Dicussion

Let the battle begin!

Rand: Well, well I cannot believe what I am seeing. The champion of all socialist leeching bums sitting here in front of me!

Marx: Happy to see you too. I have been waiting for this moment, to defend myself to a ignorent hot headed woman like yourself. This shouldn't take long though, after all what do women know about philosophy?

Rand: I would not know, Mr. Marx, as I myself do not interact with ignorants. However, I will tell you that your insults are lost on me. I have come to speak about our fundamental differences, and the question I have for you is this: how do you call yourself a great man when your only achievement has been to round up the lazy among us, luring them with a shoddy moral front, and adhere them into an angered mass?

Marx: Well Comrade, how do you call yourself a great woman? We are living in a world of war, yet all your ideas are supporting war between the social classes? How do you call yourself a great woman when you are trying to create a world of selfishness and greed? "Philosophers, like yourself, have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it."

Rand: Which is precisely what I am working to accomplish. However, when the deaf refuse to listen and the lazy refuse to work, that is where I separate myself. When you realize that everyone is not equal, as I believe you will, you will realize that trying to make them so only creates more problems for your beloved society. When one works hard, that individual deserves what he or she has worked for. Therefore, what you view as greed is only self-protection. "Each man should seek his own happiness through a concious, productive life in which his own independent, rational judgement is his only guide to action." When one of your spineless followers refuses to work because he knows he will get paid regardless, it is you who are advocating the laziness. Those who do not work deserve nothing, and those who do not work are not trying to change the world as you propose, Mr. Marx.

Marx: But don't you agree that the world is already full of laziness? There are plently of bourgeoise who live extravagantly, yet all they are doing is living off the money that their families created years ago. They are doing nothing to earn their keep in modern society. While, at the same time a family of six including parents and childeren work an 18 hour day in the factory and never even get the chance to own their own home and recieve an education. Don't those people deserve a chance to succeed in society?

Rand: Your ideals, unfortunately, come under the premise of pity. I believe that the individual must work for themselves and only themselves. Those who have no motivation or desire to help themselves fall victim to their own weak moral code. Essentially, a self-inflicted wound on their part. Those who submit to your system may gain money, as you propose, but at the same time, lose their fundamental personal freedoms. By submitting to the plan of others and going along with them, all sense of individuality is lost. I ask you, which do you consider the worse of the two evils? Poverty, or a life in chains? I tell you, with no uncertainty, that those in chains have no opprtunity to better themselves, or achieve anything greater. Their loss of their personal economic and individual freedom will be gone forever, and this is what is diplorable beyond all comparison.

Marx: Socialism is by no means trying to prevent one's individuality but simply the war between classes. With the way I look at it, with socialism, "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." Socialism is simply a means of democracy at all levels of society, including the workplace. I by no means see it as imprisoning ones indviduality. "The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development."

Rand: You continue to ignore the fact that in trying to eradicate social classes, you are forcing everyone into rigid system. By submitting to it, they have lost free will, a basic freedom, and consequently, their individuality. Your idealistic world is in fact, one of slavery where youa re the master to masses of demoralized slaves. "Man exists for the acievement of his desires." your system works only when the person's desires are to obey your law.

Marx: Well I'm very sorry to say, that I must go. I have no time for this pointless bickering, and besides debating with an ignorant woman wasn't penciled into my daily schedule today. I have no more time to waste on you.

Rand: Very well. I believe I have presented to you a fair picture of our philosophies. I hope you now realize that it is you who is ignorant, and not I. Good day.

Marx: "Go on get out. Last words are for fools who haven't daid enought."

Unfortunately, this debate was never continued due to the deaths of our two main characters.

WAR OF THE PHILOSOPHIES Ayn Rand and Karl Marx never met to discuss their philosophies in real life, but here's how their discussion might go if they ever had the opportunity.

