Rating: 
Summary: Awesome
Review: Call me a free market maniac but this book is simply awesome.
Rating:
Summary: Good Philosophy for a better society
Review: Ayn Rand has a refreshingly frank, "tell it like it is" style of writing. I can understand that it may seem a little "preachy" to some, but you cannot deny the logic and intelligence of her ideas. All it requires is for people to think long and hard about it. An example of the logic: If you leave people to do whatever they want to do, whether it is working to make a profit or helping others, or both, they will do it better through personal choice than through coercion. You can see it in microcosm with the way individuals intereact with each other - whether it be trade or any other type of interaction. If it ever appears otherwise, that means there are other factors involved. Economics and politics have been popularly portrayed as much more complex than they really are, to confuse people and to keep people ignorant. I recommend this book to anyone, for expressing the simplicity of these areas of knowledge.
Rating: 
Summary: Ayn Rand the Subjective Collectivist
Review: Rand claims the only reason to have a government is to protect "individual rights," but nowhere in her writings does she show these rights exist in any form other than her own thoughts and rants. In Objectivist epistemology, things exist in reality (the physical world) or in the mind: as abstractions, emotions, precepts, etc. So then, these rights must be thoughts or they must be matter. These rights aren't matter, they are not made of tissue, of cells or DNA. Ask any doctor or biologist where the "rights" are located in humans. Ask them if they know of any "rights gland" that exists. They will laugh in your face. We can easily see that these rights are not part of our physical nature, they are not made of cells or atoms, so then, they must be thoughts. If they are thoughts, and if man is born with a "blank slate" as Rand says, then how could a newborn have rights, if he has no "rights concept" or no thoughts about "rights" at birth? That's easy: The newborn's rights come from Rand's thoughts, and these rights are subjective. Rand thinks about the newborn's "rights," and then the baby has them. Notice that this is not only subjective, but also collectivist in nature: In Rand's world the baby's nature is created by the thoughts of another human. Rand believes the baby has "rights," and then "poof," the rights are created. How much do these rights weight? Where are they located? What color are they? Rand has absolutely no evidence that these rights exist, they are fantasy. Imagine a newborn baby in a world where all other humans have perished in some accident. Suppose a super genius space alien from another plantet gives the baby a medical exam with a super machine and super tecnology, etc. Will he find rights in there? Of course not. Why? because they are not there. The fact is these "rights" make no sense when thinking about the solitary baby, because Rand's view of rights demands another person (an objectivist) "thinking" about them for the warm emotioal feeling to develop, for the rights to be created. Based on these facts, Rand's arguments for capitalism are absurd. Get you ideas for freedom from Ludwig von Mises or Thomas Jefferson. Rand's idea of rights is subjective and collectivist in nature. Sorry boys, but you need to clean out your pants and then reread this a few times.
Rating:
Summary: Must Read
Review: This book provided an energetic introduction to a philosophy our society tends (wrongly) to view to evil. This is a must read for the well rounded philosopher and student of ethics.
Rating: 
Summary: An early, rational and authentic capitalist's manifesto...
Review: This book, amongst other things, deals rationnally, and often very intelligently, with classical issues such as: - The emancipation from medieval serfdom finally ending up in the enslavement of individuals to carloads of utopical and irrational societal ideals, which have more or less all been proven historically dammageable to societies at large. The road to hell can indeed be paved with what seems at first sight to be very laudable intentions. - The importance of property rights, including intellectual property rights, for the long term progress and advancement of all elements of an industrious society. - How important, in the process of the generation of wealth (value added contributions to society at large, if you prefer), is the return to the originators of that newly generated wealth, as well as the importance of their right to dispose thereof, i.e. to allow them to generate more wealth. To put it otherwise, if a fool and his money are soon parted, the end result cannot be a bad one for society at large. At the same time, if a fool and his money cannot be parted, although they are lucky to even have met in the first place, the end result can only be a bad one for society at large. - The limitation of antitrust laws, that is the protection of weak elements through the recurrent dismantling of the most productive elements in favor of more inefficient contributors of industrial society, again, in the name of an utopic, but alas irrational, so-called social justice. - The necessity of leading a disciplined monetary policy. At that time, the contributors, amongst them Alan Greenspan, saw a strict adherence to the gold standard as the best way to restrain the government's natural propensity for inflationary taxation on national wealth, i.e. the recurrent use of the dollar printing press, which dates back as early as the North's need to finance the secession war. - The vanity of state interventionism and the primary goal of government (with its monopoly of the use of legal force), i.e. protection against coercion from outside elements (military protection) as well protection against the coercion from inside elements (police, as well as the administration, or mediation, of justice). I particularly enjoyed young Alan Greenspan's 1963 remark that "at the bottom of the endless pile of paper work which characterizes all regulation lies a gun." Actually, Greenspan's three essays are a real pleasure to read, but he does, of course, not yet dwell on his latter, post tech-bubble, schumpeterian's "destructive creation of wealth" rhetorics. In fine, this book contains various essays, most of them by Ayn Rand, but also three early refreshing writings by young Alan Greenspan (one on business ethics, i.e. goodwill, as a patiently acquired "intangible" asset, serving as the better customer protection, i.e. vested consumers are often less naive then what government administrations assume them to be), two by Nathaniel Branden (one dealing with the rational refutation of commonplace paranoiac fallacies about capitalism), and one by Robert Essen. These three contributors bring a lot of value-added interest to the book, and more of such would have made me definitely rate it a five star. Ayn Rand has often been criticized of being a bully, but actually it was her straightforward way that allowed her to gain a long lasting influence on a larger audience while bringing her ideas to the general public, first in the form of novels, then through the more elaborate exposition of her philosophy, objectivism. A good read.
