One of my favorite quotes is from Ayn Rand, "When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit." Wish Democrats and Republicans would take this to heart.
@Frank Silvers True, but fascism has the same problem. The problem starts when collectivism becomes a religion. To believe in socialism, when it has failed so many times, requires an anti-rational mind, unwilling to evaluate actual results. If you haven't read Atlas Shrugged, please do. It's a great book on the subject.
@Frank Silvers Fascist regimes allow private enterprise (though very controlled by the state of course). Socialist do not. Apart from that, they're pretty much the same, and the intolerant, authoritarian and evil part, certainly is. Still collectivism gone to shit though.
But to fair, Ayn Rand's objectivism has no practically because libertarians and conservatives read Ayn Rand's writings and they have created something that is equivalent to Frankenstein's monster and that monster is known as the politics of Donald J. Trump.
To find objectivists search in Ayn Rand Institute, not in libertarian party which she regards as falls and not in conservatives who believes in altruism she called absolutely evil
@xsuploader did i say i didn't? That's a rude thing to say, and clearly, you missed my point. This was a talk show on 1970s television -- a sh*tload less airspace available then compared to now, yet it made it to air. That's my point. A well intended, supportive opinion, based on an objective observation. I said literally nothing about what i do or don't do with my time. But i love seeing your powers of assumption and your mental energy being used to throw shade at a random nobody for a year old comment. But good for you - you got my attention 👏👏👏. So I'm going to take the opportunity to tell you that you deserved way better with your emotional upbringing. If you like philosophy, maybe studying psychology would be worth your time. I'm thinking more specifically about emotional development and interpersonal dynamics. I wish you luck and good intentions.
"If you go by emotions, not reason, it means you’re going against reality. Something exists, something is right, and you say, “no, I don’t like it” because I want to believe something else. You, in effect, go by emotions, by your whims, not by reason."
Except, we are not robots. You analyze your emotions, which is the human thing to do. Only a psychopath can be totally disconnected from their internal self. Everyone else has to accept the environment shapes their emotions but you should still use those emotions as part of the overall calculus in any decision given the context.
Rand got emotional and judged others for disagreeing with her as being impolite. She wouldn’t last a minute in a debate. She can’t handle the opposing views that challenge her. I’d be willing to bet that she didn’t take biology either. Because it takes human intervention to have a civilization and she seems to think that we should be allowed to do whatever we want Willy nilly without it. That’s why we have gun violence today….no one is intervening.
People have lost the courage to speak out and do what is just because we have transferred that purpose to government. If government only existed for the reason Ayn suggests, the people would feel more responsible for the moral policing of their country.
There are hundreds of such companies, of which everybody was so afraid, but they don't even exist anymore. Ayn Rand was the absolute champion of a long-term vision.
and imagine how quickly they would've lost their monopoly status if they were subjected to the laissez faire capitalism that rand supported rather than the mixed economy that they actually existed under (and still collapsed under despite government support).
Audience member: "Money is power. And the more money you have, the more power you have" Donahue: "Can we encourage you to make a contribution to that observation?" Rand: "I will not answer anyone who is impolite." *laughter from the entire audience* Rand: "I do not sanction impoliteness and I am not the victim of hippies!" So much for that supposed beacon of philosophy. It's snowflakes all the way down.
I understand what she's saying: In a perfect world where people are doing "the right" thing--respecting themselves and others. Donahue is not considering CORRUPTION AND MANIPULATION
@@mateowannacomedyremasterz6605 Yes…By time we are sitting in the “rubble” of the “empire” her statue will have replaced George Washington’s down on Wall Street!
2:12 She hits it out of the park in the first 2 minutes of the interview. Why is she so harsh on those who preach altruism and self-sacrifice? "Because I look at them. Just look at them. Because they don't hesitate to sacrifice whole nations."
She is talking about people who sacrifice others, yet pretending to be talking about people who sacrifice themselves. A person has a right to sacrifice that which is theirs(their own life, time, body). They haven't the right to sacrifice the lives, time, or bodies of others against their will.
I can not recall anyone in my lifetime who was more wrong about more things than Phil Donahue. He stood on the wrong side of virtually every topic he ever addressed on his show.
You are correct. Phil's reasoning got lost in his political ideology like so many people today. Just look at Covid policy. The Democrats/woke/liberals were wrong about everything
The entire premise of the first part is Donahue "Selfishness is bad, cause if some oil monopoly tycoon decided to be selfish, then he could corner the market and increase prices that would basically enslave everyone and make all suffer". If an entire civilization can not withstand the moral decision of just one person, then this civilization has no right to continue. A proper civilization should recognize its own weakness and instead of relying on the goodwill of the powerful it should seek to create alternatives to withstand such a power grab. We should not beg for the altruism of the powerful, but be powerful enough to thrive even if the powerful actively act against the population.
@Akshay Natu That's actually a good rule. I believe you will do more good in the world than those, who simply shout on the street from time to time, but feel like actual people that need help are beneath them.
There are a lot of good people in the Libertarian party that push these ideas. Dave Smith & Michael Malice are my favorite current voices who share most of her philosophy. These kinds of ideas are really spreading over the last few years & thank God for that =D
That's why I prefer the way the Brits express their opinions in Parliament. And I assume, the Founders of the USA were doing it this way as well, should have, they were British subjects for half of their lives. The TV series John Adams show it well, at least I wasn't suspicious of anything as with other depictions. The Brits don't clap, they either say "yeeeeeees", "hear, hear" or "nooooooo", the noise of it makes it hard to distinguish, but those sounds definitely mean Yes and No. I'm afraid those who haven't heard it should watch how it's done. It's lively and funny. What I like about it, is that you get a better understanding of how things really are. You hear both voices. With American clapping, it's not that clear, you hear those who agree, but you don't hear those who disagree, they are almost silent, and even though they are present, you don't notice them, clapping is simply too loud, even if they say "noooo" they will hardly be heard. But I don't know if the Brits don't clap during the TV shows. It's the Parliamentary rules, but they are good rules. Even greater support is shown by taking a piece of paper and waving it, but no clapping. Clapping is lovely at the theatre.