Ayn Rand is walking down the street of her native St. Petersburg, when she notices the name "Karl Marx" over the door of an office. Instantly angered, she enters without a knock. Marx looks up from his desk, a look of recognition flickers across his face as he realizes he is being confronted by his greatest opponent. Let the battle begin! Rand: Well, well I cannot believe what I am seeing. The champion of all socialist leeching bums sitting here in front of me! Marx: Happy to see you too. I have been waiting for this moment, to defend myself to a ignorent hot headed woman like yourself. This shouldn't take long though, after all what do women know about philosophy? Rand: I would not know, Mr. Marx, as I myself do not interact with ignorants. However, I will tell you that your insults are lost on me. I have come to speak about our fundamental differences, and the question I have for you is this: how do you call yourself a great man when your only achievement has been to round up the lazy among us, luring them with a shoddy moral front, and adhere them into an angered mass? Marx: Well Comrade, how do you call yourself a great woman? We are living in a world of war, yet all your ideas are supporting war between the social classes? How do you call yourself a great woman when you are trying to create a world of selfishness and greed? "Philosophers, like yourself, have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it." Rand: Which is precisely what I am working to accomplish. However, when the deaf refuse to listen and the lazy refuse to work, that is where I separate myself. When you realize that everyone is not equal, as I believe you will, you will realize that trying to make them so only creates more problems for your beloved society. When one works hard, that individual deserves what he or she has worked for. Therefore, what you view as greed is only self-protection. "Each man should seek his own happiness through a concious, productive life in which his own independent, rational judgement is his only guide to action." When one of your spineless followers refuses to work because he knows he will get paid regardless, it is you who are advocating the laziness. Those who do not work deserve nothing, and those who do not work are not trying to change the world as you propose, Mr. Marx. Marx: But don't you agree that the world is already full of laziness? There are plently of bourgeoise who live extravagantly, yet all they are doing is living off the money that their families created years ago. They are doing nothing to earn their keep in modern society. While, at the same time a family of six including parents and childeren work an 18 hour day in the factory and never even get the chance to own their own home and recieve an education. Don't those people deserve a chance to succeed in society? Rand: Your ideals, unfortunately, come under the premise of pity. I believe that the individual must work for themselves and only themselves. Those who have no motivation or desire to help themselves fall victim to their own weak moral code. Essentially, a self-inflicted wound on their part. Those who submit to your system may gain money, as you propose, but at the same time, lose their fundamental personal freedoms. By submitting to the plan of others and going along with them, all sense of individuality is lost. I ask you, which do you consider the worse of the two evils? Poverty, or a life in chains? I tell you, with no uncertainty, that those in chains have no opprtunity to better themselves, or achieve anything greater. Their loss of their personal economic and individual freedom will be gone forever, and this is what is diplorable beyond all comparison. Marx: Socialism is by no means trying to prevent one's individuality but simply the war between classes. With the way I look at it, with socialism, "The proletarians have nothing to lose but their chains. They have a world to win." Socialism is simply a means of democracy at all levels of society, including the workplace. I by no means see it as imprisoning ones indviduality. "The real purpose of socialism is precisely to overcome and advance beyond the predatory phase of human development." Rand: You continue to ignore the fact that in trying to eradicate social classes, you are forcing everyone into rigid system. By submitting to it, they have lost free will, a basic freedom, and consequently, their individuality. Your idealistic world is in fact, one of slavery where youa re the master to masses of demoralized slaves. "Man exists for the acievement of his desires." your system works only when the person's desires are to obey your law. Marx: Well I'm very sorry to say, that I must go. I have no time for this pointless bickering, and besides debating with an ignorant woman wasn't penciled into my daily schedule today. I have no more time to waste on you. Rand: Very well. I believe I have presented to you a fair picture of our philosophies. I hope you now realize that it is you who is ignorant, and not I. Good day. Marx: "Go on get out. Last words are for fools who haven't daid enought." Unfortunately, this debate was never continued due to the deaths of our two main characters.
Back to Welcome Page Objectivism Socialism