All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace

[undead]

I've watched one and a half episodes so far. I have a question, because it is always a "tell" as to conscious or subconscious intent. But what is up with Rand's perpetually darting eyes? My theory is is that something inside of her knew she was full of shit.

It was during this period of nonstop work on The Fountainhead that Ayn went to see a doctor. She had heard there was a harmless pill one could take to increase one's energy and lessen one's appetite. The doctor, telling her there would be no negative consequences, prescribed a low dosage of a small green tablet which doctors had begun prescribing rather routinely. Its trade name was Dexamyl. Ayn took two of these pills each day for more than thirty years. They appeared to work: she felt that her physical energy had increased, although it was never high, and her weight stayed under reasonable control. In fact, medical opinion today suggests that they soon ceased to be a source of physical energy; their effect shortly became that of a placebo.

Dexamyl consists of two chemicals: an amphetamine and a barbiturate. It was not until the sixties that researchers investigated the effects of large doses of these chemicals. They found that extremely high doses were harmful, sometimes even resulting in paranoid symptoms; but to this day, there is only the most fragmentary and contradictory scientific evidence to suggest that low doses such as Ayn took could be harmful. As one pharmacological specialist has said: "Perhaps they hurt her, and perhaps they didn't."

In the early seventies, when for the first time she became seriously ill, her doctor took her medical history, and, quite innocently, she told him about the Dexamyl. Disapproving, he ordered her to cease taking them at once. She never took another.

I include this discussion only because I have learned that a number of people, aware that she took this medication, have drawn ominous conclusions about Ayn's mental health; there is no scientific basis for their conclusions. (source)

[Stephen Morgan]

A druggy and a dole scrounger? Maybe she's not that bad.

[Joe Hillshoist]

Rand on drugs:

In her essay, "Apollo and Dionysus," Rand describes drug addiction among hippies as follows:

Is there any doubt that drug addiction is an escape from an unbearable inner state, from a reality one cannot deal with, from an atrophying mind one can never fully destroy? If Apollonian reason were unnatural to man, and Dionysian "intuition" brought him closer to nature and truth, the apostles of irrationality would not have to resort to drugs. Happy, self-confident men do not seek to get "stoned."

Drug addiction is the attempt to obliterate one's consciousness, the quest for a deliberately induced insanity. As such, it is so obscene an evil that any doubt about the moral character of its practitioners is itself an obscenity.

In a passage from a different essay, Rand says that "drug addiction is nothing but a public confession of personal impotence."[*] Her published comments all refer to addiction, and do not include any explicit reference to the idea of using illegal recreational drugs without abusing them or being an addict.

http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/bio/biofaq.html#Q5.2.4

[82_28]

I suppose then, it all just follows. I've never met a winger who has ever been completely true or honest with him/herself or in their dealings with others. They never live by the golden rule, which is to say, that some people get the "golden rule treatment", but there is always a class of or multiple classes of people or "causes" who do not receive this luxury from them. Wingers always have their marching orders and do not live in freedom nor do they want to see freedom exerted in others, but live in a constant state of acceptance of some form of existential authority. In other words, people who hail from the right wing are always going to have varying degrees of pathological hypocrisy. Whereas, their "nemesis", the left, "the side" which I have always idealized as always striving for honesty outside of the dictates of authority, in personal life and in societal practice, tend to admit their shortcomings, vices and such in interest in remaining honest to not only others, but most importantly themselves. Not saying the people of the left do not have their own shortcomings, but we strive for not only personal freedom, but cooperation as well. What a sad, sad specimen of a human Rand was, worthy of empathy, simply because she hid so much within her closet and her subconscious was clearly never at peace. Behaviors that to this day are easily detected by people who could have cared for her and helped. I am not at peace either, nor are most or rather, is every soul on this planet at peace. We need each other, we would be no where without each other. Rand's "philosophy" was pure pathological greed done up in a bow and presented as though it were something profound. It was nothing of the sort. If it is true she lived in sadness, then it is not because her idealism was met with disappointment (she is the most powerful figure in this great mess we now live within), but because very psychological integral aspects of her psyche never, ever had their needs met, but was too proud, too pathological to accept the help that she could have found just about anywhere to get her out of her funk. Instead of humility, she chose to destroy all that is good and right with the world and wound up doing a good job of it. It's no wonder she never had emotional needs met. I would have told her, had I known her and I was her contemporary to get the fuck over it and quit fucking destroying all that is good and right, then would have inquired into her ostensible drug addiction and sought to help her. But this is Ayn Rand. Too good to be helped. What a sad and pathetic figure of destruction shall she always be lashed to. Unbelievable how worshiped she is even unto this day.