@Norma F**СК МЕ - СНЕCK MY РR0FILЕ I agree with her. I was home educated, never went to a state or private school. Especially these days with the internet, schooling in the traditional sense is obsolete. Just a bunch of propoganda & gobbleEgook
There was nothing impolite " I used to love your books but now I am more educated".... I used to like Donahue but now that I am more educated... I am sure he would have found that as an insult.
this is really good, maybe the best i've seen of ayn rand explaining her ideas in person. phil donahue does a good job of interviewing her considering the time alloted.
Yes that woman in the audience with the glasses was impolite to Ayn Rand! It's frustrating that Donahue is defending her. She started off by patronizing Ayn Rand by saying she appreciated her work 15 years ago but now she's smarter than that ( I'm paraphrasing but that is the gist of what she said) She is being condescending and she's insinuating that she's too intelligent to appreciate the work by Ayn Rand any longer
Funny how only 10 years ago, I thought she was the philosophical devil. Never mind the fact that I hadn’t read in-depth, any of her philosophy. I now feel she is correct at LEAST half the time.
My god that black lady from 1978 is talking about our reality now in 2023 at 38:28. Humanity has been going on a downward spiral despite we have all these technological advances. Wonder how folks 45 yrs later will be like.
@Dean Mitchell - It's implicit that she's referring to any company / conglomerate such as ITT. You can replace ITT with Boeing, Mitsubishi, Microsoft, it doesn't matter.
the lady chirping about itt being able to do what it wants to do where is itt today ps the same bullshit is being talked about today about certain companies and 10 years down the road they are no where to be seen
No, Ayn Rand is the villain because her writings of objectivism has no practically. Why do think that Ron Paul as named his son Rand Paul after Ayn Rand?
The men need to be educated about the strength of women and women need to stand up for themselves. A philosopher is different from someone who has to go to work. They live and work in their own minds.
Right! The idea of a man who claims to be a feminist attacking an old lady who survived communism not honoring insulting, loaded questions made me laugh. He really is the model male feminist
Funny you say that, Phil Donahue was canceled, and the only people who didn't support him bring canceled was the left. Liberals and conservatives loved canceling Donahue because he committed the crime of being anti-war at the beginning of a war.
Read her books many times. Late at night, in front a warm fireplace, looking up at the ceiling in contemplation.The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged were insightful as a kid, and are still educating me-- making me evaluate and revaluate her philosophy. My conclusion: one has to know and care about themselves before they can care about somebody else. Example: a man who doesn't care about himself will never be a good husband nor father and the same applies to a woman. Education is not only academic but rational experiences applied. A mechanic can rebuild a car's engine, knowing he/she is the best mechanic around, yet never read one line of Shakespeare.
@Akshay Natu RESPECT MY WILL RESPECT ME TOO RESPECT THE STRENGTH AS I RESPECT YOU CONTENTMENT IS KEY IF YOU FALL I WILL HELP YOU RISE BUT ASK NOT MORE FOR ONES WHO NEVER TRY BE YOURSELF THE LAW THAT IS YOU LIVE YOUR IDEAS WISELY SHARE YOUR PEACEFUL VIEWS CONTENTMENT FREEDOM TO SAY NO THIS IS MY RATIONAL CHOICE I WILL NOT CARRY ANOTHER'S LOAD
We don't live in a free market. We live in an empire with overregulation in most industries. The reason corporations are consolidating to be mega corporations is to have leveraging power in Washington
This reminds me of one of Malcolm X's quotes: "I can say it as it is. Hope you'd take it as it is" Unfortunately, not many people in the world know what the attainment of real virtue is. Hard work and determination, though much spoken, is not practised by the majority. As a result, many people find it harsh when the truth or reality of their worthlessness is spoken to them in words. These are the same people in a family or govt. who will survive with your resources like leeches and then turn back and say you are disgusting. If you don't believe this, then observe the world closely. Merely reading the theory of objectivism will not do it for anyone. Humans are good at pointing out flaws but to self-assess one's own flaws is another story. Only a man who knows virtue will understand and appreciate someone else's virtue. That is to say, if you have practised valuing time and hard work all your life, you will appreciate a man of same values equally. A lazy person will not be able to appreciate that. For him, it would be just an escape by stating that the hardworking person is just after money. These people are highly toxic. Their envy is so strong that it can go till the extent of exercising mental animosity or brute force against the virtuous. This could be one among your family or the government. In short: Phil Donohoe is a delusional and daft of a person here.
41:53 - [paraphrased] " Do you believe that females should be in leadership positions. ", Ayn Rand: " No, a woman can't hold a leadership position. I wouldn't vote for her. ", " A woman in charge of an army? It's unspeakable. ". So basically, just an example of that all of her ideas, theories and politics are 'beyond herself' like she doesn't care what her gender is, she cares about the state, the world, and how the future is 200 years later. Not 'now-ism' or 'me-ism'. So in general, she's quite good, however there's that monopoly flaw (previous comment).
If you interested in going down the rabbit hole of the free market arguments around the subject of monopolization check out Tom Woods, Dave Smith, Michael Malice, Ron Paul, or really anyone out of the Austrian school of economics or the Mises Caucus within Libertarianism.
She always missed the purpose of Christ, which was to liberate us of the fear of death, and all of the psychocultural death related psychic derivatives
to me I have too much proof of God(lol) but I agree with a lot of the things that she talked about we are all entitled to our own opinions as long as we aren't hurting ourselves or others do I think if Ayn was a Christian it would've made her happier? absolutely
27:52 is the achilles heel of Ayn Randian 'laissez faire 'anything goes' Capitalism', as monopoly ought to be eradicated, which Ayn Rand never mentions in any of her interviews nor books AFAIK, so this woman in the audience describes what many of us feel, including myself. " At first, when I was 18... I liked the book... now that I'm smarter... uh... the monopoly... ".
I don't understand your point. You're saying Ayn doesn't acknowledge that monopolies need to be eradicated? What monopolies? I don't know of any monopolies that exist without state power actively fueling them
Laissez-faire 'anything goes' Capitalism without anti-monopoly laws, without regulation, without incentivization & commission structures, without harmony, without 'corporate love & corporate worship' (i.e. in Japan like people start at Honda at age 18 and finish at age 80 Etc.), without idealism mixed with selflessness, and so on.... is just 'rampant Capitalism with zero regulation' which is what she writes of in her books, as the philosophy to conquer 'statehood'. Hmm what did I just write.
