The author actually spent several weeks scouring our archives in research for this book. Looks very interesting. I enjoyed meeting the author and discussing intellectual history with her. Amazon has an amazing price.
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/10478/goddess-of-the-market-ayn-rand-and-the-american-right/
Goddess of the Market: Ayn Rand and the American Right
Previous post: Another Reason to Dislike “Transformers 2″
Next post: Why Objectivists Hate Anarchy
{ 15 comments }
From the Amazon page:
“…the novelist and philosopher Ayn Rand was a powerful thinker whose views on government and markets shaped the conservative movement from its earliest days…..Jennifer Burns offers a groundbreaking reassessment of this key cultural figure, examining her life, her ideas, and her impact on conservative political thought.”
Some people consider Ayn Rand a *conservative* thinker??? Yeah, I know she was virulently anti-socialist, believed in limited government, and hated hippies, but she was also uncompromisingly atheistic, whereas most conservatives are very religious (or pretend to be) and want the State to enforce their views on drugs, abortion, prayer in school, etc. I had always considered Objectivism, politically speaking, as a variant of (classical) liberalism.
Russ,
Today we call Progressives, Liberals. Tomorrow it will be something different. The Amazonians have no other way to describe her; they cannot call her a Liberal, for that would be the exact opposite of what they know. So everyone who is not Liberal (bka Progressive), is a Conservative.
Oh yeah, and Libertarians are just crazies.
For Life & Liberty
I think of Rand as the Snow White and her followers as the seven dwarves. Rather than embracing those who were inspired by her and continued to explore and further develop ideas of hers most of which were not entirely original, she tolerated no deviance from orthodoxy. The phrase “own worst enemy” comes to mind…
Nevertheless, her books brought many people, including myself, to the philosophy of liberty, most of whom (like me) want nothing to do with objectivism.
Christopher wrote:
“Today we call Progressives, Liberals.”
Please, let’s not call them progressives, either. Doing so implies that their way is the way of progress, i.e. getting better. Let’s just call them what they are; socialists.
You’re probably right, though. Amazon, or whoever wrote the review, probably can’t use any other word or phrase to describe her that the ignorant masses would understand. I can hear it now; “Oh, *classical* liberal? You mean like Lyndon Johnson?”
The inherent atheism necessarily undermined the ability of objectivism to stay on track. It became an extension of a personality and its flaws continue to this day.
That is not to say that there are no objectivists who make contributions to economic science. As long as they stay away from interpretation they can uncover scientific truths of praxeology.
Bruce Koerber wrote:
“The inherent atheism necessarily undermined the ability of objectivism to stay on track.”
Atheism undermined the ability of Objectivism to stay on what track? Objectivism was never intended to be merely a political philosophy or popularization of economics. It was intended to be a totally integrated systematic philosophy, encompassing ontology, epistemology, ethics, politics and aesthetics. That being the case, it would have been remiss not to have had something to say about God.
As a deeply religious person, I must say that I agree with Rand more on religion (from what I’ve read of her) than just about any other subject.
Dear Russ,
The track is purposeful human action. A moth does not know why it is attracted to the light it just is. Humans act purposefully and they can be unaware of what is the source of their attraction (off track) or they can act purposefully and be aware of the source of their attraction.
“The inherent atheism necessarily undermined the ability of Objectivism to stay on track.”
John W. Robbins already exposed Randian nonsense for what it was.
See here:
http://www.fpcr.org/blue_banner_articles/without_a_prayer.htm
http://www.trinitylectures.org/MP3/The_Philosophy_of_Ayn_Rand_Refuted.mp3
Robbins’ book isn’t bad, but it should be used with caution –
http://mises.org/misesreview_detail.aspx?control=41
Sickening smear on Rand and all libertarians-
http://www.alternet.org/story/145819/ayn_rand,_hugely_popular_author_and_inspiration_to_right-wing_leaders,_was_a_big_admirer_of_serial_killer?page=entire
Thanks, Mikey, I didn’t know the full extent of Rand’s quotes on that psychopath. This is obviously a fevered leftist screed, but I can’t see how it’s a smear on libertarians. What kind of libertarian could ever have uttered her garbage about Hickman? Not any kind I recognize (and thank god she didn’t recognize us).
it was a smear conflating tea-party’ers with the randians.
This statist knows that some people think all libertarians
endorse everything Rand ever wrote. Although not true,
he can use this to his advantage in his overall mission
to discredit, to frighten, to convince Americans to continue paying the costs of their own slavery.
Newson summed it up nicely.
Ron Paul is attracting too many supporters!
Statists are getting panicky.Desperate.
Comments on this entry are closed.