tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post3002980125007880645..comments2024-03-27T05:47:21.295-07:00Comments on Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature: Objectivism & History, Part 2Daniel Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06359277853862225286noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-31004326488702359442008-08-01T15:25:00.000-07:002008-08-01T15:25:00.000-07:00I always get the feeling that Rand and her so call...I always get the feeling that Rand and her so called philosophy, was just some cheap stunt cooked up in an American government 'think tank' to keep good middle class white university kids out of Marxist groups. It is like some capitalist friendly 'radical group' put together by a Madison avenue pr firm.<BR/><BR/>It is like they just gutted Marxism (or at least a superficial version of it) and put in parts that didn't fit. Throw in a huge misunderstanding and hatred for Kant (why study real philosophy? you can pretend you are smart with Objectivism) and the kids will eat it up.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-44381923101233406192008-08-01T11:51:00.000-07:002008-08-01T11:51:00.000-07:00David: "...here in the Objectivist approach to his...David: "...here in the Objectivist approach to history I see echoes of Marxism."<BR/><BR/>The parallels between Marx and Rand, particularly on the issue of history and social change, are surprising considering how different they are on so many fundamental issues. Sciabarra draws attention to the parallels in his <EM>Russian Radical</EM> and claims that they are based on a "revolt against dualism" which both Rand and the Marxist tradition share. I agree that there is, in both Marxism (and intellectualized radical leftism in general) and Objectivism this notion of intellectual vanguard that regards itself as the bearers of a special insight based on "reason" (or "dialectic") that will allow them to bring about a brave new world. That is part of special appeal of Rand. She takes some of these idealistic, leftward conceptions that appeal to the idealism of young, ignorant intellectuals and uses them to develop an exciting pro-capitalist, pro-entrepreneur ideology. In that sense, Rand did for capitalism what Marx did for socialism.gregnyquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13653516868316854941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-21571501683660191122008-08-01T11:47:00.000-07:002008-08-01T11:47:00.000-07:00@anon: In the passage you quoted, I said actually ...@anon: In the passage you quoted, I said actually "Marxist-Leninist," which is what Lenin's philosophy (derived but different from Marxism) is usually called.<BR/><BR/>However, you are correct in that earlier in my post (para. 2) I did refer only to Marxism which I should have referred more specifically to Marxist-Leninism or Bolshevism.<BR/><BR/>Clearly, Marxism-Leninism is a deviation from orthodox Marxism which holds that only through the self-activity of the proletariat will a stateless, classless socialist society come into being.<BR/><BR/>@damien: By Socialist Realism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialist_realism) I'm referring to the top-down literary "movement" with rather formalistic (formulaic?) rules on the purpose of art, subject matter, and how it is expressed. With Socialist Realism, the only permissible form of art is that with promotes Socialism (as defined by the Party) and expressed in a simple (simplistic?), "realistic" manner - no decadent, bourgeois avante-gardism, thank you.<BR/><BR/>In Rand's conception of Romantic Realism, she only deviates from the Socialist Realist model in terms of "the what" (the ideology), not "the why" (promote said ideology) or "the how" (via "realism"). And no irrational, mind-killing, anti-life avante-gardism, please.<BR/><BR/>So in short, I'm not referring to a general philosophy or attitude. Perhaps you know this and you're just riffing on it (based on your previous posts, you probably are), but I want to clarify my point nonetheless.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04053206301930599116noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-63036084875732347272008-08-01T10:26:00.000-07:002008-08-01T10:26:00.000-07:00One of the similarities between communists and obj...One of the similarities between communists and objectivists is that the two often ignore facts that contradict their view of the world. Although in a way Rand's view of the world was a bit more realistic than that of the communist. Communists expected their leaders to serve without any desire for power. Socialist Realism was and is an oxymoron.Damienhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02691850040385670009noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-43719148254666988902008-08-01T10:02:00.000-07:002008-08-01T10:02:00.000-07:00quoteIn fact, Rand's whole philosophical appro...quote<BR/><BR/>In fact, Rand's whole philosophical approach is rather Marxist-Leninist in that she starts with broad abstractions and overlays them on top of reality. Hell, the Objectivist movement itself parallels that of the Bolsheviks ... the splits and schisms and purges; the elevation of minor disagreement to major disputes of "principal" (the fate of the world, after all, is in the balance); the use of shaming and shunning; "democratic" centralism wherein all branches must submit to the authority of a central committee, and it to a Leader; the belief that a "vanguard party" possessing an ideology that unlocks the mysteries of life, the universe, and everything will lead the world into a new golden age...<BR/><BR/>quote<BR/><BR/>You are confusing Marx and Lenin.<BR/><BR/>For Marx, there would be no state & no party. No leader, no centralism. Don't confuse the two, Lenin was not a Marxist. He even states this quite clearly when he says that what they are building in Russia is not socialism.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-54901910674129015022008-08-01T10:00:00.000-07:002008-08-01T10:00:00.000-07:00Hi David,I'd be very interested if you could tell ...Hi David,<BR/><BR/>I'd be very interested if you could tell me in which book, written, by Marx, he states that all historical and social phenomenon has one single cause; economics.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-54982401976053590672008-08-01T09:04:00.000-07:002008-08-01T09:04:00.000-07:00edit: at end, should read "Objectivist do renounce...edit: at end, should read "Objectivist do renounce..."Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02466534274017427264noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-6665140163426474582008-08-01T09:03:00.000-07:002008-08-01T09:03:00.000-07:00Vico attacks this idea from a slightly different a...Vico attacks this idea from a slightly different angle too in "New Science" where he goes after philosophers who read all kinds of esoteric meanings (which happen to support their theses) into the religion and philosophy of the ancients.<BR/><BR/>I've previously noted the parallels between the aims and means Rand's Romantic Realism and the Bolshevik notion of Socialist Realism, and here in the Objectivist approach to history I see echoes of Marxism.<BR/><BR/>Both schools of thought reduce all historical and social phenomenon to one single cause. For Marxists it's economics. For Objectivists it's abstract ideas (or what they call "philosophy" - even tho' abstractions are only one feature of philosophy).<BR/><BR/>In fact, Rand's whole philosophical approach is rather Marxist-Leninist in that she starts with broad abstractions and overlays them on top of reality. Hell, the Objectivist movement itself parallels that of the Bolsheviks ... the splits and schisms and purges; the elevation of minor disagreement to major disputes of "principal" (the fate of the world, after all, is in the balance); the use of shaming and shunning; "democratic" centralism wherein all branches must submit to the authority of a central committee, and it to a Leader; the belief that a "vanguard party" possessing an ideology that unlocks the mysteries of life, the universe, and everything will lead the world into a new golden age...<BR/><BR/>They may be driving different cars, but they're using the same engine.<BR/><BR/>[In fairness, do Objectivists renounce the use of force except in self-defense - and against Savages, of course.]Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02466534274017427264noreply@blogger.com