In 1976, she retired from writing her newsletter and, after her initial objections, allowed a social worker employed by her attorney to enroll her in Social Security and Medicare.
Enrolled? Do you have the option to not pay taxes? You are forced to contribute whether you want or not. Her attorney helped her to claim money that they have imposed on her by taxes. And it's just less than usd 2k, way less than what the gov has taken from her.
great interview by as ayn sais ppl are becoming more and more unpolite ,compare older interviews and this one ,more and more mockery,ayn was the smartest here
A common tactic is for people to accuse her of the very motivations they secretly desire to act on, and then label her a hypocrite when in reality, it's just a psychological strategy to deflect one's own desire to be a tyrant rather than address her arguments.
@@avatarparadigms so should human beings act on every desire that they have? Are you in favor of all illegal immigration into the United States as well? The people are acting on their own desire for a better life possibly or to come over to this country and/or for malevolent purposes?
@@travispee3503 I don't care if people come to this country legally or illegally because I don't believe the laws have any ontological verity in the first place. Banning a person from being in your country is like banning a certain kind of cloud from blowing in your national airspace. And taking issue with the existence of laws that ban foreigners is like taking issue with the instincts of wolverines. From my perspective, it's all just nature being exactly what nature is. My only approach is simply a question of how to better adapt to the world as I find myself in. If playing by the laws equals better adaptability, that's my route. If not, that's not my route.
@@avatarparadigms that is not the purpose of legal immigration. It's not just about laws. It's also about economics, culture, disease control, etc. Your use of the team "banning" is both only incorrect, but disingenuous. To require a path to citizenship is not a ban, but being those who truly want to assimilate to the adopted ideas and cultural in which they desire to be apart of. To shrug and simply allow anyone to come into your home that may not have good intentions, or simply wants to take advantage of the system you have created is beyond stupid and dangerous.
@@mytruthslays1303 I don't believe in rights. What we traditionally call rights are simply powers we have the ability to impose with impunity. If I can kill you without consequence, then, materially speaking, its indistinguishable from me having the right to. And where things are indistinguishable, we have no justification for making the distinction. That means what we call rights are determined solely by those powerful enough to dictate who gets to act without consequence and who does not. If I can kill you without facing consequences I'd rather avoid, then, in effect, it's my right to kill you, irrespective of whatever powers you define the social construct we call rights as entailing. At present, the political system we currently have in place allows illegal immigration as a means of attaining the power to enslave illegal immigrants with impunity. So your anti-illegal immigration stance is, in practice, identical to also being pro-slavery since the only way to stop illegals from being enslaved is to legalizing illegal immigration - which you're not willing to do. By throwing illegal immigrants in penal colonies for slave labor, we grant them legal status. By letting them work for slave wages, we effectively grant them the equivapency of legal status. And by prohibiting their interspersion into the U.S., we spare them from slavery at the price of depriving them of legal status. There isn't a moral solution to this paradox. It's either we legalize slavery or we criminalize a people. Choose.
A command based on words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount : “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” The Mosaic law contains a parallel commandment: “Whatever is hurtful to you, do not do to any other person.” If Jesus is not God you can ignore this? If God became flesh and dwelt among us, you have a problem here.
Selfishness means SURVIVAL, but it can expand beyond the "natural tendency" of individualism into mutually beneficial cooperation with others quite easily without descending into GREED, but only if VIRTUE is present. VIRTUE is what must be taught and learned. An infant must be self-interested in acquiring sustenance and emotional bulwarking, or it dies. Humans are self-interested in survival because of a cascade of biological hormones that inform us to seek out the pleasure of sustenance and emotional grounding, and to avoid the pain of hunger and lack. This is the dopamine and oxytocin frame that all humans are born with. This is why we seek food, this is why we seek love, and BOTH of those things are best found in COOPERATION with a framework of VIRTUE. No one wants to be taken advantage of for someone else's greedy ends. This IS the Golden Rule.
Of course, it is learned, grasped, and reasoned. How else can it be if we talk about "rational" selfishness? You must involve all your natural senses and means of survival(intellect) in order to integrate an objective moral code.
Well do you have to pound it in your child's head that they should share like the rest of the world or do they naturally try to give everything to others to please them before self?
@@gearbear4530 Every single question he asked was literally designed to present her views in the most uncharitable manner possible. Donahue was a textbook disingenuous, virtue signaling, bad faith, interviewer. He’s practically the template for many other disingenuous, virtue signaling, bad faith talking heads. Question who has benefited you and the people you know more, the bad guy rich oil company owners who sell the product that gets you to and from work or the undoubtably virtuous, compassionate, rich Donahue who’s convinced you that you’re a “good person “ like him if you agree with his views?
Oh, come on! Phil Donahue is still married to Marlo Thomas. And besides, Ayn Rand's writings are not philosophical. Her writings of objectivism has individualism turned highly hyper.
There is not a mother on this earth that would not give her life for her child if called for. Rand never had any kids so she could never understand that. Smart woman for sure, learned a lot from her, but disagree whole heartedly about her definition of altruism, and her philosophy on the topic. She is really confused by communism and nazism, I would never consider them altruistic ideologies. They left their mark on her for sure.
Are you crazy? 600k American mothers per year not only don't give their lives, but in fact kill their own child bc if it's possible inconvenience to their lives,
"OBJECTIVIST Ayn Rand" "27:47 - Nononono Ask the question politely. I don't respond to rudeness. That hippie was disrespectful. {Cut to commercial} But back to the previous question, if anyone wants to ask it politely..." These types are always the biggest hypocrites lmaooo.