[Wombaticus Rex]

Indeed, the most powerful, self-reliant, and rational people I know are also the kindest and most humble.

I suspect that's kind of inevitable, here in the real world.

But sweet jebus damb, Ayn Rand can write a great speech.

I'm forever grateful to her for innoculating me against rhetoric and "logic".

[Stephen Morgan]

Adam Curtis' new blog post:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/adamcurtis/2 ... water.html

[tazmic]

[8bitagent]

HOLY CRAP! I literally almost spit out my soda. That is, wow...simply a brilliant spot on parody. I'm a huge Adam Curtis fanboy and love his trademark woozy hypnotic collage/music/narrative style, but he hit all the right notes here. "late night wikipedia binge", and "armed with a skinny puppy cd", oh man...

Adam Curtis could make a right wing documentary talking about how communists are behind US entertainment pop culture and I'd still eagerly watch and be entranced by his technique.
To me, documentaries are often the feeling and not always the message.

[MacCruiskeen]

tazmic, you beat me to it! That video is brilliantly funny, very precisely observed, and (therefore) a real public service. It's such a timesaver.

The Complete and Utter Works of Adam Curtis in three minutes flat! All you need to know is here:



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x1bX3F7u ... e=youtu.be

From the voice-over, one priceless quote among many:

"Combining archive documentary material with interviews, Curtis filled in the gaps by vomiting grainy library footage onto the screen, to a soundtrack of Brian Eno and Nine Inch Nails. He had discovered that it did not matter which footage he used, so long as he changed the shots so bewilderingly fast that the audience did not notice the chasm between argument and conclusion. This was especially effective when he simply cut the music mid-bar." [music cuts out mid-bar]

[8bitagent]

See, cognitively I recognize Michael Moore, Curtis, etc play certain fiddles...but I don't care. It's an intoxicating brew I can't get enough of!

[Hammer of Los]

Great stuff guys, I love it!

Oh, and especial thanks to dear old Stephen for that blog link.

So, he's talking about Syria now is he, good old Adam Curtis.

I read through it, I must read it again. He seems to have no opinion on current or future western policy in this area, only a historical overview of kindly, idealistic, well motivated but ultimately unsuccessful CIA meddlers.

Oh! Hang on a minute!

I can feel something.

You know, I recognise this feeling. A funny, tingling feeling, like wavy lines are shooting out from my head.

I think it is, you know.

Yes, I definitely feel it;



Just remember, life is a great big bang-up. Ahem.

[hanshan]

...

A druggy and a dole scrounger? Maybe she's not that bad.

...

[tazmic]

The Complete and Utter Works of Adam Curtis in three minutes flat! All you need to know is here

It's worth adding this:

ERROL MORRIS: There are those that believe that [the Gulf of Tonkin incident was] part of a conspiracy to escalate the Vietnam War. Here’s a question: are they right? And, in an even more general sense, is history primarily a history of conspiracy? Or is it just a series of blunders, one after the other? Confusions, self-deceptions, idiocies of one kind or another?

ADAM CURTIS: It’s the latter. Where people do set out to have conspiracies, they don’t ever end up like they’re supposed to. History is a series of unintended consequences resulting from confused actions, some of which are committed by people who may think they’re taking part in a conspiracy, but it never works out the way they intended.

I couldn't have summed him up better myself.