Libertarianism is a fraud: Chris Kluwe Slams Ayn Rand Acolytes: ‘John Galt Does Not Live In Reality’
A brilliant take down of Randian Libertarians by out-spoken pro-gay sportsman, Chris Kluwe! He's my new hero.
Here’s an amazing excerpt From Chris Kluwe’s new book: [italic]Beautifully Unique Sparkleponies: On Myths, Morons, Free Speech, Football, and Assorted Absurdities[/italic]
“So I forced myself to read “Atlas Shrugged.” Apparently I harbor masochistic tendencies; it was a long, hard slog, and by the end I felt as if Ayn Rand had violently beaten me about the head and shoulders with words. I feel I would be doing all of you a disservice (especially those who think Rand is really super-duper awesome) if i didn’t share some thoughts on this weighty tome.
Who is John Galt?
John Galt (as written in said novel) is a deeply flawed, sociopathic ideal of the perfect human. John Galt does not recognize the societal structure surrounding him that allows him to exist. John Galt, to be frank, is a turd.
However, John Galt is also very close to greatness. The only thing he is missing, the only thing Ayn Rand forgot to take into account when writing “Atlas Shrugged,” is empathy.
John Galt talks about intelligence and education without discussing who will pay for the schools, who will teach the teachers. John Galt has no thought for his children, or their children, or what kind of world they will have to occupy when the mines run out and the streams dry up. John Galt expects an army to protect him but has no concern about how it’s funded or staffed. John Galt spends his time in a valley where no disasters occur, no accidents happen, and no real life takes place.
John Galt lives in a giant fantasy that’s no different from an idealistic communist paradise or an anarchist’s playground or a capitalist utopia. His world is flat and two-dimensional. His world is not real, and that is the huge, glaring flaw with objectivism.
John Galt does not live in reality.”
600-post Libertarian Flame War churning through the usual 3-4 idiotic talking points in 3.. 2.. 1..
And an oldie but goodie:
[quote]"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."
I love that quote, R2. That so perfectly sums up the Randian acolytes.
Hell, I'm gonna buy Kluwe's book just for the title alone.
He's so attractive. He undoubtedly has the muskiest, most delicious ass in the NFL.
I would love to see his cock. I bet it looks like him - long, lean but solid!
I know all the fortysomething trolls here go on and on about how Ben Cohen is the hottest ally... I think Kluwe blows him out of the water, though. He's the sexiest ally we've got right now.
"The Fountainhead sounds like a snore bore! Ayn Rand was totally warped by the Bolsheviks and what they did to her father. She was all about eugenics and hating on poor people. Her hero was a child murderer whom she so admired because "other people don't exist for him"
I love how she collected social security benefits under her real name. a hypocritical sociopath what a shocker.
I was always curious about Atlas Shrugged as a phenomenon. Why are people so enamored of it when its premise is so awful? I've never read it. What I've read about Ayn Rand makes me loathe her so I never really felt motivated to actually pick it up and read it. Chris Kluwe has provided a valuable service.
[quote]Why are people so enamored of it when its premise is so awful?
To borrow a phrase, it's a stupid person's idea of an intelligent book.
The Voice of the Night
REALLY stupid, as it's not even well-written.
That's just it, R11... not only is the subject matter awful bullshit, the prose itself is tedious, wooden, and awful.
Anyone who recommends or praises this book for any reason on any level is a fucking idiot.
It fits into a certain Darwinian mindset, along with the belief that they, too, are one of the elites that could "Go Galt" and bring down society by their absence. Most of the people with this belief, of course, are all too easily done without. Whenever I hear that phrase, I just laugh and tell them to go right ahead.
Please do not use Darwin's name in conjunction with Libertarians and Ayn Rand.
So, what does this tell us about former vice president nominee Paul Ryan who worshipped at Ayn's hemline?
Us older gays will remember that there was a gay porn actor who went by the name of Jon Galt. Hairy daddy type with big jug ears. Kinda hot.
[quote]So, what does this tell us about former vice president nominee Paul Ryan who worshipped at Ayn's hemline?
Well, mostly that he's an idiot. And a hypocrite at that, since he later tried to deny that he was all that enamored of Ayn Rand.