Only sacrifice required is to remain Authentic (Self Love/Esteem) that holds any value... Sacrifice bonds with people that have 3rd party Government Interference (Manic Oppression)... Cut ties with anybody that interferes with you being you... No matter who they are, how hard it is, how long it takes & how many people you have to let go... (Plan A Escape Route/Know your Exists)... She is another kindred spirit... I believe in INTUITION over influence... When FREEWILL & REASON are part of the equation ... 3 of A Perfect Pair... Naturally attracted/drawn to... like minded Artist/People... Authentic Artist Get A Authentic Audience it doesn't matter if its complicated or simple Art/Music (Life)... Only type of Artist I can be is Authentic/Unique (me) The realization of the connections are after the fact (entire lifetime) Never sellout... fuck your addictions... fake people aren't worth my time & energy Watch out for Malignant Narcissist and their Sellouts/Slaves that Flip the Script Scapegoat Dilemma... If the left is doing the rights agenda its not Liberal and a sign of Right Winged Government Interference (White Privilege has morphed into Informant Privilege... Informant Nazis/Slaves come in all colors.. Modern Slavery) LIBERAL - . 1. willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own; open to new ideas. 2. relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise. ...small government, progressive, modern, forward-thinking, radical, left-wing, freethinking Most informants became criminals after they were born into it or recruited into the informant system... Atheist/Individuals Rule
![HIWWHEE | OHM [Official MV]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/OJJLtTLqLag/mqdefault.jpg)
One of my favorite quotes is from Ayn Rand, "When I disagree with a rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn; if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit."
Wish Democrats and Republicans would take this to heart.
Ayn Rand's entire philosophy is pure trash.
@Frank Silvers True, but fascism has the same problem. The problem starts when collectivism becomes a religion. To believe in socialism, when it has failed so many times, requires an anti-rational mind, unwilling to evaluate actual results. If you haven't read Atlas Shrugged, please do. It's a great book on the subject.
@Frank Silvers Fascist regimes allow private enterprise (though very controlled by the state of course). Socialist do not. Apart from that, they're pretty much the same, and the intolerant, authoritarian and evil part, certainly is. Still collectivism gone to shit though.
But to fair, Ayn Rand's objectivism has no practically because libertarians and conservatives read Ayn Rand's writings and they have created something that is equivalent to Frankenstein's monster and that monster is known as the politics of Donald J. Trump.
To find objectivists search in Ayn Rand Institute, not in libertarian party which she regards as falls and not in conservatives who believes in altruism she called absolutely evil
My opinion of her philosophy aside, its amazing that this was a part of tv entertainment in the 70s at all
Yeah society is so much dumber now
@@fhowland nah entertainment is just cheaper
right?
there are plenty of recent interviews of intellectuals on mainstream networks. your fault for not watching them
@xsuploader did i say i didn't? That's a rude thing to say, and clearly, you missed my point. This was a talk show on 1970s television -- a sh*tload less airspace available then compared to now, yet it made it to air. That's my point. A well intended, supportive opinion, based on an objective observation. I said literally nothing about what i do or don't do with my time. But i love seeing your powers of assumption and your mental energy being used to throw shade at a random nobody for a year old comment. But good for you - you got my attention 👏👏👏. So I'm going to take the opportunity to tell you that you deserved way better with your emotional upbringing. If you like philosophy, maybe studying psychology would be worth your time. I'm thinking more specifically about emotional development and interpersonal dynamics. I wish you luck and good intentions.
"If you go by emotions, not reason, it means you’re going against reality. Something exists, something is right, and you say, “no, I don’t like it” because I want to believe something else. You, in effect, go by emotions, by your whims, not by reason."
Except, we are not robots. You analyze your emotions, which is the human thing to do. Only a psychopath can be totally disconnected from their internal self. Everyone else has to accept the environment shapes their emotions but you should still use those emotions as part of the overall calculus in any decision given the context.
@@robertnicholls9917 Lmao
@@jackraiser4391 "I have no counterargument lmao"
@@WOWWOW-hk1tb No need for a massive cope
I like how that one woman asked Ayn a question and Phil decided to answer it himself.
The audience is so flippant they would’ve clapped for a toaster pop or the pouring of a glass of water.
They are not as serious, insightful and worthy of praise as you.🤣😂
@@zenodotusofathens2122 He spoke the truth. They remind me of people today.
The View’s studio audience is worse lol
Rand got emotional and judged others for disagreeing with her as being impolite. She wouldn’t last a minute in a debate. She can’t handle the opposing views that challenge her. I’d be willing to bet that she didn’t take biology either. Because it takes human intervention to have a civilization and she seems to think that we should be allowed to do whatever we want Willy nilly without it. That’s why we have gun violence today….no one is intervening.
Her basic philosophy is: to hell with everyone else, it’s all about ‘me.”
People have lost the courage to speak out and do what is just because we have transferred that purpose to government. If government only existed for the reason Ayn suggests, the people would feel more responsible for the moral policing of their country.
Revealing: they're talking about how powerful corporations like ITT, Xerox having so much control and those companies barely exist any more.
There are hundreds of such companies, of which everybody was so afraid, but they don't even exist anymore. Ayn Rand was the absolute champion of a long-term vision.
and imagine how quickly they would've lost their monopoly status if they were subjected to the laissez faire capitalism that rand supported rather than the mixed economy that they actually existed under (and still collapsed under despite government support).
They are merely replaced by others like Apple and Amazon.
@@fromthepeanutgallery1084 which is a great thing since apple and amazon have delivered way more value than those companies
@@fromthepeanutgallery1084 Chosen by consumers
Dont share your ideals with people, they will crucify you if the truth makes them uncomfortable
Sadly that is true but it behooves you to help the ignorance of your neighbors.
💯
That's why I do it . Makes my life more interesting. But I'm polite and really don't care to convince them of anything
Listening to this in 2021 is akin to John Galt’s radio broadcast in Atlas Shrugged. So glad this is preserved for the ages.
It is like listening to this today. Amazing that nothing has changed. Especially about her comment about Israel.
One of the most brutal interviews and question period I have every seen. Rand is one tough mind to crack.
"The universities are the real villains in the picture." BASED.
Depending on welfare and govt benefits at the end of her life: IMMORAL according to her own words
@@zackamania6534 It is especially when they take your money to pay for such things at gun point.
Translation: "My ignorance is as good as your knowledge." RETARDED.
