• IninewCrow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The funny part is how we rationalize exploiting thousands and often millions of people… Some of whom work to the point of death

    But everyone goes nuts if we threaten violence against those who make our lives miserable.

    • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The funny part is how you blame businesses, but every time a government or nonprofit tries the same, SALARIES ARE NOT PAID (on time or at all).

      CENTRAL PLANNING IS WORSE AS B2B COMPETITION.

      Fck off zurdos de m

      • AngryCommieKender@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        https://www.csac.ca.gov/sites/main/files/file-attachments/list_of_service_organizations.pdf?1652979589

        That’s an extensive list of every 501©3 in the largest economy in the US. California has strong workers protections compared to the rest of the nation. If they don’t pay your salary, withhold your salary, or even fire you without your final pay in hand, they owe triple in damages. Nonprofit corporations, and Co-Ops, are the only corporations that should exist, as they are the only ones not legally beholden to shareholders profits first.

        We will execute corporations in a heartbeat if they decide to FAFO out here.

          • Dasus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires.

              • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                But in south America they have been robbed blind by communists getting 11.5% loans from China for failed projects. IN DOZENS OF LATIN AMERICAN COUNTRIES!

                • masquenox@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yeah, it’s all China’s fault and totally not the imperial power who exploited South America for decades, foisted murderous fascist regimes onto it and funded genocidal death squads over there who murdered millions.

            • masquenox@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              I don’t understand why people in the US fall for that take. Socialism did take root in the US - that’s the whole reason they had to invent police and alphabet organisations to crush it.

      • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        One, non-profits are worse by design, being both a tax write-off and deliberately exploitative entities, and two, any government that goes it has to work against number of international interests, each of which probably gets more income than many country’s economy. Companies are centrally planned by their CEO and board of directors, your statement makes no sense. The only difference is in what they are willing to do and were they are willing to go, where the real difference is not having to give a shit about your workers or consumers.

        • Demuniac@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I work in a non profit healthcare company and the first part of your statement is bullshit. No comment on the rest of it though but non profit can work just fine.

          • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            They work worse and act as an excuse not to offer universal care, so I disagree. Talk to these guys about just how good non-profit healthcare is … https://www.bbb.org/us/fl/orlando/profile/hospital/adventhealth-0733-160528155/customer-reviews

            Basically, as bad as healthcare, but they can get tax-free incentives. Good luck for the diamond in the rough you claim to belong to, but it’s far, far, far from the norm and it comes with hidden costs.

            • Demuniac@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Has anyone ever told you the world is bigger than the US? Because it is, and I’m from there. That’s why healthcare isn’t a problem no matter what type of company I work in (if I even work). So maybe working non-profit in the US is unfair, but it is just as working for a normal organisation here in Europe.

              • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                Sorry, bud, I have universal healthcare in Europe. Nice try. No need for “non-profit (tax-subsidized private) healthcare”, at least not at the citizen level of the country I’m at where we do get it. The only one who seems stuck in the US bubble is you & company. But if you want, there are plenty of sites for European non-profits too, feel free to provide an specific example as I am able to do instead of moving from vague to vague and I’ll take your claim more seriously than what a bunch of meaningless Internet points gives it.

                • Demuniac@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  I’m sorry but your comment confuses me a bit. You specifically link to a US based article, and mention how bad non-profit organisations are. One of the things you mention as being bad about it (and why it doesn’t work) is because you don’t get healthcare.

                  Then I mention that this is not true for at least some other regions of the world, and I know that from personal experience, but now your saying I’m wrong? Or do you want me to share where I work?

                  I must just be misunderstanding your comment for sure, so please elaborate what you mean.

              • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Of course it isn’t, I’m not arguing for for-profit universal healthcare, where did you get that impression? I’m arguing against non-profits being used as tax-free launderers without any real benefits that also seem to want to get their low level workers to work for free while the CEOs cash in a nice salary.

          • TheObviousSolution@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Take your choice between mainstream non-relevance, free reusable software projects for large enterprises with small or next to nothing labor costs, political fronts, while also being far from the norm of how non-profits are used. You used the term “non-working”, not me, but it’s quite apt. If FSF and the Linux Foundation are worth anything, is because of the trust one can place in their central leadership, but their licenses get ignored all the time internationally and no amount of lawyers and money can overcome that. Even in regards to Ukranian and anti-Putin support, most of it is coming from the mainstream because that’s where the people are, crumbs don’t make an argument.

