ayn rand

 So, with Obama and the Democrats firmly in charge, and stimulus money spewing out of Washington, Ayn Rand books are again flying off the shelves. Does this mean that Atlas is finally going to shrug? Will the competent capitalists finally say “to hell with it” and go on strike? Will the lights go out in New York?

Did hardcore liberals flee en masse to Canada when the Republicans were in charge?

I don’t think so. The U.S. is still a pretty good place to do business, and last I checked quite a few billionaires and successful capitalists voted for Obama. Atlas will not shrug.

 Maybe we should celebrate the increased sales of Atlas Shrugged anyway. The strike against the moochers was a plot device, not a call to action. The plot device was an excuse to teach a philosophy, one that happens to celebrate capitalism and small government.

One question to consider: how many of these books will actually be read? How many were purchased for outreach by existing Ayn Rand fans? I can picture it now: “You voted for Obama?? Here’s an 1100 page novel proving you wrong. It may be long, preachy and ponderous, but it’s very appealing to bitter nerds. Prepare to be enlightened.”

I guess I’m just not sold on Ayn Rand as the optimal advocate of capitalism. Her philosophy is incompatible with being a Christian, a parent or a likeable person. This leaves a rather small and politically ineffectual target market. (Yes, I am aware that some Christians, parents and likeable people are enamored with Rand’s works. People who really like their government small can overlook much to treasure her well written words against socialism.)

Some of the new copies of Atlas Shrugged will be read, of course, and converts will be made. Should we at least celebrate this small victory?

Alas, no, for Ayn Rand’s ethical philosophy is incompatible with a free society. Rational self-interest may work within a capitalist framework, but it does not support said framework. As any work on public choice economics proves, the self-interest of the governors and those who actively support them leads to big government: crony capitalism, regulatory capture, and excessive pensions to civil servants. Donations to earmarking congresscritters pays dividends. Donations to a principled small-government politician are acts of charity.

There is yet another problem with handing out Rand books: Objectivist moral philosophy is just plain wrong. You are not going to convince a skeptical socialist to switch over to capitalism by handing him easily refuted arguments. Only those predisposed will drink the Kool-Aid, and that’s not a good thing. Bad ideas have bad effects. Spend some time at a Libertarian Party convention or an Objectivist meeting to see the damage.

 America is abuzz on the issue of torture, and everyone is talking past one another.  The left blanketedly admonishes that torture is never appropriate and always ineffective. The right is reactionary, arguing that torture may have prevented mass American deaths and that the left is therefore wrong when it claims torture is never justified. 

These arguments miss the appropriate issue, which is whether it is appropriate for the American government to sanction torture.  The answer is no.  But it is dishonest to claim that under no circumstance could torture be justified. Certainly, torture is justified if one has in possession someone who knows the whereabouts of a villain with the capability of destroying all of mankind, would one not? Torture is justified under less dire circumstances too, and it is dishonest to argue that such circumstances can happen only on television.

So, under some circumstances torture is justified.  But, that does not mean that the American government should ever sanction it.  When the government sanctions torture, as it seems to have done under the Bush Administration, it absolves the individual torturer from responsibility for his or her actions.  The responsibility is spread out amongst the many layers of bureaucracy, executive opinions, legal memos, etc.   Everyone can point a finger at someone else and nobody is to blame. Stated eloquently by the protagonist in Ayn Rand’s The Foutainhead: “Who permitted them to do it?  No particular man among the dozens in authority.  No one cared to permit it or stop it.  No one was responsible.  No one can be held to account. Such is the nature of all collective action.”  If nobody is to blame for torture, then you will generate instances of torture that are unnecessary--under the cover of your American flag.

So, how do we reconcile the suggestion that America should not sanction torture and the truism that torture may be justified sometimes? I believe that we must criminalize torture and prosecute anyone who engages in it.  If the circumstances are so dire that the government agent honestly believes that breaking the spirit of another human being through physical force (i.e. torture) is the only mans to prevent the doomsday event, then that agent should be willing to sacrifice his or her own liberty to prevent the doomsday event.  It is much greater sacrifice to put one’s own liberty at risk to save other human lives, than it is to trample another person’s human rights. This higher threshold will reduce instances of torture and better ensure that it will be used only when absolutely necessary. As a safety valve, the President has the power of pardon if the criminality is unjust under the totality of the circumstances. 

I understand that some national policies are moving us towards socialism and is removing incentive from our society. I realize that rewarding mediocrity is something that, in the long run, benefits no one. But what I did not realize is that there exists a protest movement that is going with the government flow and accepting medicrioty as a means to teach government a lesson. The movement is accepting the results of national policies and reducing their high levels of productivity which are being penalized more than rewarded.

It is called Going Galt.

It stems from a classic American novel written by Ayn Rand called Atlas Shrugged. Although written in 1954, the book is as timely as ever.  click here for the story