How I discovered Ayn Rand and Objectivism – My personal story

Posted by Maphesdus 11 years ago to Philosophy
308 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

It's difficult to say for certain when I was first introduced to Ayn Rand. For the longest time, “Atlas Shrugged” had always been one of those famous literary works, like “To Kill a Mockingbird” or “Catcher in the Rye,” which I knew were considered classics, but which I had never read and didn't know much about. Ayn Rand's magnum opus was among these, and it sort floated around in my subconscious, just below the level of awareness; existing, but in a state which was incorporeal and insubstantial.

One day, I was watching an episode of South Park titled “Chickenlover,” in which the character Officer Barbrady reveals that he is illiterate, but subsequently learns to read, and then reads “Atlas Shrugged” and decides never to read again because of it. This little cameo nudged “Atlas Shrugged” into my consciousness a bit more, and made me decide that perhaps maybe I wanted to possibly read it someday. I didn't know what the story was even about, but if it was getting made fun of on South Park, it had to be kind of a big deal, right? So I made a mental goal to eventually read “Atlas Shrugged” at some unspecified point in the indeterminate future. Then I went about my regular life as usual and soon forgot about it.

In 2009, I took a summer-sales job selling home security systems door-to-door. The company was sending sales-reps out of state, so I got to visit a part of the country I had never been to before. On the way there, during a layover between flights (tickets paid for by the company), I decided to browse the used book store at the airport. On one shelf there happened to be an old hardcover copy of “Atlas Shurgged.” I eagerly picked it up and read the brief synopsis on the back cover, which gave me a glimpse into a world on the brink of economic collapse. It sounded intriguing, and so I began flipping through the pages. Being somewhat impatient, I flipped towards the back of the book to see what state the world would end up in. Had the characters in the book solved the economic problems of their society? Had things fallen apart completely? What did their world look like? By pure chance, I happened to land on what turned out to be one of the most memorable exchanges of dialogue in the entire book:

––––––––––––––––––––––
“Okay, I'll tell you. You want me to be Economic Dictator?”
“Yes!”
“And you'll obey any order I give?”
“Implicitly!”
“Then start by abolishing all income taxes.”
“Oh no!” screamed Mr. Thompson, leaping to his feet. “We couldn't do that! That's . . . that's not the field of production. That's the field of distribution. How would we pay government employees?"
“Fire your government employees.”
“Oh, no! That's politics! That's not economics! You can't interfere with politics! You can't have everything!”
––––––––––––––––––––––

So... this was a novel about politics and economics? I smiled. This was in May of 2009, and the country was still feeling the effects of the 2008 financial crisis, so the story felt absolutely relevant to the current times. Unfortunately, I was flat broke, and didn't want to spend what little cash I had on a book, even if it did look like it would be a really good one. Looking at my watch, I realized my next plane was going to be departing soon, and I had only about ten minutes or so to get to the terminal. So I put “Atlas Shrugged” back on the shelf and walked out of the bookstore. It would be another three years before I finally picked it up again.

I spent that summer involved in what I had initially thought was going to be just another job to pay the bills, but which, looking back, I now realize taught me some very important life lessons. It was the first sales job I had ever had, and it gave me a totally new perspective on salesmen, business, and money. I admit I didn't do particularly well at the job, as I've always been an extremely shy and introverted person, and had a habit of being a bit submissive (when you're a salesman, these are not good personality traits to have).

Of course I wasn't the only one who was struggling. Many of the other sales reps also found they had significant difficulty in persuading people to buy our product. Taking note of our struggles, our team leader (who had done extremely well with sales in summers past) introduced us to a book which he said would help us overcome our weaknesses. That book was called “The Psychology of Selling,” by Brian Tracy. I didn't know it yet, but this book was going to have a profound impact on my life and my perspective on business and money. It was the first time in my life that I had ever read any self-help book, or any book that dealt directly with the issues of money, sales, and business. It was amazing. Although I admit my skills as a salesman didn't improve much, Brian Tracy's book started me on a journey of financial discovery, a quest to discover the inner workings of business, finance, and eventually, economics.

Following that summer, I started to develop a keen interest in money matters, and I began to actively seek out other self-help books on the subject. Over the next couple of years, I delved into various books like “Rich Dad, Poor Dad,” by Robert Kiyosaki, “Super Rich,” by Russell Simmons, “Think and Grow Rich,” and “The Law of Success,” both by Napoleon Hill, and “How to Win Friends & Influence People,” by Dale Carnegie, along with several others. Combined, these books taught me to think about business and money in a totally new light. They taught me that rather than slaving away for a paycheck at some mindless dead-end job where I would have little control over my own life, I could choose a different path – I could choose freedom. These books taught me that personal success, economic prosperity, and true financial independence were simply a matter of having the proper mindset, of understanding how to create and build real value. I still had not yet read “Atlas Shrugged,” but these other books had established in me a value system based on the principles of independence, personal responsibility, humility, productivity, and financial freedom. I was beginning to think like an entrepreneur.