  • theangryseal@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    My god so much of my young life was spent idolizing this hack.

    It’s humiliating, and it damaged every relationship I had. I mean, naturally. Who the fuck am I that anyone who spends time with me would do so from their own rational self interest?

    That’s not how love works and I wish I had seen that earlier in my life, because the only thing I’ve found that has any real value is the love of other people. Even if someone were to live by the “philosophy” of objectivism for self preservation, once everyone knows what a selfish twat you are, it’s a matter of time until you find that you NEED other people to survive.

    Empathy has value. Altruism is a virtue. Those two sentences were all I needed. Not thousands of pages of nonsense that even the author couldn’t live by.

      • theangryseal@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yes. Exactly. Being self absorbed is against rational self interest.

        I have needed so many people in my life, and they’ve needed me. Even when I absolutely did not want to be there, I did it anyway because they’d do it for me.

        It’s been a long time since I read those books, probably more than 20 years now. I probably can’t remember 99% of what I read. I remember the hero worship, I remember that town that fell apart after the factory closed, little things.

        I was primed to fall right into that shit. Young, questioning my religion (Appalachian Pentecostal. Like, deeeeeply engrained in everything I was), and from the poorest part of the country and ashamed of it. I seen the hypocrisy of the people around me, the preachers living off of offerings while everyone around me starved, knowing very few people who weren’t dirt poor and living with chickens in their houses (like the town that lost the factory).

        I thought that maybe the thing that was holding me back was my altruism, because I wanted to rise above that mess.

        Altruism is the only way that people forgotten by the world survive. I wouldn’t have made it without food stamps. I wouldn’t have made it without the people who crawled under the house to fix the sewage and never charged my mother a dime. It didn’t matter how smart I was, I wasn’t on an even playing field. It didn’t matter how much I wanted better things. I wasn’t on an even playing field. So many people are worse off than me, and they come from harder backgrounds than me. Meeting the right people is what it takes to get out of it.

        Sorry for the wall of text. I mean, maybe I needed to take that shit so seriously to become a better person by damming myself trying to be selfish. I feel like I would have been better off without it though.

        • ABC123itsEASY@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think social needs like fulfillment and happiness, pride that comes with seeing others succeed, the contentment that comes with deep love for others and receiving that in kind are all things we have evolved to share and receive and can be the end goal just as much as a means to an end. Sure, the evolutionary pressure that created that kind of social dependency may have been more practical and survival oriented in nature, however we are long past that at this point and I think it’s fair to say humans need those things directly in order to be healthy now. Exactly the reason why NASA can’t just send people up together without considering the social dynamics of that unit; even the most intelligent and motivated people will be unable to act in their own self interest without those social needs met properly.

    • xX_fnord_Xx@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      But, but, magic metal makes steadfast man special, which, in turn, causes female Jesus to lubricate in one of the worst love scenes in literature.

      If only the moochers would stop getting in their way!

      I lost a best friend to Objectivism , and I’m not sure if the dumb bastard has changed his ways. I haven’t the time.

    • PsychedSy@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s always kind of weird to see people blame her fucky philosophy for them being cunts. You just found an excuse to be the dick you wanted to be.

  • Yeller_king@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    And that’s why wages didn’t increase for workers as a result of industrialization. People are just as poor now as they were before! /s

    • ripcord@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, that’s been an ongoing battle. It sure as hell wasn’t going well in the 1920s and 1930s, then a bunch of shit happened to claw back rights and value for workers.

      Some of those battles continue to be fought.

      Those battles have not been going well for the last 40+ years as worker share of profits, power, and wealth disparity has been eroded pretty much every year.

      But we have lots of bread and circuses so it’s cool I guess.

      • Kedly@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        They are kind of starting to forget about the bread part of Bread and Circus lately though

    • antidote101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Taking advantage of an underclass then having that underclass threaten to guillotine you… Seems like it just went from French to French… Whole scenario is French.

