I continue to be impressed with the array of puns invented for the purpose of smearing Ayn Rand, objectivists, and sympathizers.

  1. Randroid, Ayndroid, Rayndroid, Ayn Randroid: Variations on the same theme. While the "droid" ending itself would bring the point across, the rhyme with "android" makes this pun particularly effective. The association can be with programming or with lack of emotion, or both. Usually implies that the person in question has been brainwashed by Ayn Rand, and is advocating what he is because it's his programming.
  2. ARian: With "AR" as an acronym for Ayn Rand. Establishes rhyme with "aryan," which is usually associated with nazism, which is associated with Nietzsche, who is associated (incorrectly) with Ayn Rand. In an appropriate context, can be used to great effect to associate Rand with nazism due to the speed at which the human mind can make the necessary connections. Valuable because objectivism explicitly opposes nazism in every meaningful way, and so explicitly trying to associate the two will probably be impossible if an objectivist is present. ARian associates the two implicitly, often allowing you to get away with it.
  3. Randite: Less creative than the previous two, this one gets its effect solely due to the implication that the person in question holds his views because he worships Ayn Rand rather than because the views make sense. Not as offensive as Ayndroid and thus more useful when in polite society. Attempts to take issue with this pun will probably be viewed as nitpicking due to its benevolent appearance, so it will probably go unchallenged. Also used effectively here on E2 in the alliteration "rabid randite."
  4. JordanM points out that "in NY among Liberatian Party circles, the term "randista" is used (associating Rand with the personality cult of several Latin American Populist Dictators, mainly Juan Peron (Peronista)."

This list is meant to be exhaustive. If you find some that I've missed, please /msg me.

Don't underestimate the effectiveness of these puns. As Douglas Hofstadter writes:

    "Suppose a friend who has borrowed your car telephones you to say that your car skidded off a wet mountain road, careened against a bank, and overturned, and she narrowly escaped death. You conjure up a series of images in your mind, which get progressively more vivid as she adds detail, and in the end you 'see it all in your mind's eye'. Then she tells you that it's all been an April Fool's joke, and both she and the car are fine! In many ways that is irrelevant. The story and the images lose nothing of their vividness, and the memory will stay with you for a long, long time. Later, you may even think of her as an unsafe driver because of the strength of the first impression, which should have been wiped out when you learned it was all untrue." (Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid, 338-339)

Thus even if the person you're attempting to persuade eventually reads Ayn Rand's writings, the associations created by these puns will tend to color the way he or she perceives the philosophy. To this end, the worst thing you can do is argue against Randroism based on the content of the philosophy. Doing so would give the appearance that Randroism has serious content which is worth considering.

Log in or register to write something here or to contact authors.