mark - maybe read later
I am not sure that Objectivism is compatible with Christianity
This tool doesn’t have even the slightest idea what Rand’s philosophy is all about. There’s nothing “randian” that created the latest crash. There’s nothing evil about helping the poor and greed is not a moral good.
Rand was about keeping to your own values, not subverting them to someone else’s.
Ayn Rand said:
I am done with the monster of “we,” the word of serfdom, of plunder, of misery, falsehood and shame. And now I see the face of god, and I raise this god over the earth, this god whom men have sought since men came into being, this god who will grant them joy and peace and pride. This god, this one word: “I.”
Lucifer said:
Isaiah 14:14
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Nope.
The financial crisis was triggered by a complex interplay of policies that encouraged home ownership, providing easier access to loans for subprime borrowers, overvaluation of bundled sub-prime mortgages based on the theory that housing prices would continue to escalate, questionable trading practices on behalf of both buyers and sellers, compensation structures that prioritize short-term deal flow over long-term value creation, and a lack of adequate capital holdings from banks and insurance companies to back the financial commitments they were making
a messianic form of capitalism that demonized the state and society, while fostering an idolatry of the individual entrepreneur, the corporate CEO, and the unabashed pursuit of money as the highest moral good.
The capitalism favored by Ayn Rand conforms to and is compatible with the values of the Founding Fathers of limited government, individualism, a culture based on reason and rationality, and respect for the natural rights of liberty, private property, and pursuit of happiness by the individual.
The unabashed pursuit of money as the highest moral good:
In a modern division of labor economy, the earning of money becomes an essential aspect of productive activity. This is because in order to live in such an economy, one must obtain the goods and services of other people. These goods and services are not given away for free, nor, to any significant extent are they, or could they be, obtained through barter. To obtain the goods and service of others, one must possess money. Thus, if one's productive activity is to be appropriate to life in a division of labor society, that is to be the means of obtaining the goods and services of others, it is essential that it be moneymaking. Only then does one's activity make it possible for one to share in the benefits of a division of labor society.
Second, Rand’s ideology is morally reprehensible. Rand proclaimed such things as compassion, generosity, charity, and empathy as evil and enemies of humanity.
Nope.
Rand's ethics were influenced by Aristotle and were the product of both reason and observation of reality. She considered the initiation of physical force, evasion of reality, failure to be rational in thought and action, altruism, collectivism, and socialism to be the enemies of humanity. Benevolence, generosity, compassion, charity were acceptable if they were not forced and were not a sacrifice of one's values.
Last, and contrary to her own claims, Rand was an enemy of intelligence and rational thought. She fancied herself a philosopher, but was at best a polemicist. Her understanding of philosophy and its history was amateurish at best. She demonized essential thinkers like Emmanuel Kant without addressing their ideas in any but the shallowest way.
Ayn Rand's theory of concepts was brilliant. It provides a way to achieve objectivity of knowledge, values, concepts, and truth. She corrected Aristotle's errors and produced the pathway to integration that produces objective principles. Kant's philosophy is of a set of affirmations, worldly or otherworldly, but of negations. In metaphysics Kant denies the reality of this world not n favor of a higher realm, such as God, but in favor of an inconceivable-that is, of a nothing, nothing to human consciousness; he denies for sake of the denial. In epistemology, Kant condemns man's consciousness as impotent to grasp real truth, not because our mind is inferior to some higher consciousness, but because, like every kind of consciousness it requires a means of consciousness. Again, Kant denies for the sake of the denial. These negations make Kant the father of disintegration and negation of principles.
I submit this crisis has little to do with "Randian Economics", and everything to do with the unconstitutional statutory laws that have been ensconced since an unlawful Opinion was released from the US Supreme Court in a Tax Case at:
Neither the Court or Congress bothered to correct the false statement placed in the Syllabus taken from the 'Instructions to the Lawyers' instead of from trial's evidence and adjudication. That pernicious error has turned "We the People ... into "We the Corporations ..." and is the starting point of our demise.Too bad Ayn Rand was an atheist.
FUDB!
Have you ever heard of Sir John Maynard Keynes? You know, the educated idiot that said a government can spend its way out of any economic problem. Someday the world may finally find that the Austrian School and Chicago School of Economics is the only way for a great nation to stay great. Ludwig von Mises' and Friedrich Hayek's teachings would be a refreshing change to the Socialist tinkerers that never met an economy they could force to its knees.
Benji, try reading "Human Action: A Treatise on Economics" and get back to me. [no, I haven't read it myself. I am saving that for the day I retire and have a couple of years to dedicate to it.]
politicians like Rand Paul — who is, after all, named after her
= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
I am sure this ‘author’? has this on good opinion.
Seems Paul’s birth name was Randal, he grew up as Randy and his wife ‘changed’ it to Rand.
Guess if you follow the theory that Clinton was the 1st Black President, Obama the 1st Jewish pResident and Hillary was named after an obsure soda jerk named Edmund Hillary, this is perfectly good logic.....
This guy is obviously a GOP political strategist and the Tea Party and Rand Paul scare the crap out of him.
I’m glad. The Old Guard Rockefeller Republicans should be scared. Their days are numbered.
They have cooperated with the socialist that have been systematically destroying this country and from what I read in his article he wishes to continue this collaboration on the expansion of the socialist state.
Go ahead, make your case against Ayn Rand, there's a lot to criticize. But you jumped the shark with that statement. It's simply delusional and I couldn't read further.
Ping.
Stopped reading right there as the author has no knowledge of Rand, nor the "philosophy" around money and how it is clearly stated it is NOT the tools of the very premise he put forth.
Money is made – before it can be looted or mooched – made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can't consume more than he has produced. ~~Atlas Shrugged, The Money Speech
Ayn Rand had a clear idea who the baddies were, her good guys” were horrible though
Yeah....not so much. When you start with a moronic premise like this one, you're conclusion is pretty much doomed. The US hasn't been remotely Randian in decades if ever, though the farther we get from it, the worser we do. I stand with The Won when he says that if a particular group or ideology mucked something up, they don't get to direct the fix. Course his application of the principle is 180 degrees out of phase with reality, but what the heck, at least he got SOMETHING right, eh?
Rand’s philosophy is incoherent, sophomoric materialism, but her depiction of a future American fascist state was prophetic.
_______________
There are writers who help readers to escape preconceived notions and prejudices and assumptions. One might not find their whole developed system appealing, but they do help young people who are trying to break free and form their own opinions and beliefs about the world. You wouldn't want to take them as your guide in all things, but you're glad that they were around when you needed them.
I wish Ayn had realized that and hadn't tried to lay down the last word on everything once and for all for everyone. But if she had known that, she wouldn't have been Ayn Rand. It may have been the whole Russian woman thing.
“And this crisis was caused, to a great extent, by Randian economics. Eschewing traditional fiscal conservatism, the American Right embraced for the better part of three decades a messianic form of capitalism that demonized the state and society, while fostering an idolatry of the individual entrepreneur, the corporate CEO, and the unabashed pursuit of money as the highest moral good.”
No need to read further, this is complete and utter bull excrement.