The Left-Right Paradigm 101-- According to Rand

Posted by MattFranke 10 years, 6 months ago to Philosophy
18 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Quoted directly from Objectivism by Leonard Peikoff, from the chapter on government.
"The liberals tend to advocate intellectual freedom while demanding economic controls. The conservatives (though they endorse many economic controls) tend to advocate economic freedom, while demanding government controls in all the crucial intellectual and moral realms. Both groups obviously subscribe to and reflect the mind-body dichotomy. The conservatives, whose roots lie in religion, are mystics of spirit. The liberals, whose roots lie in Marx, are mystics of muscle.
'The conservatives [writes Rand] see man as a body freely roaming the earth, building sand piles or factories-with an electronic computer inside his skull, controlled from Washington. The liberals see man as a soul freewheeling to the farthest reaches of the universe--but wearing chains from nose to toes when he crosses the street to buy a loaf of bread.'
Is it a paradox that the spiritualists advocate economic freedom, while the materialist advocate intellectual freedom? Ayn Rand holds that such a development is logical:
'...each camp wants to control the realm it regards as metaphysically important; each grants freedom only to the activities that it despises.... Neither camp holds freedom as a value. The conservatives want to rule man's consciousness; the liberals, his body.'
There is nothing more to be said about liberals; no one can confuse Franklin D. Roosevelt or Edward M. Kennedy with Objectivism. About the conservatives, however, who pretend to be defenders of "free enterprise" or "the American way of life" while spreading all the opposite ideas and laws, something remains to be said.
Precisely because of their pretense, the conservatives are morally lower than the liberals; they are farther removed from reality--and, therefore, they are more harmful in practice. Since they purport to be fighting "big government" they are the main source of political confusion in the public mind; they give people the illusion of an electoral alternative without the fact. Thus the statist drift proceeds unchecked and unchallenged.
Historically, from the Sherman Act to Herbert Hoover to the Bush Administration(s), it is conservatives, not the leftists, who have always been the major destroyers of the United States.
"Conservative" here must be construed in philosophic terms. It subsumes any "rightist" who attempts to tie the politics of the Founding Fathers to unreason in any form--whether he is a Protestant fundamentalist, a Catholic invoking Papal dogma, a neoconservative invoking Judaic dogma, a Republican invoking "states right" (i.e. a man seeking fifty tyrannies instead of one), a libertarian invoking anarchism, or a Southerner invoking racism.
Freedom is the opposite of every one of these creeds--and so is Objectivism their opposite.
Objectivists are not "conservatives." We do not seek to preserve the present system, but to change it at the root. In the literal sense of the word, we are radicals--radicals for freedom, radicals for man's rights, radicals for capitalism.
We have no choice in the matter.
We have no choice because, in philosophy, we are radicals for reason."


So there you have it; the truth about liberals and conservatives; simply two sides of the same coin; a duopoly of power, both meant to enslave and control the masses.


All Comments

  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Hiraghm 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Climate changes, a process which takes hundreds to thousands of years.

    Weather changes, a process which takes hours to days.

    There is no global climate. There are various climates which change independently and interactively. Therefore, there is no "the" climate.

    Even the asteroid that hit the Yucatan took a hundred thousand years to kill off the dinosaurs.
    The area of the galaxy the solar system is traveling through affects the Earth's climates more than all the activity of Mankind since our inception.

    There is no climate "trend". Weather patterns are cyclical and overlapping.

    Trying to control climates is like trying to control economies.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    One point I took away from AS and Fountainhead is we should hold another person's ideas up as sacrosanct.

    I certainly don't agree with every word of AS and Fountainhead. At one point in AS, Dagny appears to admire her grandfather (maybe another relative) for allegedly murdering a politician who promoted policies she disagreed with to scare other politicians into business-friendly policies. That was the most offensive thing, but there are many things I disagreed with.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Of course the climate is changing and some of it is anthropogenic, but the planet doesn't have needs, humankind does.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Hiraghm 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    I'm talking about the State religion, or Green religion. The religion that holds that Man's wants and needs are subordinate to the needs of the planet. The religion that holds that man is despoiling the planet, and that global warming is real and man-made.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by Hiraghm 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Mostly the author's interpretation.
    Two things always need to be kept in mind in these discussions, imo.
    Atlas Shrugged is a fiction story written by a human being to make a point. It was not written by the bastard child of Shakespeare and Aristotle.
    Ayn Rand is a human being, not a prophet; while one can admire her ambition in creating a whole new philosophy, one that stands up to much scrutiny, she doesn't know it all. And it's neither blasphemy nor heresy to challenge her ideas.

    I have repeatedly said that objectivism, like socialism, is a utopian philosophy.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Are you rejecting what Rand wrote? I reject part of it too, but I can't understand if you're belittling the Rand quotes, the author's interpretation of the quotes, or my comments.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Hiraghm 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    "RINO" argument?

    What about the religious left? Y'know, the Pope and all those Catholics, Jews, and the biggest, most intolerant, power-mad religion of all, Earth Worship?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ Hiraghm 10 years, 6 months ago in reply to this comment.
    Blacks LOVE watermelon and fried chicken. Women can't drive worth a darn. Jews are money-grubbers. Businessmen would rape their own mothers for profit.

    Oh... sorry, I thought we were invoking mindless stereotypical generalizations about groups which are more inventions of our own minds than have any basis in objective reality.

    The 'right' wants people to control themselves, to be responsible for themselves. The 'left' want to control everybody 'for their own good'. The objectivists/anarchists/libertarians, want free license to do whatever the hell they want regardless of its affect on the people around them (provided they don't initiate violence).
    Of course, the last group never figures out that if your exercise of license annoys the rest of us too much... we'll just kill you. Unlike the fairy tale of Atlas Shrugged, in the real world there are lots and lots of smart, clever and inventive people who don't subscribe to objectivism. WWII would have been a lot easier if the national socialists weren't quite so good at science, technology and industry.

    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years, 6 months ago
    Rand anticipates the RINO argument but includes the religious right.
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo