Most of Trump's supporters morph him into whatever 'hero' they need to justify that support—most likely a reaction to the pent up rebellion against Clinton's embraced statism. The mental gymnastics manifested to support Trump, or Clinton, in this election cycle have been 'spectacular' and revealing.

Hear; hear!

Re: “Can't really speak to the thoughts Ayn may have had about what would come of his position.” That is somewhat at variance with your earlier statement that “If any objectivist accepts a cabinet position they have already betrayed their belief (or perhaps it would be correct to say they have revealed their true belief).” Actually, we cannot infer very much about a person’s beliefs based on whether or not that person accepts an appointment to a government position that would not exist in an Objectivist society, and Ayn Rand never claimed that we could.

She may have had a hope that he would change the direction of the economy from a fiat based monetary system to one that offers freedom from debt. He failed to live up to her expectations. There is a hope that working within a socialist/communist democracy the direction of the movement can be changed. It only serves to keep those who would change the system occupied while the system continues to be what it is. Can't really speak to the thoughts Ayn may have had about what would come of his position.

Before becoming Federal Reserve Chairman, Alan Greenspan was appointed Chairman of President Ford's Council of Economic Advisors. Ayn Rand approved and attended the swearing-in ceremony. Did she betray her beliefs? http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/new...

It is irrelevant if any of Trumps appointees are Ayn Rand fans. Alan Greenspan was supposedly a fan then when asked to work for the Federal Reserve he readily accepted the job. He did not dispense with the fiat banking system he worked with it and profited form it. (Reread Atlas Shrugged in case you missed why) If any objectivist accepts a cabinet position they have already betrayed their belief (or perhaps it would be correct to say they have revealed their true belief). If I were given the position of dictator of the world I would not accept it, or at the very least if the position were thrust upon me I would resign immediately. There is no position in the government of leading bureaus that should not exist that can be better if held by someone who professes belief in free agency and liberty. The hope that the slavers will produce fewer chains and perhaps even realize that slavery (even slavery to the state) is wrong because they claim to be objectivists is to place hope where there is none.

Trump's election keeping Clinton out is not a justification for the Trump idolatry. Conservatives who do that are following the 'man on the white horse' without regard for what he stands for. It is not enough to be against Clinton. His threatening businesses who leave the country, his open advocacy of eminent domain and Federal land control, and many other abusive positions are not "standing up to the real would-be dictators". So far his frightening statist pragmatist positions are right down there with JFKs Fascist New Frontier.

We will believe someone like Allison is appointed to anything when we see it, and can then assess the nature of the position. His principles have nothing in common with Trump. The Treasury Secretary nomination,.for which Allison was reported as a possible candidate, went to another establishment crony from Goldman Sachs..

According to Reuters, John Allison is one of three people being considered for Federal Reserve Vice Chairman for Bank Oversight. Considering how his bank was screwed over by Bush's Treasury Dept., his appointment to this post would be richly ironic.

Trump’s “dictatorial mindset” may be “obvious” to you, but I and many others find his mindset a lot less dictatorial than that of Hillary or any recent president. As for the “ongoing Trump idolatry” that alarms you so much, most of it stems from his ability and willingness to stand up to the real would-be dictators and begin dismantling their hold on power. I don’t know of anyone else in either major party capable of accomplishing what he is doing. Most people who voted for Trump are aware of his shortcomings, but view him as more of a liberator than a dictator. For now at least, that’s the case.

Mangled post: "It doesn't make the Trump administration Objectivist or mean Trump support for the kinds of principles Allison stands for.

It fails everywhere. Leonard Peikoff said in his history of philosophy lectures that the problem with Pragmatism is that it doesn't work. But that is only an ironic summary of a very bad philosophy.

It does not mean "good old American practical know how", but has had an enormous influence on American culture and progressive politics that dominates the political parties and the bureaucracies today. Be sure to listen to the Peikoff lectures on the history of western philosophy to see where Pragmatism came from and why, and what is wrong with it in all essentials.

Everyone can read what you wrote and it wasn't "proposing alternatives".

That Trump has a dictatorial mindset is obvious from listening to him. It doesn't make him a full fledged dictator and no one said that. The trend, this time the ongoing Trump idolatry in the name of conservatism pretending to be "free market", is alarming.

Her qualifications were that she thought about what she wrote. Her decision making methods when in the Collective were many times, as reported by those who were excommunicated for wrong thoughts, were extremely emotional when dealing with students and those within the Collective. I realize that Branden and Peikoff were the most harsh with any kind of statements or actions that did not fit their beliefs but Rand went along with it until Branden didn't let her know that he was having an affair with a student and no longer would have the affair with her, hers being open with Barbara and Frank having to go along with it and pretty much ruining their lives.

You might guess that I do not accept her whole philosophy as somehow proved as completely objective. It being a religion if not questionable. Perhaps Conservatives are right to pick and choose what they can accept of the philosophy and discard some of the atheistic metaphysics and of the selfishness oriented ethics. +

i guess I should investigate the word pragmatism a bit more. I wonder where it would fail if practiced.