Rating:
Summary: Beating the people with the people's stick
Review: Are you people insane? The first person who wins a footrace to an oasis in the desert does not have the "moral right" to keep it for himself. What any rational people would do is divide the water equally, with extra shares to anyone who is dangerously dehydrated. It is not "force" or "coercion" or any such hoo-ha to say "Hell with you. I'm taking my share of the water whether you like it or not."
Rating:
Summary: Capitalism: The Unknown Ideal
Review: An excellent collection for anyone interested in the moral underpinnings of free-market capitalism. As a quick side note to the editoral, you said it yourself "...the antitrust laws forced railroad barons to use illegal payoffs to forge ahead with expansion..." and therefore, we see the AT laws are indeed to blame... Something about Force and Mind; Morality ending and the Gun beginning... I found this to be one of the more easily available non-fiction works from Rand, and the contributing writers are well known indeed. I find the topic of Mr. Greenspan's piece curious considering his current position and policy, but I suppose we are all allowed to change with age.
Why only Four Stars? While providing some very distinct insights into objectivist philosophy, Rand's more notable works (Fountainhead, Atlas, Anthem, etc.) paint the incredible picture of Objectivism in Action. In 'Capitalism' we find the true possiblities of an unadulterated free-market economy spelled out in none too technical text. Given an un-addled mind, and an active imagination, one can think these ideas through to fruition. But, through the fictional works, we can see the 'final product' of an objectivist outlook, and what it means to the future of mankind.
Too often do we find examples of moral philosophy rotting between two covers, never to see the 'real' world. It is my fear that this is what has happened in this work. Too many have picked it up, read it, and said "To what end?" without proper answer. Some might say that most who read it would be lacking in the ability to see the application of these ideas. Perhaps it is that in today's world of fad morality, the impact can better be had through the use of the readers imagination and mind; Allowing them to convince themselves of the grand possibilities of the human spirit, by seeing it enacted within a fictional work.
Rating:
Summary: A great book, except for one thing....
Review: This is truly a terrific book if you want to learn more about what capitalism really is. I truly believe that capitalism is the most perfect form of government, and Ayn Rand does a great job of explaining and comparing capitalism to other forms of governments. However, I do believe in God, and how I wish that Ayn Rand would have included the virtues of God within her views on capitalism.
Rating:
Summary: Psychopathic nonsense
Review: I can only say that the Ayn Rand "philosophy" is the
way forward to the extinction of the human race , of our
planet , which maybe is a good thing (says the cynic ) ?
Those kind of psychopaths are convinced that selfishness
is the way to go but as the great french writer Victor
Hugo wrote of the prisoner turned rich businessman
Jean Valjean in his 1862 masterwork " Les Misérables " ,
that becoming wealthy was good for him BUT by using
that wealth to provide employment for the poor and
homeless in his town was even better !
And so it is that capitalism can only work if we have
two goals , the latter of more importance than the former :
to take care of ourselves and to take care of those around
us , to strive towards a better society ! Only by cooperating
can we create an allmost crimeless society great for everyone to live in and please don't think I'm a utopist !
In fact I , from all the horrors I've seen , I should have become a cynic but cynicism equals death of the spirit , no ,
I will not let myself be dragged down with the people who laugh a
hollow laugh , those that are on the sinking boat called earth and roar with laughter as it sinks with them !
It is our task to educate ourselves and by doing so try (!)
to enlighten others who are not so fortunate !
As L.P. Boon said : Kick them a conscience ! Exactly the
virtue missing from people like Ayn Rand and her predecessors
like the infamous D.A.F. 'the marquis' De Sade , another
one for the virtue of caring for " number one " !
Kids should not try to only compete with eachother but also
learn to cooperate with one another , something allready
happening in many young new european school and which is
funny " applauded by the businessworld where more and more
managers see that where people are good communicators and
good at working together , not jealous of one another ,there's
a great improvement of productivety !"
Please read the genius Victor Hugo or Emile Zola instead of this crap , you'll have a much more satisfying experience ( and it's
even a bit cheaper and 1000 times more exciting than Rand ! or
buy the video if you don't like reading , John Malkovich starred in it along the best french actor Gérard Depardieu ! )
Rating:
Summary: Socialists won't like this!!
Review: This is a wonderful book. I am doing my senior thesis in college on 'why capitalism is a moral system' for my philosophy degree. I love Ayn Rand. She is an athiest and a capitalist...like me. It's too bad that the socialist professors I know look down upon her. It's also too bad how narrow minded the editor on this page was. Rand points out the double standards of how it's called 'social gains' when workers push for higher wages, yet 'greed' when employers (who holding all the risk in their hands) want to increase profits. Like I said, if you are truly socialistic, you will not like this book.
| 
