Your Email:

Subject:

Message:
Entry: The Day I Met Ayn Link: http://www.takimag.com/site/article/the_day_i_met_ayn#20670 Post contents: No one owned that property, it was government property which by its very nature is ownerless. No one cares about their one- trillioneth allocation of any piece of government property. Roark cared because their "modification" destroyed the very concept he had agreed to create. The thieves were people who changed the plans and tried to build a monstrosity with stolen funds to boot. Roark properly destroyed it. As far as the thief goes, how can he have property rights in stolen property ? What sane person would equate the repossession of his stolen property with the original act of theft. And, NO, I don't require the approval of the other victims to reclaim my stolen property. That building was actually Roark's property and he properly disposed of it. Now if people do not care to reclaim their stolen property, then it belongs to whomever does reclaim it from the thief. First come, first served. So if it were possible of course the victim should reclaim plus reasonable damages. Obviously you never read The Fountainhead carefully or you would known those were not minor "modifications" and you would have known the motivation of the collectivists who mutilated Roark's great design. Your comments about architects are off the wall, as you drop context and seem to be UNABLE to think in principles. You keep issuing verbose variants of the same refuted many times over point. Sent at: 2008 05 16