Quote:
Originally Posted by nathanbforrest45
Rand's core belief is that the world is divided into two camps, the individual and the collectivist. You can either chose to live your life for yourself or to be a slave to everyone else. John Galt's statement that he will live his life for no man and ask no man to live for him is the entire philosophy of Rand summed up in one sentence
To Rand capitalism is the only economic system that is consistant with true individual freedom and there can be no other kind of freedom other than individual. How can one have a collective freedom? Actually, to Rand capitalism takes precedence over any specific political system, be it democratic, republican, or monarchy as long as its based on free market capitalism.
Rand's philosophy, Objectivism, does not state you do not need others, it does not state you do not help others, it does not state that you do what you want no matter what. She does speak of "rational self interest". It may be in my self interest to feed the poor for a variety of reasons. Her position is that you make the choice to feed the poor, not the government. To Rand the only purpose of the government is to provide you with protection from foreign invasion and a court system to enforce the contracts you have freely make with other "traders"
Rand recognized in her book "Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal" that we have never had a completely capitalistic society. That, to her, did not mean it was not the ideal society and we should all strive to attain that ideal.
There are several beliefs of Ms Rand that I do not share, her belief in God for example, her belief that a husband owes nothing to his wife or children. However, for just about every other point of Objectivism I am one of her biggeset fans.
By the way, what the hell is Egotistical Altruism?????
|
Egoistic Altruisim was a school of phillosophy that taught rational self-interest long before Rand's "Objectivism" was coined for it.
Rand whining that we've never had a truly Capitalist society is no different than those who argue the same for Communism. Neither has ever had a perfect vacuum in which to prove its success over the other, and I don't particularly endorse either blindly. Which is more than I can say for Rand.
Rand's views on geschtalt versus individualist ethical standpoints might not be so bad, but she very adamantly argues that EVERYTHING can be broken down into a black and white analysis of its superiority to other things, that this is how the individual should make choices in the face of the world she seems to think would work best.
Capitalism is BETTER than Communism. Hands down. End of debate. No discussion.
Beethoven is BETTER than Mozart. Disagree? Shut up. Fuck you. I'm the individual and what I say is right.
Chocolate is BETTER than vanilla. Get rid of Vanilla. It's a lesser flavor for lesser men. Why? Because it's objective. I'm an objectivist and when I point out the objective truth, you better agree or get the hell out of my way.
This is why I find her laughable.