Old TV shows we're so much better
Audience member: "Money is power. And the more money you have, the more power you have"
Donahue: "Can we encourage you to make a contribution to that observation?"
Rand: "I will not answer anyone who is impolite."
*laughter from the entire audience*
Rand: "I do not sanction impoliteness and I am not the victim of hippies!"
So much for that supposed beacon of philosophy. It's snowflakes all the way down.
I understand what she's saying: In a perfect world where people are doing "the right" thing--respecting themselves and others. Donahue is not considering CORRUPTION AND MANIPULATION
Well said. I really think her arguments gain more & more weight with each passing decade.
@@mateowannacomedyremasterz6605 Yes…By time we are sitting in the “rubble” of the “empire” her statue will have replaced George Washington’s down on Wall Street!
2:12 She hits it out of the park in the first 2 minutes of the interview. Why is she so harsh on those who preach altruism and self-sacrifice?
"Because I look at them. Just look at them. Because they don't hesitate to sacrifice whole nations."
Ok
She is talking about people who sacrifice others, yet pretending to be talking about people who sacrifice themselves. A person has a right to sacrifice that which is theirs(their own life, time, body). They haven't the right to sacrifice the lives, time, or bodies of others against their will.
I can not recall anyone in my lifetime who was more wrong about more things than Phil Donahue. He stood on the wrong side of virtually every topic he ever addressed on his show.
The product of Ivy League curation
@@Drisdelle09 Or that of basic human decency.
You are correct. Phil's reasoning got lost in his political ideology like so many people today. Just look at Covid policy. The Democrats/woke/liberals were wrong about everything
He was perfect because he was able to challenge her on her ideas.
You are a nut job. Worshipper of Limbaugh,Tucker and Trump.
26:29
"You don't fight an evil by adopting it and practicing it."
...
"Would you fight for anything?"
"How do you think I got here?"
The entire premise of the first part is Donahue "Selfishness is bad, cause if some oil monopoly tycoon decided to be selfish, then he could corner the market and increase prices that would basically enslave everyone and make all suffer".
If an entire civilization can not withstand the moral decision of just one person, then this civilization has no right to continue. A proper civilization should recognize its own weakness and instead of relying on the goodwill of the powerful it should seek to create alternatives to withstand such a power grab.
We should not beg for the altruism of the powerful, but be powerful enough to thrive even if the powerful actively act against the population.
@Akshay Natu That's actually a good rule. I believe you will do more good in the world than those, who simply shout on the street from time to time, but feel like actual people that need help are beneath them.
🇺🇸👍This lady was brilliant!!!
Stop helping people...the best way to help people!
This lady is amazing. She speaks logical facts, and it's a shame that the audience is so against it. And they clapped for everything.
There are a lot of good people in the Libertarian party that push these ideas. Dave Smith & Michael Malice are my favorite current voices who share most of her philosophy. These kinds of ideas are really spreading over the last few years & thank God for that =D
@@mateowannacomedyremasterz6605 Cool
That's why I prefer the way the Brits express their opinions in Parliament. And I assume, the Founders of the USA were doing it this way as well, should have, they were British subjects for half of their lives. The TV series John Adams show it well, at least I wasn't suspicious of anything as with other depictions. The Brits don't clap, they either say "yeeeeeees", "hear, hear" or "nooooooo", the noise of it makes it hard to distinguish, but those sounds definitely mean Yes and No. I'm afraid those who haven't heard it should watch how it's done. It's lively and funny. What I like about it, is that you get a better understanding of how things really are. You hear both voices. With American clapping, it's not that clear, you hear those who agree, but you don't hear those who disagree, they are almost silent, and even though they are present, you don't notice them, clapping is simply too loud, even if they say "noooo" they will hardly be heard. But I don't know if the Brits don't clap during the TV shows. It's the Parliamentary rules, but they are good rules. Even greater support is shown by taking a piece of paper and waving it, but no clapping. Clapping is lovely at the theatre.
@[L A Y L A]- Go To My ChanneI! L!VE NOW Well said & nice butt
@Norma F**СК МЕ - СНЕCK MY РR0FILЕ I agree with her. I was home educated, never went to a state or private school. Especially these days with the internet, schooling in the traditional sense is obsolete. Just a bunch of propoganda & gobbleEgook
Really interesting conversation.
Who got brought here by Michael Malice?
I just heard this interview mentioned in an interview with Douglas Murray.
Check your premises > check your privilege
There was nothing impolite " I used to love your books but now I am more educated".... I used to like Donahue but now that I am more educated... I am sure he would have found that as an insult.
She was still stuck in a war mindset, she was a broken soul, sad
I give a standing ovation to her. Majestic u are mam ayn rand. Totally changed our vision to see world
That woman asking about the illuminati is hilarious 😂😂
She was QAnon before qAnon existed lol
this is really good, maybe the best i've seen of ayn rand explaining her ideas in person. phil donahue does a good job of interviewing her considering the time alloted.
Completely agree 👍 & go lions! 😀
34:16 is a legendary moment
I did not expect an illuminati conspiracy theorist to pop up in this interview lol
I am grateful we are able to see her speak. Her brilliant ideas are coming back.
She's just awesome. These applauses the whole time destroyed the whole focus.
Yes that woman in the audience with the glasses was impolite to Ayn Rand! It's frustrating that Donahue is defending her. She started off by patronizing Ayn Rand by saying she appreciated her work 15 years ago but now she's smarter than that ( I'm paraphrasing but that is the gist of what she said)
She is being condescending and she's insinuating that she's too intelligent to appreciate the work by Ayn Rand any longer
Funny how only 10 years ago, I thought she was the philosophical devil.
Never mind the fact that I hadn’t read in-depth, any of her philosophy.
I now feel she is correct at LEAST half the time.
i tell you right now she is right quite a bit more than 50 percent of the time lol
You are basically saying she is a bit better than a coin.
Having that paradigm shift away from the horrific ideas of collectivism and authority are you? Soon you'll begin to see how spot on in so many things.
The thing is its tough to think like her. Better to conform with society.
Maybe you might lay out a few examples of that other half, where she's wrong. Because I can't think of any.
My god that black lady from 1978 is talking about our reality now in 2023 at 38:28. Humanity has been going on a downward spiral despite we have all these technological advances.
