Beating The Puss And Putrid Infected Cunt Of Ayn Rand's Dead Corpse

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Under Randianism the productive class are at the top of the social pyramid or hierarchy because of their creativity, superior intelligence, and industrial innovation.

They are supposed to represent the great and glorious noble elites from around the world.

The poor, incapable, down trodden, and unwashed masses are supposed to kneel before this class of people in thanking them that they exist at all because supposedly their existence is meaningless or hopeless without them.

So, in effect the productive class are masters and everybody else are either servants or slaves.

Sounds like a bunch of bullshit, doesn't it?


Sounds exactly like the kind of metanarrative and ideology that those in power or those who control things would create for themselves.

Even more pathetic is that for somebody like Ayn Rand who rejected morality or ethics as a sort of Nietzschean slave value is how she turn her own values of work or labor into a form of social morals.

I worked for my place in society and therefore I deserve my security within it because I'm entitled to it they exclaim.

I'm a part of the productive and chosen class or people they say.

I've worked for this and that where I deserve everything the Randians espouse.

They thus externalize existence of their own productive work or laboring within it as a form of installed social morality.

Well, what if I or others decide to steal and otherwise kill you for your possessions?

What then?  Why shouldn't I?  Why shouldn't we?

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

I don't acknowledge you to be entitled or privileged to anything.

I don't acknowledge you being a protected class.

I don't acknowledge you being chosen for anything.

I don't acknowledge your so called legitimacy as a right to rule over others or myself.

I certainly don't acknowledge you having any special rights to anything.

Do you objectivists really think that everybody else are just going to go around willingly being your lower caste servants and slaves on this planet forever?  

Do you really believe there won't be any resisters or consequences for this?

You're supposed to be our superiors?

Let's see how superior you really are when you try to defend on your own from those coming to take everything that you have violently.

If you are superior you ought to be able to constantly defend against swarms of people trying to take you out or steal what you have, right?

There's a reason why Ayn Rand spoke a great deal about what she called the looters.

Because it is the looters without rules and without respect of an authority that in all reality are stronger in being able to take away from the so called productive class.

Fuck John Galt! John Galt can take a bullet in his head.

[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

If I ever found John Galt's break away civilization I'd burn it down to the ground.

Looters of the world unite!   


[You must be registered and logged in to see this image.]

Disclaimer:  If you're a libertarian and thus a Rand tard by association where you pissed your pants a little bit after reading this I've accomplished my goal in writing it.

I'd like to see ILP's reaction to this post..........

They have a large congregation of Randians there....

I agree with you, might makes right. If a "protected class" doesn't have an army backing them, then it's just plain bullshit and lies. Any "right" needs the immediate backing of physical force and direct violence.

The Economic Thought of the Roman Catholic Church

Common Property – Fascism
Thomas Aquinas is a Catholic philosopher and theologian who is considered by the Catholic Church to be its greatest theologian and a doctor of the Church. His thinking is apparently “foundational for understanding the economic thought of the Roman Church-State.”ii Aquinas believes in the socialist idea of communal possessions. He wrote in Summa Theologiae ii-ii 5th article, “the possession of all things in common is the natural law…‘the possession of all things in common and universal freedom’ are said to be of the natural law because, to wit, the distinction of possessions and slavery were not brought in by nature, but devised by human reason for the benefit of human life.”

“The community of goods,” wrote Thomas, “is ascribed to the natural law, not that the natural law dictates that all things should be possessed in common and that nothing should be possessed as one’s own, but because the division of possessions is not according to the natural law, but rather arose from human agreement, ...the ownership of possessions is not contrary to the natural law, but an addition thereto devised by human reason...Hence, whatever certain people have in superabundance is due, by natural law, to the purpose of succorring the poor” (2nd  and 7th articles).

So, as Rome sees it, property is for common good. You may own it, but it is for common good. Whatever you have that is more than you need will be given to others. Does this mean in practical terms that if you own anything, you will be taxed to death so that the state may collect revenues to support those who have not?

It may also mean, as has happened in South Africa, that if your house is vacant, squatters may come in to occupy your home, and nothing is done to remove them, while you continue to pay the bills.

Pius XI tells us this in his 1931 encyclical Quadragesimo Anno:
Under fascism, property owners may keep their property titles and deeds, but the use of their property is, as Leo XIII wrote, “common”. Fascism is a form of socialism that retains the forms and trappings of capitalism, but not its substance. Under fascism, property titles and deeds are intact, but the institution of private property has disappeared. Government regulations and mandates have replaced it. For this distinction between legal ownership and actual use, the fascists owe a debt to the Roman Church-State.iii


Redistribution of Wealth
John Paul II wrote this in Sollicitudo Rei Socialis (On Social Concern) in 1987:
...the goods of this world are originally meant for all. The right to private property is valid and necessary, but it does not nullify the value of this principle. Private property, in fact, is under a ‘social mortgage’, which means that it has an intrinsically social function, based upon and justified precisely by the principle of the universal destination of goods.iv


In the same document, Pope John Paul also wrote that in today’s world “we are faced with a serious problem of unequal distribution of the means of subsistence originally meant for everybody” (emphasis added).v

It sounds like the economic theory being espoused here is redistribution of wealth.

That is, in fact, exactly what it is. But it gets worse. Because the goods of some are due to others according to natural law, it is not considered sinful for the poor take the goods of their neighbors. Thomas continues in his Summa Theologiae ii-ii, 7th article, “In cases of need, all things are common property, so that there would seem to be no sin in taking another’s property, for need has made it common.”
Not only is such taking of another’s property not a sin, it is not even a crime, according to Thomas:
...it is lawful for a man to succor his own need by means of another’s property by taking it either openly or secretly; nor is this, properly speaking, theft and robbery... It is not theft, properly speaking, to take secretly and use another’s property in a case of extreme need; because that which he takes for the support of his life becomes his own property by reason of that need...In a case of a like need, a man may also take secretly another’s property in order to succor his neighbour in need (7th article).


According to this statement, your neighbor determines the need.

and according to the Catholic Church their property is untouchable.

The jews always proved readily that the catholic church was a failed economic system. Jews were better bankers, since judaism has better fiscal policies, and also actively promotes economic greed within their religious faith.

Allemotionnoreason, aren't you a judophile???