tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post6048873490251576485..comments2024-03-27T05:47:21.295-07:00Comments on Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature: Objectivism & Politics, Part 55Daniel Barneshttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06359277853862225286noreply@blogger.comBlogger18125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-69437813016855725582010-06-27T14:06:27.625-07:002010-06-27T14:06:27.625-07:00"Even more to the point, these things were be..."Even more to the point, these things were believed by most people in America long before Rand arrived on the scene."<br /><br />Glad you said that Greg, this truely is one of the most annoying features of objectivism the idea that she showed/discovered/gave these beliefs to the World! Arghhhhhh it's enough to make your gums bleed with apoplexy.<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-44570659758368682702010-06-27T14:02:37.813-07:002010-06-27T14:02:37.813-07:00"It is interresting that you all point out ho..."It is interresting that you all point out how poorly objectivism is doing in schools but fail to notice it's effects on the streets."<br /><br />BS of the highest order. You don't believe me? Well for a start every year is Rand's year(!), yet when you ask 'em what this renaissance amounts to answer comes back there none.<br />If it is having an effect then how many objectivsts are there in the World now, as oppossed to June 2009? When you ask objectivists for something concrete as that the answer never comes.<br /><br />As for the current crises well I doubt there are many governments that would consider a return to the 'Gold standard'Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-46092206447126032812010-06-27T13:11:54.403-07:002010-06-27T13:11:54.403-07:00Treeluv: "While governments the world over ar...Treeluv: "While governments the world over are running around aimlessly trying multi-knee-jerk, money-throwing solutions to the economic crisis a single voice is rising in opposition."<br /><br />A single voice? Hardly. There are many voices, and very few of them are of the pure Objectivist variety. Indeed, the irony is that Rand herself probably would not have been too thrilled with the conservatives and tea party people who talk about "going Galt": none of these people are Objectivists! Many of them believe in God or are libertarians! <br /><br />"...a small but persistent voice ... is telling us that our values are derived from reality, not just consensus, that individuals decide what to devote their lives to and that our senses are valid, and our minds are free."<br /><br />This implies that only Rand believes these things, that outside of Objectivism, everyone believes that values are derived from consensus, that individuals don't or shouldn't decide for themselves, that senses are invalid and that minds are not free. The fact is, very few people believe that values are determined by consensus, and no conservatives that I know of hold such a belief; both conservatives and libertarians believe that people should decide for themselves; and, beyond a few eccentric professors, everyone tends to place a high level of trust in the senses. Even more to the point, these things were believed by most people in America long before Rand arrived on the scene.gregnyquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13653516868316854941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-17881087732270437022010-06-27T09:18:02.703-07:002010-06-27T09:18:02.703-07:00I don't mean to break up your feeding frenzy, ...I don't mean to break up your feeding frenzy, but I thought you might need some fresh food.<br /><br />It is interresting that you all point out how poorly objectivism is doing in schools but fail to notice it's effects on the streets.<br /><br />While governments the world over are running around aimlessly trying multi-knee-jerk, money-throwing solutions to the economic crisis a single voice is rising in opposition. <br /><br />While governments stimulate by printing money and then having a spending party to get people to "think" we are wealthy and keep doing that economy stuff so we can pay taxes, a small but persistent voice (starting mostly on this new internet, the wild wild www) is telling us that our values are derived from reality, not just consensus, that individuals decide what to devote their lives to (not government home-buying plans) and that our senses are valid, and our minds are free.<br /><br />It is interresting to see how much resistence to change there is when you start hacking at beliefs near the trunk of the belief tree, no matter how invalid those beliefs are. How is that for human nature.Mark Stoufferhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17946875033209369015noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-22385942354864756562010-06-24T13:44:40.530-07:002010-06-24T13:44:40.530-07:00Erm...there is not phase 2 is there? I know that,...Erm...there is not phase 2 is there? I know that, you know that but do they know that?<br /><br />- apologies to Telly Savalas.<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-58664658241793039662010-06-24T13:33:24.820-07:002010-06-24T13:33:24.820-07:00Phase 2: Going Galt?
As I asked the head of the ...Phase 2: Going Galt? <br /><br />As I asked the head of the UKOA if he was going to go Galt, half in jest and he told me in all seriousness that he was. What did that mean? He was stepping down as the head of the UKOA. This the organisation which claims to be affiliated to the ARI and yet cannot afford a £50 mailshot to it's members every month. <br /><br />I've given up debating with them as there answers are always the same; cut and paste responses from the VOS.<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-22303921219269985242010-06-23T16:18:34.321-07:002010-06-23T16:18:34.321-07:00Steven:
> "we are finding the brightest te...Steven:<br />> "we are finding the brightest teenagers in our communites and giving them copies of AS to read" You couldn't make it up!<br /><br />I repeat:<br />Phase 1: "Atlas Shrugged"<br />Phase 2: ?<br />Phase 3: Objectivist Utopia!Daniel Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06359277853862225286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-20468248730977095052010-06-23T13:59:25.719-07:002010-06-23T13:59:25.719-07:00Sorry, could not resist another bite at this one.
