I believe Ayn had no problem with charity. What she did have a problem with, though, were those who expected charity, without “even the coin of thanks.”
In Ayn’s view, charity is fine, as long as it is done willingly. Rand did not believe government should be in the business of collecting money for charity..that it was not the proper purview of government.
mark
This is going to pop up again in 3 weeks when we examine the very first event in that chapter. I expect you to be the first to address a discussion topic aimed at dissecting that event.
I think this is exactly the problem today. Philanthropic societies were created by those "with' to help those without. It was understood that there was a benefactor-beneficiary relationship. If you found yourself without - in deep need - you went with your hat in your hand - a humbling event - and requested aid.
I think this attitude was best portrayed in the movie "Cinderella Man" where the lead - with nowhere else to turn - finally went to get "relief". Now granted it was govt. relief, but his attitude was one of humility - not expectation.
Today the attitude is exactly reversed. There seems to be a righteous expectation of the handout. Instead of humbly going down for relief, we now hear only complaints when "my check" is late.
I think a return to more localized charity is the only solution to our broken system. The abolition of income tax and the welfare state would create a booming business environment. The resulting wealth would then be available to help those truly in need - at the local level. With the end of the welfare state, local charity would then manage/evaluate true need - on an individual basis - for those who humbly submit to the scrutiny of the benefactor.
It’s one thing to help those who cannot help themselves; it’s another to help those who will not help themselves. I have a big problem with the latter, and suspect Rand did as well.
I also agree that charity should not be compulsory.