I absolutely loved her closing comment about people thinking they have to apologize to the naked savage. Let them live as they wish and let us live as we see fit without feeling guilty for our prosperity.
I have not killed or raped anyone, so no need for me to feel guilty.The topic at hand is whether or not one society should feel guilty for being more prosperous or technologically advanced than another. To that, I say NO.Of course there are many cultures that have perpetrated acts of violence on others, and for those specific deeds, someone should feel guilty. But no need to extend that guilt to everyone.
Was that a rhetorical question? If not, then I would say that a moral person would attempt to make things right. If someone gave me stolen goods as some sort of gift, then I would not be out much by returning it to the rightful owner. And I would likely gain trust and friendship.If on the other hand, I unknowingly purchased stolen goods; now I will be worse off financially if I return it to the rightful owner without any compensation. Depending on the situation, I would attempt to get compensation from the one who stole it in the first place.
That's one of the main reasons why I still read her and other Objectivists' essays in her books. The amount of stuff they were spot on about is scary! _Niko Linni_
God, if she were alive today. She thought it was bad then. The Universities, Mainstream Media, Hollywood have done this country in. It was nothing back then compared to what it is now.
She summed up the lack of reason, intellectualism and the rise of religious fanaticism in general.........she would find most aspects of this country to be repugnant now.
She was one of the greatest minds of modern times. She was spot on in the late 70's & now all she warned of is coming to fruition. She would be so saddened by our current state of affairs. She was firm in her truth & it was all by her observation coupled with intellectual scrutiny. Fleeing Russia in her youth she knew the horrors of communism and socialism first hand. She is my intellectual hero!!
That closing argument was spot on. I live in Venezuela and that's exactly what this government did with the natives... Started giving money and resources, and a big place into the modern society. And how do they behave in return?? You know the answer.
John doe no, the left is always right. the left is the future , the right is the past. she mourns correctly the lack has a intellectualism on the right. she is the only intellectual figure on the hard right and that's probably just because she was branded by the horrors of realo communism in the youth.
Social justice is a red herring pumped into the brains of weak willed leftists , who are easily indoctrinated into an ideology of socialism . Every one is born with human rights and no one is entitled to any more of them , than the next human . With those rights it is YOUR responsibility to survive and is up to no one else , to accept the responsibility of your own survival . To expect another human to provide for you , or give you ENTITLEMENTS , is asinine. Affirmative action is wrong . Feminism is wrong . Racism , being governed by laws is also wrong . Society would sort all of these problems out , all on their own , if government stayed the hell out of it .
rakhin True. I dont agree with her on mant of her opinions, but overall, she kinda predicted the future back then. She in fact predicted the state of our college campuses perfectly.
Rahkin --- Soo far ahead of her time, what an amazing woman ---- elgrigorio1 --- rakhin True. I dont agree with her on mant of her opinions, but overall, she kinda predicted the future back then. She in fact predicted the state of our college campuses perfectly. --- She didn't PREDICT anything ... What's going on Today is and was going on at that time back then . What you have seen today isn't new , it's the policy and has been the policy for a very very long time . Nothing you have today began today , it began back then to flourish the way it has today . She was just 1 of the first to speak out against this sort of apologetic policy that these Universities had adopted back in the 1980's . During the 1980's you had all of these musical "Hair" bands as they were commonly called , so you were probably too busy growing long hair , smoking weed and "Bungee" jumping off of bridges to notice , but these colleges were adopting a "self Hating American" approach to Education . Back in the 1980's there was a common phrase "most" people were aware of , " Those who can , DO . Those who Can't , Teach ..."... Educators across the Boards lost all respect during this era . When you were finished with your Formal Education you would then begin your " On the Job " Training . You would then learn that for the most part "your Formal Education " was worthless .Practical Application was always much more different than Theoretical Training . Colleges Teach Theory and how to understand these Theories but getting into the "Real Life situations" taught you how to Survive.
The road to hell is paved with ivy league degrees - thomas sowell.... Its amazing how i came to the same conclusions of ayn rand before even knowing who she was. The modern education system is pure evil and needs ro be destroyed.
it happens time and time again! A video like this one is posted WITHOUT the most rudimentary information!! What is the DATE AND YEAR that this interview took place??!! And...to a lesser degree...when was it originally broadcast? thank you.
If you like what you hear in this video you should all check out the keeping it real podcast from the Ayn Rand Center UK. It is some of the best content on RUclips.
"This combustible mixture of ignorance and power, sooner or later, is going to blow up in our faces." -- Carl Sagan "Science is more than a body of knowledge. It is a way of thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe, with a fine understanding of human fallibility." -- Carl Sagan "If we are unable to ask skeptical questions to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be skeptical of authority, then we are up for grabs for the next charlatan, political or religious, who comes along." -- Carl Sagan
"The backlash of people supporting socialism which is the most dangerous thought of all. Socialism reduces our life expectancies, it makes us unhappy, it makes us poor, it makes us sick. It is one of the most evil ideas that has ever come along and people like Karl Marx and Stalin and Lenin and Mao. This has caused more death and suffering than anything else in history and we are going to this point again. You know all these colleges have been teaching very socialistic ideas. So, we've got this younger generation where half of them think that socialism is great, and capitalism is bad." -- Mike Maloney
Ayn Rand was a visionary her focus was the consciousness of our being in accordance with the facts of reality. With such clarity the future is very predictable. She realized mystic consciousness is a direct assault on the mind of man. REASON/LOGIC be my guide.
I listened to a podcast by someone about Ayn Rand’s philosophy, in particular the concepts of self interest and second handers. The point was made that the best way to take care of the poor is not to be one of them - followed by laughter and applause. How does excessive greed, manipulation, off-shore wealth concealment, tax evasion, etc., fit into this? Multi-billionaires, who got there on the shoulders of people working for minimum wage, the ultra rich who entertain themselves as predators? And those worker people have worked their entire lives and are still poor because of those wages. Costs continue to rise but wages do not. An article in today’s Tampa Bay Times, “Report: In Tampa Bay, it takes 3 minimum wage jobs to make rent,” illustrates this. Yes, do try not to be one of those poor. May I ask, how?
