Revisiting the Relevancy of Rand's Objectivism
by: Les Carpenter
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
Given the sad sack pack of republican candidates vying for their parties nomination (Ron Paul being the sole exception) revisiting the rational thought of Ayn Rand is to say the least refreshing.
Yaron Brooks does a good job discussing Rand's continued relevancy in the first video and the second in discussing rights as derived from capitalism.
Good stuff to ponder on a very early Saturday morning when most of the rest of the world s sleeping....
Rational Nation USA
Liberty -vs- Tyranny
Given the sad sack pack of republican candidates vying for their parties nomination (Ron Paul being the sole exception) revisiting the rational thought of Ayn Rand is to say the least refreshing.
Yaron Brooks does a good job discussing Rand's continued relevancy in the first video and the second in discussing rights as derived from capitalism.
Good stuff to ponder on a very early Saturday morning when most of the rest of the world s sleeping....
I don't see it. The real drivers of socialism in America are the elderly, and they're getting it for themselves. They vote far more than young people, there are more and more of them compared to young people, and they control an unprecedented percentage of the wealth. They are also hypocrites, like everyone else. And so they complain about taxes and government spending, for instance, but they themselves are the main drivers of those taxes and expenditures.
ReplyDeleteThe cost of healthcare, for example, is largely driven by an ever aging population, but because we have a 50-state semi-private system and the only central, national insurance we have in this country is for them, and not the rest of us, they drive up costs of the entire system, and younger people pay a higher bill than they should.
It is the perfect example of when we need socialism. National, public healthcare insurance. But the older people want it just for themselves, they want a disproportionate share of a limited pool to go to them.
We DO NOT have a social safety net because it makes us feel good about ourselves. Ayn Rand just thought she was smart and every one else was a moron, yet driven by "rational self interest," quite the paradox.
We have a social safety net because people demand it for a variety of reasons - for national stability and security, for themselves and their families, to keep money flowing in economic downturns, etc. Voters, at least, tend to be much, much smarter than Rand credits the average Joe.
And yes, of course, some people, probably 30%, vote their "hearts" at little too much, but most of them are on the Religious Right, with roughly twice the numbers of the far Left. Which goes to show you Libertarians are screwing yourselves when you vote for Republicans.
Let's at least see America for what it actually is. Rand presents plenty of metaphors, and intellectual exercises, but rarely the world as it is. Objectivism is an interesting philosophy, and everyone should study it, as it has had quite an impact on modern American political thought and action, but it is not for everyone - just for the individual. ;)
JMJ
Jersey, perhaps one of your more thoughtful comments. Nonetheless you continue to represent Rand, and how she actually felt about "the average Joe" who built America incorrectly. Her views rest in a thought process unencumbered by emotionalism and the oft talked about victim mentality.
DeleteYou are correct Jersey, Objectivism isn't for everybody. But in your statement closing... "just for the individual" is telling. As we are ALL individuals unless we choose not to be I'm not sure what your point is. Rational Self Interest does not mean screw everybody else for one's own sake. Only a moron, or collectivist would buy that crap.
Take from the information what you will. Mix in in with your personal prejudices, shake it up and viola...
One of the "successes" of any political/economic ideology, is how that ideology stands up under corruption. All ideologies are corrupted through reality of human equation. Rands "objectivity" would not stand up under corruption, or even the change her ideology would become, under corruption, and certainly not the human equation. .
ReplyDeleteGuess we'll never know how that works out because Rand's "ideal", which truly is the "ideal" has never been understood by most let alone actually allowed to work in reality.
DeleteThank the "TAKERS" for that.
No one person has the "ideal" (correct truth) for everything. Those who believe that (History shows) have only found themselves oppressed by the system they supported, thinking that system had all the correct answers.
ReplyDelete