MGTOW

No !... He's a perfect example of the leftist liberal mindset !!

Not…. Really?

@@TOCC50oh lord.

Really? Did you watch the other interview?

@Skip White Im talking about Phil D. I agree she is great but Phil is not unbiased lol

Journalists used to be able to present both sides in America.

I thought he was a jerk. He would interrupt his guests constantly, getting o his soapbox on one show, then exploiting people on smother.. acting like was a rue journalist. This is how it began… before Jerry Springer, & all the gbg shows you see now, started here & w/Oprah in the 80s

you obviously live in a sheltered environment

After living in the US for more than 50 years, you'd expect that, wouldn't you?

I don't expect the general US population, even US born & bread 70 y/o's, to be as articulate as Ayn Rand.

I’ve noticed that about Scientist who argue Atheism as well. Most of their arguments are bullshit but because they have the accent and English down.. they are geniuses 😂 Ms. Rand said Faith is a sign of a psychological weakness and then walked off the stage and smoked a pack of cigarettes 😂😂😂 (she was a smoker). I still love her but come on lol.

No she's not smart go poop yo pants

@@felipedrada you would, but look at immigrants of today - 20, 30 years ... still speako no damn english

I wonder how the current kick of stoicism on youtube and social media relates to her philosophy of life. They're not of one same strand, obviously, but what do you get when you mix Aristotle with Cicero in modern times?

I too was a fan of Rand’s work in my teens. However, after studying philosophy formally at uni I concluded that she was a very poor philosopher. For instance, when she talks about Kant she sounds like the overly confident freshman who neglected to do the reading. It’s really bad.

​@ericd9827 yet all you're able to do is resort to insults without providing any examples of where she is wrong

​@@jafco9 It's really quite simple to identify places where Rand gets things patently wrong. For example, on Kant's ethics she wrote: "As to Kant’s version of morality, it was appropriate to the kind of zombies that would inhabit that kind of [Kantian] universe: it consisted of total, abject selflessness. An action is moral, said Kant, only if one has no desire to perform it, but performs it out of a sense of duty and derives no benefit from it of any sort, neither material nor spiritual; a benefit destroys the moral value of an action. (Thus, if one has no desire to be evil, one cannot be good; if one has, one can.)" This is wrong from start to finish. Literally every sentence is false --plainly false. Kant's ethics does not consist "of total, abject selflessness." Indeed, it recognizes a rather large sphere of activity governed by imperfect duties which give one wide latitude to pursue one's personal projects and interests. Also, it's false that for Kant an act is moral only if you have no desire to do it and don't benefit from it. You can desire to do something and benefit from it, but you cannot do it *because* you desire to do it or benefit from it. Finally, it's patently false that performing a moral act requires an evil motive to oppose with the motive of duty. Kant wrote extensively on the cultivation of virtue, for instance, in which one acquires the will to do what's good for its own sake and prunes away alternative motives. So there you go. Ayn Rand didn't know shit about Kant. She was undeniably intelligent, but she was a horrible philosopher.

​@Jeff Farias you never responded.

I feel the same way. I don’t agree with her philosophy but I love her brain ☺️ I think that best describes what you mean too huh? 👍🏾 She’s smart

I just came across this video, yes she has an interesting philosophy, however extremely disrespectful and diminishing to others who disagreed with her.

I agree she is smart, however not so humble about it. She wants to pick and choose who is smart enough to debate with her. Besides, she called it “her show”, well, it wasn’t. A smart person can have a debate with anyone, she could’ve had a better argument instead.

@Skip White hey there! In my opinion she overreacted. She should calmly smartly dismiss the comment just by saying something ” It’s a free society and you are entitled to your opinion.” I do agree with the comment where her philosophy is not applicable in our “current society”. But again, in philosophy you select the ideas that will benefit yourself. Not one idea is 100% correct. She was rather rude, a typical entitled older lady.

@@AlexK-vp9jd No one idea is 100% correct including this one.

Naa, society has just become more democratic. People are being given what they want - what they naturally respond more to. The masses have never hungered for virtue or depth.

