Ayn Rand got it very very right on capitalism.
She got it dreadfully wrong on social conservatism and God.
Philosophy aside, both Ayn Rand and Rand Paul are butt-ugly individuals.
“But if Rand Paul distrusts democracy he must’ve gotten it from Ayn Rand.”
It is government that the Founders distrusted enough to insist on the Amendments. It is always right to distrust government and to check the abuses of power.
This is self-evident today.
The “Ch” is pronounced as if it were an “Sh”, the “ai” is pronounced as a short “i”, and the “t” is pronounced as a “t”.
I believe in the concept of capitalism within a Representative Republic. Why do people keep insinuating that the U.S. is a Democracy?
I do not understand why Rand’s influence on Rand Paul ought to be more controversial than Marx’s influence on Barack Obama.
And as been pointed out, the Founders did not believe strongly in democracy either.
Rand’s writing (fiction) was so ponderous and silly, I couldn’t care less what her politics were.
Ayn Rand was a nut. But it doesn’t change the fact that Rand Paul is right about Syria and the NSA. If you can’t refute the message, attack the messenger.
The politics of Ayn Rand rests on a context of
1) life is the standard of morality
2) rationality is the means of achieving it
3) rationality requires that every man should live for his own self interest
4) rationality requires that he should live by principles
5) rationality requires that he should possess integrity,and be honest, independent,just,productive and proud.
6) he should not initiate force against the innocent.
7) respect for individual rights is the minimum requirement necessary for living a rational life in a rational society.
This context is the beginning of a politics that prevents totalitarianism and repression rather than causing it.
And this thread has become yet another exercise in feeding the troll.
Oh yes, this is the first leftist to write a column about why it was good to "hate", George W. Bush. The left adores this guy for giving them the license to hate............
He's just a petty Marxist enabling journolista who has very little to say, but uses a lot of words.
Either were the Founders. That's why they didn't set one up.
Rand ping. Some items of interest here.
The Founders distrusted DEMOCRACY.... what a dolt .... that is why they constructed a CONSTITUTIONAL REPUBLIC
2) If Chait voted for Barack Obama who was attending Marxist conferences about the time Rand Paul was reading Ayn Rand, he's already demonstrated that this stuff isn't that important to him. Politicians evolve. Ask the same questions about those you vote for as those you vote against. If Chait was willing to take a chance on Obama in spite of Frank Marshall Davis and all the rest, isn't he being hypocritical not to give Paul the same benefit of the doubt?
3) People take from Rand what they want or need. Even Ronald Reagan called himself an "admirer" of Rand. I don't think he went whole-hog or that Rand Paul does either. She had an admirable side. Not everything she said was horrible or monstrous. Some of it was just good sense. She opposed some things that were worth opposing when not everybody did. Finding somebody who later became a politician quoting Rand saying basically what the Founders or George Orwell would have said isn't very damning.
I’ve heard the quotes that Randism has never been tried. Actually, although she wasn’t born yet, her economic theories were tried in the late 1800s which coincided with a tremendous growth in the wealth of the country and the average American citizen. We’ve all heard that the late 1800s was the age of the “robber barons” and the oppression of the American worker, but in reality it was the age of the greatest increase in wealth in American history. And most of it without the oppressive hand of Big Government to stop the growth. I believe that’s pretty much what Rand stood for.
Rand is an ethical egoist. This is a belief that people should always act in their own best interest. Selfishness is a policy. She was highly influenced by Nietzsche and Aristotle (a strange combination). Whether or not people see selfishness as a positive attribute, it is precisely how people live. I see a Paul as a person that cares for others, but he is does believe that capitalism is a force for good.
I’m not a firm believer in democracy either. I believe in a constitutional republic of limited powers. You know, like the Founders.
“I do not believe that a majority can vote a man’s life, or property, or freedom away from him.”
Nor do I, Ayn.
“People who think she had a lot of really good ideas should not be anywhere near power.”
i.e., people who support capitalism and free markets.