Changes

Rand, who wrote the two absolute best-sellers of our century, The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957), was (deservedly) ignored and ridiculed as a philosopher: her fascination with male figures displaying absolute, unswayable determination of their Will, seems to offer the best imaginable confirmation of Sylvia Plath's famous line, "…every woman adores a Fascist." However, although it is easy to dismiss the very mention of Rand in Can a "serious" theoretical article as an obscene extravaganza — artistically, she is of course, worthless — the properly subversive dimension of her ideological procedure is not to be underestimated: [[Lacanian]] learn something from Ayn Rand fits into the line of over-conformist authors who undermine the ruling ideological edifice by their very excessive identification with it.?

Her overRand, who wrote the two absolute best-orthodoxy sellers of our century, The Fountainhead (1943) and Atlas Shrugged (1957), was directed at capitalism itself, (deservedly) ignored and ridiculed as the title of one of a [[philosopher]]: her books Capitalism[[fascination]] with [[male]] [[figures]] displaying absolute, the Unknown Ideal tells us; according to herunswayable determination of their Will, the truly heretic thing today is seems to embrace offer the basic premise best imaginable confirmation of capitalism without its communitarian, collectivist[[Sylvia]] Plath's famous line, welfare, etc"…every [[woman]] adores a Fascist." However, sugarcoating. So what Pascal and Racine were although it is easy to Jansenismdismiss the very mention of Rand in a "serious" [[theoretical]] article as an [[obscene]] extravaganza — artistically, what Kleist was to German nationalist militarismshe is of course, what Brecht was worthless — the properly subversive [[dimension]] of her [[ideological]] procedure is not to Communism, be underestimated: Rand is to American capitalism. It was perhaps her Russian origins and upbringing which enabled her to formulate directly fits into the fantasmatic kernel line of American capitalist ideologyover-conformist authors who undermine the ruling ideological edifice by their very excessive [[identification]] with it.

The elementary ideological axis Her over-orthodoxy was directed at [[capitalism]] itself, as the title of one of her work consists in books Capitalism, the opposition between Unknown [[Ideal]] tells us; according to her, the prime moverstruly heretic [[thing]] today is to embrace the basic premise of capitalism without its communitarian, "men of mindcollectivist, [[welfare]]," and second handersetc., "mass mensugarcoating." The Kantian opposition between ethical autonomy So what [[Pascal]] and heteronomy is here brought Racine were to Jansenism, what Kleist was to extreme: the "mass man" is searching for recognition outside himself[[German]] nationalist militarism, his self-confidence and assurance depend on how he is perceived by otherswhat [[Brecht]] was to [[Communism]], while the prime mover Rand is fully reconciled with himself, relying on his creativity, selfish in the sense that his satisfaction does not depend on getting recognition from others or on sacrificing himself, his innermost drives, for to American capitalism. It was perhaps her Russian origins and upbringing which enabled her to formulate directly the benefit [[fantasmatic]] kernel of othersAmerican [[capitalist]] [[ideology]].

The elementary ideological axis of her [[work]] consists in the opposition between the prime mover is innocentmovers, delivered from the fear "men of others[[mind]]," and second handers, "mass men." The Kantian opposition between [[ethical]] [[autonomy]] and heteronomy is here brought to extreme: the "mass man" is searching for that reason without hatred even for [[recognition]] [[outside]] himself, his worst enemies (Roark[[self]]-confidence and assurance depend on how he is perceived by [[others]], while the "prime mover" is fully reconciled with himself, relying on his [[creativity]], selfish in The Fountainhead, doesn't actively hate Tooheythe [[sense]] that his [[satisfaction]] does not depend on getting recognition from others or on sacrificing himself, his great opponentinnermost [[drives]], he simply doesn't care about himfor the benefit of others.) Here is the famous dialogue between the two:

The prime mover is innocent, delivered from the [[fear]] of others, and for that [[reason]] without [[hatred]] even for his worst enemies (Roark, the "prime mover" in The Fountainhead, doesn't actively [[hate]] Toohey, his great opponent, he simply doesn't care [[about]] him.) Here is the famous dialogue between the two: — Mr. Roark, we're alone here. Why don't you tell me what you [[think ]] of me? In any [[words ]] you [[wish]]. No one will hear us.

On the basis of this opposition, Rand elaborates her radically [[atheist]], [[life]]-assertive, "selfish" [[ethics]]: the "prime mover" is capable of the [[love ]] for others, this love is even crucial for him since it does not express his contempt for himself, his self-[[denial]], but on the contrary, the highest self-assertion-love for others is the highest [[form ]] of the properly [[understood ]] "selfishness," i.e. of my capacity to realize through my [[relationship ]] with others my own innermost drives. On the basis of this opposition, Atlas Shrugged constructs a purely fantasmatic scenario: John Galt, the novel's mysterious hero, assembles all prime movers and organizes their strike — they withdraw from the collectivist oppression of the bureaucratized [[public ]] life. As a result of their [[withdrawal]], what [[social ]] life loses is impetus, social services; from stores to railroads, no longer function, [[global ]] disintegration sets in, and the desperate [[society ]] calls the prime movers back — they accept it, but under their own terms…

What we have here is the [[fantasy ]] of a man finding the answer to the eternal question "What moves the [[world]]?" — the prime movers — and then [[being ]] able to "stop the motor of the world" by organizing the prime movers' retreat. John Galt succeeds in suspending the very circuit of the [[universe]], the "run of things," causing its [[symbolic ]] [[death ]] and the subsequent rebirth of the New World.

The ideological gain of this operation resides in the [[reversal ]] of roles with [[regard ]] to our everyday [[experience ]] of strike: it is not [[workers ]] but the capitalists who go on strike, thus proving that they are the truly productive members of society who do not [[need ]] others to survive.<ref>Rand's ideological limitation is here clearly perceptible: in spite of the new impetus that the [[myth ]] of the "prime movers" got from the digital industry (Steve Jobs, Bill Gates), [[individual ]] capitalists are today, in our era of multinationals, definitely not its "prime movers." In [[other ]] words, what Rand "represses" is the fact that the rule of the crowd is the inherent outcome of the [[dynamic ]] of capitalism itself.</ref> The hideout to which the prime movers retreat, a [[secret ]] [[place ]] in the midst of the Colorado mountains accessible only via a dangerous narrow passage, is a kind of [[negative ]] version of Shangri-la, a "utopia of greed": a small town in which unbridled [[market ]] relations reign, in which the very [[word ]] "[[help]]" is prohibited, in which every service has to be reimbursed by [[true ]] (gold-covered) [[money]], in which there is no need for pity and self-sacrifice for others.