Ayn Rand Triumphant
While socialism keeps trying to rear its ugly head and threatens to steal freedom and choices from individuals, there has been a growing interest in Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism. So much so you could say its a resurgence of interest. And that bodes well for the future, as it is a rejection of the collectivist mentality which has bankrupted and stagnated so many societies around the world.
Rand, an ardent advocate of rational egoism and capitalism, might have been the bane of academics in her lifetime, but now objectivism is taught at more than 30 universities, with fellowships at several leading philosophy departments. Next year, ARI plans to enter the Washington, D.C., think tank world with a center devoted to the advocacy of individual freedom and capitalism.
Why this sudden interest in Ayn Rand? Brook gives two reasons: “First, she never really went away. Many who read the books when they were young, in the 1950s, ‘60s and ‘70s, are now confident enough to say that Ayn Rand is their favorite author, and they have the means to donate to the institute. That’s enabled us to promote objectivism more aggressively.”
Second, Brook cites what he calls a cultural vacuum: “Today’s left doesn’t have anything positive to offer to young people. When they were socialists, there was at least something they were fighting for, and they believed in a right and a wrong. Today’s leftist agenda is negative and nihilistic--focused on stopping industrialization, capitalism and even Western civilization. But young people want positive values. That’s why religion is so strong today, because many view it as the only thing that promises a brighter future.”
According to Brook, this gap between liberalism and religious conservatism goes far to explain the surge in interest. “Ayn Rand is the only voice that offers a secular absolutist morality with a positive vision and agenda, for individuals and for society as a whole,” he says.
The cultural and political climate might be opportune for the objectivist movement. After all, a philosophy that celebrates reason as the only means of knowledge seems particularly appealing at a time when liberalism is preoccupied with preventing nightmares rather than promoting dreams, when neoconservatism has been widely discredited, and when standard-bearers for traditional values--such as Ted Haggard and Republican senators, David Vitter of Louisiana and Larry Craig of Idaho, have been found looking for love in all the wrong places.
Objectivism isn’t perfect, but it’s certainly a lot closer to reality than the many self destructive social systems being rammed down people’s throats around the world. There clearly needs to be an alternative society to the state controlled world of today. America is becoming too stateist. So is Europe and others. People need to take more personal responsibility and stop passing the buck to others. When you let other people make decisions for you, you’re signing away your freedoms, like a person checking into a Mental Ward. Once they have permission to run your life, they won’t give back your freedom willingly.
People need to think about alternatives to the state. At least Rand’s books are a step in the right direction. Her work is about how the individual can be free and exercise their self will. I don’t agree with everything she says, but her general sentiments are pretty solid. Which is why they continue to have resonance.
I was in college when I was introduced to The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. Those two books made short work of the mushy-headed liberalism that was being planted in my mind on a daily basis by my professors. Rand wasn’t the best writer in the world but the ideas she presented just made so much logical sense, and seemed so timely despite being written 50+ years before. Her popularity may ebb and flow but she’s always had a pretty big following. Ask around and she will either be one of the most loved or most hated authors of the 20th century.
Posted by Paul T on 09/28 at 04:34 PMIt’s amazing to me how people hate what she says, when what she says is in defense of the individual. I guess people will low self esteem who expect the government or some rich people to take care of them find what she says offensive. But without the attitudes of self reliance there wouldn’t be anyone to prop up a socialist state. That’s why they inevitably fail.
Posted by on 09/28 at 05:51 PM
Next entry: Writing Drama
Previous entry: Help a Brother Out
