<p>If you could have only one, which would it be, Power, Wealth, or Prestige? Why?</p>
<p>Power, so that I can do w/e I want.</p>
<p>I'd go for wealth. Power is great, but the old adage about corruption is too often true imo. Besides, having power is stressful. As for prestige, I've never really been that interested. But wealth is nice - takes away some of the worries of life.</p>
<p>I would choose power so that I can bring a nation back to a peaceful place by weeding out the trouble maker.</p>
<p>Wealth, everyone has their price.</p>
<p>And for those who don't realize it, Business_Freak is saying he wants power so he can commit a mass genocide eliminating all the atheists, homosexuals, jews, christians, actually, he would simply kill everyone who didnt agree with him 100% of the time.</p>
<p>Oh, we realize it. The sad thing is there are plenty of those like him who are already gaining power. We can deal with a coward on an anonymous online forum. In real life, it's going to be tough.</p>
<p>good call tetrahedron</p>
<p>read atlas shrugged, if I got the right message from it, it shows that all 3 are usually undesirable and corrupt the human SOUL. <em>gasps</em></p>
<p>maverach, I don't you got the message right. </p>
<p>Rand's writing of the novel centrals around the aspect of objectivism, which means for ones self, etc etc. They argue that one should be NOT limited to pursue power, or wealth.</p>
<p>For a book that is supposed to be #2 most influential in lives, for me it sure wasn't influential and took so much time to read too :(</p>
<p>I said "usually" because most of the men with the "wealth/prest./power" were (in simple terms) the bad guys... people like mouch and dr. stadler had unbelievable power, they don't exactly come across as true men with a pure ego, now do they? Lillian rearden had tons of dough, along with the rest of those hoity-toity rich people, but since their means to get the money was corrupt, it meant nothing. As for prestige, well, that's kinda overlapped with the other two. So I'm saying that for the most part, people on this thread who want wealth or power aren't going to follow in galt's footsteps and will therefore not be satisfied with their status. and I'm not saying it was the point of the novel, just a trend that she generally demonstrated.</p>
<p>you're right, it definitely coulda been cut down significantly, galt's 60 page speech was a bit much, imo.</p>
<p>btw, you should add "love" as an option for all those bleeding-heart romantics out there ;)</p>
<p>IMO I would include love as part of wealth, if we are speaking in terms of wealth as being intangible and tangible assets.</p>
<p>Perhaps we're going off topic here, since afterall who ever does know what a writer is actually trying to express? Thankfully, some of her ideas were written about, her theories of objectivism and various essays she decided to share with the world. </p>
<p>Rand compared to contemporary writers is very materialistic as well as compared to well, many personal-touchy feeling writers. She argues however for the largest purpose of that one should not care about how others feel. So for that idea, prestige is indeed, worthless to the characters of Atlas Shrugged whereas, power and wealth are of importance if the self wants it to be. </p>
<p>I apologize about appearing to want to start an arguement/debate over Rand's novel, afterall, perhaps hundreds have committed to spend their lives writing papers on her novels. However, I had taken huge expectations of Rand after reading The Fountainhead, which currently is one of the top novels on alltime, I was expecting a lot out of A:Shrugged. </p>
<p>I don't think there are many who have actually bothered to read Galt's speech. I was in shock at how many pages it actually consumed. In my opinion, which probably means none to the literary world, Ayn Rand's Fountainhead was perfect and A:Shrugged could have been a lot better if it was significantly shorter.</p>
<p>Power of course. I'll be able to destroy those who stand in my way and seduce the ladies.</p>
<p>Doesn't power usually follow wealth?</p>
<p>Either way, definitely wealth.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And for those who don't realize it, Business_Freak is saying he wants power so he can commit a mass genocide eliminating all the atheists, homosexuals, jews, christians, actually, he would simply kill everyone who didnt agree with him 100% of the time.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Whoah....keep all hostility to yourself! I know I do not favor gays or atheists, but I never said I wanted them killed. They are humans as well (misguided, but still humen :) ) , and nobody has the right to kill another human. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Oh, we realize it. The sad thing is there are plenty of those like him who are already gaining power. We can deal with a coward on an anonymous online forum. In real life, it's going to be tough.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you know what I want to do in the future? :D And its only tough for people like you. If I was in power, I would be generous and not behead atheists/gays. I'd rather send them to Siberia if I can.</p>
<p>I'd much rather have wealth than power or prestige, it can be more low key.</p>
<p>it seems that with wealth, it's somewhat easier to achieve the other two as well.</p>
<p>1.wealth 2.power 3.pretige</p>
<p>yeah power involves stress. And I'm already stressed out.</p>
<p>Wealth. It gets power and can buy prestige.</p>