I was proposing alternatives to the “dictatorial mindset” you claim Trump has. If you want to mark me down for disagreeing with you, that’s your privilege. Contrary to your assertion, Trump certainly is surrounding himself with "free-market" people. They are not 100% consistent, any more than Trump is, but they are serious about rolling back the regulatory state – something that a dictator and his associates would never do.

Your post is non-responsive. Nothing I have written about Trump concerns "ruffling feathers" or "politeness" or endorsing establishment Republicans.

Perhaps Jeb Bush or John Kasich would be more to your liking. They would be polite and not ruffle anyone’s feathers, and they would get along nicely with Democrats in the spirit of bipartisanship and compromise. Of course they would not repeal Obamacare, but they would make it more efficient and “compassionate.”And they would make sure that we were properly deferential to the U.N. and “world leaders”. And they would populate their cabinet with like-minded people to make sure that America continues the policies of Bush I, Clinton, Bush II and Obama as we continue our march into a progressive paradise.

Trump is not surrounding himself with "free-market" people. To the extent it helps business interests he understands and wants, he opposes regulations that hurt that; to the extent he wants business to do something else, he supports regulations and taxes as punishment.

No president has pushed for "full throttle on bringing the entire country under state control." That does not make Trump and advocate of limited government and freedom. He is not a pro-freedom president. He supports a mixed economy run by a dictatorial mindset, as if the country is now his personal family business. Conservatives who support this because they expect or assume that he will do things they like are only revealing their own statism.

A lot of people have been "considered" and quickly passed over. It is Trump support for the kinds of principles Allison stands for.

His authoritarian statism is dangerous to us and to the country. He is making political appointments to carry out and impose is own ideas of how he will run the country and the economy while threatening those who don't go along. Presidents are not supposed to run the country and the economy. He is supposed to be the executive implementing laws passed by Congress, which in turn are not supposed to control us. The administration is not supposed to be the Trump family business.

Some of his cabinet selections are the best that can be expected under current circumstances and are not what Clinton's continuation and intensifying of the Obama agenda would have been. Others are much worse. But they are all conservatives and Pragmatists with the typical view of government as a tool to make things "work" in whatever realm they think is important, selected to impose Trump's own executive decrees in how he will "run" the country.

His recent choice of Secretary of State is suspect at best: It's another Trump emphasis on "making deals" without regard to principles and enunciated policy, let alone respect for the rights of individuals such as his dealings with his crony Putin. Principles and foreign policy have not even been discussed -- only deal making.

His latest announcement of Zinke nominated as Secretary of the Interior is terrible, but few are paying attention to it. Zinke, like Trujmp, is an advocate for permanent Federal control of the land and expanding its domain. As a Republican on the House Resources Committee he has fought reforms of the Federal land agencies and has pushed for expanded funding for Federal acquisition. His support of energy production is not the complete lock it up preservationist mentality of the viros, but is still the Federal authoritarianism of control over the land and its use. Eco-fascism is not the only form of fascism.

Zinke was selected under pressure from the Trump "kids" who see the 30% of the land base under direct Federal control as their domain for upscale hunting expeditions while wallowing in the scenery. Rep. McMorris Rodgers, who had previously been reported as the selection, would have been much, much better, but was pushed out under this family pressure and the Federal land lobby the "kids" associate with.

The vast and expanding Federal lands are to be the plaything of the new Trump family business under Trump's assumed executive authority to do what he wishes, and the rest of us are to do as we're told.

Re: “And just who was Ayn Rand to decide what was proper and improper behavior 'qua man'?” Are you referring to her qualifications or to her decision-making methods? The “concretes to be integrated into a 'qua man' standard” are individual instances of the concept “man” – individual human beings with a specific nature (conscious rational animal) and a specific means of survival (using one’s mind).

Pragmatism is a philosophy. It does not mean everything that "works". Of course Objectivism works in practice. That does not make it Pragmatism.

And just who was Ayn Rand to decide what was proper and improper behavior 'qua man'? I suppose she could be aware of many of mankind and abstract an ideal man from whatever standards of man that she had and create her standard of morality as 'qua man' after the fact of first deciding upon 'mans life'? There are no concretes to be integrated into a 'qua man' standard for the man-unit of the individual consciousness which is the only concrete that has an alternative of life or death while life itself has no alternatives, having no awareness as such and no reason to exist or not for directing its actions for survival which depends only on chemical processes that have no awareness. It is only to life with awareness that can possibly have any possibility of directing its actions to maintain that awareness for existing or not. The existence of consciousness makes alternatives possible.

I think Ayn Rand simply meant that human beings have a specific nature, and have the right to live their lives in accordance with that nature. Many concrete examples of what she considered proper and improper behavior were spelled out in her writings on politics, ethics, and values.