[HN Gopher] Our Daughter Isn't a Selfish Brat, Your Son Just Has...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Our Daughter Isn't a Selfish Brat, Your Son Just Hasn't Read Atlas
       Shrugged (2010)
        
       Author : belkarx
       Score  : 47 points
       Date   : 2022-10-13 17:44 UTC (5 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.mcsweeneys.net)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.mcsweeneys.net)
        
       | kderbyma wrote:
       | Most people who have a dislike for Atlas Shrugged have a poor
       | understanding due to having only engorged themselves on satire
       | about the book, poor rendered assumptions about the nature of the
       | messages written by enraged people who take offense at what I can
       | only assume stems from seeing themselves as part of the groups
       | which Rand disparages (collectivism) and frankly tend to have
       | never read the book in its entirety let alone anything else
       | written by her to have a sense of the ongoing themes and an
       | improvement to her writing style.
       | 
       | the book inspires the idea of individual potential....which if
       | you have no personal desire to achieve tends to enrage and put
       | one on the defence, but for those who have a spark of fire they
       | get inspired.
       | 
       | I like the book, and would love to have an honest discourse on
       | its flaws that is equally willing to acknowledge the depths of
       | its actual arguments and the strengths of propositions when taken
       | into account the underlying presumptions that are at the heart of
       | the novel. It is a novel after all and not an academic treatise
       | which many liken it to because of the marketing.
        
         | dilyevsky wrote:
         | I've read about 2/3rds of it. It's a terribly written book -
         | too drawn out and on the nose and the "message" is obvious
         | since chapter two or so. It's like one of those idiotic self
         | help books where if you read first couple chapters you've read
         | the whole thing
         | 
         | Same thing with Fountainhead which i read whole
        
           | kderbyma wrote:
           | I agree it has flaws and needed an editor.
           | 
           | The book is about 30-40% too long, and does repeat the ideas,
           | but if you ignore that aspect which is fair given many books
           | suffer from that which are popular and well loved. The
           | biggest flaw is the repetition and the final monologue is 5x
           | too long.
           | 
           | it is much better when you see the fountainhead. which is
           | very similar themes, but has a lot less of those writing
           | problems.
        
           | kderbyma wrote:
           | Also...it is a novel...so the message part isn't the whole
           | point.
           | 
           | There is a plot...
        
             | dilyevsky wrote:
             | Yeas but a special kind of novel - more of a manifesto.
             | Compare it with something like 1984 which is similar kind
             | of manifesto-book but a much more captivating read.
        
         | floor2 wrote:
         | My experience is that 99% of the people who hate Atlas Shrugged
         | never read the book, they just heard that the people they hate
         | like it, so they hate it.
         | 
         | I don't even really understand why people map it onto politics
         | in the way they do. It seems to me fundamentally a story about
         | people trying to accomplish something big, innovative and
         | disruptive but being stymied by the various forces who resist
         | or fear change, whether because they're profiting from the
         | status quo or they're lazy or ignorant or entitled or whatever.
         | 
         | Like one of the central set of "bad guys" are the rival owners
         | of other railroad companies, who are trying to maintain their
         | monopoly/cartel. Another set of "bad guys" are the privileged
         | family members who expect to have wealth and power by
         | birthright. I don't see why a person who had left or far left
         | political views wouldn't resonate with the protagonists
         | struggles against these various entrenched, privileged rent
         | seekers.
        
       | rufus_foreman wrote:
       | Nowhere near as funny as the very seasonally appropriate "It's
       | Decorative Gourd Season, Motherfuckers."
       | 
       | -- https://www.mcsweeneys.net/articles/its-decorative-gourd-
       | sea...
        
         | dublin wrote:
         | Now THAT'S funny, I don't care who you are. (Although it will
         | certainly gag pretty much any content filter that can't buffer
         | more than a few dozen F-bombs...)
        
       | jleyank wrote:
       | I don't know whose or what philosophy it is but I try to live by
       | "don't be an asshole". By extension, "don't associate with
       | assholes whenever possible" guides my daily life. Sometimes, I
       | can't, so "work allows me to do what I like" helps lessen the
       | sting.
       | 
       | I'm also far too lazy and unskilled to write satire and
       | admittedly not really patient enough to read it.
        
       | ttfkam wrote:
       | "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year
       | old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a
       | childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with
       | its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted,
       | socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world.
       | The other, of course, involves orcs."
       | 
       | - John Rogers
        
         | tryptophan wrote:
         | I've never understood why Atlas Shrugged gets so much more hate
         | than any other book that ever gets mentioned. Its like a rule
         | of the internet that anytime it is mentioned, people must show
         | up and dunk on it.
        
           | YuriNiyazov wrote:
           | Because later on in life, you meet people in corporate
           | boardrooms who love doing layoffs and say things like "Atlas
           | Shrugged was the best book I've ever read, it changed my
           | life"
        
       | redbar0n wrote:
       | Seems like the author satirically argues against Objectivism by
       | putting up lack of charity and generosity as a straw man
       | characterization to attack. He completely ignores the fact that
       | taxation is collected irrespective of goodwill attitude, and
       | under the threat of force (violence/jail).
       | 
       | I frankly would have hoped the argument was not a straw man and
       | that he argued against the actual essence of the philosophy of
       | Objectivism. Instead of taking the cheap way out to argue against
       | a mere peripheral unfortunate potential consequence of it (when
       | taken to an extreme).
        