    • Melllvar@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s worth pointing out that the guillotine was primarily used to terrorize the poor commoners, not nobles (who had already fled the country by that point.)

      • oce 🐆@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Also many leaders of the revolution were capitalists bourgeois who found it unfair that nobles had more power than them by birth right. Analphabetic people with close to no news access didn’t care that much about politics. Some far left fantasy that French revolution was led by peasants against capitalist is really ironic. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bourgeois_revolution

      • drhugsymcfur@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Do you have a source for that claim? As far as I know most of the people guillotined were emigres or members of the upper class who went against the prevailing political party at the time.

        Many commoners did die in the Revolution, but they mostly died in the infernal columns or similar military actions in the Vendee region and other reactionary uprisings.

    • buddascrayon@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t know the way things are going here in the United States I think it might be time to start rolling out the guillotines.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    This isn’t exactly the most convincing argument against Rand’s philosophy - the workers didn’t invent the device and don’t work any harder than they did before. Their feeling of entitlement to the profit from it appears to be naked greed unsupported by any moral principle. Acting in one’s rational self-interest would include keeping them placated if they can credibly threaten violence, but their role as workers is completely irrelevant in that context.

    • Kalkaline @leminal.space
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ayn Rand depended on the government welfare programs before she died. She didn’t even believe her own bullshit. Any Rand lovers hate when you bring this up because they don’t have a good excuse for it.

      • zokr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ayn Rand depended on the government welfare programs before she died. She didn’t even believe her own bullshit.

        https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/ayn-rand-social-security/


        It is morally defensible for those who decry publicly-funded scholarships, Social Security benefits,

        and unemployment insurance to turn around and accept them, Rand argued, because the government

        had taken money from them by force (via taxes). There’s only one catch: the recipient must regard the

        receipt of said benefits as restitution, not a social entitlement.


        If she paid into Social Security and Medicare and paid taxes then what is the issue? The paragraph above states

        that she did not believe her actions to be hypocrisy because she had paid taxes.

      • As a person who believes in government programs, I find the idea that you have to believe the right things in order to be worthy of receiving benefits abhorrent.

        And of course they have an excuse for it: she paid taxes so it’s her money. They don’t hate it, they love it when you bring it up.

        So: gross for the person making this argument, ineffective against someone who knows the least but about how she viewed it.

        There’s tons of things that suck about Rand, so let’s find something other than being a hypocrite about her being a hypocrite.

      • FederatedSaint@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If you’ve ever read atlas shrugged and not rolled your eyes or went, “god this is insufferable” then you might be a Republican lol.

    • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Except they should get to act in their own self-interest, also. If they cannot, what’s keeping them from that; who has more power?

    • Որբունի@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      The obvious ramping up of production and half the workers getting new tasks to create even more wealth isn’t depicted.

    • aleats@iusearchlinux.fyi
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re missing a very important point here, which is that the workers are the ones whose labor is turned into profit. That means that if their work is able to generate more money, they are perfectly within their right to demand more, even if they don’t necessarily work any harder.

      • FederatedSaint@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I fuckin HATE ayn rand, but those workers are being paid for their labor, they’re not slaves. If that labor provides a little profit or a lot of profit is up to good or bad business practices of the company they’re working for, and doesn’t need to be shared with them outright, unless it happens naturally as a result of supply/demand making their labor more valuable (because otherwise they’d just go somewhere else where they will be paid more).

        The crux here is that for this to happen appropriately, we need to be living in an ideal world with appropriate laws, no corruption, exploitation, loopholes, bribing, lobbying, etc. and we do not currently live in that world, so the above is just theoretical.

        • SlopppyEngineer@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Workers have to work to earn money. Owners have to own money to earn money. Workers and owners don’t play by the same rules. Because of that the same amount of effort and time results in a very different amount of money earned. It will always create tension and if not addressed by proper redistribution of wealth lead to large concentrations of wealth, and those always lead to violence. Humans have always been sensitive about relative wealth differences, and that not only goes for humans.

        • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think the point is “profit” is wage theft by definition to some. The workers generate profit, meaning they make someone else money they earned from their labor, and regardless of the structures or systems they’re a part of that make that profit possible they should be given that profit.

