I used to think objectivism was the perfect worldview, as far as going about achieving your goals, that is. Then, I heard of a quote by the movement’s frontwoman Ayn Rand, in which she said and I may be butchering this a little, “one cannot be an objectivist, if they are against abortion.” I was already suspicious of the incomplete nature of the philosophy, given that many (((Pagan))) friends and family of mine took from this woman ideologically. This sealed the deal for me though as to the truth. Objectivism has nothing to do with being “objective”, or “correct”. All that really matters is that you do what Ayn Rand suggests that you do, which means that if your “objective” contradicts her’s, you’re “doing it wrong”. And here I thought an objectivist was just someone who–pfft, followed their objectives.

MGTOWs, Thelamites, and objectivists often overlap in terms of their philosophy and worldview. I don’t blame them for their perspective. Their willful selfishness is due to constantly being displaced and made out not to matter in the system that they’ve thrived in. They worry that worry itself, as it pertains to affecting others–will slow them down and make them prone to being used and manipulated. When in actuality, this rigid, unchanging, stubborn, not-at-all dynamic mindset allows them to be manipulated and get dragged around like an emotional ragdoll.

You know how a lot of feminists believe in astrology? You know; this idea that the stars, their position thereof and all these other things can and do affect our behavior to some extent when we’re born? Seems like the kind of beliefs you’d hear someone in a padded room wearing a strafe jacket express. Yet many educated, otherwise intelligent feminists buy into it. Why is that? Well, it’s for the same reason that many disgruntled alt-righters end up falling for certain theories, philosophies, and “rabbit holes”, out of a rightfully learned distrust of the system.

It’s a shame to see ideologues falling for such garbage. Whether its feminists trying to discuss their “horoscope” with you or an alt-righter trying to convince you that the Earth is flat. These two hypothetical people may seem different, but in reality–they’re both just attention seekers. They don’t actually feel the “boogeyman” in their gut they talk of, so often. If they did, I would imagine something else might occupy their time, like oh I don’t know–activism, instead of this–look at me nonsense.

  • Feminist: Look at me; I like stars and astronomy, and I am super into “patriarchy”.
    • Yes, even though “patriarchy” rules over us all and controls our behavior, so too do the stars and even more so somehow.
  • Alt-right: Look into this, before they shut it down, man. The Earth is flat; I’m freakin’ tellin’ ya, bro. Oh, and make more white babies. I mean, if you have the time.

Both are looking up to the sky for an answer to a question they claim to have already answered and are pulling one right out of their rear ends. How apropo.

Objectivism Qualified by Yours Truly

Since Ayn Rand did it; I guess I can too. Y’know, what. I declare: a “true” objectivist must produce labor as a man, raise children as a woman, and accept discipline as a child. Anything less than that and you’re not an objectivist. You’re one of three things, a hedonist, a sheep, or a Jew. I know it should probably be ya know, people following their objectives, but hey Ayn Rand doesn’t seem to care about the consistency of this garbage. So I’m gonna pervert it the right way.