Wonder how folks 45 yrs later will be like.
And ITT is no more so Rand was right in the end.
@Dean Mitchell - It's implicit that she's referring to any company / conglomerate such as ITT. You can replace ITT with Boeing, Mitsubishi, Microsoft, it doesn't matter.
@@Xenon777channel And you walked into that one - look at Boeing today.
Seeing that this only has 32k views explains all the marxists and commies in America. This video needs to be WAY more popular.
the lady chirping about itt being able to do what it wants to do where is itt today ps the same bullshit is being talked about today about certain companies and 10 years down the road they are no where to be seen
The more logical her arguments the more divine they are
It's amazing that we still have the same damn problems
On the jesus point, having a bad day and a half and then returning as ruler of the universe forever is not any sacrifice
BOOM!
You’re comment is extremely ignorant
I like Rand’s viewpoint on women and feminism. She was ahead of her time.
So prophetic.
26:49 best part
➡️ livegirls19. com ⤵️
B.e.S.T f'u"l'l D.a.T.i.n.G h.o.T G.i.r.L's
-L-o-V-e-S-e-X---❤️😘
..👍
!💖🖤❤️今後は気をライブ配信の再編ありがとうです！この日のライブ配信は、かならりやばかったですね！１万人を超える人が見ていたもん（笑）やっぱり人参最高！まさかのカメラ切り忘れでやら1かしたのもドキドキでした,.
💖🖤在整個人類歷史上，強者，富人和具有狡猾特質的人捕食部落，氏族，城鎮，城市和鄉村中的弱者，無`'守和貧窮成員。然而，人類的生存意願迫使那些被拒絕，被剝奪或摧毀的基本需求的人們找到了一種生活方式，並繼續將其DNA融入不斷發展的人類社會。.
說到食物，不要以為那些被拒絕的人只吃垃圾。相反，他們學會了在被忽視的肉類和蔬菜中尋找營養。他們學會了清潔，切塊，調味和慢燉慢燉的野菜和肉類，在食品市場上被忽略的部分家用蔬菜和肉類，並且學會了使用芳香的木煙（如山核桃，山核桃和豆科灌木 來調味g食物煮的時候 1618746629
She said, "How did I get here". And Donahue was like "damn, you're right."
She basically decapitated him intellectually at that moment. She’s undoubtedly fought more than Conahue could even fathom.
The Native Americans would suggest that’ she’s very wrong.
How so?
Reason has a name: Ayn Rand.
23:55 min gave this amazing smile; dear Rand ☺
The Universities are the real villains in the picture.
Yup.
No, Ayn Rand is the villain because her writings of objectivism has no practically. Why do think that Ron Paul as named his son Rand Paul after Ayn Rand?
so smart she is
Met Phil Donahue as a kid riding my bike in WGNs parking lot back in the 70s . Had a hot redhead with him . No marlo
Marlo did NOT come into the picture until 1979, married Phil in 1980.
I heard they met at Phils gynecologist office.....
The men need to be educated about the strength of women and women need to stand up for themselves. A philosopher is different from someone who has to go to work. They live and work in their own minds.
I find it interesting how people get so emotional when they interview her.
What is that.?
Because they aren't ready for the truth
@@XavierBonapartTHIS! Both leftists and the religious right were and are allergic to her philosophy!
The left used to always say don't be so sensitive, and can you just let people live their lives.... See how that turned out?
Right! The idea of a man who claims to be a feminist attacking an old lady who survived communism not honoring insulting, loaded questions made me laugh. He really is the model male feminist
Funny you say that, Phil Donahue was canceled, and the only people who didn't support him bring canceled was the left. Liberals and conservatives loved canceling Donahue because he committed the crime of being anti-war at the beginning of a war.
@@hb98678 did you watch phil in the 90s? He had a great theme song
The audience is not prepared or wanting a rational discussion.
Read her books many times. Late at night, in front a warm fireplace, looking up at the ceiling in contemplation.The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged were insightful as a kid, and are still educating me-- making me evaluate and revaluate her philosophy. My conclusion: one has to know and care about themselves before they can care about somebody else. Example: a man who doesn't care about himself will never be a good husband nor father and the same applies to a woman.
Education is not only academic but rational experiences applied. A mechanic can rebuild a car's engine, knowing he/she is the best mechanic around, yet never read one line of Shakespeare.
@Akshay Natu I do care about society. At least a bit. I'm still fully rational, and I believe I'm unknowingly following Objectivism
@Akshay Natu
RESPECT MY WILL
RESPECT ME TOO
RESPECT THE STRENGTH
AS I RESPECT YOU
CONTENTMENT IS KEY
IF YOU FALL I WILL HELP YOU RISE
BUT ASK NOT MORE
FOR ONES WHO NEVER TRY
BE YOURSELF
THE LAW THAT IS YOU
LIVE YOUR IDEAS WISELY
SHARE YOUR PEACEFUL VIEWS
CONTENTMENT
FREEDOM TO SAY NO
THIS IS MY RATIONAL CHOICE
I WILL NOT CARRY ANOTHER'S LOAD
Donahue just continually threw up straw man arguments that she destroyed
6:26 ironic we are dealing with this again today.
What she's describing "couldn't happen" in a free market, is a happening now with Google & Amazon.
We don't live in a free market. We live in an empire with overregulation in most industries. The reason corporations are consolidating to be mega corporations is to have leveraging power in Washington
You mean the same Amazon that has lowered prices and increased convenience for consumers? Be objective about it.
@@IndependenceCityMotoring and closed down thousands of small businesses as helped by the lockdowns? Amazon is not benevolent in any way
This reminds me of one of Malcolm X's quotes: "I can say it as it is. Hope you'd take it as it is"
Unfortunately, not many people in the world know what the attainment of real virtue is. Hard work and determination, though much spoken, is not practised by the majority. As a result, many people find it harsh when the truth or reality of their worthlessness is spoken to them in words. These are the same people in a family or govt. who will survive with your resources like leeches and then turn back and say you are disgusting. If you don't believe this, then observe the world closely. Merely reading the theory of objectivism will not do it for anyone. Humans are good at pointing out flaws but to self-assess one's own flaws is another story. Only a man who knows virtue will understand and appreciate someone else's virtue. That is to say, if you have practised valuing time and hard work all your life, you will appreciate a man of same values equally. A lazy person will not be able to appreciate that. For him, it would be just an escape by stating that the hardworking person is just after money. These people are highly toxic. Their envy is so strong that it can go till the extent of exercising mental animosity or brute force against the virtuous. This could be one among your family or the government.