          I think I agree that profit by default is wage theft but I can appreciate that if a system of capital and practices enable the profit past the individual workers wage that there should be some reward to that system. The problem is how that reward is distributed, which right now is poorly done in most places.

        • aleats@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not saying the employees are slaves at all. The point I’m making is that, if a company finds a way to make more money, then it’s only logical that the workers, whose work is the very reason the company is profitable, should at least get part of the profits, whether it’s through worker benefits, more pay, or anything else.

          • cogman@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            And this is the crux of the problem with randism (and modern capitalism).

            Nothing forces companies to treat workers well which means the natural direction for money to flow is towards the owners of resources and not to the producers of them.

            As time goes on and tech advances, the natural action of the owners is to reduce the number of workers they employ to maximize their own income.

            If you don’t own things, the response is “tough shit”.

            This is why so many businesses and investors are jizzing themselves over AI. The very thought of being about to fire people gives them a boner.

            • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              Totally true.

              Nothing forces companies to treat workers well

              Because the power of workers (via unions or simply a fair job market or labor regulations) has been systematically attacked since forever, because that is in the self-interest of corporations and their owners.

              As corpos and rich fucks amass more power, it is easier for them to take power from workers. They can more easily crush existing unions and attempts at unionizing, change or hobble labor laws, meddle with the job market itself, and influence the government’s management of the economy.

              So the trend is towards overpowered corporations and underpowered workers. We get to a point where workers don’t really have many options for better jobs, and they don’t have enough sway to raise the minimum wage for decades, let alone attain a more fair job market. Or implement regulations requiring better treatment.

              That’s in addition to seeking ways to replace workers with technology, or increase their productivity.

              Thing is, if most of us are unemployed because of automation, who’s buying the products and services enough to sustain these companies?

      • Jackthelad@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        A company needs to make a profit to be able to continue operating though. If they can’t, then these people have no jobs at all.

        • aleats@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Nowhere did I say the company shouldn’t make a profit. It’s only natural that companies would have significant expenses around material, jobs, offices, and all that stuff, and that’s fine. The problem arises when the company has a way to more efficiently make money, and, instead of doing things like reducing worker hours or increasing worker pay, it expects everyone to work the exact same amount and just pockets the money (not to mention when companies do things like firing a lot of their staff during a time of record profits).

          • DessertStorms@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Nowhere did I say the company shouldn’t make a profit. It’s only natural that companies would have significant expenses around material, jobs, offices, and all that stuff, and that’s fine

            You’ve been spot on with your replies to this bootlicker so far, but none of the things you mentioned here come under “profits”, those are expenses.

            It is the money that companies make after expenses that is the profit, and they are mostly able to make so much of it because they don’t pay their employees fairly for their labour, nor for any other value they produce for the owners of company, who do very little to no work, and are absolutely not entitled to the fruits of other peoples’ labour, no matter how tasty their boot might be.

            They also maintain a system that means that employees don’t have the free choice capitalists love to wave around - if they don’t participate in this exploitative bullshit, they become homeless and starve, because our human rights, like our labour, have also been commodified so that a couple of thousand people can hoard all of the money and power that comes with it.

        • fishpen0@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Since R&D is pre-profit, this is actually not true. A company needs their revenue to be equal to their expenses to stay in business. Profits by definition are extra.

          • Asafum@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            R&D and the medical industry… Ughhhbhnbnngbhhhjh…

            PUBLIC FUNDS DRUG DEVELOPMENT

            Companies: Sorry, R&D is so expensive so I cant reduce the price of “you need 3 of these a day to live” lower then $600 a pill.

      • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If I think that investing in capital and getting a return on my investment is a valid use of the money I earn but you do not, our disagreement is ideological rather than factual; who’s right and who’s wrong is a matter of opinion.

        With that said, I do find it ironic that proponents of an ideology that has failed quite dramatically are accusing proponents of an ideology that has been quite successful of being insufficiently rational.