Demjij baina

Dr Phil is given shit and lies to work with. He is far better when dealing with genuine people.

@@Leto2ndAtreides wrong, that did not age well

Thats right

From what I've witnessed, she is probably more popular now she ever was during her life. In one sense, that's a tragedy for her in the purely personal sense, but now that the spreading of her rational moral code cannot be stopped, and as the frontier of off-world migration is finally opening up, her philosophy is now free to either prove itself as the best system for human interactions, or be replaced with something even more ideal. As always, the pioneers will blaze the trail for the rest of us.

It’s not true. There are many many brilliant people engaging in dialect today. It’s only that they have not yet been filtered to the top but with time the great speakers of today will shine through and youth of tomorrow will, as you have, wonder where all the smart people are.

At the time I became aware of him (mid-80s I guess), I thought his show was mostly fluff, but I must have watched this and his other Rand appearance at least six times by now, and I agree. Every time I re-watch I find another nuance to appreciate. His questions are insightful and timely, he is clearly interested in the ideas presented, and is also a masterful liason between guest and audience. I only wish he had sat down with Frank Zappa once or twice.

I can't believe it, but I just looked it up and Donahue is still alive. Apparently he never looked young, ever. But he could absolutely bring it back. Why not?

No don't do it! People have too much to live for.

Joe Rogan

@@Alacard0malley I meant mainstream. But yes, Joe is great.

@@IceColdProfessional ah man they can't do them anyway, someone might say something that's true and wouldn't that be tragic

@@IceColdProfessionalI think podcasts will be mainstream in 10-15 years. It’s no different than how the internet was niche in the 90’s. The old media (or establishment media) right now still has a firm grasp on the majority, just as newspapers did when the internet was rising. But they losing viewers every year and that will eventually crush their business model. Their failure to adapt is what holds older viewers now but eventually writes their ticket to irrelevancy with younger viewers. You look at nightly news, cable news, even late night TV (all establishment media) and their viewership decreases every year. They can’t understand why Joe Rogan is so successful as they almost thumb their nose at anyone who follows him. It’s the same thing Newspapers did towards the internet, and history repeats itself.

yes

How is it not sad? She lost her husband. thats a sad thing. How are you making this about language, it was a perfectly constructed sentence.

Yeah, its really sweet and sad

Just so you know .... Ayn insisted on an affair with her protege and also insisted that her husband not only know about it, but approve of it. Not exactly a saint in this area.

@@laughingman4570 , in order for it to be an "affair" her husband would have had to of been left in the dark about it, of have no knowledge of it... Also, how do you justify using a word like "saint", which has holly like connotation, to even point in the direction of a woman who specifically has said she has zero interest in the subject matter of religion and it's teaching in her own life? lol

She's also a massive hypocrite and her philosophy became a cheerleading exercise for corporate greed and short sightedness. Her effect on the world was purely negative.

I like a lot of her ideas but I really hate her because she is so mean and intolerant. She seems to lack empathy, you know the missing chip theory.

Anthem by Rush is one of my favorites both musically and lyric-wise. 2112 for same reasons. Love Neil Peart

@@steveperreira5850 that's because psycho-epistomologically you hold the context of alturism so you frame every "sense of life" as a collective. Learn more about objectivist epsitomology for more info

unknown: I am definitely willing to look more into it, I read Her two most popular novels when I was a young Man. The point I am making here is that she is not a very nice person socially and she is so goddamn intolerant that I would not want to carry on any debate or discussion with her because she is just completely dismissive. I agree with her on most things, to me the individual is supreme to the collective. But I’m not gonna be a disciple of this bitch.

@@steveperreira5850 i really don't understand her philosophy of selfishness. she says we should put our self-interest first. but i find it is integral to our self-interest to NOT be selfish. if everyone is selfish it leads to a breakdown of society as a whole. therefore, humanity has evolved to be more socially responsible in order to preserve ourselves.

These people can only attack Rand personally..nobody is capable of attacking her intelect.

