Ayn Rand and Paul Ryan
 
About most of this article I must  agree  --despite the author's  pot shots 
at the Tea Party.
I am at least maginally a Tea Party supporter it should be said by way of  
self discloure.
Which is also to say that I reject the popular media characterization of  
the Tea Party
as a collection of "libertarian zealots," since many are not libertarians  
at all but are
social conservatives, political Independents, or average people simply fed  
up
with corrupt government which effects them personally and in the  
pocketbbook. 
 
This said, I also did some serious  thinking about libertarianism this  
past two months 
especially after reading Jonah Goldberg. Not so much because he is a shill  
for libertarianism,
but because of issues he raised in "Liberal Fascism."
 
Two factors of consequence, against a background of reinforced respect for  
libertarian
insistence on the value of free speech  --no small thing in a world  where 
the mass media
regularly distorts the truth, buries the truth, conceals the truth, and  
trivializes the truth
beneath a feel good exterior of pabulum as news,  fluff presented as  news, 
and
"human interest" stories that are not remotely news stories at all.
 
( 1 )  Libertarian values contribute to amorality on Wall Street. Yes,  
Wall Street 
does not require libertarianism to be unethical  --it has been a moral  
cesspool since
at least the mid 19th century--   but libertarianism helps foster  a strain 
of nihilism
that has badly eroded common ( Christian derived ) morality. Not  exactly a 
problem
to see results of this in 2008 and continuing to today. Blame Freddie and  
Fanny
all you want, blame Bernie Madoff and Ichann and other unsavory  
individuals,
blame corporate greed, blame gluttonous banks, etc, but the bottom  line
is that all we now have in the financial markets is shadow morality
in part because libertarianism regards traditional morality as  antiquated
and unnecessary since self interest is the only standard we supposedly  
need.
Libertarians may place Ayn Rand in her own category, but I do NOT
even if, compared with other libtars, she is sorta like a Mormon  compared
to other Christians. Still, regardless of idiosyncrasies,    Mormons are
Christians, not Buddhists or Hindus, and Rand is a libertarian 
and hardly a Socialist or Mercantilist.
 
( 2 )  Libertarianism promotes Atheism and undermines Christianity  and
any other moral religion you can think of. Which is not exactly a  mystery
given the origins of libertarianism as an offshoot of 60s Left  radicalism.
That is, it can and often does act as a bridge between belief and  so-called
secular humanism, something palatable to people who have serious  doubts
about traditional religion and want to integrate their lives into the  
modern
and socially "liberal" world, for which they see traditional faith 
as an impediment.
 
Not even to count objections one may make about the questionable  economic
and political premises of libertarianism. Sorry if these comments offend  
anyone
but this is how things seem as of mid April, 2011. 
 
Anyway, while Rand may be extreme by standards of other libertarians,
you can see in Randist values and beliefs the excesses those beliefs can  be
taken to in the Paul Ryan budget plan.
 
I don't buy into the narrative, whole cloth anyway, about how his  ideas
are "rob the poor to help the rich,"  but I  gotta say that when  I first 
heard
the plan described my reaction was that the GOP had just thrown away a  
really
good chance to win in 2012. Basically Ryan, while sound in some  
particulars,
is crazy on balance. And why ?  I think the article is  right  :  Because 
he is
a Randist, a doctrinaire  whack job who seems to really think that tax  cuts
for the wealthy are the way to go. There are a number of other objections  
to
his plan that could be discussed but for starters this will do.
 
Billy
 
=====================================================
 
 
 
 
 
