Ayn Rand failed to understand its appetite
I think Rand is spot on with regard to selfishness. If you're not all that familiar with her version, try this. It's a concise statement.
objectivistcenter.org
Ayn Rand failed to understand its appetite
I don't think so. I think she shows remarkable understanding of it. She recognizes that people's primary interest is in themselves. That's human nature. So her approach is designed to harness its plus side and mitigate the other side.
Self-interest is good because it is dynamic and productive, unlike communism. But self-interest can turn into greed, disregard for others, etc. So she mitigates that by advocating an enlightened, mature, sophisticated kind of self-interest, the selfish recognition that it is not really in our self-interest to overdo it.
Will everyone be so enlightened? Can we expect perfection? There will always be some who won't see their self interest that way and will take advantage of others. But we can have laws and mores to discourage that. I don't see how that's any less workable than the alternatives. One alternative, one preached by some Christian elements, is that we should aim for altruism, holiness. Right, like that's going to work. I think we have a better chance of achieving near-universal enlightened self-interest than near-universal holiness.
You claim to wholeheartedly embrace Ayn's philosophy, but in practice you accept things which run completely counter to it.
We live in a democracy. That means collaboration and compromise. I "accept" a lot of things that I think are not optimum because they are the best available options or because they are the law. Are you suggesting that it is wrong to compromise? That if we can't get our way one hundred percent we should hold our breaths until we turn blue leaving our opponents to set the path or our lives? Or is it only a problem when libertarians compromise but it's OK for everyone else? My "enlightened, long-term self-interest" lies in us all getting along and having a stable society, not in interminable infighting.
One further word on perfection vs. compromise. In every system there is a tipping point. There is a tipping point in collectivism grinds us down as a nation and we are no longer vibrant going forward. That happened with the Soviet Union. It may be happening in Europe. It is more important to keep us on the healthy side of the tipping point than it is to achieve perfection so we fight harder closer to that line than we do at the margins. Utopia is not achievable. I don't see any failing in guarding the tipping point rather than fussing at the margins.
To me the answer is no way!
I think that's a rush to judgment. |