Why should they have respected her? Ayn Rand didn’t respect anyone unless they perfectly embodied all the tenets of Objectivism- even if they also happened to have disembowled and chopped to pieces a 12-year old girl and tricked her father into paying them ransom money. And even then, she still held herself to a different standard than her fellow Objectivists. Like when her “side-piece,” Nathanael Branden, caught her cheating on him, she justified her affair, but when he did the same, she beat him up, shut down the schools he funded, excommunicated him from Objectivism, and wished a life of impotence upon him. She was a horribly misguided piece of shit.

@@crescentfreshbret ?? That doesn't remotely negate objectivism, that just paints the lady as a sociopath..... Let's use the given that she was a sociopath: even if she was, you don't have to be a sociopath to be an objectivist.....so I'm lost. Now in terms of respect, the reason why she didn't respect anyone outside of those constraints is very clear: she doesn't view them as honorable/intellectually honest. It's the same reason why moral nihilists view most arguments as intellectually dishonest. So again, looking at things from a purely objective lens (no pun intended) im lost.

I was thinking the same thing

Yep, a corporation.

Retroactively applying your crackpot theories to one man’s slip up almost 50 years ago is pretty crazy. You’re just as bad as the mystics Rand decries in this interview.

Free will doesn't exist. Check out the new scientific studies on free will. It's pretty interesting, our brains decide for us before we realize it and think it was a conscious decision.

@@dandrechesterfield5411 Could you expand on that. Why would consciousness determine if a choice was free as long as one alternative could be chosen over another whatever the mechanism?

@@HablaCarnage63 Sam Harris has a few podcasts on the subject heres one clip kzfaq.info/get/bejne/aLJhlJp0rb-6fJs.html

@@dandrechesterfield5411 Thanks.

I love what you said and agree.

America has become more and more socialist. Obamacare and the Covid-19 lockdowns are the opposite of what shes advocating.

​@A Miles To be ahead of one's time means the future more sembles their way of thinking. Would Rand recognize her ideas as having prominence in American society today?

@A Miles from Cambridge dictionary: to have new ideas a long time before other people think that way

I don't believe her philosophy either, my belief is Christianity

I've read Atlas Shrugged, The Fountainhead, and We the Living by Ayn Rand so I'm familiar with her ideas. This interview was very interesting. While I have admiration for her extraordinary intellect and ability to convey her ideas as it pertains to her loathing of collectivist doctrine (including her animus towards soft socialist concepts like "responsibility"), it struck me when she started talking reverently about science and scientists and showing no ability to appreciate the logic and reason underpinning Christian theology. It was amazing to me that even the great Ayn Rand fell prey to this aspect of the collectivist ideal. This absurdly childish notion that "science" can explain life's deepest mysteries. She had zero awareness of how she had fallen prey to this pinnacle of collectivism.

Exactly. It’s crazy how relevant this still is. Half of a hundred years later. Wow! I’m just reading Atlas Shrugged, and wow it’s relevant to society today.

@@badgerlife9541Its pulp philosophy. pop nonsense for people who want their socially unacceptable, often immature feelings girded by another.

​@@badgerlife9541then you will love her 1971 book The New Left: The Anti-Industrial Revolution. Im that book, she predicted almost everything happening today, and pinpoints the origin of Woke.

she makes sense if you think about it rationally, but most people aren't rational, most people are emotional. Emotionally she sounds "evil" or bad, but rationally she makes sense. That's the problem

Now the Trumpsters can honor and praise her because thats where they got many of their unhinged ideas.

​@@bretwright3535in other words you don't believe that you are important

You do realize that she is still basing it on internal feelings. No one is completely rational even if they believe so to make themselves feel better. A truly logical person would be impartial and not hold extreme views. It is clear based on her pattern of speech that she internalized her feelings. There is always 2 sides to a coin. Yin and yang. It will never be one way or the other. There will always be opposition

I don't think she was evil. Just a massive hypocrite.

Lol no they weren’t. People were just as stupid they just didn’t have social media to platform stupidity.

She wasn't too good at pointing out the weaknesses of her own thought.