[CONTINUED IN COMMENTS]


All Comments


Previous comments...   You are currently on page 5.
  • Posted by LetsShrug 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Why don't we teach "how to recognize tyranny" in school? (Never mind, I know the answer...but the point is if public schools don't start teaching the importance of freedom and rights and how to retain them we will keep churning out useful idiots.)
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Robbie53024 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Equality under the laws is the only equality anyone should expect. There is no equality of ability, there is no equality of heritage, there is no equality of opportunity (opportunity does not knock on everyone's door at the same time), and there certainly is not equality of outcome.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by dbhalling 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    You ignore both history and the 9th amendment "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Natural Rights prohibit zoning laws.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    I suppose I won't be going to the banks' sweet 16 party.

    Actually, my father's a banker at a regional bank outside the Midwest, and I have good relationships with local banks that send referrals. I have no idea how the bureaus would score us though.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Maph is not a troll. First and foremost, what people on this site share is an interest/ enjoyment of the movies. Maph has always been clear that he loves the movies. Second, we have trolls all the time and generally they are quickly down voted into oblivion. Note that Maphesdus is not. In fact, please look at the number of upvotes this very post you are discussing in has. Third, if we all just agreed on everything, what would be the real interest? We encourage lots of debate. With few exceptions, There are plenty of Conservatives on this site who also don't promote certain aspects of Objectivism or Rand . There are some who promote more progressive ideology. The fact is, there's lots of negative stuff about Rand out there, and it is appreciated whenever someone gets the opportunity to set some straight on the mis-information, distortions, outright lies. Thank you for your contribution on this post but Maphesdus is not a troll.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    "I don't agree that almost all people are intellectually dishonest, but there are certainly trolls stalking about as agitators deliberately trying to be disruptive, and they certainly are intellectually dishonest. I don't know who this Maphesdus is and where else it posts, though your observation is interesting, but you can see from its posts in this forum alone that it has a record of supporting progressive propaganda and trashing Ayn Rand and individualism, so on those grounds alone your suspicions are warranted. Whatever Maphesdus is, I agree that it would be a waste of time to attempt to educate it,"
    How have I misinterpreted?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by xthinker88 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    However, I know John and don't think he's an ass. He does have a tendency to "pile on" in these articles and not all of the evidence is of equal value. But that is mostly the result of the way that he puts them together - over time and based largely on specific questions or responses he gets. After pointing out so many falsehoods and inconsistencies, why should he take the time to create a well polished article that then lays out the evidence in a more logical fashion. There is nothing in it for him.

    He was actually sued by one of Kiyosaki's partners in crime for a similar critical article - he won.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by xthinker88 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Yes but the illegal advice, the refusal to back up his claims about his real estate prowess, the outright lies about his investments (took companies public, major shareholder), the misleading and poor advice concerning education (from a college graduate nonetheless), and the display of a lack of understanding of basic real estate investing terminology clearly demonstrate Kiyosaki to be a fraud.

    And I disagree with the inconsistencies comment to a certain extent. It shows that the Robert/Bob is trying to tell people whatever he thinks they want to hear regardless of the truth. And he deserted the Marine Corps out of a sense of conscience about the war - when he really just missed the boat. In fact, with a military background to some degree similar to John Reed's, I question how anyone who had actually been in the Marines could tell some of the stories Kiyosaki tells unless he is a complete sociopath. Inconsistencies like bankrupt in 85 when there is no bankruptcy court record of it? Or how about that nobody can actually find the "rich dad" and he appears to be a creation of the Robert/Bob's imagination. Actually even the Robert/Bob inconsistency, in the context of Reed's article, is there to show that this guy basically is building a personality cult based on lies and that he is full of himself.

    In a war of words between an ass and a liar, I'll take the ass every time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    That is true but I wouldn't say it's the single _most_ corrupt, evil action against blacks in this country, which was slavery, the anti-individualist mentality condoning it, and the brutality enforcing it.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Well heeled, politically connected pressure group lobbyists, politicians, and activists entrenched in government agencies from the viro movement are imposing restrictive laws and taking private property for their nature preservationism. They are not an "abstract concept". They are real people using force to trample human rights. The viro movement consists of and is led by nature worshiping misanthropic nihilists.