The thing that is hilarious is that they don't even realize that "Going Galt" is nothing more than or less than unions going on strike. It's a pro-union message, written by and read by and worshiped by anti-union morons.
To continue the quote from the book and from where the OP leaves off:
"John Galt does not live in reality.
In reality, hurricanes hit coastlines, earthquakes knock down buildings, people crash cars or trip over rocks or get sick and miss work. In reality, humans make good choices and bad choices based on forces even they sometimes don’t understand. To live with other human beings, to live in society, requires that we understand that shit happens and sometimes people need a safety net. Empathy teaches us that contributing to this safety net is beneficial for all, because we never know when it will be our turn.
If an earthquake destroys half the merchandise in my store or levels my house, that’s something I can’t control; it doesn’t matter how prepared I was or how hard I worked. Trying to recover from something like that can cripple a person, both financially and mentally, unless he has some help from those who understand that we’re all in this together, we need each other to function as a society, and the next earthquake might hit one of our houses.
If a volcano erupts and takes out vital transportation and infrastructure, should we just throw our hands up in the air and say, “not my responsibility”? No, because it is our responsibility.
It’s our responsibility as members of a societal group to take care of the underlying foundations of peace and security — to ensure that the roads and rails are protected because they provide a collective good."
"John Galt as written lacks this rational empathy. John Galt is brilliant but doesn’t have the long-term vision to maintain the society that allowed his brilliance to flourish. John Galt is self-motivated but has no concern for the effects of his actions on other people. John Galt is a lone individual living in a world filled with countless teeming masses, and just as John Galt plants his feet on the backs of all those who came before him, he must provide a surface for future generations to plant their feet as well, not through sacrificing everything he owns but by realizing a stable society is ultimately a productive society.
But that’s not John Galt. A world full of Ayn Rand’s John Galts is a world that will eventually consist of only one person, and then none, once his lifespan concludes. John Galt doesn’t care for the disasters that affect his neighbors — they can sink or swim on their own (and they’ll sink). John Galt doesn’t care for the public good, because all he can see is his own good (and he’ll wonder why it gets harder and harder to get the resources he needs). John Galt doesn’t recognize that genius arises under any circumstances (and he’ll never know how many geniuses he excluded from paradise because their parents didn’t fit his ideals, or why the population keeps shrinking).
John Galt is a remorseless shark feeding on those unable to get out of his way, the blood-churned waters boiling around him as he takes in everything he requires for his own happiness without thought of the cost to others, rending and tearing the stability of social interactions until his once-teeming world is barren and lifeless, collapsed under the gluttonous appetite of self.
Then he starves, and no one is left to mourn his passing."
Dear god, I love Chris Kluwe. Why doesn't he have a gay brother (who has low enough standards to date me)?
Chris Kluwe's feet are enough to put him in the gay hall of fame, all by themselves.
You realize that the name, "John Galt", is an acronym, don't you? Rearrange the letters...
Do you mean an anagram R23?
Thank you, R24, I misspoke.
None of the anagram generators on line seem to think it's an anagram of anything.
Libertarianism is actually worse than conservatism. Now you're probably wondering what could possibly be worser than a bunch of racists with an intellect rivaled only by garden tools, and that's simple: the people manipulating them. Libertarians tend to be either paranoid or self-centered and sociopathic. Sociopaths are manipulators. They are shallow and see others around them not as people, but only as targets and opportunities. Sociopaths are masters at influence and deception. Very little of what they say actually checks out in terms of facts or reality, but they're extremely skillful at making the things they say sound believable, even if they're just making them up out of thin air.
In 1975, Ronald Reagan stated, "I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism". I mention this because it was Reagan who injected libertarian poison into conservatism which created the modern day conservative ideology that we have today. Trickle down economics wasn't exactly a conservative idea, it was a libertarian one. Add that in with Reagan's anti-government rhetoric and you get a fusion of conservative/libertarian or in other words the modern day conservative ideology.
[quote]Now you're probably wondering what could possibly be worser than a bunch of racists with an
Worse are the lowlife trash whose entire political repertoire consists of going around falsely smearing others as "racist" (at least half of datalounge).
