I’ve spent the last few years devouring Soviet history. Books, papers, blog posts, podcasts, all of it. I can’t get enough. Not to brag, but I do feel as though I’ve achieved a certain level of understanding about the USSR, its history, and eventual collapse. But I’ve also put the work in.
And yet, whenever I engage people I know IRL or online, I’m amazed by how doggedly people will defend what they just inherently “know”: that the Soviet Union was an evil totalitarian authority dictatorship that killed 100 million of its own people and eventually collapsed because communism never works. None of these people (at least the people I know IRL) have learned anything about Soviet history beyond maybe a couple days of lectures and a textbook chapter in high school history classes. Like, I get that this is the narrative that nearly every American holds in their heads. The fact that people believe this isn’t surprising. But what is a little surprising to me is that, when confronted with a challenge to that narrative from someone they know has always loved history and has bothered to learn more, they dig their heels in and insist they are right and I am wrong.
This isn’t about me, I’m just sharing my experience with this. I’m just amazed at how Americans will be completely ignorant about a topic (not just the USSR) but will be utterly convinced their views on that topic are correct, despite their own lack of investigation into that topic. This is the same country where tens of millions of people think dinosaurs and humans walked around together and will not listen to what any “scientist” has to say about it, after all.
Removed by mod
Terry Goodkind’s books are a horrifyingly amped up Ayn Rand fever dream with swords and extra sexual violence, so I’d rather source a similar quote somewhere else.
Isn’t there a sequence where the main character is kidnapped by bdsm assassins and goes through some very specific hentai tags for no obvious story reason.
Removed by mod
Libertarian you say
Removed by mod
That’s on you. Here’s a glowing endorsement from Randroids themselves:
https://www.atlassociety.org/post/the-randian-fantasies-of-terry-goodkind
There’s some
to that quote and its context, which is a lot like Ayn Rand works too: it implies that the protagonist (and the reader) are now privileged keepers of secret information that amounts to “you are smart, everyone else outside of the secret club is stupid” which is poison for solidarity or any sort of class consciousness.
Removed by mod
Here, from the author himself, thanks to @Beaver@hexbear.net for finding it.
https://cgi1.usatoday.com/mchat/20030805003/tscript.htm
Removed by mod
You don’t get a pass to invalidate everyone else pointing out, with evidence from the author himself, what he deliberately put into his work, no matter how willfully ignorant you now choose to be.
I’ll quote your own totally nonpolitical message you got from your very nonpolitical book:
That’s you. Right now. You believe what you want to believe, because Terry Goodkind said you were very smart and a wizard for nodding along while consuming the product.
You can willfully ignore the political ideology of the author and the messages he deliberately put into his books if you wish.
I went as far as I could and what I saw utterly disgusted me. I only later looked up what I had already seen for myself and said “oh, that makes a lot of sense” regarding Goodkind’s political beliefs and what he was pushing on people, especially people that wanted to believe there was no political message at all while still absorbing it.
I was a huge fan as a teen, I’ve read all the books, and how my guy can’t see the anti-communist randian libertarianism is frankly astonishing. It’s not subtle, and once I started learning actual politics I recognized what the books were about almost immediately. They were a huge part of my teens and early twenties, but they’re exactly as you describe, and super easy to recognize as such.
When I was still a young liberal and nowhere near a leftist, I did the same: “Wizard’s First Rule” was recommended to me by an adult because I seemed so very smart for my age according to them.
I didn’t even finish the book because in my gut it horrified me, even the narcissistic arrogance of the “first rule” itself:
The cheap trick of that is telling the reader that they’re very smart and a wizard if only they read the book and nod along to the message, and everyone else is inferior because they’re not part of the secret not-Randian Randian secret club.
It’s very telling to me that the @TheOneAndOnly@lemm.ee is believing exactly what they want to believe and refuse to see evidence put right in front of their face from the author himself.
I had to go through my edgy atheist phase before I wised up. That rule and the sixth one “the only sovereign you can allow to rule you is reason” were almost Sam Harris-esque, so naturally I continued to think they were brilliant. Took a few years to go from that to ML, and realizing what those books were was a big step.
You don’t take our word for it.
But how do they form their initial desires?
That’s the neat part: they don’t, not beyond the most basic instinctual needs.
Everything else is from environmental exposure, and yes, external messages being absorbed. No one is immune to propaganda, especially not people who absorb it without knowing (or willingly acknowledging) what they absorbed.
That quote about “Wizard’s First Rile” comes from an Ayn Rand cultist’s propaganda book series “The Sword of Truth” and there’s heaps of irony in that fan posting that while believing what they want to believe about how there’s totally no political messaging in the series, even when evidence was heaped at their feet.