In short: Phil Donohoe is a delusional and daft of a person here.
She taught that self sacrifice was immoral. Jesus disagrees.
41:53 - [paraphrased] " Do you believe that females should be in leadership positions. ", Ayn Rand: " No, a woman can't hold a leadership position. I wouldn't vote for her. ", " A woman in charge of an army? It's unspeakable. ". So basically, just an example of that all of her ideas, theories and politics are 'beyond herself' like she doesn't care what her gender is, she cares about the state, the world, and how the future is 200 years later. Not 'now-ism' or 'me-ism'.
So in general, she's quite good, however there's that monopoly flaw (previous comment).
If you interested in going down the rabbit hole of the free market arguments around the subject of monopolization check out Tom Woods, Dave Smith, Michael Malice, Ron Paul, or really anyone out of the Austrian school of economics or the Mises Caucus within Libertarianism.
ITT & GM sort of made her point.
Great job Jeanette ! You wild hippie ! LOL
Where’s itt now?
She always missed the purpose of Christ, which was to liberate us of the fear of death, and all of the psychocultural death related psychic derivatives
You've always missed the purpose of rationality, which is to realize that primitive religious myths should be disregarded and discarded.
34:16 Alex Jones before there was Alex Jones!
❤
Haha 2.50 fuel, wouldn’t that be nice!
to me I have too much proof of God(lol)
but I agree with a lot of the things that she talked about
we are all entitled to our own opinions as long as we aren't hurting ourselves or others
do I think if Ayn was a Christian it would've made her happier? absolutely
Well said. Amen 🙏
If she were only alive today, to see what shape our country and the whole world is in.
Maybe people would listen now. Doubt it.
27:52 is the achilles heel of Ayn Randian 'laissez faire 'anything goes' Capitalism', as monopoly ought to be eradicated, which Ayn Rand never mentions in any of her interviews nor books AFAIK, so this woman in the audience describes what many of us feel, including myself. " At first, when I was 18... I liked the book... now that I'm smarter... uh... the monopoly... ".
I don't understand your point. You're saying Ayn doesn't acknowledge that monopolies need to be eradicated? What monopolies? I don't know of any monopolies that exist without state power actively fueling them
Laissez-faire 'anything goes' Capitalism without anti-monopoly laws, without regulation, without incentivization & commission structures, without harmony, without 'corporate love & corporate worship' (i.e. in Japan like people start at Honda at age 18 and finish at age 80 Etc.), without idealism mixed with selflessness, and so on.... is just 'rampant Capitalism with zero regulation' which is what she writes of in her books, as the philosophy to conquer 'statehood'.
Hmm what did I just write.
In 1976, she retired from writing her newsletter and, after her initial objections, allowed a social worker employed by her attorney to enroll her in Social Security and Medicare.
Enrolled? Do you have the option to not pay taxes? You are forced to contribute whether you want or not. Her attorney helped her to claim money that they have imposed on her by taxes. And it's just less than usd 2k, way less than what the gov has taken from her.
So much for her philosophy against “socialism.”
great interview by as ayn sais ppl are becoming more and more unpolite ,compare older interviews and this one ,more and more mockery,ayn was the smartest here
21:08
The governments only functions
She mistakes politeness with disagreement. She wants no one to disagree with her, quite a dictator.
A common tactic is for people to accuse her of the very motivations they secretly desire to act on, and then label her a hypocrite when in reality, it's just a psychological strategy to deflect one's own desire to be a tyrant rather than address her arguments.
@@avatarparadigms so should human beings act on every desire that they have?
Are you in favor of all illegal immigration into the United States as well? The people are acting on their own desire for a better life possibly or to come over to this country and/or for malevolent purposes?
@@travispee3503 I don't care if people come to this country legally or illegally because I don't believe the laws have any ontological verity in the first place. Banning a person from being in your country is like banning a certain kind of cloud from blowing in your national airspace. And taking issue with the existence of laws that ban foreigners is like taking issue with the instincts of wolverines. From my perspective, it's all just nature being exactly what nature is. My only approach is simply a question of how to better adapt to the world as I find myself in. If playing by the laws equals better adaptability, that's my route. If not, that's not my route.
@@avatarparadigms that is not the purpose of legal immigration. It's not just about laws. It's also about economics, culture, disease control, etc. Your use of the team "banning" is both only incorrect, but disingenuous. To require a path to citizenship is not a ban, but being those who truly want to assimilate to the adopted ideas and cultural in which they desire to be apart of. To shrug and simply allow anyone to come into your home that may not have good intentions, or simply wants to take advantage of the system you have created is beyond stupid and dangerous.
@@mytruthslays1303 I don't believe in rights. What we traditionally call rights are simply powers we have the ability to impose with impunity. If I can kill you without consequence, then, materially speaking, its indistinguishable from me having the right to. And where things are indistinguishable, we have no justification for making the distinction.
That means what we call rights are determined solely by those powerful enough to dictate who gets to act without consequence and who does not.
If I can kill you without facing consequences I'd rather avoid, then, in effect, it's my right to kill you, irrespective of whatever powers you define the social construct we call rights as entailing.
At present, the political system we currently have in place allows illegal immigration as a means of attaining the power to enslave illegal immigrants with impunity.
So your anti-illegal immigration stance is, in practice, identical to also being pro-slavery since the only way to stop illegals from being enslaved is to legalizing illegal immigration - which you're not willing to do.
By throwing illegal immigrants in penal colonies for slave labor, we grant them legal status. By letting them work for slave wages, we effectively grant them the equivapency of legal status. And by prohibiting their interspersion into the U.S., we spare them from slavery at the price of depriving them of legal status.
There isn't a moral solution to this paradox. It's either we legalize slavery or we criminalize a people.