Also, people who use the term "worser."
R28 is rather defensive, isn't he?
R28 is ayn rand russkie from the spirit world
[quote]So I forced myself to read “Atlas Shrugged.” Apparently I harbor masochistic tendencies; it was a long, hard slog, and by the end I felt as if Ayn Rand had violently beaten me about the head and shoulders with words. I feel I would be doing all of you a disservice (especially those who think Rand is really super-duper awesome) if i didn’t share some thoughts on this weighty tome
So a guy who had his mind made up read a book that he knew going in went against his thinking of the world and then declares it a fraud?
And this is some kind of logical big win?
And you agree because, of course, you're some open minded thinker.
Damn, you're stupid strong and that's not a good thing.
The best part is this
[quote] I feel I would be doing all of you a disservice (especially those who think Rand is really super-duper awesome) if i didn’t share some thoughts on this weighty tome
And we should be taking feedback on topics like this from a guy who kicks footballs?
Pretty fucking full of himself. I'm guessing his head doesn't fit in a standard sized helmet
r28 here, what's "defensive" about telling the truth? Apparently you have a problem with it.
Ayn Rand cannot be discussed here with any objectivity. Her haters and followers can be equally loony.
R31 wins today's speed-fallacy award, straw-man and ad-hominem division.
[quote]Ayn Rand cannot be discussed here with any objectivity.
[quote]what's "defensive" about telling the truth?
You certainly wouldn't know. You don't seem to have any real relationship with 'truth'.
Indeed, R34. Poor, R31 ... brainwashed and defensive, blind to reality, clinging to dogma and ideology, and having absolutely zero good arguments.
I hope Kluwe runs for political office one day.
Me too, seems like the smartest guy to come out of pro sports ever
I suck at anagrams, what's John Galt?
Ayn Rand was behind Objectivism not Libertarianism.They are both similar in philosophy BUT most Randians don't like libertarians. Libertarians in the US have been influenced by Rand BUT she couldn't stand them.
This is what Rand said about them:
"But this party plagiarizes some of my ideas, mixes them with the exact opposite—with religionists, anarchists and every intellectual misfit and scum they can find—and call themselves libertarians and run for office."
In my opinion, Rand's philosophy was an extreme reaction to the dictatorial collectivism of the Soviet Union. She came from there and formulated a response that wasn't a middle ground but a extreme reaction to it.
One fabulous fact about Rand was that she was the head of the costume department at RKO studios at one time. Maybe the only fabulous thing about her!
[quote]I was always curious about Atlas Shrugged as a phenomenon.
Most fans probably haven't read it. They use it as a pseudo-intellectual justification for their natural selfishness.
[quote]brainwashed and defensive, blind to reality, clinging to dogma and ideology, and having absolutely zero good argument
Sigh, in her two posts she offers no facts, just inane name calling and then she posts this.
She is the queen of the blissfully self unaware
[quote]You realize that the name, "John Galt", is an acronym, don't you? Rearrange the letters...
ALL OF THEM CUNTS
Has Kluwe tweeted on The Day Love Won Out?
He's commented throughout the day, r44. He's been somewhat sober though, still seems caught up on the dismantling of the VRA (understandably).
Earlier he posted something like: "giving states rights means nothing when they disenfranchise certain populations" (paraphrase).
Chris Kluwe has a future in politics if this sports thing ever winds down for him.
Actually, probably not. Politicians never get elected speaking the truth like he does. Well, rarely anyway.
But I'm really glad he's so out-spoken, and hope he keeps it up, and in fact, does more.
Chris is on Conan tonight. He'll for sure talk about gay marriage.
r46 he might but I imagine this "sports thing" will wind down this year. So he'll probably move to a CA city and get himself elected as a Representative somehow, either state or national.
[quote]She is the queen of the blissfully self unaware
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Libertarians, idiots, etc.
Ayn Rand is a fascinating phenomenon.
The concept that teenaged boys get swept away by the power of her ideas as expressed in her prose does not register for me.
Who are these people?
I guess that's the first time I've seen Chris interviewed. He sure is a fast talker.
R51, they're over-privileged white men oblivious to their own level of privilege, who think themselves superior to everyone else, and are looking for justifications for their selfish supremism.