        • aleats@iusearchlinux.fyi
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, I’m talking specifically in terms of the concept of rational self-interest here. It’s perfectly within reason for the workers to think they should be paid better, given that their labor is now worth more, and their interest of getting paid far outweighs the interest in a more profitable company. In the same way, it’s perfectly within reason for the manager to attempt to maximize the company’s profit, as it’s in their best interest to do so, since a company that makes more profits will (theoretically, of course) pay the manager better. It’s an obvious reason why workers have created unions since time immemorial, and the same reason why companies attempt to break unions. It’s a complex web of relationships between who owns and manages capital and who works and ultimately generates that capital, and there are many positions one can take, such as the one you hold, or mine.

          • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            I don’t disagree with you on this, but I guess we’re getting far from the topic of the comic. I’m not actually a big fan of Rand. (I did read Atlas Shrugged but I skipped the monologue.) I just don’t think the comic in the OP is a good criticism of it either in theory or in practice. It bugs me because I think exposure to ridiculous caricatures of “enemy” ideologies leads people to support their own ideology uncritically - after all, the others are so obviously wrong!

    • thepaperpilot@incremental.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This comic reminds me of a classic argument used for leftist policies, unrelated to ayn rand though. Under capitalism, technological advancements are harmful to the working class because companies are likely to keep pay and hours the same, and just scale up production and/or lay off surplus labor force.

      Under a system where the workers own the means of production, those same advancements could go towards lowering the hours of the employees without lowering their pay, or if they decide to scale up production then it would mean more profit that the company could decide democratically what to do with, making it likely to result in pay increases for the workers. Point is it wouldn’t just go into the hands of the capitalist class, but rather stay under control of those who labored for it.

    • marcos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      This isn’t the most convincing argument because in a healthy society the things the workers demand will happen naturally.

      Yet, if you go assuming those things aren’t happening, it means the society is not healthy, and will improve dramatically by following the procedure on the last panel.

      • Wogi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I was told by my first economics professor that if I could solve that problem, and eliminate the assumption of rationality, I’d be the richest man on earth over night.

        It’s a problem, they know it’s a problem, they just don’t have a better answer.

        • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          You can’t even assume everyone can agree on the same definition of rational. If a business owner is a sadist they might value treating their employees like dirt more than the money they’d make if the business ran more efficiently. For a dickhead, rational self interest could mean forgoing profit to cause misery.

          • Wogi@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Rational in the economics sense just means that people do things for a reason. We’re not acting randomly, we believe that when we put money towards a thing that we are receiving something of value for it.

            Any more specific than that and we’re not talking about rationality in the economics sense any more. Rationality does not mean correct. Just with cause.

          • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            …they might value treating their employees like dirt more than the money they’d make it the business ran more efficiently.

            This sounds like the metric for hiring middle-management if anything.

            • roscoe@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              It would certainly help explain middle management’s obsession with return-to-office policies in the face of all the evidence that WFH increases productivity.

    • RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Add greed and self-interest to that list. Those leaders and owners like CEOs are beholden to investors and shareholders, and if they demand a return on their investment or the C-suite wants a raise, the workforce will be one of the places the value is extracted from.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      And apparently conservatives can’t tell the difference between a meme and a comic strip despite being in c/comicstrips.

  • Yewb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Many people commenting here more than likely didnt read atlas shrugged - my take away is that the politicians and do nothings at the top are the problem, making poor decisions and never being accountable to them.

    Not everything is black and white if you think she was just some capitalist tool to push an agenda do yourself a favor and read the book, if you still have that opinion good on you but at least you did your homework.

  • MxM111@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The sad thing is that not a single “proletariat revolution” produced better or even similar result that democratic capitalism produced in the West. Granted, Rand is to the far right economically of the modern Western society, but still…

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    In case anyone didn’t know, Ayn Rand idolized serial killer William Edward Hickman.

    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.” (The Fountainhead is Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas’ favorite book – he even requires his clerks to read it.)

    https://www.rawstory.com/2018/03/ayn-rand-became-big-admirer-sadistic-serial-killer-william-hickman/

    • seaweedsheep@literature.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’m glad other people are aware of this. I used to post about her infatuation with that butcher every time I saw her name come up on Reddit. It makes me happy to see other people doing the same.

  • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    NOW DO THIS WITH EXTREME LEFT NARCO DICTATORS IN SOUTH AMERICA AND WITH EXTREME RIGHT MAGA IDIOTS IN US AND WITH CARREER POLITICIANS EVER WHERE.

