TheEgoist Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I hate to be the bearer of bad publicity once again, but tonight Stephen Colbert, on his comedy central show, did his Word Segment on what he calls "Rand Delusion". In Colbert's usual sarcastic style, he lampoons Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand and the recent publicity it has garnered thanks to conservative commentators. What I hate most about it, is that parts of it actually made me laugh, like listing Anton LaVey as a fan of Rand. What wasn't as funny was listing Reagan and Greenspan as people who admire/d her, mostly because any admiration they had didn't transfer into public policy. This is precisely what I have been talking about; people are going to start tying Atlas and Rand to the conservative movement. Colbert referred to A.S as the "conservative Bible". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilicyote Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 There is a small upside to this, though not nearly as big as the downside. A lot of conservatives have never read A.S. Now some of them might -- which is good. Small... OK tiny upside. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Hopefully it's caused some people to buy it and read it who wouldn't have otherwise. And it will certainly spin off other blog posts, TV pieces, and news stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rearden_Steel Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 “The only thing worse than being talked about is not being talked about.” Oscar Wilde Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grames Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 "There is no such thing as bad publicity except your own obituary." Brendan Behan Irish author & dramatist (1923 - 1964) For Ayn Rand all publicity is good publicity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exaltron Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I was googling this and couldn't find anything, then it occurred to me that this might be a play on "The Grand Illusion" (name of a French film, a Styx album among other things). So if you're looking for the video, it's actually called the "Rand Illusion". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jake_Ellison Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Unlike Colbert's previous two goofs on Rand, this wasn't funny. Probably because it was preachy, trying to convince people rather than just be funny. The laughs were mostly the minimum people give out of politeness, and some in the audience cheered, but not too enthusiastically. I guess they were wondering the same thing I was: Which is it? Are the rich evil thieves, and the cause of the recession, or are they the producers who need to continue sacrificing for the greater good? It's tough to make sense, even superficially, when you string those two arguments together, the way Mr. Colbert did here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rourke Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 With Rand and Objectivism being so closely tied to the mentality of CEO's, who are persona non grata right now, the negative publicity garnered could be a stake in the heart of Rand as a philosophy with broad public appeal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I was googling this and couldn't find anything, then it occurred to me that this might be a play on "The Grand Illusion" (name of a French film, a Styx album among other things). So if you're looking for the video, it's actually called the "Rand Illusion". Oh yeah, I know the Styx album well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheEgoist Posted March 12, 2009 Author Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Unlike Colbert's previous two goofs on Rand, this wasn't funny. Probably because it was preachy, trying to convince people rather than just be funny. The laughs were mostly the minimum people give out of politeness, and some in the audience cheered, but not too enthusiastically. I guess they were wondering the same thing I was: Which is it? Are the rich evil thieves, and the cause of the recession, or are they the producers who need to continue sacrificing for the greater good? It's tough to make sense, even superficially, when you string those two arguments together, the way Mr. Colbert did here. Agreed. I thought his thing with The Fountainhead was just funny and light-hearted. I don't know the other incident, but usually Colbert is pretty funny even if he goofs on something I happen to think is positive. However, this was hardly funny and I know people who aren't Objectivists or fans of Rand are going to call me stuck up, but it just was not a funny bit. It was incoherent and more vicious than comedic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thales Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 We're losing jobs and losing homes precisely because the self was not put first to begin with. Or to translate this, the annual five trillion dollar welfare state has resulted in this mess. I agree with Jake's take. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myself Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 However, this was hardly funny and I know people who aren't Objectivists or fans of Rand are going to call me stuck up, but it just was not a funny bit. It was incoherent and more vicious than comedic. Actually I thought it was good PR. He basically spends five minutes explaining the premise of the book in a mostly factual way. His "jokes" got barely any laughs and when they did it was off a beat or two as if they were waiting for a punchline he never delivered. It sounded by the audience feedback that they were more interested than amused by Rand's ideas. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thomas M. Miovas Jr. Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 After watching the video, I have a different take on it. He accurately described the events of the novel, it was just the side panel that made the rude commentary. And it is interesting that when Atlas Shrugged becomes most popular, the worst sort of CEO's are in the news, like Madoff; but the more rational people will realize that Atlas Shrugged is not about the Madoff's going on strike, it's about the producers, not the swindlers, going on strike. And it is bringing the right sort of issues into the forefront of public discussion. I agree that there is some danger in Objectivists being mentally associated with Conservatives. As others have pointed out, "Going Galt" involves a lot more than just protesting higher taxes. However, if American's can identify with that aspect of Atlas Shrugged, maybe they will pick up the rest in due time. It's great advertising, it's just too bad Miss Rand isn't around to see it. Historically, it takes about 100 years for a new philosophy to have significant cultural impact, so we are still in the early stages of the philosophical revolution. Yes, there will be a great deal of misunderstanding and misrepresentations of Objectivism, and that is something we have to fight, but I think it is good overall that Atlas Shrugged is some much in discussion these days. I remember 30 years ago when I first came across Atlas Shrugged and I couldn't find anyone who had even heard of it. Now it is everywhere, which is great! If we keep our heads about us, we can make great strides into the culture. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spaceplayer Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) I hate to be the bearer of bad publicity once again, but tonight Stephen Colbert, on his comedy central show, did his Word Segment on what he calls "Rand Delusion". In Colbert's usual sarcastic style, he lampoons Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand and the recent publicity it has garnered thanks to conservative commentators. What I hate most about it, is that parts of it actually made me laugh, like listing Anton LaVey as a fan of Rand. What wasn't as funny was listing Reagan and Greenspan as people who admire/d her, mostly because any admiration they had didn't transfer into public policy. This is precisely what I have been talking about; people are going to start tying Atlas and Rand to the conservative movement. Colbert referred to A.S as the "conservative Bible". Colbert, Stewart, et. al, are the Tooheys of our day, or at least, students of Toohey, using sharp words to cut at Rand. Colbert's word segment, however, is typical of so many Rand bashers lately, it reveals they haven't read, or if they have, don't understand, the point of ATLAS. He started off talking about Santelli before the skit, and harped on the idea that ATLAS was about the rich versus the poor. FAIL, Mr. Colbert. EPIC F*CKING FAIL. Edited March 13, 2009 by Capitalism Forever Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
exaltron Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 Unlike Colbert's previous two goofs on Rand, this wasn't funny. Probably because it was preachy, trying to convince people rather than just be funny. The laughs were mostly the minimum people give out of politeness, and some in the audience cheered, but not too enthusiastically. I guess they were wondering the same thing I was: Which is it? Are the rich evil thieves, and the cause of the recession, or are they the producers who need to continue sacrificing for the greater good? It's tough to make sense, even superficially, when you string those two arguments together, the way Mr. Colbert did here. Well I can't claim to be un-biased, but I have seen funnier send-ups of Rand. The only thing I chuckled at was the comment about things being so desperate that Americans are actually reading. But Jake_Ellison's observation about his bait-and-switch satire is an excellent one. I find more and more that leftists rely on this type of argument where they want to have their cake and eat it too, especially when it comes to altruism. They will argue that it is in your interest to help the poor, but at the same time suggest that you have no right to assert your interests when it comes to those in need. It seems like the more leftists ascend to power, the more shrill and desperate they are in trying to rationalize their politics. If they had any sense they would just keep quiet and let the guns do the talking, instead of pretending that they are justified in their philosophy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) I was googling this and couldn't find anything, then it occurred to me that this might be a play on "The Grand Illusion" (name of a French film, a Styx album among other things). So if you're looking for the video, it's actually called the "Rand Illusion". I just thought it was a reference to Dawkins's The God Delusion. But if it's Illusion, not Delusion, that rules that out. Edited March 12, 2009 by brian0918 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) We've still got a few months before the next big popular TV reference to Rand, The Simpsons episode that is supposed to do a remake of The Fountainhead. With all