How, you ask? By getting government out of these spheres of influence. Literally none of what you've mentioned has anything to do with the proper domain of political law. You presume very much in your "observations." Why would "wealth concealment" be bad? Why is "tax evasion" bad? If all the millions of different pressures to do such things weren't put on people (By the Government), just for having any real wealth, then it would be easier to become wealthy. "Punish the wealthy," "get the rich," "make them pay," this is literally just another way of saying to give disincentives to people in general from becoming wealthy. The bigger-picture way of saying this is that going after and hating the rich just makes the whole country poorer and poorer (which ends up affecting the poor even more fatally than the rich, despite the overall higher numbers of cash the rich might lose). Altruism, the hateful envy of wealth, hatefulness towards "the rich", and All politics that stem from these ungrateful viewpoints, they all work to malevolently undermine the wealth of nations as a whole. Thus, the viewpoint you're espousing here is actually the cause of the very problem you're *trying* to address in the first place.
@@lordgrishnakh1148 wealth is weaponized. Why else are workers penalized by low wages? Why else do super wealthy denigrate the workers whose skills make them wealthy by keeping them in poverty? Not sure that Rand could foresee that, coming from a Stalin/Hitler/Putin style socialism.
@@schmidtrodney There is an unrecognized big difference between simply not being given something, and having something actually taken away. Only the latter could be considered any sort of Actual "weaponization against you". The former, when it comes to wages being lowered like you said anyway, is just a change of terms of a private agreement (which is completely legal AND JUST to perform, as per the conditions set forth in the private contract itself). All private agreements Have to be two-way streets of mutual consent. If one side - EITHER side - Requires a change of terms (and if the contract permits them a clear means to change the terms), then those terms must be accepted or successfully negotiated by the other side, or else the whole thing must fall apart (and in this case, that particular worker would not work that particular job anymore). This is completely fine, and anything else would be a travesty. The contract *must* become void if legitimate terms and the changes thereof cannot ultimately be accepted by *everyone* involved. At the very least, for the unaccepting party. Otherwise the very meaning of contract becomes perverted usurped, because it would no longer be an agreement but force. How can you talk as though simply not being given something anymore is "weaponization," but completely fail to acknowledge that it is Actual Unjust Coercion when someone is Forced to give something they don't want to give? The latter is actual theft. And if it's forced to continue over some indefinite prolonged time, it's practically a partial slavery even. Forcing an employer to pay more than he wants to (and let's just ignore the fact for now that he'll simply just lay people off and keep the most skilled workers only in reality) is no different in principle than Politically Forcing a worker to work "x" extra hours of overtime every day, completely for free. It's theft at the very least, and you could consider it partial slavery even. You shouldn't let the false delusions of "class warfare" take away from that point in your mind. Especially considering my last comment, thoughts like "but who cares about them? They're the rich guys anyway" are not justifiable - whether looking at the principle or at the consequences of such.
@@schmidtrodney In brief, the broad perspective you're trying to give here, of evil rich men taking advantage of workers and building everything up for themselves out of this exploitation, is completely wrong. The only way that anything like that can be considered to be true, is Specifically to the extent that the *government* is involved in the market and gives certain people unjust advantages and disadvantages in the economy thereby. But otherwise, naturally, in a simple market proper, that sentiment could only ever be a lie spawned from a combination of ungratefulness, malevolently envy, and theories of political philosophy that are contradictory and which cannot hold up to proper scrutiny. Again, but that sentiment IS true, in some cases, and to some limited degree, in our *mixed economy.* But your anger is misdirected. The true source and perpetrators are Government. Not the specific employers engaged in this themselves. Those employers are merely just the benefactors of the government involvement. None of it would be possible without the government involvement. And all *other* employers and rich people are likewise victims of this government involvement as well. Along with consumers in general. Not just the workers under those specific coercively privileged employers.
@@lordgrishnakh1148 so raise the minimum wage and offer free education at community colleges. That would be a start. Correction: I am not upset and no one is evil.
An exquisite explanation, reasoning of the causes which have brought about the decline of the democratic system. Had the so-called intelligentsia of the free, democratic world listened to this brilliant woman and the "whistleblowers" revealing the reasons why the American spirit was going down the drain and WHO was responsabile for it the world wouldn't be faced with the current predicament.
Rand is correct ... one has to really appreciate the truth here (and you need to read and listen to much more of her philosophy), but what we see in 2020 is a result of the opposite of Objectivism.
You don’t have to be a fan of Ayn Rand to agree that this is the current environment we are living in today. We are living in a society that does not allow opposing viewpoints. People are in fear of being ‘cancelled’ and stay silent. This is dangerous to a free society and Rand predicted it over 40 years ago. In today’s society, we cannot have a civil discussion with opposing viewpoints such as this interview. People would cry, scream, shout, and be enraged with someone speaking their mind in 2020. Just look what is playing out across the United States from the streets to the White House. This has been building up for quite sometime but really accelerated from 2010 during the Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party protests.
Well Obama/Policies/Dems Crippled oil market, ACA and the lowest growth in history, compared to any president. Oil business is a monopoly controlled by a small group. They recently cut back on 500 million or something barrels to jump prices again. I assume, probably around after Trump is in office, we will see a jump. America needs to start creating its own energy...unfortunately difficult if not impossible because of heavy regulations that help no one.
free market capitalism (infinite growth to thrive - by its very nature and principal) against infinite population growth with finite anount of resources. The very idea is a paradox. Iam not confusing anything. Ive studied Rand and objectivism for 17 years.
What is your argument? With finite resources, an open market effectively combats such a problem. Say people can not afford high water bills, due to shortage. So more efficient machines are created. Problem lies, when this system becomes crippled with large goverment intervention.
