> Keep in mind "Ayn Rand" ended up in the public safety net for care.
There’s no hypocrisy there. She paid into the system. Why shouldn’t she get as much value out of it as possible?
There’s no hypocrisy there. She paid into the system. Why shouldn’t she get as much value out of it as possible?
Or perhaps she was still a dense prick to the end of her days. Who knows?
You are probably just butthurt at this ridiculous ideology being exposed for what it is.
Either outcome is meaningless. I'll worry about it when the bank accepts internet points as mortgage repayments.
That's not how “the system” works though. She paid so other people could benefit from it, then when she benefited it, she became part of a scheme that took money from working people to give it to her: she become one of the parasites she hated in good years.
I don't blame her for preferring hypocrisy to suicide, but it's still fair to call her hypocrisy for what it is.
I think my comment explains this pretty clearly, I’d recommend reading it more carefully and in good faith before responding.
If you steal from some people make up for the loss that some other people inflicted on you, you're still a thieve no matter the moral framework.
> I think my comment explains this pretty clearly, I’d recommend reading it more carefully and in good faith before responding.
There's no bad faith on my side, your argument just ain't valid.
She’s not, she’s stealing from the same entity that caused the loss - the state.
If she's stealing someone, it's someone akin to her younger self whose work is taken away by the state to give her.
Had she become a burglar, stealing directly from the senior public servants[1] houses, then it would have been somehow consistent. But I'm pretty sure she would still have agreed that this was theft and immoral.
The reality is simple, at the end of her life, she simply couldn't afford to live in a way that matched her individualist ideology.
[1]: because even though Rand claims she hates the State, it's pretty clear from the writing that her main personal issues are the civil servants themselves.
> she isn’t stealing the state in any way
I never claimed she was stealing the state, I claimed that she was stealing from the state.
> If she's stealing someone, it's someone akin to her younger self whose work is taken away by the state to give her.
I didn’t claim she was stealing anyone.
The state took her money, and she reclaimed some of it. This is perfectly consistent with her moral philosophy and doesn’t constitute hypocrisy in any way.
Not a native speaker, what's the difference between those two?
> I didn’t claim she was stealing anyone.
Wait you did, right above “I claimed that she was stealing from the state”.
> The state took her money, and she reclaimed some of it.
No, in reality the state redistributed her money, then the state handed other people's money to her.
> This is perfectly consistent with her moral philosophy and doesn’t constitute hypocrisy in any way.
You keep saying that but you've failed to make a convincing argument.
How would accepting stolen money handed over by your nemesis be consistent with anything?
If we consider the state stole her money earlier, then the state is again stealing someone's money by the time it gives it to her. If taxes are theft, then late Ayn Rand was in “Possession of property obtained by crime”, which isn't morally more defensible than the theft itself.
I agree down-voting just makes people emotional, and doesn't add anything.
Personally, I saw Rands writing as lazy thinly veiled fictional despotism, and targeted peoples need for simple answers in a chaotic world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Illusion_of_control#By_proxy
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Randian_hero
This doesn't mean both perspectives can't seem true =3
The Internet is a big place, and some people are always having a bad day. =3
Sure, she could have used the money she had put into social security to invest, and maybe would have come out better off. But for those of us who see how public services can enrich an entire society, there is irony to how this all played out.
Then where exactly is the irony or hypocrisy here?
FTFY.
She didn't steal from the thieve, she became complicit with the thieve stealing other people's work to get their money back (gracefully handed by the thieve).
Have a wonderful day =3