Romancing the Stone-Cold Killer: Ayn Rand and William Hickman

Naked Capitalism link to Michael Prescott ^ | 2005 & Dec. 13, 2009 | Michael Prescott

[parsifal]

True. One could just see a serial killer moving into Galt’s Gulch. . .

parsy, who has had to change his mind about Ayn

[Mr Ramsbotham]

That is not self-interest. It is psychosis.

She had some good insights, but apparently on a personal level she had some fairly deep-seated issues, not least of which was the need to be worshiped.

[DesScorp]

"self-interest is not selfish"

No, but Rand did preach selfishness. In her ideology, the only sin was sacrificing for others. She was in her own way, a kind of Anti-Christ (not in the religious notion, but in the arena of ideas). She had some important, and some good ideas, but in many ways, she was a despicable woman.

[ConservativeMind]

Ping for later reading.

Interesting.

[BipolarBob]

"The only thing missing in her world view is God. Everything else would have fallen into place with God."

I have a hard time believing this. She wasn't faithful to her husband. In fact the sanctity of marriage was foreign to her philosophy.

[Lurker]

Only if you were a moron.

[Irenic]

I kept wondering how she could see a taker as a hero. The fella wanted to steal/force money from another, that he didn’t earn of his labor—because of his *need*.

Maybe she was thinking society *made* this freak of nature. That society had shown him— you are to be given what you need. He had need for bible college, but the irony that he would not be gifted this, considering the bible teaches to give.

His thinking conflicted by instinct and what society has taught. Instinct of self, so much so, that his *needs* ran over the very life of another, driven by the conditioning that one is to be given what one *needs*. In a twisted sick fashion, he did work to get what he wanted/needed.

When I take my emotion out of the equation and look at what this guy did, it really is ironic...kidnap, ransom, kill— to go to bible college. The whole things just slams against itself all over the place, convoluted!

I don’t agree with her on this AT ALL. There are other things of hers that I don’t agree with, but there are also many ideas of hers that I quite agree with!

[tsomer]

unfortunately it is social darwinists that give true capitalists a bad name.

Capitalists will never catch up to the leftists where social Darwinism is concerned.

[GeronL]

I think that counts as a part of religious faith in this case.

[DesScorp]

"Oddly, there are plenty of instances of selflessness in Rand’s writings—for example when Reardon relinquishes the heroine to John Gaul"

That's not selflessness, that's just defeat.

[Gondring]

[...] she never said why. Nor could she, as an atheist: Human nature to her was merely the result of millions of years of random mutations.

That doesn't follow.

[tsomer]

That's not selflessness, that's just defeat.

I wondered about that, but it doesn't explain everthing.

It's defeat, but with a sportsman-like acceptance of defeat, an amicable agreement among near equals and ones acknowledgement of the other's claim. This presupposes a moral order--otherwise one would have to kill the other.

She believes rational, enlightened, self-interest provides this moral glue.

At her best she rehashes Adam Smith's principals, but even he felt it necessary to follow Wealth of Nations with a work about religion and moral order within society. He died while the work was underway, and I think that he requested that his notes be destroyed.

I recall that Rand was a refugee from Bolshevik Russia, and this explains a lot: the condescension, greed, and cynicism underlying the "looters," and their proclamations about "greater good", etc seem true and reveal actual experience of this. It also explains her latent romanticism and idealism, a belief in perfectibility of mankind. This is something she shares with her leftist adversaries.

[Tribune7]

True. One could just see a serial killer moving into Galt’s Gulch. . .

Sounds like a great idea for a video game