The problem with those naked savages is they got in the way of the USA exploiting the resources of the land they were unfortunate enough to live on. Can't have that. Speaking of the military, who would be in the military if all followed Rand's philosophy of no self-sacrifice. After all, what is the military but collective self-sacrifice by individuals who sacrifice their lives for the common good.
Altruism is the trading of something of value for something of lesser value. People who join the military do so voluntarily, and they do it for a reason. It might be for family tradition, or national pride, or perhaps to enjoy the adventure. Whatever their reason, that is the value they are trading for. It is NOT a sacrifice. Giving away money is NOT a sacrifice if you get something of equal or greater value in return. Some donate to charity for their sense of self-esteem or pride, others to alleviate some sense of guilt. In either case, if their donation is to something or someone they VAULUE, it is not a sacrifice, because they are getting something of value in return. If, on the other hand, you were to give a donation to a cause you despise, a group of people who represented NO value to you, the Nazi Party, for example... then THAT would be self-sacrifice. You would be trading something of value for something of lesser value. That is true altruism.
@@someonenotnoone Your "claim" is that Ayn Rand wanted what belonged to her. Your implication is that it is WRONG to want what is yours. My response is: _"you hilariously believe that it is bad to want what is YOURS.... but it is alright to want what is NOT yours."_ Irrational people making irrational statements in public will someday lead to rational people finally getting rid of irrational people through attrition. Keep it up... you're helping our cause.
@@johnnynick3621 Let me know when you use propositional logic to predict anything in physics. Your religion is not compelling to me. Peddle your faith somewhere else.
@Gerr Gerring yes, I am not claiming that she is in any way a more original zizek or something other than comparable on outward appearance, I am saying that she is a similar archetype of the public need for an polemic.
Listen to everything that she is saying in the context of the pro-Hamas demonstrations coming out of our universities in the wake of October 7. It fits in so perfectly.
@@someonenotnoone A rational person does NOT side with a known terrorist organization that makes no secret of its desire to tear down your society and enslave you in their mystic, third-world barbarian anti-civilization. It is not surprising that those of you who support such irrationalities despise and fear Ayn Rand.
SaulOhio also it was pretty much known by most of the prominent researchers well before her death that cigarettes cause cancer. It wasn't a matter of wishy washy data by the late 70s
Charles Grisham But she started smoking in the 20's or 30's. When did she say what you claim she said about smoking? Do you have any documentation to prove she said it was a hoax? Do you know when she said anything about the evidence of the cancer connection, relative to when the conclusive evidence became available?
Very well put. She pushed crypto-fascism to the new Conservative movement in the US. And we've all seen where the Conservative movement has left the USA after 30 years of it dominating our politics.
@@someonenotnooneClimate always changes, thinking a government can change it is hysterical. Charlton Heston explains it, the earth will be here long after humans are extinct.
Climate always changes. Believing man will destroy the earth is hysteria. Believing a government can control climate is ludicrous. Charlton Heston and George Carlin explain it simply here on RUclips.
@@someonenotnoone Hysteria - exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement. Didn’t Al Gore predict we would be underwater years ago? Wouldn’t atolls be the first to be submerged? No more polar bears? Ozone hole, acid rain, global cooling… Maybe a little research and analytical thinking will open your eyes. Sometimes the people telling you to trust the science have an agenda?
3:02 so she's saying that in order to overcome an oil shortage we should just drill more? well, that's what we did and now fracking is starting to make the land underneath us unstable and cause earthquakes. it seems like the idea of conservation isn't just "telling a society to give up and lower their standard of living".
Without the explicit awareness of Aristotelean (a Greek pagan) premises and method (the basis of America’s classical Liberal founding), America along with the rest of Western civilization was inevitably made vulnerable to the socialist death cult corruption we’re experiencing.
I'm no randite but she comes across smarter in her interviews than her books. Granted, I don't read fiction and a single page of Ayn Rand causes me excruciating pain and she is a terribly fucking overrated author
this woman is all starey-eyed, androgenous, probably bonkers, says profound sounding silliness and has thousands of influential followers - a bit like jesus really - hahahahahahahahahahaha
“She spews non stop hatred” “She was obviously insane “ “ consume by a hatred for mankind” Ok , I watched and listened . I feel , all of these statements actually apply to you more . Ayn speaks with logic and reason .
I honestly don’t understand how this woman is an intellectual thinker. She fears education that dares critique capitalism, that’s a first time me hearing a so-called intellectual makes such a statement. Can we not do better than this system? Objectivism is inherently a flawed school of thought. She has a distorted view on collectivism and a fully embraces capitalism without addressing its flaws in any way. She fears colleges (or any school of thought) who question or critique’s Capitalistic systems such as today’s far right thinkers. Colleges must not blindly push Capitalism down our Academic Institutions and allow them to be places of research and debate (which thinkers like her would obviously lose to intellectuals of modern time) But the fear of colleges from the right speaks to how dumb far-right capitalistic societies want their working class. Objectivism only allows rampant capitalism to become more corrupt due to the acceptance of that terribly flawed view of human essence. [Greed|Selfishness] She doubts altruism which is looking out for one another and fully supports Objectivism which focuses on inherent greed. Milton Friedman talked on this point as well saying Greed is what makes our economy flourish but like every far right Capitalistic thinker fails to do is only regard to the markets over humanistic ideals. This so called intellectual is calling out college campuses for thoughtcrimes. And that speaks on the true ignorance of the right leaning intellectuals. Every wonder why my generation dislikes the Boomer Generation so much? Because this generation [Boomers] were the entitled brats that brought the world to its current conditions. She helped birth classical liberalism. Inspiring Alt-Right thinkers to this day. And help propel Plutocracy in America. We now have Neoliberalism ruining this country on behalf of corporate America. What a horrible so-called intellectual that influenced a generation of thinkers. I’m sorry this was the best of your generation. *ONLY COWARDS FEAR AN INFORMED AND EDUCATED YOUTH*
The problem is, schools are not teaching critical thinking, speaking from experience. You go into a humanities class, and they teach left-leaning ideas as if they are solid fact. In what way do you suppose this will produced educated youth? All it will do is produce whining and sniveling college students only capable of screaming in terror when they don't get their way.