...Sorry, could not resist another bite at this one.<br /><br />I did ask them in the UK what they were doing and the answer was, strap your corsets on, "we are finding the brightest teenagers in our communites and giving them copies of AS to read" You couldn't make it up!<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-43355219773252449772010-06-23T13:52:45.317-07:002010-06-23T13:52:45.317-07:00"Yes. This is what the "cultural change&..."Yes. This is what the "cultural change" project amounts to - to make mankind fit to accept Ayn Rand's philosophy."<br /><br />Well, one does not wish to be cruel, but whatever they are doing it does not seem to be working, at least in the UK. As the objectivists we have over here really are a mediocre lot. Nothing wrong with mediocrity but when it tries to pass itself off as greatness that truely is a sin.<br /><br />Sadly for those of us in the UK even the BNP seem more on the ball than that lot.<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-65927839175889195872010-06-23T13:46:35.588-07:002010-06-23T13:46:35.588-07:00"Back in the 80s, Peikoff believed that all O..."Back in the 80s, Peikoff believed that all Objectivism needed to triumph was a few courses at the Ivy League schools. Once the undergraduates at Harvard and Yale had the opportunity to be exposed to Objectivism, Rand's ideas would inevitably become the dominant philosophy in America."<br /><br />I bet you can't find that claim on the ARI website.<br /><br />To paraphrase the Doors, the collectivists/Kantains/welfare-statists et all have still got the "guns and the numbers".<br /><br />Just proves the old adage that it's such a shame that the people who know how to run governments are either cutting hair, driving taxis or objectivists.<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-71990717971841667592010-06-23T10:03:44.867-07:002010-06-23T10:03:44.867-07:00"But what is the objectivist game plan here? ..."But what is the objectivist game plan here? Are they trying to change or mold men and women so that they can create this world?"<br /><br />Obviously, neither Rand nor her orthodox followers ever spent much time thinking this thing through. Groups with millennial hopes rarely do. They tend to focus most of their energy criticizing and expressing impassioned contempt for the existing order.<br /><br />As far as can be made out from the implications in her writings, Rand seems to have believed that, if human beings were exposed to the right premises, the rest would follow almost automatically. Of course, she would always insist that there was nothing "inevitable" about any of this because people had "free will." In any case, there are obvious tensions between the deterministic implications in Rand's theory of history and her radical view of free will. But narcissistic ideologues are not very good at noticing the contradictions in their own thought.<br /><br />Back in the 80s, Peikoff believed that all Objectivism needed to triumph was a few courses at the Ivy League schools. Once the undergraduates at Harvard and Yale had the opportunity to be exposed to Objectivism, Rand's ideas would inevitably become the dominant philosophy in America. Hearing Peikoff make that preposterous contention is what first made me realize how detached from reality Objectivism actually is. Any philosophy that makes so much virtuous noise about reason, rationality, and reality and yet believes in something so removed from reality as the Objectivist theory of history can't be taken seriously as a <em>rational</em> system of thought.gregnyquisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13653516868316854941noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-5259433358483335112010-06-23T10:00:09.870-07:002010-06-23T10:00:09.870-07:00Lots of good thoughts all around.
