Ayn Rand versus conservatives
Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 5 months ago to Philosophy
Since so much of Galt's Gulch Online content has become conservative headline aggregation posting and commentary over the last several months, let's discuss what Ayn Rand thought of conservatives and conservativism. She put forth quite a bit of commentary on the subject, particularly after Atlas Shrugged came out.
To put it bluntly, she considered conservatives as big a danger to this country as she did liberals/progressives, considering both leading the country down a path towards statism, socialism, anti-capitalism, and most importantly-anti-freedom. Following is just one quote, there are a number:
“Conservatives”
Objectivists are not “conservatives.” We are radicals for capitalism; we are fighting for that philosophical base which capitalism did not have and without which it was doomed to perish . . .
Politics is based on three other philosophical disciplines: metaphysics, epistemology and ethics—on a theory of man’s nature and of man’s relationship to existence. It is only on such a base that one can formulate a consistent political theory and achieve it in practice. When, however, men attempt to rush into politics without such a base, the result is that embarrassing conglomeration of impotence, futility, inconsistency and superficiality which is loosely designated today as “conservatism.” . . .
Today’s culture is dominated by the philosophy of mysticism (irrationalism)—altruism—collectivism, the base from which only statism can be derived; the statists (of any brand: communist, fascist or welfare) are merely cashing in on it—while the “conservatives” are scurrying to ride on the enemy’s premises and, somehow, to achieve political freedom by stealth. It can’t be done.
The Objectivist Newsletter
“Choose Your Issues,”
The Objectivist Newsletter, Jan, 1962, 1
So What Do You Think Conservatives
To put it bluntly, she considered conservatives as big a danger to this country as she did liberals/progressives, considering both leading the country down a path towards statism, socialism, anti-capitalism, and most importantly-anti-freedom. Following is just one quote, there are a number:
“Conservatives”
Objectivists are not “conservatives.” We are radicals for capitalism; we are fighting for that philosophical base which capitalism did not have and without which it was doomed to perish . . .
Politics is based on three other philosophical disciplines: metaphysics, epistemology and ethics—on a theory of man’s nature and of man’s relationship to existence. It is only on such a base that one can formulate a consistent political theory and achieve it in practice. When, however, men attempt to rush into politics without such a base, the result is that embarrassing conglomeration of impotence, futility, inconsistency and superficiality which is loosely designated today as “conservatism.” . . .
Today’s culture is dominated by the philosophy of mysticism (irrationalism)—altruism—collectivism, the base from which only statism can be derived; the statists (of any brand: communist, fascist or welfare) are merely cashing in on it—while the “conservatives” are scurrying to ride on the enemy’s premises and, somehow, to achieve political freedom by stealth. It can’t be done.
The Objectivist Newsletter
“Choose Your Issues,”
The Objectivist Newsletter, Jan, 1962, 1
So What Do You Think Conservatives
Previous comments... You are currently on page 12.
Of course it would help if the rest of the country were not all trying to play left field with a catchers mitt.l
Liberals want to make change fast by any means needed and why not they are the outsiders.
So which group are the true conservatives today?
The rest is just yesterday's news and a bit of shopworn history.
The approach is to try and sway one to support one side rather than the other in the belief that only one side is correct and the 'middle' is automatically wrong.
A Secular progressive will recognize only liberal (correct) and conservative (false) and is unable to see any other viewpoint but tries to recruit the bi-conceptual to their side arguing they have the most merit.
They will not see nor notice an objectivist who views the world in different terns.
Conservatives the same but the opposite direction.
Both define liberal and conservative politically and forget the original definitions which gives those who understand the entire range an advantage.
they also do not use the correct definition of center preferring to define it as the center of their world view
Of the two the so called conservatives are much more aware of that range of choices than are the liberals. One is practical the other practical. One believes in jobs done the other in jobs talked about. Forgetting that without the doers the talkers will swallow their tongues and die in the midst of their own words. A menu is not a meal.
Short version.....
The real tragedy is how many on this forum have repeatedly and often maligned faith without having any real idea of what it is. Faith is the belief that propels one's self to action without a sure knowledge of the future. Faith is the core of the entrepreneur and inventor: they want to believe that something better than what they have is out there, but without the action to step into the unknown - and the risk of failure - they are just like everyone else who prefer the well-lighted room of comfort.
Reason helps us determine what already happened and why. Reason deals with the past. Faith deals with what may be. Faith deals with the future. They are neither exclusive nor in opposition. Together, they allow one to determine where one has been and chart a course for where one may yet go.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/post...
and it was voted down to Zero and garnered a mere 8 comments.
Let's at least get moving in the right direction. The ideal is off on the horizon behind us. Right now we need to be more concerned with the cliff dead ahead.
People don't change because they are forced to. They change and adapt new ways of thinking when they understand how it will benefit them.
Think of it this way: do you walk into a party with new people you've never met and immediately launch into a tirade at the top of your voice about the evils of socialism? Only if you're trying to never get yourself invited to a party again. No. What you do is make small talk with a few people and find commonalities. Then when the subject comes up, you present your viewpoint. Best of all, you let the logic of the argument do all the talking.
Making enemies is pathetically easy. Making allies is much more difficult, but rewarding.
Load more comments...