No rational person fears education of the populace. If that was what universities were doing, we would be supportive. What Rand was talking about back then and has become painfully obvious today is that universities have become indoctrination centers instead of education centers. For proof that today's colleges are institutes of indoctrination, I offer your own words: _"She fears education that dares critique capitalism, that’s a first time me hearing a so-called intellectual makes such a statement."_ It's the first time you are hearing support and praise for the most moral system ever available to man. Universities DO NOT teach the virtues of capitalism anymore. They instead, promote socialism, a system that provides a free ride to professors and administrators, the leeches of the university system. Collectivism requires society to justify using coercion and physical force against its members. Their justification lies in the destructive concept known as altruism. You sound like you are trying to be intelligent. That's a positive thing. But instead of trying to SOUND intelligent, educate yourself. Read a few of Rand's novels and non-fiction books. Gain an understanding of her moral philosophy on your own. We all had to do that. After studying her philosophy, you can form your own opinion. If you disagree with her, you can at least do so knowledgably and intelligibly.
You are, at least at the time you wrote your comment, a complete idiot! You obviously have not read her philosophy or her non fiction writings explaining her positions or you had no ability to comprehend them. But then, you, as nearly are all of her critics, unable to make a valid argument for lack of truth as to what she has written and explained. It's not against the law for someone to be an idiot, as you so egregiously show yourself to be,, but reality itself inevitably punishes the results of being one
She predicted the conditions we're dealing with right now.
And it is getting worse and worse
@@classicalliberal4220 boy is it😂
Exactly. I was just thinking the same thing.
This is what happens when universities support Palestine.
Bingo. She was spot on.
I absolutely loved her closing comment about people thinking they have to apologize to the naked savage. Let them live as they wish and let us live as we see fit without feeling guilty for our prosperity.
Mike Betts might you feel guilty for killing them? raping them?
I have not killed or raped anyone, so no need for me to feel guilty.The topic at hand is whether or not one society should feel guilty for being more prosperous or technologically advanced than another. To that, I say NO.Of course there are many cultures that have perpetrated acts of violence on others, and for those specific deeds, someone should feel guilty. But no need to extend that guilt to everyone.
If someone steals something without my knowledge, and gives it to me as a gift, am I obliged to return it if I find out?
Was that a rhetorical question? If not, then I would say that a moral person would attempt to make things right. If someone gave me stolen goods as some sort of gift, then I would not be out much by returning it to the rightful owner. And I would likely gain trust and friendship.If on the other hand, I unknowingly purchased stolen goods; now I will be worse off financially if I return it to the rightful owner without any compensation. Depending on the situation, I would attempt to get compensation from the one who stole it in the first place.
So let's return the land we stole from the natives to them.
This lady is a psychic. This is exactly what is happening today
That's one of the main reasons why I still read her and other Objectivists' essays in her books. The amount of stuff they were spot on about is scary!
_Niko Linni_
She was SO AHEAD of time. She was brilliant!
how is she spot on ?
She is not psychic. She understood human nature.
Michael - If you thought this 8 years ago, can’t imagine what you think in 2021. Crazy world we’re living in
God, if she were alive today. She thought it was bad then. The Universities, Mainstream Media, Hollywood have done this country in. It was nothing back then compared to what it is now.
You have been brainwashed by the right wing corporate media.
people like her were warning us to not let that happen. too fucking late
she didnt think it was so bad then people like her predict the future and try to stop it before it gets worse
She summed up the Education System and Hollywood perfectly in the last :30 sec
She summed up the lack of reason, intellectualism and the rise of religious fanaticism in general.........she would find most aspects of this country to be repugnant now.
"Now, you have to apologize to every naked savage on the planet." - Ayn Rand
Benjamin Goldstein I don't know any...
dont have to! get it right fukstik
Perplexing why this short video doesn’t have 20 million views the last 11 years. This lady was a genius, she nailed it 50 years ago!
Because 20 million people are on TikTok watching some girl dance. Because they are dumb and lazy.
She was one of the greatest minds of modern times. She was spot on in the late 70's & now all she warned of is coming to fruition. She would be so saddened by our current state of affairs. She was firm in her truth & it was all by her observation coupled with intellectual scrutiny. Fleeing Russia in her youth she knew the horrors of communism and socialism first hand. She is my intellectual hero!!
she was just another communist dressed as a libertarian.
george bsuh
And how exactly was she a communist?
Ayn rand said it is not in woman's best interest to rule man, it puts her in a very unhappy position. Came true.
One of the most gifted thinkers and writers of our time.
Not really lol she was a bad writer and a complete idiot
That closing argument was spot on. I live in Venezuela and that's exactly what this government did with the natives... Started giving money and resources, and a big place into the modern society. And how do they behave in return?? You know the answer.
Best wishes to you sir
Stay safe fam
So amazing, she literally predicted every thing exactly to the T
i like this woman !!!
I'm guessing Ayn wouldn't be a fan of the lockdowns.
Her last statement was a damn good shot of truth.
John doe no, the left is always right. the left is the future , the right is the past. she mourns correctly the lack has a intellectualism on the right. she is the only intellectual figure on the hard right and that's probably just because she was branded by the horrors of realo communism in the youth.
I’ve just discovered her this week. I’m shocked and at a loss for words for this wisdom and insight.
Same. Currently 3 days into my Deep dive. No intention to stop soon. She’s a beautiful mind. Wish I could’ve met her
Have you read We The Living? It’s my favorite of her four novels, though I’ve never read anything by her fictional or nonfictional that I didn’t enjoy
She called it, universities.
Wow, and that was 40 years ago!
Rand said the same in 1957's _Atlas Shrugged_.
50 years ago
Woman had some good points
Wow she nailed academia.
This lady was a brillant visionary and a future teller!
Trolling SJWs before they even existed
jeep23862
It’s not “justice”, that’s what’s wrong.
Social justice is a red herring pumped into the brains of weak willed leftists , who are easily indoctrinated into an ideology of socialism . Every one is born with human rights and no one is entitled to any more of them , than the next human . With those rights it is YOUR responsibility to survive and is up to no one else , to accept the responsibility of your own survival . To expect another human to provide for you , or give you ENTITLEMENTS , is asinine. Affirmative action is wrong . Feminism is wrong . Racism , being governed by laws is also wrong . Society would sort all of these problems out , all on their own , if government stayed the hell out of it .
How prophetic in light of today's turmoil.
Abe Frohman right...
She's the nation's only hope actually
Joe Sanders f
Joe Sanders unfortunately she's dead.
Nothing changes... This interview was decades ago and it is as relevant today as it was then. Smh
Regular Kev my dear departed father used to say the same...it took me a while to realize it , but it's true
Nailed it.
She would be turning in her grave to see what has become of America . They didn't listen !
Apologise to "every naked savage"! Oh, my!
40 year later and time proved this brilliant woman was right.
Soo far ahead of her time, what an amazing woman
I wish she could have seen the past year
rakhin True. I dont agree with her on mant of her opinions, but overall, she kinda predicted the future back then. She in fact predicted the state of our college campuses perfectly.
Rahkin --- Soo far ahead of her time, what an amazing woman ---- elgrigorio1 --- rakhin True. I dont agree with her on mant of her opinions, but overall, she kinda predicted the future back then. She in fact predicted the state of our college campuses perfectly. --- She didn't PREDICT anything ... What's going on Today is and was going on at that time back then . What you have seen today isn't new , it's the policy and has been the policy for a very very long time . Nothing you have today began today , it began back then to flourish the way it has today . She was just 1 of the first to speak out against this sort of apologetic policy that these Universities had adopted back in the 1980's . During the 1980's you had all of these musical "Hair" bands as they were commonly called , so you were probably too busy growing long hair , smoking weed and "Bungee" jumping off of bridges to notice , but these colleges were adopting a "self Hating American" approach to Education . Back in the 1980's there was a common phrase "most" people were aware of , " Those who can , DO . Those who Can't , Teach ..."... Educators across the Boards lost all respect during this era . When you were finished with your Formal Education you would then begin your " On the Job " Training . You would then learn that for the most part "your Formal Education " was worthless .Practical Application was always much more different than Theoretical Training . Colleges Teach Theory and how to understand these Theories but getting into the "Real Life situations" taught you how to Survive.
@@elgrigorio1 the fact that she predicted so many things should make you reconsider what your disagreements are and whether they are valid.
she was not ahead of her time. she was well embedded into the communist movement.
The road to hell is paved with ivy league degrees - thomas sowell.... Its amazing how i came to the same conclusions of ayn rand before even knowing who she was. The modern education system is pure evil and needs ro be destroyed.
Poison to socialists and leftist SJW’s . I LOVE HER !
She was a great thinker.
Go Leafs!!!
@@alexal4
Don’t you know that Ayn Rand was pro choice and an atheist?
Reagan changed the direction and now Trump trying again
Absolutely spot on in 2024. What a timeless visionary!
This was so prescient.
She was so correct
it happens time and time again! A video like this one is posted WITHOUT the most rudimentary information!! What is the DATE AND YEAR that this interview took place??!! And...to a lesser degree...when was it originally broadcast? thank you.
1973
ruclips.net/video/CxawpzjIuAg/видео.html
All this has happened already.
"youre supposed to apologize to every naked savage because you are more prosperous" 😮💨
Legend
Read atlas shrugged
Amazing. Exactly what we’re living through right now
If you like what you hear in this video you should all check out the keeping it real podcast from the Ayn Rand Center UK. It is some of the best content on RUclips.
She was able to predict the reason behind the future decline of western nations
WoW!!!
"This combustible mixture of ignorance and power, sooner or later, is going to blow up in our faces." -- Carl Sagan
"Science is more than a body of knowledge. It is a way of thinking, a way of skeptically interrogating the universe, with a fine understanding of human fallibility." -- Carl Sagan
"If we are unable to ask skeptical questions to interrogate those who tell us that something is true, to be skeptical of authority, then we are up for grabs for the next charlatan, political or religious, who comes along." -- Carl Sagan
She means lack of knowledge. People are destroyed for lack of knowledge. right out of the word.
Never truer words than today
thats your advantage
Bloody Hell, I didn't realise it has been going on for so long.
"The backlash of people supporting socialism which is the most dangerous thought of all. Socialism reduces our life expectancies, it makes us unhappy, it makes us poor, it makes us sick. It is one of the most evil ideas that has ever come along and people like Karl Marx and Stalin and Lenin and Mao. This has caused more death and suffering than anything else in history and we are going to this point again. You know all these colleges have been teaching very socialistic ideas. So, we've got this younger generation where half of them think that socialism is great, and capitalism is bad." -- Mike Maloney
If only Rand was alive to see the Harvard of the last few months. She was spot on.
Listen America f ing listen!!!!!!!!!
Exactly
“People are turning to the Right…but there is no intellectual leadership.” I wonder what she would have said about Trump and the MAGA movement.
Trump 2024🎉
Trump 2024
Ayn Rand was a visionary her focus was the consciousness of our being in accordance with the facts of reality. With such clarity the future is very predictable. She realized mystic consciousness is a direct assault on the mind of man. REASON/LOGIC be my guide.
I wish I could get by in my job by saying "It's all in the newspapers" Generalities are no substitute for congruent facts, however.
Wow!
Ayn rand resembles Kate, an economist of Adams's institute
Atrophy, will always be the inevitable outcome. Try as we might, inexorably we will fail.
'So, how did that search for an intellectual leader go... '
['... Shut up, boy...']
I still say Ayn died but came back as Anne Widdecombe.
Omg amazing
I listened to a podcast by someone about Ayn Rand’s philosophy, in particular the concepts of self interest and second handers. The point was made that the best way to take care of the poor is not to be one of them - followed by laughter and applause.
How does excessive greed, manipulation, off-shore wealth concealment, tax evasion, etc., fit into this? Multi-billionaires, who got there on the shoulders of people working for minimum wage, the ultra rich who entertain themselves as predators?
And those worker people have worked their entire lives and are still poor because of those wages. Costs continue to rise but wages do not. An article in today’s Tampa Bay Times, “Report: In Tampa Bay, it takes 3 minimum wage jobs to make rent,” illustrates this.
Yes, do try not to be one of those poor. May I ask, how?
How, you ask? By getting government out of these spheres of influence. Literally none of what you've mentioned has anything to do with the proper domain of political law. You presume very much in your "observations." Why would "wealth concealment" be bad? Why is "tax evasion" bad? If all the millions of different pressures to do such things weren't put on people (By the Government), just for having any real wealth, then it would be easier to become wealthy. "Punish the wealthy," "get the rich," "make them pay," this is literally just another way of saying to give disincentives to people in general from becoming wealthy. The bigger-picture way of saying this is that going after and hating the rich just makes the whole country poorer and poorer (which ends up affecting the poor even more fatally than the rich, despite the overall higher numbers of cash the rich might lose). Altruism, the hateful envy of wealth, hatefulness towards "the rich", and All politics that stem from these ungrateful viewpoints, they all work to malevolently undermine the wealth of nations as a whole.
Thus, the viewpoint you're espousing here is actually the cause of the very problem you're *trying* to address in the first place.
@@lordgrishnakh1148 wealth is weaponized. Why else are workers penalized by low wages? Why else do super wealthy denigrate the workers whose skills make them wealthy by keeping them in poverty? Not sure that Rand could foresee that, coming from a Stalin/Hitler/Putin style socialism.
@@schmidtrodney There is an unrecognized big difference between simply not being given something, and having something actually taken away. Only the latter could be considered any sort of Actual "weaponization against you". The former, when it comes to wages being lowered like you said anyway, is just a change of terms of a private agreement (which is completely legal AND JUST to perform, as per the conditions set forth in the private contract itself).
All private agreements Have to be two-way streets of mutual consent. If one side - EITHER side - Requires a change of terms (and if the contract permits them a clear means to change the terms), then those terms must be accepted or successfully negotiated by the other side, or else the whole thing must fall apart (and in this case, that particular worker would not work that particular job anymore). This is completely fine, and anything else would be a travesty. The contract *must* become void if legitimate terms and the changes thereof cannot ultimately be accepted by *everyone* involved. At the very least, for the unaccepting party. Otherwise the very meaning of contract becomes perverted usurped, because it would no longer be an agreement but force.
How can you talk as though simply not being given something anymore is "weaponization," but completely fail to acknowledge that it is Actual Unjust Coercion when someone is Forced to give something they don't want to give? The latter is actual theft. And if it's forced to continue over some indefinite prolonged time, it's practically a partial slavery even. Forcing an employer to pay more than he wants to (and let's just ignore the fact for now that he'll simply just lay people off and keep the most skilled workers only in reality) is no different in principle than Politically Forcing a worker to work "x" extra hours of overtime every day, completely for free. It's theft at the very least, and you could consider it partial slavery even. You shouldn't let the false delusions of "class warfare" take away from that point in your mind. Especially considering my last comment, thoughts like "but who cares about them? They're the rich guys anyway" are not justifiable - whether looking at the principle or at the consequences of such.
@@schmidtrodney In brief, the broad perspective you're trying to give here, of evil rich men taking advantage of workers and building everything up for themselves out of this exploitation, is completely wrong. The only way that anything like that can be considered to be true, is Specifically to the extent that the *government* is involved in the market and gives certain people unjust advantages and disadvantages in the economy thereby. But otherwise, naturally, in a simple market proper, that sentiment could only ever be a lie spawned from a combination of ungratefulness, malevolently envy, and theories of political philosophy that are contradictory and which cannot hold up to proper scrutiny.
Again, but that sentiment IS true, in some cases, and to some limited degree, in our *mixed economy.* But your anger is misdirected. The true source and perpetrators are Government. Not the specific employers engaged in this themselves. Those employers are merely just the benefactors of the government involvement. None of it would be possible without the government involvement. And all *other* employers and rich people are likewise victims of this government involvement as well. Along with consumers in general. Not just the workers under those specific coercively privileged employers.
@@lordgrishnakh1148 so raise the minimum wage and offer free education at community colleges. That would be a start.
Correction: I am not upset and no one is evil.
An exquisite explanation, reasoning of the causes which have brought about the decline of the democratic system. Had the so-called intelligentsia of the free, democratic world listened to this brilliant woman and the "whistleblowers" revealing the reasons why the American spirit was going down the drain and WHO was responsabile for it the world wouldn't be faced with the current predicament.
Brilliant woman...
Rand is correct ... one has to really appreciate the truth here (and you need to read and listen to much more of her philosophy), but what we see in 2020 is a result of the opposite of Objectivism.
You don’t have to be a fan of Ayn Rand to agree that this is the current environment we are living in today. We are living in a society that does not allow opposing viewpoints. People are in fear of being ‘cancelled’ and stay silent. This is dangerous to a free society and Rand predicted it over 40 years ago.
In today’s society, we cannot have a civil discussion with opposing viewpoints such as this interview. People would cry, scream, shout, and be enraged with someone speaking their mind in 2020.
Just look what is playing out across the United States from the streets to the White House.
This has been building up for quite sometime but really accelerated from 2010 during the Occupy Wall Street and Tea Party protests.
Yep thats why gas is $3.50 and will only go ever higher and not lower. Also why the average wage has dropped a staggering 5k in the last few years?
Well Obama/Policies/Dems
Crippled oil market, ACA and the lowest growth in history, compared to any president.
Oil business is a monopoly controlled by a small group. They recently cut back on 500 million or something barrels to jump prices again. I assume, probably around after Trump is in office, we will see a jump. America needs to start creating its own energy...unfortunately difficult if not impossible because of heavy regulations that help no one.
