AH Challenge: Objectivist State

Your challenge, should you accept it, is to have a nation based on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism come into existence. The POD and other details are up to you.

What can you come up with?
 

Valdemar II

Banned
Your challenge, should you accept it, is to have a nation based on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism come into existence. The POD and other details are up to you.

What can you come up with?

A billionair buys Sealand and declare it a Objectivist State.
 
Hard one but...

Hitler investagates the area of the supernatural. He thinks that he is the only true one who sees through objectivists eyes. He reforms Germany as a state that belivies the truth is beyond themselves,and belive the Jewish people are unknown to this state.
 
Your challenge, should you accept it, is to have a nation based on Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism come into existence. The POD and other details are up to you.

What can you come up with?
A state based on objectivism is impossible.

But you would know this if you had familiarized yourself with the writings of the eminent 20th century Russian-American philosopher Ayn Rand.

(Seriously, I'm not seeing this happening. Objectivism is basically libertarianism on steroids, and is more than a little nutty. About the only way you could have it happen is by the suggestion by the previous poster, with the Sealand thing.)
 
I think it would be a TL where people set up micro states more easily which in it self is a interesting question. As we stand today, the powers that be look down on sucession.
 
Trying to make Iceland such a state would be interesting, but the other posters are right in that such a thing is really not probable.
 
I think it would be a TL where people set up micro states more easily which in it self is a interesting question. As we stand today, the powers that be look down on sucession.
It's secession!

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

As for an objectivist state, I suppose one could consult the writings or Terry Goodkind since his books are all about an Objectivist setting up an empire in a fantasy world. The end result is ... rather horrifying, with the Objectivist "hero" doing things like butchering a group of unarmed anti-war protestors on the grounds that they "hate moral clarity."
 

wormyguy

Banned
It's secession!

Sorry, pet peeve of mine.

As for an objectivist state, I suppose one could consult the writings or Terry Goodkind since his books are all about an Objectivist setting up an empire in a fantasy world. The end result is ... rather horrifying, with the Objectivist "hero" doing things like butchering a group of unarmed anti-war protestors on the grounds that they "hate moral clarity."

He doesn't seem to understand objectivism, or at least libertarianism, then, confusing it with "far-right" movements like Fascism. Libertarian ideology is to avoid war as much as possible. It is, by definition, an inefficient enterprise, and, (even worse!), serves to promote higher taxes, central planning, and the interests of the state (big government!). No "true" Objectivist or Libertarian state would ever go to war unless its very survival is threatened.

Getting off of philosophy, an objectivist state of any significance is unlikely. It, ironically, shares many similarities with the "final development" of Communism, because it assumes that everyone will be willing and eager to work towards a greater good. Libertarianism, however, is more pragmatic, because it applies the economic principle of the "invisible hand," that when people work in their own interests, they are also working in the interest in the greater good.
I think, that with fairly minimal tomfoolery, if you butterfly away Karl Marx, World War I, and the Great Depression, the US or UK might become Libertarian. Or you could just have Ross Perot become POTUS in 1992.
 
He doesn't seem to understand objectivism, or at least libertarianism, then, confusing it with "far-right" movements like Fascism. Libertarian ideology is to avoid war as much as possible. It is, by definition, an inefficient enterprise, and, (even worse!), serves to promote higher taxes, central planning, and the interests of the state (big government!). No "true" Objectivist or Libertarian state would ever go to war unless its very survival is threatened.
Their survival is threatened by the evil empire of strawman Islamo-Communists with an obsessive love for gang rape.

They're very strange books.
 
Why protest against that, then? :D
Apparantely, it's because they hate moral clarity. IIRC, that book was written around the time when big protests over the buildup to the Iraq War were going on, which makes one wonder if the author was trying to make a point of some sort.
 
Apparantely, it's because they hate moral clarity. IIRC, that book was written around the time when big protests over the buildup to the Iraq War were going on, which makes one wonder if the author was trying to make a point of some sort.

Terry Goodkind, Writer Onboard? Never! :eek:
 
Their survival is threatened by the evil empire of strawman Islamo-Communists with an obsessive love for gang rape.

They're very strange books.

Yeah, but they can be a good read through rather morbid.

It's funny how all the bad guys like Jagang and the other major malefactors are all recognizably human with clear and fully understandable motivations despite all their assorted evilness. Hell Jagang is just Attila the Hun with the percent for a wacky cult.

The vast bulk of the ''noble'' people are all semi-robots who only ever achieve full moral clarity by subordinating their will and ideas fully to that of their god-like and oh so multi-talented Führer. (Democracy is scorned in the 5th book quite clearly)

It's strikeing how D'Hara and it's armies (the ''good guys'') resemble that of Nazi Germany in these books. I know the fascist label gets tossed around too much but it fits here.
 
Top