Screw Ayn Rand, I'm going to start worshiping Chris Kluwe!!
He makes a hell of a lot more sense, and he's not nearly as sociopathic!
Some of you think her books are so awful, but look at how long "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" have been discussed and debated over the decades? I personally though they were both decent reads, considering the era in which they were written. But I hardly subscribe to Ayn Rand's beliefs. In fact, I think she has it all wrong.
[quote]Some of you think her books are so awful, but look at how long "Atlas Shrugged" and "The Fountainhead" have been discussed and debated over the decades?
It's not because they're good. Or deep. Or insightful.
It's because they push a dogma that others want to push and keep in the lime-light.
They're shit, from ideas to prose.
[quote]Ayn Rand is a fascinating phenomenon. The concept that teenaged boys get swept away by the power of her ideas as expressed in her prose does not register for me. Who are these people?
Ayn Rand is a fascinating phenomenon. The concept that low IQ types who can't refute her arguments get swept away into a black and white fundamentalist-like resentment against her does not register for me. Who are these people?
R57, that was hilariously stupid and off-base. How lame.
Rand threads and commentary about her anywhere are always pretty ridiculous. I don't think I've EVER seen seen anyone online try to criticise her ideas without going straight into ad hominem and name calling. Some of her philosophy (of the capitalism can do no wrong variety) is flawed and can be specifically refuted, but she normally comes off looking a lot better than the people who hate her.
[quote]I don't think I've EVER seen seen anyone online try to criticise her ideas without going straight into ad hominem and name calling.
Really? You don't read much then.
[quote]Some of her philosophy (of the capitalism can do no wrong variety) is flawed and can be specifically refuted, but she normally comes off looking a lot better than the people who hate her.
More than flawed. Dead wrong. And no, she never comes off better than her critics. Ever.
r61, thanks for giving a demonstration of my point.
R62, says the guy who is just clinging desperately to justifications for believing in bullshit. Whatever. It's your brain you're letting rot with this shit.
I think Chris Kluwe did an excellent job of destroying Randianism, personally. And the fact that Ayn was a sociopathic hypocrite is just sauce for the goose.
I have less respect for libertarians than I do for conservatives. At least conservatives can make me laugh. Libertarians are simply annoying.
That includes people who call themselves 'civil' libertarians and claim that they're for 'civil liberties' and not like regular libertarians, but who are in reality self-centered, paranoid, devoid of any reality based solutions to any of the problems they complain about, and who like to claim things that liberals have fought for as their own.
For example, some of these people claim that MLK was a 'civil' libertarian. MLK was not a 'civil' libertarian, he was a liberal. MLK supported federal intervention to protect the civil liberties of African-Americans.
Also, libertarianism didn't even become popular until the 1970s, and since then the only 'civil liberties' people claiming to be 'civil' libertarians have fought for are their right to narcotics and to not have their meth lab spied on by the government.
Even when they ARE right about a given topic, it's more like a stopped clock being right twice a day... it may be 'right', but it's mostly an accident and at any rate, it's for all the wrong reasons.
someone has told r64 that there's self-esteem to be had by resenting misunderstood labels.
R65, I think it's most modern Randian "libertarians" that misunderstand the labels.
And "old school" (turn of the LAST century, not this one) "libertarians" that don't understand that the meaning of the label has changed dramatically.
But go ahead and keep justifying/rationalizing your adherence to an utterly failed ideology.
I ♥ Chris Kluwe
Libertarians don't understand anything, but particularly capitalism (not the same thing as free markets or private property).
Chris Kluwe rocks.
Chris Kluwe is super hot, and an amazing person.
I'm still baffled by what "John Galt" could possibly be an anagram for. "Jolt Nahg"? "Njal Thog"? "Jlag Hont"?
[quote]I know all the fortysomething trolls here go on and on about how Ben Cohen is the hottest ally... I think Kluwe blows him out of the water, though
Whether it's in the water or out of it, the important thing is that Chris Kluwe blows Ben Cohen.
R64 is trying to misrepresent groups like the ACLU, which are not and never have been libertarian or "civil libertarian" as he defines it.