Fred Rogers No this woman was a delusional idiot, who in the end turned out to be a hypocrite. She ended up taking social security, after years of rallying against social security and admonishing Americans who took SS benefits.

She didn´t stand up for a 12 year old girl who was victim of a paedophile. That aside the woman was promoting egotism, the route of all all human failings and suffering. When people take their heads out of their arses it gives them a wider view of the world and therefore a far better understanding

Cat 52 I'm not an objectivist, but it still annoys me to see ignorant takes on Mrs. Rand or her philosophy. @Cat52 so if the government takes money from you that you don't think it should and you regain some of the stolen money you are a hipocrit?

@@ChristopherWanha it would be interesting to know if she ever paid SS taxes. But since funds are fungible, get back some income tax from her published works seems entirely reasonable.

She refused to acknowledge those that disagreed. How is that standing up for anything?

Yeah I've seen that show where she was on Donahue the year before this one. That was some incident.

@@elgrigorio1 It was indeed. That was the orange dress interview, for anyone who is curious. That wasn't her best moment IMO, because it was one of the few times she allowed herself to appear deliberately unpersuasive. She probably could have handled that particular question better, but at the same time, it is highly entertaining television and provides a unique insight into how she came to deal with such forms of social adversity toward the end of her life.

Truer words have never been spoken.

While drinking Starbucks and surfing their phones

You still think the USSR’s fascist system is what Socialism is all about, but you’re simping for a toxic Libertsrianism simp lik Rand and calling people like us “brainwashed.” >snicker

Cubans get to live longer lives than Americans. u$a is THE bully of earth extorting all other nations to comply. Socialist nations are overtaking u$a's predatory capitalistic warmongers.

No she didn't. They fled the revolution at it's beginning.

...and the only indication one needs that the mind is turned, "off," or has been badly crippled.

Rand says 'I think xyz bc of these reasons is the same as another person saying they feel xyz bc of these reasons. Rand got lost in semantics there....

@@BrianbeesandbikesIt's not "semantics." Words have meaning. "If language is not correct, then what is said is not what is meant." Confucius

Her real issue is inventing a personal definition of altruism and then arbitrarily deciding what uses of resources are good and bad and what motives are good and bad. Mother Theresa is popularly the image of altruistic endeavor. Her actions showed that she placed a higher value on serving others than on personal comfort. So she improved her condition every time she gave up something because her motive was not accumulation of things, but rather accumulation of what she thought were good works that would get her into heaven.

Carl Hopf that is always overlooked too.

@@superhoga That doesn't defy Rand's philosophy, it plays right into it. Objectively speaking, Mother Theresa was operating within her hierarchy of value, which is what Rand was advocating for. She placed higher value on serving others, so fundamentally, that wasn't altruism, because altruism is marked by self-sacrifice. Otherwise it would be merely doing nice things just because. Mother Theresa is a special case - she found her comfort in helping others, and this seemed to be an axiomatic truth that even Rand probably couldn't disagree with. If she did, then I would say that she's misjudging exactly the lengths to which certain people are willing to go for others, or she's simply mistrustful. But the point is, it's not altruism, by definition.

@@superhoga Christopher Hitchens would disagree with you. I would have loved to see a conversation between Hitch and Rand.

Rand never said that you should do what you want because you like it. She said to do what is in your rational self-interest. In a TV interview, you don't have time to be thorough in explaining things so she gave you a shorthand version.

Sorry to be off topic but does anyone know a method to get back into an instagram account?? I stupidly forgot my account password. I love any help you can give me

@Lian Johan instablaster :)

@Tripp Bryson i really appreciate your reply. I got to the site thru google and I'm in the hacking process atm. I see it takes a while so I will reply here later when my account password hopefully is recovered.

@Tripp Bryson it worked and I finally got access to my account again. I'm so happy:D Thanks so much, you really help me out :D

@Lian Johan Happy to help xD

technically that could also be 1981 but rand also talks about the "incident last year" in reference to a 1979 interview with donahue

+Brian Simerl I googled it, ended up watching Obama on Running wild with Bear Grylls.

