/lit/ - Literature

>>17289712
commies always lie

>>17289746
the only way they have ever come to power, was by lying about their end goals

>>17289712
>reading books written by w*men

do rightoids really?

>>17289746
>>17289749
Facetious lies, brought to you by the makers of Poverty (now with retcin!) nuwar. A cleaner faster acting kind of war. Try it today!
Don’t settle for those others guys!

>>17289776
I will concede that communists are ruthlessly barraged with propaganda, but I had family live through their rule, and I know they weren't lying.

>>17289871
>but I had family live through their rule
That was a state centralized capitalism. A “mixed economy” the state ruled over. I am no fan of tanky experiments. They are indeed lies. They aren’t and weren’t socialists and they aren’t going to establish communism. That’s up to the people.

>>17290116
sure, just a tanky experiment, not like people which experienced first hand the consequences of a failed experiment are going to be willing to try another.

>>17289712

the book is really good in the beginning third or so then starts going downhill (all in my opinion, of course). Just wait till you get to the speech part. No editor alive would have allowed that monstrosity to be put into print regardless of their personal ideology.

>>17290116

I wasn't aware that you knew anon personally and where his family was from

>>17290793
Yeah. Anarchist here. Drr.

>>17290810
Well what tanky state did they come from?

>>17290898

idk I am not him/her. It just seemed like your response was overly dismissive considering you don't even know where their family is from

Unless you are suggesting that there are no historical instances of communism but that is another story

>>17290932
>It just seemed like your response was overly dismissive
It wasn’t. As we both agree, they’re liars. They claim to own the only workable path to communism and have not once succeeded. There. Done.

>>17289712
I quite enjoyed it but I found the notion that unrestrained business owners not skinning their workforce alive by virtue of their empathy and benovolence laughable. I'm familiar with Rand's background so I get why it's written like it is. I feel like is. Thing is in my estimation people suck no matter which way you go.

>>17289712
ONE DAY
I WILL GET THIS GODDAMN BOOK
ONE
DAY

Some motherfucker bought it before me,now im stuck in this cess pit (Bosnia) without it
GODDAMN YOU

>>17289746
Dishonesty is their trade.

>>17291731
There's probably 10 copies in all in my country too, and I just saw that one of my goodreads qt women friends read it and rated it 5/5, so I might need to wife her

>>17289712
Rand is not as band as many make her out to be. She really just updated American Individualism/Transcendentalism to account for the industrial revolution. She really did not go about it in the best or most elegant fashion, but it probably made more sense at the time.

How many of you are going to sperg about American Individualism and show you have no clue what that means?

>>17291731
>>17291822
It’s trash

>>17291846
Is she just an updated transcendentalism or is she just a combining of transcendentalism and pragmatism?

I honestly can not say, the pragmatist had a way of wording things that just grates on me.

>anyway le commies were clearly lying when they said she can't write


Not sure if I’m illiterate, but when I first read Rand in high school I had the distinct impression that she was a great fiction writer. Still think so today, years later. Her ideas are still shit, though.

>>17292070
Like most (all) philosophies, it is idealistic and sort of ignores everything that does apply.

>>17289712
I personally found it unbearable, specially when it's so clear it's just ideological propaganda. I think I read a fifth, and that was more than enough. Got a milited time on Earth, and I wasn't gonna waste it on reading a 1K-pages political pamphlet

>>17289755
>t. faggot leftist?

>>17292220
I think it was an incel