         | bananarchist wrote:
         | This isn't an argument it's a comical story, but no one has
         | ever mistaken an objectivist for having a sense of humor, so I
         | don't know why I'm surprised by this response.
        
           | bennysonething wrote:
           | It's a self righteous rant trying to disguise itself as a
           | comical story. Fails due to lack of laughs.
        
             | bananarchist wrote:
             | You shoulda been in the room where I was reading it.
             | Uncharted chortles. I guess humor is _sub_jective tho...
        
               | benj111 wrote:
               | How many Objectivists does it take to change a lightbulb?
        
           | aaron695 wrote:
        
           | redbar0n wrote:
           | But it seems you have mistaken me for an Objectivist.
           | 
           | I was hoping for a good satire of Objectivism, one that
           | really hit the nail on the head.
        
             | jhbadger wrote:
             | Then play Bioshock.
        
               | redbar0n wrote:
               | Oh my, it's on my to-play list, so this might just
               | inspire me to buy it!
        
               | thedrexster wrote:
               | Here's another strong, strong recommendation you do so :D
        
             | bananarchist wrote:
             | My mistake. Personally I always smash my thumb whenever I
             | swing a hammer.
        
           | [deleted]
        
         | bennysonething wrote:
         | Came here to say the same thing, gave up reading article after
         | half way through when it became apparent it was a straw man.
        
           | undoware wrote:
           | A "straw man" is a variety of argument.
           | 
           | This makes no argument; it is satire -- a caricature -- as
           | has been repeatedly pointed out; hence, it cannot be a straw
           | man.
           | 
           | Now, this is not to say that it might not blamelessly strike
           | you as unfunny; in this case, though, you may want to reword
           | your comment as "not funny IMO".
           | 
           |  _Shrugs_ I liked it
        
         | Yaa101 wrote:
         | Nah, the author is just really sad that poor Johanna will never
         | have any real friends...
        
         | benj111 wrote:
         | The tag line is "daily humour every day since 1998"
         | 
         | It is, as you point out, satire.
         | 
         | It is a quite common device in satire to set up a less than
         | accurate scenario, in order to highlight a single failing. It
         | isn't aiming to be a well balanced essay on the pros and cons
         | of anything.
        
           | redbar0n wrote:
           | Yeah, but there is good satire (which hits the mark, even
           | remotely), and there's bad satire.
        
             | gota wrote:
             | My dear comrade; you are publicly and repeatedly
             | complaining about something not being funny. That is never
             | a good sign of dettachment.
             | 
             | No one will ever believe you are not offended by the
             | article because everyone knows that, if it were the case,
             | you'd simply not have posted (much less replied several
             | times)
             | 
             | Let us chill and drink some delicious juice made out of
             | these misterious fruits of our labor
        
               | redbar0n wrote:
               | I'm not complaining that it wasn't funny. I'm belaboring
               | that it was vacuous and disappointing. I want good satire
               | that hits something and has a punch!
        
               | skinnymuch wrote:
               | I don't think the specifics of why you're complaining is
               | the point of the commenter you responded to. It's that
               | you're complaining so much. Note the parent comment
               | brought up you not being offended or deattached.
        
               | redbar0n wrote:
               | I made a single legitimate criticism of the article. I'm
               | no objectivist, as mentioned in another reply thread. The
               | parent comment did actually assume I took offense from
               | the article or is particularly attached to it, both of
               | which is false. My only attachment here is to clearing up
               | false speculation about my motive.
        
         | moomin wrote:
         | You're getting heavily dunked on here, but personally I think
         | your parody of an Ayn Rand fan is even more on point than the
         | author's.
        
       | jti107 wrote:
       | i cant think of any successful/stable long term
       | civilization/tribe/country/society/city state that is based on
       | this concept.
       | 
       | might work if you're a hermit or lone monk.
        
         | kelseyfrog wrote:
         | It also works for people who have enough weight to throw around
         | so that they don't have to care about the consequences of their
         | actions. You would think that the social repercussions of doing
         | such would be enough to alert someone that they were self-
         | sabotaging, but the mindset has a built in mechanism that
         | prevents this insight from occurring, namely that it allows the
         | user to reframe such feedback as other's attempts at looting
         | them from their rewards. It's a bit of a strange mental
         | attractor in that respect, once a stable orbit of the
         | assemblage of ideas takes place, it is very difficult to
         | perturb one out of it.
        
       | Mountain_Skies wrote:
       | I've often been surprised by how many women are fans of Atlas
       | Shrugged but I guess having a female main character written by a
       | woman has something to do with it as the philosophical themes
       | usually aren't aligned with those reader's ideological
       | preferences. Male Ayn Rand fans much more frequently prefer The
       | Fountainhead, which also features strong female characters but is
       | told from a male's perspective. No idea if this is just a
       | reflection of people I know or true in the larger societal
       | context.
        
