, like Mayshark, did not understand her message. And he actually read the book! Or so he said...
Jason Lee Steorts, writer for "The Harvard Crimson" says it best about Chambers's comments:
"The basic error is to say that Rand wants her own species of Big Brother to “solve and supervise” the problems of complexity and instability. This simply is not so. It is true that her “prime movers” withdraw from society in order to effectuate the collapse of the “looters”; in this sense they “do battle” with the “socializing elite.” But they fight precisely against the idea that any person or persons should be granted Big Brotherly responsibilities. They oppose, precisely, the “suprevis[ion]” of a “managerial political bureau.” Their message throughout, to borrow Rand’s formulation, is: 'Hands off!'."
Share your thoughts
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.