of this attention on one person, people are more likely than ever to pick up one of the novels, which means more money for ARI activities. Edited March 12, 2009 by brian0918 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IchorFigure Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 In the past I've regarded Colbert as somewhat neutral on his political/philosophic views but that was more explicit than I expected. He makes all the same wrong thoughtless assumptions we've all seen a hundred times. If he read the book he clearly didn't understand that being a producer is classless. He proceeds from the assumption that she views *all* rich as good and *all* "lower class" as bad which is just missing her entire point. So often it seems as though some people are incapable of thinking outside the scope of the frozen premises of Marxist altruistm and Christian morality. When you offer them another option it's like they can't even grasp what you mean and assume you mean them instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01503 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I used to be a fan of Colbert's; I still have a T-Shirt that says "Colbert Nation" on it in my closet. He's pretty much the Christian leftist; in real life, he teaches Sunday school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brian0918 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 (edited) I bought Colbert's "I Am America and So Can You!" a couple years ago (before my shift to the right). After watching him rip on the free market a few months ago, I sold it on half.com to some other sucker. Edited March 12, 2009 by brian0918 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
01503 Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 I bought Colbert's "I Am America and So Can You!" a couple years ago (before my shift to the right). After watching him rip on the free market a few months ago, I sold it on half.com to some other sucker. He actually associates the conservatives with Rand in that book by listing his persona's (the typical super-conservative) favorite book(s) as "Anything by Ayn Rand". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMartins Posted March 12, 2009 Report Share Posted March 12, 2009 You can watch the full episode here: http://www.comedycentral.com/colbertreport...pisodeId=221300 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
th3ranger Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 In the past I've regarded Colbert as somewhat neutral on his political/philosophic views but that was more explicit than I expected. He makes all the same wrong thoughtless assumptions we've all seen a hundred times. If he read the book he clearly didn't understand that being a producer is classless. He proceeds from the assumption that she views *all* rich as good and *all* "lower class" as bad which is just missing her entire point. If he read it at all, he probably refused on purpose to understand what the book is about, it's a condemnation of everything he believes. He "blanked out." It is always interesting to see Oism presented in so specifically a twisted way. You can practically hear echoes of the parts that he or whoever told him about the book disagreed with the most and refused to understand at all. Leave it to leftists to turn Atlas Shrugged into a book about class warfare. For them, all of society is stratified into groups of race, gender, income, etc.. What a sad way to live. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capitalism Forever Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 This is precisely what I have been talking about; people are going to start tying Atlas and Rand to the conservative movement. Like it or not, it is inevitable. The fact is that, while liberals have absolutely nothing in common with Objectivism, conservatives range from nothing (such as Huckabee) to quite a whole lot (e.g. Thomas Sowell). And, importantly, the Huckabees are seen by most of them as "not conservative enough," while people like Sowell are considered to be the best and most outspoken representatives of the movement. To a liberal, a "conservative" is anyone who "does not hate life as much as I do." Anyone who believes in anything other than nihilism; anyone who ever expresses certainty about anything other than Global Warming; anyone who doesn't see the American way of life as the greatest evil on Earth. By this standard, Ayn Rand is the absolute uber-"conservative"--the epitome and the fountainhead of everything the liberals think is "wrong" with America. In light of this, I do not find it any surprise at all to see all the overwhelmingly negative mentions Atlas Shrugged gets from them. Conservatives, on the other hand, while they may disagree with Objectivism on some points, do recognize Ayn Rand as the most eloquent defender of some of their core values. It is not surprising, therefore, that now that these values are under such a heavy attack by the Obama administration, they cite Atlas Shrugged in their attempt to defend them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maximus Posted March 13, 2009 Report Share Posted March 13, 2009 (edited) Keep in mind that Cobert is not a consevative or O'ist. He is a leftist comedian who's show spun off of John Stewart's The Daily Show. It is a lampoon of what the left believes that conservatives are, that's why he portray's himself as such an idiot. I consider him just one step above Al Franken. Edited March 13, 2009 by Maximus Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.