Choose.
A command based on words of Jesus in the Sermon on the Mount : “All things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.” The Mosaic law contains a parallel commandment: “Whatever is hurtful to you, do not do to any other person.”
If Jesus is not God you can ignore this? If God became flesh and dwelt among us, you have a problem here.
Very good.
Warm ? She is cold as Ice .
Political Abuse of Psychology/Psychiatry, Health Care/Doctors, Science... Academia/Education Industrial Complex
(comment #4)
Did Donahue say "The Fountain Pin?"
@@jenniferbrower I know, I've read most of Rand's books/novels. I just thought he said "pin" and not "head"
She beleive on God, her God his reason...
Is that Gayle King, Oprah’s best friend, asking a question at 38 minutes?
Is selfishness really our "natural tendency" or is that learned?
Selfishness means SURVIVAL, but it can expand beyond the "natural tendency" of individualism into mutually beneficial cooperation with others quite easily without descending into GREED, but only if VIRTUE is present. VIRTUE is what must be taught and learned. An infant must be self-interested in acquiring sustenance and emotional bulwarking, or it dies. Humans are self-interested in survival because of a cascade of biological hormones that inform us to seek out the pleasure of sustenance and emotional grounding, and to avoid the pain of hunger and lack. This is the dopamine and oxytocin frame that all humans are born with. This is why we seek food, this is why we seek love, and BOTH of those things are best found in COOPERATION with a framework of VIRTUE. No one wants to be taken advantage of for someone else's greedy ends. This IS the Golden Rule.
Of course, it is learned, grasped, and reasoned. How else can it be if we talk about "rational" selfishness? You must involve all your natural senses and means of survival(intellect) in order to integrate an objective moral code.
Well do you have to pound it in your child's head that they should share like the rest of the world or do they naturally try to give everything to others to please them before self?
30:08
She was a genius!
She was a pos
donahue running the conversation is such a bore. nice hair tho, lots of soy etc etc
Donahue , one of the original soy boys .... and true leftist !
True, but still I give him credit for how he behaved during this interview. I man, he took the L with class.
shut up, he was an intelligent interviewer & presented her with questions good enough for her to expose her philosophy in various ways.
☝Same way you expose your ignorance ? Tell us where the bad man hurt you ....
@@gearbear4530 Every single question he asked was literally designed to present her views in the most uncharitable manner possible. Donahue was a textbook disingenuous, virtue signaling, bad faith, interviewer. He’s practically the template for many other disingenuous, virtue signaling, bad faith talking heads.
Question who has benefited you and the people you know more, the bad guy rich oil company owners who sell the product that gets you to and from work or the undoubtably virtuous, compassionate, rich Donahue who’s convinced you that you’re a “good person “ like him if you agree with his views?
Oh, come on! Phil Donahue is still married to Marlo Thomas. And besides, Ayn Rand's writings are not philosophical. Her writings of objectivism has individualism turned highly hyper.
RIP Donahue
Jennifer Tilly asks a question at 35:20 ! 😄
we humans dont get it .
Thinking about the WEF and all their hoaxes.
if Ayn married Jordan Peterson what kind of children would they bring up?
holy fuck, she’s amazing
There is not a mother on this earth that would not give her life for her child if called for. Rand never had any kids so she could never understand that. Smart woman for sure, learned a lot from her, but disagree whole heartedly about her definition of altruism, and her philosophy on the topic. She is really confused by communism and nazism, I would never consider them altruistic ideologies. They left their mark on her for sure.
Both forms of socialism which is collectivist (one for the "workers", the other for the "workers", both really for the state)
Are you crazy? 600k American mothers per year not only don't give their lives, but in fact kill their own child bc if it's possible inconvenience to their lives,
"OBJECTIVIST Ayn Rand"
"27:47 - Nononono Ask the question politely. I don't respond to rudeness. That hippie was disrespectful. {Cut to commercial} But back to the previous question, if anyone wants to ask it politely..."
These types are always the biggest hypocrites lmaooo.
I missed your point. I don't see the correlation between objectivism & choosing to not answer an arrogantly asked passive aggressive question.
Objective rudeness.
She rambled and didn't ask a question.
She reminds me of a wicked and I mean wicked Witch.
Well she was brilliant & right about govt / economics in general.
Thats what she is
Wow this woman is evil!
No she's not. She's an intellectual hero. Which of her opinions to find "evil!"?
She seriously is and all of her followers too. Bunch of sociopaths.
@@electroheartbeat85 Weak mind.
phil needs a haircut so badly it bothers me looking at his head
If you took your current hairstyle back to '79, people would say the same about you!
lol
Only sacrifice required is to remain Authentic (Self Love/Esteem) that holds any value...
Sacrifice bonds with people that have 3rd party Government Interference
(Manic Oppression)...
Cut ties with anybody that interferes with you being you...
No matter who they are, how hard it is, how long it takes & how many people you have to let go... (Plan A Escape Route/Know your Exists)...
She is another kindred spirit...
I believe in INTUITION over influence...
When FREEWILL & REASON are part of the equation ... 3 of A Perfect Pair...
Naturally attracted/drawn to... like minded Artist/People...
Authentic Artist Get A Authentic Audience it doesn't matter if its complicated or simple Art/Music (Life)...
Only type of Artist I can be is Authentic/Unique (me)
The realization of the connections are after the fact (entire lifetime)
Never sellout... fuck your addictions... fake people aren't worth my time & energy
Watch out for Malignant Narcissist and their Sellouts/Slaves that Flip the Script
Scapegoat Dilemma...
If the left is doing the rights agenda its not Liberal and a sign of Right Winged Government Interference (White Privilege has morphed into Informant Privilege... Informant Nazis/Slaves come in all colors.. Modern Slavery)
LIBERAL - .
1. willing to respect or accept behavior or opinions different from one's own;
open to new ideas.
2. relating to or denoting a political and social philosophy that promotes
individual rights, civil liberties, democracy, and free enterprise.
...small government, progressive, modern, forward-thinking, radical, left-wing, freethinking
Most informants became criminals after they were born into it or recruited into the informant system...
Atheist/Individuals Rule