It's late so this won't be a long post, but I'm thinking about John McCain's favorite book, "For Whom the Bell Tolls." It's been a while since I've read it, but from what I understand the main character goes to Spain to fight in a war that he knows is lost and he gives his life for it anyway. It's a matter of principle that somethings are done for the greater good. It's kind of like Spock's, "Logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." That sentiment also reminded me of Tom Brokaw's work, "The Greatest Generation."
All this stands in stark contrast to many current politicians fascination with Ayn Rand. When I was younger, in college, I read Ayn Rand. I was vaguely aware of what I was reading. What I walked away with after reading one or two of her books is that society wants a certain amount of homogeneity but we need individuals to step to the front and break the molds. We need to all be ourselves.
There's a tension there isn't there? Sacrificing oneself for the greater good isn't really looking out for oneself is it? The first Ayn Rand quote I found online is. "My happiness is not the means to any end. It is the end. It is its own goal. It is its own purpose.” I was taught, whether it was at home, church, school, or by osmosis that this is simply narcissism. This is not a mindset to be emulated. Another quote, "To be free, a man must be free of his brothers. That is freedom. This and nothing else.” What? Who even thinks that way?
Paul Ryan. Paul Ryan has made Ayn Rand required reading for his staff. Justice Clarence Thomas every year makes his new interns watch a film version of Rand's novel, "The Fountainhead." Rex Tillerson's favorite book is Rand's, "Atlas Shrugged." Mike Pompeo cites her as a major inspiration. There are more.
As I wrote above I read several of her novels, but didn't take away much. As I write this missive I have referred to several articles about her and her philosophy. She was in an word, an "elitist" of the highest order. She felt some people were simply better than other people and we should let them do pretty much whatever they want. Common folk can just kind of come along for the ride.
This idea is in great contrast to the idea that all are born equal with certain inalienable rights. We know that all are not born equal. Some come out of the womb with birth defects. Some come out already addicted to drugs. Some are born and just always seem destined for great things. Most have different levels of opportunity for nutrition, education, moral development.
When Thomas Jefferson talked and wrote of us being born equal he was doing it in the context of an age that was getting ready to largely do away with Monarchs and aristocrats. The days when people had to lean on the clergy to read and write their letters was drawing to a close. Jefferson though he spoke of, "enjoyment of life and liberty," and "pursuing and obtaining happiness," he was not speaking of narcissism. He was putting forth the idea that many people could be of value to society. Not just a few. Many. Pretty much all in one way or another.
Ayn Rand's philosophy is particulary un-Christian and un-American. I hope you will reject it as I do.
No comments:
Post a Comment