Yet despite this, I was still shocked by how off the mark Fox & Co. were. There certainly are aspects of Atlas Shrugged that lend support to their Tea Party extremism, but on the whole I felt that Rand was arguing more against their political and economic policies than those of the American Left. One of the first criticisms Rand slaps down is Jim Taggert’s decision to continue to buy his steel from Orren Boyle despite the fact that he can never deliver the product on time; Taggert’s response? “he’s my friend.” Perhaps before they endorsed Atlasism, Tea Baggers need a refresher on the Bush/Cheney administration’s choice to ink huge contracts with Lockheed Martin or the re-working of laws regulating natural gas production that paved the way for Halliburton’s vast expansion. One of the other arguments frequently cited by neo-Cons is Rand’s demonstration that bailouts and government meddling in industry stifle the economy to the point of ruin. Perhaps they too need a refresher, this time on the original $7 billion financial bailout approved by Bush. Rand is also critical of those who inherit wealth—either in the form of hard currency or socio-economic power—as opposed to creating it themselves. Yet you never hear wealthy Republican heirs and heiresses suggesting that perhaps they should have to actually earn their trust funds.
On a more philosophical note, although I found that Rand really bashed me over the head with Objectivism, it is not an ideology without its merits. Her beliefs in happiness, productivity, and reason are certainly tenets I can ascribe too. Her absolute belief in them, and her application of them only to the individual are, however, something that I disagree with strongly. Countless times throughout the book we are told that each of the "hero" characters are only working for their own personal gain, be it fortune, innovation, or ideological domination. The idea behind this is akin to utilitarianism---but applied solely to one person. The inherent flaw in this philosophy is of course that no man is an island; we both affect and are affected by those around us and thus our success and happiness cannot be judged without consideration to the greater society in which we live.
One needs to look no further to the recent natural disasters in Japan to recognize the global nature of modern society. An earthquake and a tsunami hitting one country on an island has had profound effects on stock markets around the world, to name only one global repercussion. The trickle down of this negative aftermath to an individual living in a small town half-way around the world from Japan is by no means a stretch of the imagination. While the characters of Atlas Shrugged might chagrin those who wanted to help their neighboring countries to succeed, our modern global economy suggests that at least some measure of world wide cooperation is necessary. On the flip side, the success of the post-WWII Marshall Plan (to such an extent that a similar initiative is being considered in the post-revolution Arab world), demonstrates the positive outcome that cooperative financial measures--or in Rand-speak "looting"--can have on global society.
Rand does allow her Objectivist characters to act for the benefit of others, and sometimes does justify it in the perspective of self-interest I have identified above. But it is too little in comparison to the constant badgering of the need to look out solely for oneself whenever a broader self-interest is applied. This, coupled with her decision to not explore this theme when Dagny and Hank discover the abandoned industrial town of Starnesville, Wisconsin, (once the home of the Twentieth Century Motor Company) make it even clearer that Rand's Objectivism was only applicable in the narrowest of senses. Which, when you think about it, suits the ideology of Tea Partyers just fine.
On a more philosophical note, although I found that Rand really bashed me over the head with Objectivism, it is not an ideology without its merits. Her beliefs in happiness, productivity, and reason are certainly tenets I can ascribe too. Her absolute belief in them, and her application of them only to the individual are, however, something that I disagree with strongly. Countless times throughout the book we are told that each of the "hero" characters are only working for their own personal gain, be it fortune, innovation, or ideological domination. The idea behind this is akin to utilitarianism---but applied solely to one person. The inherent flaw in this philosophy is of course that no man is an island; we both affect and are affected by those around us and thus our success and happiness cannot be judged without consideration to the greater society in which we live.
One needs to look no further to the recent natural disasters in Japan to recognize the global nature of modern society. An earthquake and a tsunami hitting one country on an island has had profound effects on stock markets around the world, to name only one global repercussion. The trickle down of this negative aftermath to an individual living in a small town half-way around the world from Japan is by no means a stretch of the imagination. While the characters of Atlas Shrugged might chagrin those who wanted to help their neighboring countries to succeed, our modern global economy suggests that at least some measure of world wide cooperation is necessary. On the flip side, the success of the post-WWII Marshall Plan (to such an extent that a similar initiative is being considered in the post-revolution Arab world), demonstrates the positive outcome that cooperative financial measures--or in Rand-speak "looting"--can have on global society.
Rand does allow her Objectivist characters to act for the benefit of others, and sometimes does justify it in the perspective of self-interest I have identified above. But it is too little in comparison to the constant badgering of the need to look out solely for oneself whenever a broader self-interest is applied. This, coupled with her decision to not explore this theme when Dagny and Hank discover the abandoned industrial town of Starnesville, Wisconsin, (once the home of the Twentieth Century Motor Company) make it even clearer that Rand's Objectivism was only applicable in the narrowest of senses. Which, when you think about it, suits the ideology of Tea Partyers just fine.
