Rejecting_Objectivism

Given the continued support of American voters for undiluted statism and collectivism, the prospect of any advance in the near future towards liberty is dim. Despite expressed dissatisfaction with various governmental policies, citizens have demonstrated with their actions (or lack thereof...) that anything remotely resembling real freedom is not something they truly value. Indeed, the vast majority of folks goes out of its way to embrace ideas that actively promote a decrease in their lifestyles and an increase in their slavery.

While I could produce a litany of examples to illustrate this sad phenomenon, I find more interesting the response of posters to virtually any article critical of Ayn Rand and/or Objectivism. Though even many so-called libertarians dismiss Rand and Objectivism, the writers I have noticed are those who answer pieces in more general venues. They are dismissive of Rand, in particular, but underlying their disdain for her and Objectivism is a virulent distaste for freedom, in general.

Consider as a prime example, this piece (here) and examples of what these wonderful people have written in reference to Rand and freedom:

“...family-hating...”

“...boundless contempt for ordinary people...”

“...despise [their customers]...”

“...selfishness...the most intrinsically subjective value...”

“...obsession with self-esteem...” and “the problems that delusion causes...”

“...libertarians and communists are more or less the same...”

“...Randites...”

“...‘Property’ as an inviolable absolute ‘right’...[and the non-initiation of violence] cannot be justified via the Second Law of Thermodynamics...” These are “...Tenet[s] of Faith.”

Atlas Shrugged is “...a piece of shit.”

“...property is a social construct.”

Objectivism “...is ultimately so rigid you can’t actually live your life by it unless you completely disconnect yourself from society, so in principle, it is kind of like a cult.”

“Runaway Capitalism exploits the underclass and destroys the environment...”

Viewing voluntary social interactions among peaceful individuals as the only proper path is “both unrealistic and bizarrely isolationist.”

“A lot of Randroids are otherwise bright people with a severe case of arrested moral development.”

“... Rand's beliefs [do] not work in the real world...”

“...a crock...”

Collectivism is merely “economy of scale.”

“... Rand was nothing more than a reactionary with an extremely misanthropic view of the world.”

John Galt was “an asshole.”

“...crap...”

The Fountainhead is “...disgusting and unethical...”

“Ayn Rand was a truculent, domineering cult-leader, whose Objectivist pseudo-philosophy attempts to ensnare adolescents with heroic fiction about righteous capitalists.”

“Laissez faire has been done. It works great if you can be one of the propertied class. Everyone else gets screwed.”

“Objectivism/Libertarianism? Fascism, table for one.”

Ayn Rand “... was right up there with Lenin and Stalin.”

Libertarians “...just believe in justice for everybody, and no government interference in your life, and puppies, and rainbows!"

“This is the great lie of the libertarian. The notion that the vague and fluffy ideals they quote as being libertarian (but are actually pretty universal) have anything to do with the practice of their ideology. The global warming denialist, anti-regulatory, laissez-faire, teenage boy fantasy wankery is the reality of this ideology. Reading Ayn Rand and loving it as a teenager is bad. Never outgrowing her degenerate and despicable message of selfishness and George Bushian certainty is unforgivable.”

“... bastardization of libertarian philosophy by people like Mises and Rand is a recent phenomena.”

Wow.

How horrible freedom, Rand, and Objectivism must be. After all, here are the basic ideas of Objectivism:

1. There is an objective reality.

2. People should be rational.

3. People should be concerned with what is in their actual self-interest.

4. People own their lives and property.

5. People should be in control of and decide how their own lives and property are used.

6. The initiation of violence against peaceful and innocent individuals is universally wrong.

7. Art should uplift rather than degrade the human spirit.

I have posted this basic reply to any number of articles whose authors snidely dismiss Rand, Objectivism, and freedom. But as can be seen from the material above, these ideas and principles are truly horrific and disgusting to quite a few people. Of course, such hatred-filled individuals rarely state what Rand or Objectivism actually contend but instead prefer to attack straw men representations of this philosophy and/or liberty.

In rejecting such radical notions, these smug critics must, of course, accept the following:

1. There is no absolute “reality.” “Reality” is whatever one wants it to be.

2. People should be irrational and illogical.

3. People should be concerned with whatever is destructive to their self-interest.

4. People do not own their own lives and property; all people are and should be slaves.

5. People should recognize that anyone other than themselves should be in control of and decide how their lives and property are used; anyone can, for any reason, take whatever they want from other people and dictate to them how they should live their lives.

5. Initiating coercion and violence against innocent and peaceful others is the basis of all proper social interactions. Only involuntary actions are proper; forcing others to do or not do what they want is the essence of how people should be treated.

7. Art should be degrading to the human spirit and treat people as worthless scum.

Of course, those who denigrate Rand and Objectivism and liberty scramble desperately to avoid admission of the essence that forms their souls. Like bloodsucking ticks, they latch on to minor points to deflect focus from their inhuman (and inhumane) philosophies; they mischaracterize and fabricate the positions of their opponents; they ignore history, facts, and logic; they twist themselves into painful knots seeking to extricate themselves from the inexorable consequences of what they advocate.

In other words, these contemptible apologists for tyranny do what over ninety-percent of Americans do when confronted with the reality of their beliefs. These people are the norm. These are the “average Janes and Joes,” the typical, the majority, the corrupted face of what America and its ideals once almost achieved.

These are the kinds of slavering monsters that would gladly disarm individuals like me; who would snatch money from my hand and bread from my mouth and justify such thievery as “moral”; who would point the figurative or literal guns of the police at my head while forcing me to my knees to do their bidding; who find abhorrent anyone who consistently and unashamedly upholds reality, reason, morality, and freedom.

These are the faces of the enemy. These are the human beings who reject what it means to be fully “human.”

###

Return to ATLAS Home

Return to Russ Madden's Home Page