    See Ron Arnold's "Trashing the Economy: How Runaway Environmentalism is Wrecking America" http://www.amazon.com/Trashing-Economy-R...
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    You are misrepresenting again. This is about your condescending pseudo-intellectual dismissals while misrepresenting what Ayn Rand wrote. It is not about agreeing with Ayn Rand. Anyone can agree or disagree with anything he chooses. No one is forcing you to agree with anything, unlike your own advocacy of racist policies imposing force on others.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Maphesdus: "And your claim that reading is an inherently superior method of absorbing information when compared to listening is a totally baseless claim with no evidence to support it. "

    You are misrepresenting again. This is what I in part wrote:

    "One can in principle do that with audio, but the mechanics of it are a lot harder and distracting even when not on a bike in traffic. Most people couldn't do it as well cognitively, either, because of the difference in media we are accustomed to. (In principle a blind person used to only hearing with the kind of focus required would have a better chance.) It's more than a matter of the content being the same between a book and an audio, it's a matter of how we process information in a way most conducive to comprehension."

    "However, here we have a case of someone so sloppy and inconsistent in its own thought amongst its own dodging and weaving maneuvers that you have to grant that listening and reading are equivalent. Reading wouldn't help."

    The evidence, aside from the description there that everyone can relate to personally, is throughout your posts, as has been explained and illustrated many times.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Maphesdus: "I clearly stated in [PART 2] that I had listened to the audio book, so don't you try spout off some stupid nonsense about how I never specified whether I had read it or listened to it. I stated it very clearly. It's not my fault if you can't read."

    "Spouting stupid nonsense"? It's buried in a run-on post extending to three long parts with two mixed in with the comments, you repeatedly misstate what Ayn Rand thought, wrote and did, leaving people to wonder if you ever really did read it, and you claim overlooking your "statement" means we "can't read?".

    This is what I already responded to you:

    "And so you did say you listened to it -- in Part 2 Paragraph 3 right after watching a movie and before you "got really into Ayn Rand's philosophy" spending a whole 6 months not noticing that she supports the Declaration of Independence before you threw it all out because she rejected your racist policies -- even though you would have been willing to forgive worshiping a serial killer. In fact you "got really into it" so much that you have been misrepresenting it ever since.


    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    The problem I have with your "favor' of force is that you promote increasing it rather than constraining it and in allowing government to define it's own 'essential functions'. As a majority of progressive liberals do, I don't doubt that you personally don't wish to apply the force, but you certainly promote the government doing it for you in support of what you think right.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    I will admit that the post has generated a very good discussion of AR's ideas and philosophy, If debates what you want to call it, OK. But you do continually mis-state and mis-construe so many of her statements and much of her thinking behind those ideas. I sometimes think that you've studied very diligently, some of the many books that are out there that attempt to dispute her philosophy, not by reason, but by attack, incomplete context, and personality.

    I would ask, what is your personal philosophical foundation that drives you toward your obvious progressive-liberal and strong statist viewpoints in opposition to AR's philosophy?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Right. That is different than buying it: "$3.95 a month is a nominal membership fee to belong to a site that promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged and facilitates communication between like-minded individuals". You pay to pretend you are a "like minded individual" who "promotes the ideas of Ayn Rand" so that you can troll to trash and misrepresent Ayn Rand's ideas. The little symbol you bought next to your monicker "does not make a troll worthy of respect and is not what this system was intended to mean."
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by ewv 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    And so you did say you listened to it -- in Part 2 Paragraph 3 right after watching a movie and before you "got really into Ayn Rand's philosophy" spending a whole 6 months not noticing that she supports the Declaration of Independence before you threw it all out because she rejected your racist policies -- even though you would have been willing to forgive worshiping a serial killer. In fact you "got really into it" so much that you have been misrepresenting it ever since.

    Maphesdus: "I think it's rather funny that you keep trying to say I didn't understand Ayn Rand simply because I didn't agree with her."

    Your misrepresentations have been explained to you, so don't misrepresent that, too. I didn't "keep saying" that you don't understand it because you disagree with it. I didn't say that even once. Disagreement with Ayn Rand requires first understanding what she said. It doesn't work in both directions. You didn't even understand it in your brief emotional plunge before you decided to disagree with it. This isn't the first time that has happened.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Zenphamy 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    And where do you propose that the War on Poverty gained it's support from if not the Civil Rights mania? Hell, that even gave the reparation argument momentum and foundation.

    I don't think from your arguments, that you lived through that time.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LetsShrug 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    You. Do.to. you've admitted over and over that you're in favor of forcing business owners to do business with anyone who walks through the door. Don't pretend otherwise and don't twist the use of force up with the law stopping violent criminals where force is necessary to fight evil. NOT the same.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by 11 years ago in reply to this comment.
    "Have you noticed that those who promote getting rid of millions to save the planet, also promote sending mosquito nets to Africa to save lives? Those who want to sell helpful vaccines, also claim it is the best way to wipe out whole populations."
    ---
    I haven't heard anything about mosquito nets, but in regards to vaccines, I do know that some fear mongering conspiracy theorists have taken the words of Bill Gates and twisted them around to make it sound like he was advocating genocide, when he really wasn't. Is that what you're referring to?
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo