I'm an Ayn Rand fan and Fountainhead is my favourite novel ever. So there.

I can agree that Rand's novels are terrible by the traditional standards of literature. I can also agree that as a philosophy, Objectivism isn't terribly sound either. (Going into further depth on either of these points would require more energy than I'm willing to muster at the moment.) I would disagree that seeing them as a source of inspiration is indefensible. One way to understand Rand's stuff is to see it as an equal and opposite reaction to Marxism. "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged" aren't meant to be compared to stuff by James Joyce or F. Scott Fitzgerald. They're meant to be compared to Marx's "The Communist Manifesto" and Mao Zedong's "Little Red Book". As difficult as it is for the current generation to imagine nowadays, both of these books inspired vast numbers of young people, changing the world irrevocably and, in my opinion, for the worst. Even if you disagree with Rand's politics, you must admit that she succeeded in demonstrating that the rhetorical tools and demagoguery that the Marxists relied so heavily upon could just as easily be appropriated to serve a political stance that was stood squarely opposite that of Marxism.

In my case, yes, my politics tend strongly libertarian and, yes, I believe that a value system that is honestly based on enlightened self-interest is more moral than one based on selflessness (Judeo-Christian morality). Note that I first read Rand in my early 20s, after having graduated from university. Ironically, during high school I had a vague sense of admiration for Marxism and a morality based on selflessness that I believe was fostered by made-in-Hollywood films and television shows. I changed my views after attending university in France and seeing first hand the effects of socialism (in particularly the "entitlement mentality").

EDIT:

I note that your screen name and signature here refer to the novel "Snow Crash" by Neal Stephenson, which depicts as libertarian a scenario as anyone could imagine! Of course, in that novel, it's a somewhat dystopic future, but it's all the more exciting for that!

This post has been edited by wankongyew: Apr 29 2009, 03:22 PM

No, it is not. What you linked to appears to be a psychological model to explain human behavior. Objectivism attempts to be a complete philosophy, but is really only relevant as a form of ethics. In short, it says that traditional morality is wrong. Instead, all that good comes from selfishness, and all that is evil comes from selflessness.

I also fail to see why criticizing Ayn Rand is seen as being pro-Western. If anything, it should be the opposite.