This website is a member of Liberty Alliance, which has been named as an company.
 
 

September 4, 2012 at 9:14 am

Ayn Rand Expert Interviewed on The Colbert Report

Stanford University Professor Jennifer Burns discusses Ayn Rand’s influence on right-wing politics, her creation of objectivism, and her denunciation of Ronald Reagan.

 
 
Posting Policy
We have no tolerance for comments containing violence, racism, vulgarity, profanity, all caps, or discourteous behavior. Thank you for partnering with us to maintain a courteous and useful public environment where we can engage in reasonable discourse. Read more.
  • richbrat

    “Virtue of Selfishness” is an oxymoron like the persons who believe in it. Nathaniel Brandon, another of Rand’s lovers and favorite protoge, eventually denounced her philosophy as dysfunctional because he realized that people CAN come together and work for a common good, and that altruism and idealism has a place in human motivation. Given that she was an atheist, her “objectivism” leaves out the very real nature of God working through His creation. Obviously people who espouse her are disabled (philosophically– missanthropes) and very dangerous when put into positions of power, by the very “self-serving” nature of their actions. It could not be any clearer what the true motivations of the Republican party are, romney said it himself, “We are the party that wants to get rich.” Well then take your business to China like the other billionaires-turned-communist. The communists are atheists too.

    • LeSellers

      You’ve missed several very important points.

      First, just because one admires any of Ayn Rand’s basic philosophy does not mean he adheres to it in its entirety. I will not live my life as a slave to anyone, nor will I demand that anyone be my slave (paraphrasing d’Anconia’s famous vow), especially when the state is the one doing the coercion (and slavery is based on coercion, is it not?) is a very good sentiment. I can accept that without being an atheist and still giving to charitable institutions and to individuals. I know this is possible because I do it. I can, along with Rand, reject large government while making sure that the poor and the needy have the assistance they need (especially assistance that leads them to stop being poor or needy).

      The virtue of selfishness is a shorthand for doing what one can do best compared to others so that they will be willing to do their best for you. Each benefits from the exchange, and each is better off. We want to be rich, but conservatives (and even more, libertarians) know that to get rich yourself, you must first make someone else, many “someone elses”, better off (which probably means making them rich, too).

      The teachings of Jesus Christ never involved forcibly taking something from one person to give it to another. Even in the Law of Moses, where the “widow’s tithe” was required, the poor person had to come and get it himself, he did not rely on the state to collect it and then parcel it out to him.

      Mr. O’bama, where are the Jobs?

  • Ellen_L

    Remember this is comedy central. The idea is to get laughs.
    Some ideas need more than a sound byte to understand.
    This interview is a satire not an honest or realistic view of Ayn Rand or her ideas.
    Nathaniel Branden did split with Ayn Rand over personal reasons, again very complex, but never denied her philosophic ideas. He does not endorse altruism – and altruism is NOT benevolence – it is actually splitting one’s self off from the rest of humanity and then choosing the others. The fact is that one is also human and one is responsible for one’s own life and prosperity. Others come after. Yes, this a difference from many (no where near everyone’s) Christian ideas. It is more in keeping with Judaic thought. There is no actual war between the interests of people who recognize facts, generally a win-win solution is possible and desirable.
    As to abortion, while objectivists do not think that the government should dictate to women what they should do with their bodies, we also do not think that government should pay for it or healthcare in general. We surely don’t believe that those who find abortion bad should pay for it. The choices here are different than when Reagan ran – and she should have realized Reagan had no real chance to overturn abortion. Today the choice is clearer and Obama has far more wrong with him than arguments about abortion.

 
 

Our YouTube Channels