    NOT BUSINESS OWNERS. they arnt as bad as you think…

      • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Come live in south America and see how the political class is rich. They are all left wing narco dictators. Ecuador, Cuba, Argentina, venezuela, el salvador… All in the hands of NARCO COMMUNISTS. really, come visit.

        • antidote101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Ecuador is currently run by a pro-democracy president who was born in Florida. Argentina by an America-friendly Libertarian, Venezuela’s leader is a leftist, and is still in power because he survived a US lead coup (Aka Operation Gideon, part of which involved economic attacks)… and Cuba isn’t particularly known for it’s cocaine trade.

          Also, you should look into the CIA whistle blower Gary Webb, who discusses US involvement in the cocaine trade at length.

          You’re quite lacking in solid, verifiable facts in your comments.

          • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You are not informed, u specifically said this because el. Salvador ecuador and Argentina are trying to escape communism. While their (new) presidents do their bests, many government and congress people vote for extreme left. Their HUGE number or government workers drains their funds.

            YOU ARE uninformed. I actually live here…

    • antidote101@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      You seem to lack an understanding of the history of US forced regime change in Latin America and the world.

      Quite a lot of (in fact most of) the coups the US have conducted have been against legitimately elected leftwing governments… And sometimes with the aid of, if not for international business interests (dole bananas being the go to example, and the reason the term banana republic exists).

      Also, whilst I’m sure that fairly ethical small business operators (perhaps like yourself) find cultural avenues to feel attacked by culture and politics - I think you should try to be rational and think through these feelings when you come across topics like this.

      For instance, is this comic supposed to be aimed at small business owners, or is it supposed to be a lampooning of Ayn Rand’s philosophies?

      …most of society’s woes are aimed at large corporate and political interests, and when confronted on a personal level, most people understand the necessity and customer service focused interests of small business as being useful and good in society. It tends to be the more money hungry, greedy, and heatless aspects of large scale global Capitalism and Corporatism that society and culture aim to criticize…

      …hence the grey uniforms and drab setting in this comic.

      • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        No, I understand that history. But the extreme left influenced by ruzzia venezuela China Cuba has taken over many countries. Some fight back now, like El Salvador, Ecuador and argentina.

        • antidote101@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          I don’t think that’s the case, also neither Putin’s Russia nor Xi’s China are governed from “the extreme left”. Both leaders are classically Authoritarian traditionalist conservatives. Hence the mistreatment of gays in Russia, and China’s laws against boy bands being too effeminate (both of which are examples of culturally conservative positions).

          In fact, I’m sure many people here see how this comic can even apply to the mistreatment of factory workers toiling under the economic abuses in both the world powers you’ve brought up, so again, your criticisms and comments aren’t lining up with the depictions and intent of the comic, nor with the political state/history of the world.

          • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Owww I know a LOT.

            Tell me, what do you thunk happened with twenty years of kirchenian politics? Sold the entire country to China? They went bankrupt SEVEN TIMES. for oevr a decade, the INFLATION PER YEAR WAS OVER 100%.

            DUDE.

            • Renacles@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 year ago

              And Argentina is fighting back by voting Trump’s dog cloning friend? Argentina’s problem is not China, it’s corruption and incompetence.

              • JustMy2c@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                1 year ago

                Milei is a moron for supporting Trump, he probably does NOT know exactly what Trump stands for. Milei is also way too religious for my liking, women’s rights and so on are horrible old fashioned shit (like trump).

                But yes, what he is doing YESTERDAY 1 MARCH (the may accords he announced and more) is actually 100% focussed in ending corruption. At least for now he’s doing exactly what he should, economically and anti corruption and reorganizing the state departments. Don’t forget they went bankrupt 7 seven times last few years and have had over a decade of ANNUAL inflation each single year over 100%…

                And bad loans from china by corrupt extreme left wing (narco) communists is exactly what you and I can agree on that is the REAL problem in argentina. After they fix they I hope he thinks again before making abortions illegal etc

                • Renacles@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Milei fires a bunch of people right after Christmas, the guy is comically selfish and has no one’s wellbeing in mind.

                  He also supports Trump, people connected to the last military dictatorship and is pretty much against anything progressive.