W Post
 
 
The Gospel according to Ayn Rand
“Then Jesus looked up at his disciples and said:‘Blessed are you who are  
poor, for yours is the kingdom of God.’” (Luke 6:20) According to Ayn Rand, 
the  novelist and atheist philosopher so beloved of influential American  
conservatives today, that’s where Jesus got off track.  
“There is a great, basic contradiction in the teachings of Jesus,” Rand  
writes. She argues that when Jesus teaches about “the salvation of one’s 
soul,”  that’s individualism and therefore good. But when it comes to ethics, 
Jesus goes  off the rails. Jesus’ mistake, per Rand, is the idea that, “in 
order to save  one’s soul, one must love or help or live for others.” And 
that, _Rand  concludes_ (http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/texts/jesus.html) , 
leads to Christianity’s “failure.”  
Rand, of course, “is _noteworthy for her atheism _ 
(http://rebirthofreason.com/Articles/Parille/Ayn_Rand,_Objectivism,_and_Religion_(Part_1_of_4).shtml)
 and uncompromising  opposition to religion.”  
Ever since Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wisc.) put out his draconian budget proposal  
that slashes essential programs for the poor and gives big_ tax breaks to 
the rich_ (http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/10/war-on-the-weak.html) , Ryan’s 
attachment to the works  of Ayn Rand has been in the spotlight. Jonathan 
Chait, in the pages of Newsweek,  calls out Ryan for launching a “_War on the 
Weak_ (http://www.newsweek.com/2011/04/10/war-on-the-weak.html) ” and explains 
“How the GOP came to view  the poor as parasites –and the rich as our 
rightful rulers.” The success of this  idea that the rich have the right to 
rule 
and the poor don’t have any right to  their help, is due to the popularity 
of the philosophy of Ayn Rand on the far  right. According to Chait, Ryan is 
“a Rand nut…Ryan once appeared at a gathering  to honor her philosophy, 
where he announced, ‘The reason I got involved in  public service, by and 
large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it  would be Ayn Rand.’ He 
continues to view Rand as a lodestar, requiring his  staffers to digest her 
creepy tracts.”  
Rev. Jim Wallis takes up the contrast between reading Rand and reading the  
Bible. He compares her work (and Ryan’s budget) to the biblical prophet 
Isaiah,  and Wallis calls down biblically based wrath on those who make a 
virtue of  crushing the poor. His column, “_Woe to You, Legislators_ 
(http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-wallis/woe-to-you-legislators_b_849300.html) 
,” cites 
Isaiah 10: 1-3. It’s an  inspired choice. “Doom to you who legislate evil, 
who make laws that make  victims -- laws that make misery for the poor, 
that rob my destitute people of  dignity, exploiting defenseless widows, taking 
advantage of homeless children.  What will you have to say on Judgment Day, 
when Doomsday arrives out of the  blue? Who will you get to help you? What 
good will your money do you?”  
I used to be a big Ayn Rand fan. I admit it. I read all her works and 
avidly  discussed them with friends. I was in high school at the time. It 
became 
very  clear to me as I experienced a call to the ministry in college that I’
d I have  to grow up, give up Rand’s selfish ideas, and begin to recognize 
that following  the Gospel of Jesus Christ meant living for others.  
Conservative Christians who support the Ryan version of radical 
conservatism  based on the atheist individualist philosophy of Ayn Rand have 
some 
serious  questions to ask themselves and these questions are long overdue. The 
political  alliance between Christian evangelicals and the tea party has 
already been  analyzed by pollster Robert Jones as a “_shotgun marriage_ 
(http://onfaith.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/panelists/Robert_P_Jones/2010/11/the_shotg
un_marriage_of_tea_party_and_evangelicals.html) .”  
It’s worse than that. Today’s radical conservatism is an unholy and 
unstable  hodgepodge of ideas that are fundamentally alien to each other. This 
marriage is  doomed. 
Ayn Rand’s atheist hyper-individualism opposed religion in all its forms. 
The  reason is that despite their failure at times to live up to their 
principles,  the world’s religions all have an ethical core that teaches the 
moral 
duty human  beings have to care for one another. Principled atheism and 
humanism, it should  be noted, share this basic moral value. Rewarding the rich 
and denying the duty  to care for the poor is incompatible with the core 
teachings of the world’s  religions, and with many humanist values, as Greg 
Epstein describes them in_ Good Without God _ 
(http://www.amazon.com/Good-Without-God-Billion-Nonreligious/dp/0061670111) , 
and it is certainly a 
philosophy  opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ. 
While I do not agree on certain theological doctrines with many 
evangelicals,  I respect many of them for their on-the-ground commitment to the 
poor 
and the  vulnerable. Evangelical Christians have read Isaiah, they have read 
Jesus’_  Sermon on the Mount _ 
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sermon_on_the_Mount) and they know that Jesus was 
not mistaken about  the ethics of loving 
one’s neighbor. It is the whole law and the whole gospel.  
Christian evangelicals who support the Ryan budget that hurts the poor and  
rewards the rich as the ‘Gospel according to Ayn Rand’ have some soul 
searching  to do and Holy Week is a good time to do that.  
“For what does the Lord require of you but to do justice, love kindness, 
and  walk humbly with God?” (Micah 6:8) 
======================================================= 
Susan Brooks Thistlethwaite  | Apr  18, 2011

-- 
Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community 
<[email protected]>
Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism
Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org

Reply via email to