You're failing to account for Government Intervention, which has an effect on the above.
_Niko Linni_
Michael Smith
Lol
Your comment didn’t age very well.
Obummer was to blame , looking back from 2020. Go Trump !
wow she reminds me friedrich nietzsche... against chrstian morals with altruism, selflessness, and so on...
My God she was so accurate
About the feelings of selfish individualists, sure.
Her part in Hollywood is confusing, she started in Hollywood,,,,,wAaaaaaaaaaaa
She doesn’t know anything about the origin of America
free market capitalism (infinite growth to thrive - by its very nature and principal) against infinite population growth with finite anount of resources. The very idea is a paradox. Iam not confusing anything. Ive studied Rand and objectivism for 17 years.
17 years? Wow, that's sad, what a waste.
What is your argument?
With finite resources, an open market effectively combats such a problem. Say people can not afford high water bills, due to shortage. So more efficient machines are created. Problem lies, when this system becomes crippled with large goverment intervention.
bobs hanery you fail to take into account infinite population growth
Jeremiah Wilson
It's related. Supply/Demand
bobs hanery you cant see the relation and correlation can you? think about it for a few.
The problem with those naked savages is they got in the way of the USA exploiting the resources of the land they were unfortunate enough to live on. Can't have that. Speaking of the military, who would be in the military if all followed Rand's philosophy of no self-sacrifice. After all, what is the military but collective self-sacrifice by individuals who sacrifice their lives for the common good.
Altruism is the trading of something of value for something of lesser value. People who join the military do so voluntarily, and they do it for a reason. It might be for family tradition, or national pride, or perhaps to enjoy the adventure. Whatever their reason, that is the value they are trading for. It is NOT a sacrifice.
Giving away money is NOT a sacrifice if you get something of equal or greater value in return. Some donate to charity for their sense of self-esteem or pride, others to alleviate some sense of guilt. In either case, if their donation is to something or someone they VAULUE, it is not a sacrifice, because they are getting something of value in return.
If, on the other hand, you were to give a donation to a cause you despise, a group of people who represented NO value to you, the Nazi Party, for example... then THAT would be self-sacrifice. You would be trading something of value for something of lesser value.
That is true altruism.
@@johnnynick6179 Nicely articulated.
Ayn Rand is fantastic!
Her abstract mumbo jumbo makes me shrug..what exactly does she mean..
she means "gimme it it's mine!" Like a little goblin
@@someonenotnoone As opposed to what YOU say...."gimme it.... I want it" like a spoiled brat who has never earned anything but wants everything.
@@johnnynick3621 Right but unlike you there is evidence for my claim.
@@someonenotnoone Your "claim" is that Ayn Rand wanted what belonged to her.
Your implication is that it is WRONG to want what is yours.
My response is: _"you hilariously believe that it is bad to want what is YOURS.... but it is alright to want what is NOT yours."_
Irrational people making irrational statements in public will someday lead to rational people finally getting rid of irrational people through attrition.
Keep it up... you're helping our cause.
@@johnnynick3621 Let me know when you use propositional logic to predict anything in physics.
Your religion is not compelling to me. Peddle your faith somewhere else.
Hmm she would have loved the self-serving non-sacrificing capitalists called the Kardashians, then.
Vinay Seth uuhhh, not really, Ms.Rand was a h ell of a lot smarter n way more attractive in many ways than the kbimbos
Blatter
this is zizek 1.0 - a product of the public need for an exotic and charismatic authority
@Gerr Gerring yes, I am not claiming that she is in any way a more original zizek or something other than comparable on outward appearance, I am saying that she is a similar archetype of the public need for an polemic.
😮
Listen to everything that she is saying in the context of the pro-Hamas demonstrations coming out of our universities in the wake of October 7. It fits in so perfectly.
"pro-Hamas" it's not surprising you support Any Rand and have such a poor grasp on reality
@@someonenotnoone A rational person does NOT side with a known terrorist organization that makes no secret of its desire to tear down your society and enslave you in their mystic, third-world barbarian anti-civilization.
It is not surprising that those of you who support such irrationalities despise and fear Ayn Rand.
@@someonenotnoone Right to the insults, typical.
@@hydrogenbombb right to the delusions, typical.
So, she clearly didn't know about the impact of carbon emissions on the environment.
LOL apparently she thought that lung cancer being caused by cigarettes was a hoax! Why would that be a conspiracy?
Charles Grisham Where did you get the idea she thought it was a hoax? She thought the evidence was not conclusive, and at the time, she was right.
SaulOhio m.huffpost.com/us/entry/792184
SaulOhio also it was pretty much known by most of the prominent researchers well before her death that cigarettes cause cancer. It wasn't a matter of wishy washy data by the late 70s
Charles Grisham But she started smoking in the 20's or 30's. When did she say what you claim she said about smoking? Do you have any documentation to prove she said it was a hoax? Do you know when she said anything about the evidence of the cancer connection, relative to when the conclusive evidence became available?
Prophetic
You mistitled the video. Big failure
Very well put. She pushed crypto-fascism to the new Conservative movement in the US. And we've all seen where the Conservative movement has left the USA after 30 years of it dominating our politics.
mvoe out of moms basement neckbeard
When did we have a 30-year dominating conservative movement in our politics?
She is one of the reasons we now have a climate crisis
What an absurd comment. You, blowing hot air, causes more climate change than she ever could.
BTW - There is NO climate crisis. No such thing.
BTW... It would be good to know when this interview took place: 1979.
The philosophy of Jesus Christ was what this country was founded upon.
She is prejudiced from the time she spent living under communism. Her point of reason stems from this oppressive experience.
no she saw reality of commnuism u tard
Are you saying that communism is oppressive? You fucking fascist. She lived under communism, you haven't. Signed Boomer Vet
And THAT is precisely why her words should strike you as a warning against evil. We’re seeing it today… disguised again as altruism.
she really saw this trend evolving very early on.
She described Climate Change hysteria and the epidemic of American self loathing.
Hysteria? Please, elaborate.