         | tinglymintyfrsh wrote:
         | Possibly the reader-hero/-author mirror effect. I wouldn't
         | ascribe too much to gender equating to philosophical
         | tendencies.
         | 
         | I'm often disappointed by the lack of philosophical depth and
         | nuance objectivist adherents display. Plus, the arrogance of
         | assuming one's perception is exactly the way reality is when
         | there are as many viewpoints as there are individuals. Beyond
         | math and gravity, subjectivity and ambiguity are the norm.
         | Furthermore, no one is an island and cannot scale their efforts
         | beyond themselves without cooperation and friendships that
         | require solidarity.
         | 
         | Modern libertarianism, the political extension of hyper-
         | individualist objectivism, is largely an ideology sold and
         | popularized by billionaire climate deniers to cynically benefit
         | themselves.
        
       | bjourne wrote:
       | Spoiler alert: there is no hardcore sex in Atlas Shrugged.
        
         | mikestew wrote:
         | Spoiler alert: it's a humor piece. There's sex in Atlas
         | Shrugged, maybe it just doesn't fall into your category of
         | "hard core", but again I will point out that it could have been
         | described as such for humorous effect.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       | lukewrites wrote:
       | Gore Vidal wrote my favorite summation of Ayn Rand:
       | This odd little woman is attempting to give a moral sanction to
       | greed and self interest, and to pull it off she must at times
       | indulge in purest Orwellian newspeak of the "freedom is slavery"
       | sort. What interests me most about her is not the absurdity of
       | her "philosophy," but the size of her audience (in my campaign
       | for the House she was the one writer people knew and talked
       | about). She has a great attraction for simple people who are
       | puzzled by organized society, who object to paying taxes, who
       | dislike the "welfare" state, who feel guilt at the thought of the
       | suffering of others but who would like to harden their hearts.
       | For them, she has an enticing prescription: altruism is the root
       | of all evil, self-interest is the only good, and if you're dumb
       | or incompetent that's your lookout.            ...For to justify
       | and extol human greed and egotism is to my mind not only immoral,
       | but evil. For one thing, it is gratuitous to advise any human
       | being to look out for himself. You can be sure that he will. It
       | is far more difficult to persuade him to help his neighbor to
       | build a dam or to defend a town or to give food he has
       | accumulated to the victims of a famine. But since we must live
       | together, dependent upon one another for many things and
       | services, altruism is necessary to survival. To get people to do
       | needed things is the perennial hard task of government, not to
       | mention of religion and philosophy. That it is right to help
       | someone less fortunate is an idea which ahs figured in most
       | systems of conduct since the beginning of the race. We often
       | fail. That predatory demon "I" is difficult to contain but until
       | now we have all agreed that to help others is a right action.
       | ... Both Marx and Christ agree that in this life a right action
       | is consideration for the welfare of others. In the one case,
       | through a state which was to wither away, in the other through
       | the private exercise of the moral sense. Miss Rand now tells us
       | that what we have thought was right is really wrong. The lesson
       | should have read: One for one and none for all.
       | 
       | https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a4595/comment-0761/
        
         | theGnuMe wrote:
         | I remember the early days of Hacker News (different account)
         | where Ayn Rand was praised to high heavens. Libertarianism ad
         | nauseum.
        
         | tinglymintyfrsh wrote:
         | There's a good reason Julian Assange was dragged out of the
         | Ecuadorian embassy holding "History of the National Security
         | State".
         | 
         | If we don't live for others, he who dies with most toys still
         | wins a lonely, meaningless death. I believe Ayn had a chip on
         | her shoulder from growing up in the Soviet Union and took an
         | extremist contrarian view rather than a moderate one. Extremism
         | is often what catapults people into fame.
         | 
         |  _" There is only one party in the United States, the Property
         | Party...and it has two right wings: Republican and Democrat.
         | Republicans are a bit stupider, more rigid, more doctrinaire in
         | their laissez-faire capitalism than the Democrats, who are
         | cuter, prettier, a bit more corrupt - until recently... and
         | more willing than the Republicans to make small adjustments
         | when the poor, the black, the anti-imperialists get out of
         | hand. But, essentially, there is no difference between the two
         | parties."_ -G.V.
        
       | tinglymintyfrsh wrote:
       | Is it satire? It reads like a narcissism-rationalizing shitpost
       | in the spirit of "throwing trash on the ground creates jobs".
       | There is quite a difference in culture between US military
       | families and Europeans on one-side and "It's all about me" on the
       | other.
        
         | etrevino wrote:
         | This is satire. _McSweeney 's_ is a humor literary journal.
        
         | mikestew wrote:
         | It would probably be helpful had you previously read _Atlas
         | Shrugged_. I am by no means recommending the book (in fact, I
         | 'd advise avoiding such poor writing and childish naivety), but
         | having been one of the unfortunate folks who wasted hours on
         | that book, I knew what the author was going for from the first
         | paragraph. And I found it quite humorous.
        
       | [deleted]
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2022-10-13 23:02 UTC)