Do negative wanderers recapitulate negative philosophy in 3rd density?

[APeacefulWarrior]

Although I don't remember reading it in the LOO, I determined (subject to revision ) that STSers almost always start out wanting to share their knowledge with others as a favor to them, and then they get attracted to the power. Your post about Rand looks like an example of that idea.

Well, past a point, it starts becoming more of an issue of a Wanderer's choices while incarnated vs the larger choices and guidelines their higher self made when programming the life. I highly doubt that Rand herself, the 3D entity, consciously decided at the very outset that she would share teachings specifically so she could create a cult of personality around herself. After all, her first mainstream novel ("We The Living") was largely written as a warning about how much life sucked for many people in post-revolutionary Russia in hopes other countries wouldn't follow suit. She didn't REALLY go around the bend until "Atlas Shrugged."

But at the same time, if she was a Wanderer then her higher self would have had a very concrete reason for creating that incarnation. After all, as Ra notes, 5D and 6D negative Wanderers are rare because most higher-density negatives fear the forgetting and uncertainty of the process. They'd need a serious motivation to do it. That would have presumably created a drive for her to get into a position of being able to influence/enslave others, one way or another. And it's worth noting that before she got into novel-writing, she actually attempted a career in Hollywood! (Speaking of influencing people...)

My own guess? I think her higher self was attempting to derail the upcoming 4D positive changeover of Earth by sending, basically, an Avatar of Ego who could more successfully communicate the negative philosophies than any who had come before. Because that is effectively what she did. Previously, what few humans were called to preach negativity did so from the shadows, never gaining widespread fame. But Rand? Regardless of what someone might think of her ideas, it's indisputable that she was one of the single most influential thinkers of the 20th Century.

She mainstreamed selfishness itself, in an era where group-based "collectivist" thought was rapidly taking root. If nothing else, it certainly illustrates what Ra was saying about how a strong ideological push in one direction will necessarily create a counter-movement.