@@someonenotnooneClimate always changes, thinking a government can change it is hysterical. Charlton Heston explains it, the earth will be here long after humans are extinct.
Climate always changes. Believing man will destroy the earth is hysteria. Believing a government can control climate is ludicrous.
Charlton Heston and George Carlin explain it simply here on RUclips.
@@someonenotnoone Hysteria - exaggerated or uncontrollable emotion or excitement. Didn’t Al Gore predict we would be underwater years ago?
Wouldn’t atolls be the first to be submerged? No more polar bears? Ozone hole, acid rain, global cooling…
Maybe a little research and analytical thinking will open your eyes. Sometimes the people telling you to trust the science have an agenda?
@@someonenotnoone Why don't you elaborate?
3:02 so she's saying that in order to overcome an oil shortage we should just drill more? well, that's what we did and now fracking is starting to make the land underneath us unstable and cause earthquakes. it seems like the idea of conservation isn't just "telling a society to give up and lower their standard of living".
Fracking causing earthquakes? Give me one example of a major earthquake caused by fracking.
Amazing that she predicted what's happening today in 2024 in US Universities!!
Without the explicit awareness of Aristotelean (a Greek pagan) premises and method (the basis of America’s classical Liberal founding), America along with the rest of Western civilization was inevitably made vulnerable to the socialist death cult corruption we’re experiencing.
She needs to learn to speak
Maybe you need to learn to listen
I'm no randite but she comes across smarter in her interviews than her books. Granted, I don't read fiction and a single page of Ayn Rand causes me excruciating pain and she is a terribly fucking overrated author
Honestly, I'm more drawn to her non-fiction books and essay collections. I never really got into her fiction much.
_Niko Linni_
I read her non-fiction mostly, but I recommend the Fountainhead, even if you don't like her style, the message is great and very inspiring.
wow u must be stupid, read capitalism the unknown ideal its epic and fun
this woman is all starey-eyed, androgenous, probably bonkers, says profound sounding silliness and has thousands of influential followers - a bit like jesus really - hahahahahahahahahahaha
We all feel a little more stupid after reading your comment
She was obviously insane, and consumed by hatred for mankind. Are you deaf? She spews non stop hatred.
Oh look. Another tolerant, caring leftist spewing hatred and lies about someone they disagree with. What a surprise.
“She spews non stop hatred”
“She was obviously insane “
“ consume by a hatred for mankind”
Ok , I watched and listened . I feel , all of these statements actually apply to you more . Ayn speaks with logic and reason .
I honestly don’t understand how this woman is an intellectual thinker. She fears education that dares critique capitalism, that’s a first time me hearing a so-called intellectual makes such a statement. Can we not do better than this system? Objectivism is inherently a flawed school of thought. She has a distorted view on collectivism and a fully embraces capitalism without addressing its flaws in any way. She fears colleges (or any school of thought) who question or critique’s Capitalistic systems such as today’s far right thinkers. Colleges must not blindly push Capitalism down our Academic Institutions and allow them to be places of research and debate (which thinkers like her would obviously lose to intellectuals of modern time)
But the fear of colleges from the right speaks to how dumb far-right capitalistic societies want their working class. Objectivism only allows rampant capitalism to become more corrupt due to the acceptance of that terribly flawed view of human essence.
[Greed|Selfishness]
She doubts altruism which is looking out for one another and fully supports Objectivism which focuses on inherent greed. Milton Friedman talked on this point as well saying Greed is what makes our economy flourish
but like every far right Capitalistic thinker fails to do is only regard to the markets over humanistic ideals. This so called intellectual is calling out college campuses for thoughtcrimes. And that speaks on the true ignorance of the right leaning intellectuals.
Every wonder why my generation dislikes the Boomer Generation so much? Because this generation [Boomers] were the entitled brats that brought the world to its current conditions. She helped birth classical liberalism. Inspiring Alt-Right thinkers to this day. And help propel Plutocracy in America. We now have Neoliberalism ruining this country on behalf of corporate America. What a horrible so-called intellectual that influenced a generation of thinkers. I’m sorry this was the best of your generation.
*ONLY COWARDS FEAR AN INFORMED AND EDUCATED YOUTH*
You are obviously very unfamiliar with her writings. You have probably five years of intense study to acquire an informed opinion
Is your glorification of sacrifice and poverty based on Marx or Jesus?
The problem is, schools are not teaching critical thinking, speaking from experience. You go into a humanities class, and they teach left-leaning ideas as if they are solid fact. In what way do you suppose this will produced educated youth? All it will do is produce whining and sniveling college students only capable of screaming in terror when they don't get their way.
No rational person fears education of the populace. If that was what universities were doing, we would be supportive. What Rand was talking about back then and has become painfully obvious today is that universities have become indoctrination centers instead of education centers.
For proof that today's colleges are institutes of indoctrination, I offer your own words:
_"She fears education that dares critique capitalism, that’s a first time me hearing a so-called intellectual makes such a statement."_
It's the first time you are hearing support and praise for the most moral system ever available to man. Universities DO NOT teach the virtues of capitalism anymore. They instead, promote socialism, a system that provides a free ride to professors and administrators, the leeches of the university system.
Collectivism requires society to justify using coercion and physical force against its members. Their justification lies in the destructive concept known as altruism.
You sound like you are trying to be intelligent. That's a positive thing. But instead of trying to SOUND intelligent, educate yourself. Read a few of Rand's novels and non-fiction books. Gain an understanding of her moral philosophy on your own. We all had to do that.
After studying her philosophy, you can form your own opinion. If you disagree with her, you can at least do so knowledgably and intelligibly.
You are, at least at the time you wrote your comment, a complete idiot! You obviously have not read her philosophy or her non fiction writings explaining her positions or you had no ability to comprehend them. But then, you, as nearly are all of her critics, unable to make a valid argument for lack of truth as to what she has written and explained. It's not against the law for someone to be an idiot, as you so egregiously show yourself to be,, but reality itself inevitably punishes the results of being one