Awesome movie watched it twice , want it in my DVD collection

I know. So many politicians buying into and trying to implement this black-hearted hag’s reprehensible ideas. Definitely very depressing.

imagine growing up in Canada and watching what's happened to the USA. We don't even visit on mass anymore.

2020 says hi. 😂😂😂

how you feeling now ?

@@lifeisabadjoke5750 Rand's effect on society has been so negative. Justifying greed and shortsightedness, advocating eugenics, much of the so called 'trumpism' can be traced back to her nonsense

She admits she is not a cult!! Yes!!!

That's funny, the bible changed me

She seems kinda dumb, or juvenile.

@@cathyhamlin3611 when you’re mind is open any book can change you.

Cathy, which "Bible" or version had any positive affect upon You that You claim "changed You "? If it "changed" You, as You claim, then was it via Your personal decision within logic, reason, reasoning, thinking or perhaps placed You into a forced acceptance with no choice, or perhaps You were just directed, perhaps inDOCtrinated to accept thaparticular Doctrine, thus refrain from thought, logic, reason, reasoning ?

They're not taught in legitimate settings because its not a legitimate 'philosophy.

She basically stole her shtick from Nietzsche.

@@shinybeast8946 who tf taught you to think?

@@nikolavlah9199 you think for yourself, dipshit.

@@nikolavlah9199 it optimistic to assume he's thinking

All comes from Aristotle.

Vanity of vanities, all is vanity

Piotr Nowacki You are talking about suppression, which is sometimes necessary, and in sports can be tactical. She was talking about repression, which is usually harmful.

Mike Blain What a comment. What a distinction. Kudos to you sir.

Why would you share if its not in pursuit of you personal gain?

@@spiraleddays1870 Indeed but the people who do it often do so for their own gain. Ego, pleasure to help someone else or both.

@@flazeda8743 that further increases my point we should strive towards the individual not the collective

@@spiraleddays1870 I wasn't disagreeing, just saying actual sacrifices are rare imo. Once we did good for ourselves and even before that we often want to help the collective it seems.

Exactly. Ayn Rand was born on February 2, 1905. She said on the show that she was 75. So, this was filed in 1980.

Also references the Iranian revolution and the Shah's escape into exile.

A character from her book

Correct. She is much underappreciated.

She wasn't a genius, she was a pop-philosopher who appealed to basic people's basic instincts

Just because she didn't _start_ the cult, doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

people often retain the accent they grew up with

The accent gave her power over people. She hid her flimsy philosphy behind it.

@@tabby1412 Flimsy? How so?

@@MrJes3141 Rand built a fantasy "man" character to counter the fantasy Marxist man that had damaged her life and country. Both are ridiculous and do not bear out in basic observation and daily life. Her "philosophy" is entirely reactionary and a warped form of self defense. In the end, she began to crack and practically begged St. Peter to save her. I hope he did.

I think you mean "Leave it to Rand to oversimplify and pretend she knows everything about a man she's only ever seen on TV." It _is_ arrogance, and only arrogance.

Old Do-Gooder Phil. Do good with other people's money to make him feel good that he fought to get you to cough up tax to help those that he thought supported him.

She also cursed socialism and people who accept government assistance... until she got strung out on drugs and blew all her money... then she went straight to the government with her hand out. She was a fraud

@jeep23862 no you fool...

@jeep23862 Are you a pragmatic?

@jeep23862 Of course you are

@jeep23862 I dont want to waste my time trying to prove a hardheaded guy like you the truth. The sadness in your eyes will tell you.

@jeep23862 Given the eyes reflects your ignorance of your mind, I can tell.

The early Donahue was the good Donahue. He got desperate as time went by.

Actually, a great many of the discussions on his program appear quite polite and civilized when juxtaposed against the culturally suicidal anarcho-tyranny of 2024.

Wow. An Ayn Rand podcast. That would be something. Is there any podcaster today equal to this woman's brilliance? No. And look at how low talk shows have sunk. The View, Jimmy Kimmell, Bill Mahr... No wonder the West is an insane irrational mess.