Daniel, that th...Lots of good thoughts all around.<br /><br />Daniel, that three-phase summary is priceless.<br /><br />The lack of any ability to compromise is certainly one of Objectivism's core weaknesses.<br /><br />It dawns on me that I sort of take for granted that a political system has to include mechanisms for resolving conflict.<br /><br />How on earth was I (sort of) Objectivist-y, regarding my political system as childish, but believing that you could actually have a system that <b>disregarded</b> those concerns.<br /><br />It's one thing not to have thought things through, but quite another to <b>have</b> and then wave it off and say something like "nah! we just all need to think alike..."<br /><br />Brilliant.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14966179466026805822noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-84448050696380678992010-06-23T05:27:01.288-07:002010-06-23T05:27:01.288-07:00The claim that there are no conflicts of interests...The claim that there are no conflicts of interests between rational men is one of the purest examples of the Objectivism's refusal to accept the trade-offs and complexities that abound in the real world, not the one that Objectivists imagine.<br /><br />I was debating an Objectivist recently (I know, it's tough being related to them) about whether it is right for government to override the ability of employers to provide contracts to employees who are willing to work under unsafe conditions. <br /><br />It started with an argument that apartheid was supported by communists because they wanted to keep Blacks unemployed, while capitalists wanted to hire blacks for lower wages (obviously this sounded like human nature apart from the labels, but let's put the labels aside because any government action might be communism to an Objectivist). My point was that human nature is at the center of these things and the labels often don't tell you as much as understanding the interests of the individuals involved and the capitalists could have wanted the cheaper labor because they could also treat Blacks in a worse manner.<br /><br /><br />He seemed to think that the only *right* view was that the government should not interfere with the ability of employers and employees to interact *freely*, whatever that meant. <br /><br />I tried to point out that most current law on labor contracts, FDA etc. for the most part is designed to handle problems with fairness when information and/or leverage is asymmetric and that in most situations when something resembling symmetry exists, buyer beware is the usual warning. I also tried to point out that imposing costs on employers to meet safety standards might be necessary to motivate employers to take actions that they would not take otherwise, because the numbers may work out to make the employer less willing to improve safety standards (if employees are considered easily replaceable, for example). A law can force the employers to improve standards in a way that might be difficult for unions etc. to do. There are lots of real world examples of this, and the standard libertarian/Objectivist response is that innovation often takes place without such force. What I don't understand is why Objectivists think that innovation is only right if it takes place in the absence of such force and why they cannot see that sometimes such force can be expedient.<br /><br />Which brings me back to the main point - the fundamentalist dismissal of complexity by refusing to even grapple with it!Xtra Lajhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17166565583455141813noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-54329351668890519272010-06-22T14:52:29.673-07:002010-06-22T14:52:29.673-07:00Steven:
>But what is the objectivist game plan ...Steven:<br />>But what is the objectivist game plan here? Are they trying to change or mold men and women so that they can create this world? <br /><br />Yes. This is what the "cultural change" project amounts to - to make mankind fit to accept Ayn Rand's philosophy.<br /><br />Fortunately their world-domination plan seems to be based largely upon the well-known <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gnomes_(South_Park)" rel="nofollow">Underpants Gnomes strategy</a>:<br />Phase 1: "Atlas Shrugged"<br />Phase 2: ?<br />Phase 3: Objectivist Utopia!Daniel Barneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06359277853862225286noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-74758826240377727332010-06-22T14:16:51.031-07:002010-06-22T14:16:51.031-07:00"It is not a world fit for normal human being..."It is not a world fit for normal human beings. As the best conservative opinion has long maintained, no social system can work which is exclusively based on voluntary interaction (i.e., the “trader principle”) guided solely by short-run utilitarian ends (i.e., “rational self-interest”). Yet this is where atomistic individualism leads in practice."<br /><br />But what is the objectivist game plan here? Are they trying to change or mold men and women so that they can create this world? Or do they seek to create this world which will then, say in generations to come, make this world work?<br /><br />When ever I ask them what they are doing I get the jokey "Come back in 150 years" and the world will be "objectivist". They base this timeline on the fact that Kant philosophy has so corrupted the Earth, erm...200 years later?<br /><br />They may hate the conservatives but the objectivists I've come across are even poorer than me! Which in the UK means they are recepients of welfare, shurely shome mistake? Apparently not, you can still be an objectivist and get back what you paid into the state and some such drivel about you don't stop a juggernaut by laying down in front of it. But do you stop the welfare juggernaut by jumping on it?<br /><br />As for the ideal objectivist man, well as I said before they are financially worse off than me! But the UK organisation boasts a dentist in it's ranks. The UKOA is certainly poorer than the SPGB and when you ask them what they have achieved, as individuals they merely respond that they are 'natures aristocrats', perhaps when AS is your favourite book you are asbolved from trying?<br /><br />Steven Johnston<br />UKAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-91308671281056685212010-06-22T11:21:09.366-07:002010-06-22T11:21:09.366-07:00Here's their official "government" w...Here's their official "government" website, with a greeting from Prince Lazarus himself: <br /><br />http://www.new-utopia.com/Michael Prescotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12963295565160636175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-87782498182327431512010-06-22T11:18:04.082-07:002010-06-22T11:18:04.082-07:00"I've immediately become fascinated by th..."I've immediately become fascinated by the idea of some of these weird-utopia-communities."<br /><br />Here's an especially weird one: <br /><br />http://cpedia.com/search?q=New+UtopiaMichael Prescotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12963295565160636175noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29196034.post-58703936361099920222010-06-22T10:18:26.061-07:002010-06-22T10:18:26.061-07:00I've immediately become fascinated by the idea...I've immediately become fascinated by the idea of some of these weird-utopia-communities. Got a reference for that? Might be for some fascinating reading.<br /><br />Watching the right's-occasional prostrations of Ayn Rand, it's weird to realize how anti-conservative she truly was. And how hippie it is in a certain light.<br /><br />"Tear everything down, man, and build a commune. We'll all barter."<br /><br />My brain just switched off, there...sorry. Great piece. You've got me morbidly fascinated with each post. I dare not watch, but cannot look away, and all that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14966179466026805822noreply@blogger.com