@@maryevans767 No. that's not true, we still have charlatans like jordan petersen and joe rogan for basic people to look up to.

I appreciate her defense of individualism, and against the collectivist state, on that we are brother & sister. If I spent a weekend with her alone, murder comes to mind, she is so condescending.

She is in no way right wing

@@jonathonhanson7278 Did you notice that I enclosed it in quote marks? LOL. Relatively speaking, her ideas, or to be more specific, the economic implications of her philosophy, are in line with what many today consider economic conservatism.

@@tomservo75 She wouldn't agree with any political party today because they have abandoned the small businessman or Capitalistic system by impeding, and getting in the way, stopping advancement of free-thinking rational men that this country was founded on.

She wasn't right wing and she dispised conservatism as much as "progressivism". You haven't done your homework.

doctorx0079 not Danny Rand? 😂😂😂

@MAFIOSA E what's funny about that

she was morally bankrupt, and encouraged short-term thinking and greed.

@edwardgiovannelli5191 there's no such thing as "morally bankrupt". And she was a long-term thinker in the truest sense because she understood human nature.

@@manusha1349but she didn't understand human nature... she played to, and celebrated, the worst of human instincts and rationalized them by calling them 'rational.' But she couldn't grasp the better angels of humanity so she condemned them as frivolous To think she understood all of human nature is, I'm sorry, laughably inaccurate. At best, naïve.

I feel badly for you

He had a great show.

Yawn. This story is a canard that ought to be retired. She had no choice but to opt into it as Medicare was a mandatory government policy. Please do some basic research before posting.

She paid considerable tax through the years. It was the medical system set up in this country by the Altruists. Survival, you do what you have to reasonably do.

Do you mean she legally took back some of the wealth that was stolen from her at the point of a gun? Go read what she had to say about social security before you make a fool of yourself.

I agree.

She was smarter than all those idiots who were throwing evert buzz word at her. A million times smarter!!!!

Or the world will go down in destruction. Hopefully, there will be a repository of her writings that survives so those of us that are left can rebuild.

I'm curious, why do you think that intellectualism, ("thinking, analysing things...") somehow precludes love or the capacity to love or to be happy? And death awaiting us all...what pray-tell would that have to do with thinking or not thinking? It certainly isn't an argument to not think. Her philosophy involved the idea of achieving in a way that does not harm nor exploit anyone else. Indeed, free trade not only benefits you, but those who choose to trade with you too, else they wouldn't choose to trade. "Real love", I contend, is to value someone else to a very high degree. Why would you insist, as you seem to be doing, that this would preclude deep thinking, and/or vise versa, that deep thinking would preclude "real love"? "Happiness is a state of uncontradictory joy, a joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values, and does not work for your own destruction..." ~ Ayn Rand, For the New Intellectual

That is your opinion. I have no more need of love. If you look deeply at it, it is selfish people who are all hop'd up on dopamine. Rationality is the right way to live a life, like Ayn. Living as intellectually honest as you possibly can. People like Ayn ad myself are not psychopaths, I actually have deep empathy for animals, but my particular type of human has pretty much lost all empathy for humans. And I admit that is probably why I am a Libertarian. I no longer desire the help of humans nor do I want to help humans. Love......pshhhh.....it is the instinct of the herd and frankly, the weak.

Ryan Nelson She wasn't (a) non-empathetic towards humans, and (b) loveless.

Ryan Nelson *"Love......pshhhh.....it is the instinct of the herd and frankly, the weak."* You're thinking Nietzsche, not Rand.

LucisFerre1 I did not say that. I said she was not a psychopath so, I pretty much agree with you. She probably had empathy for whatever she had it for, and she probably coveted other sentient beings (love). I was speaking of myself as Love being the instinct of the weak. And its not just Neitzsche, I believe it to be sound psychology.

:P

She's dead, as you too will be one day.

She's really likable to people who recognize intellect. I agree, she's cute :-) I don't agree with her religious argument but I love her mind.

yeah, she supported eugenics all through her life. Pretty freightening.