A case for objectivism

Written by Tom Bux
Published October 08, 2003

I believe that in the short term people are quick to jump when they see negative politics, but after a while, they wise up. People soon realize that rude attacks on adversaries is not what politics should be about. That is what is happening how. I think that when people like Howard Dean call Bush a "gang leader", only die-hard socialists who are starving for red meat cheer. The rest of America, who look at it more objectively, just see political hacks who have no real new ideas, just a pot full of mud to throw.

I am sometimes mystified by how I ever became a libertarian. I attended public school, went to Penn State, and majored in Liberal Arts. I majored in American Studies, and studied a lot about culture from many great professors.

While pondering the immortal words of Socrates when he said "I drank what?," I had a realization stemming from my naiveté, and my belief that not everyone can be as liberal as Sean Hannity makes them out to be. It was that I was cheated on education. I never learned about conservative social philosophies like Objectivism.

Don, over at Anger Management mentions Ayn Rand and objectivism quite a lot, and I did some research and found how much my thought coincides with objectivism. From what I can see, objectivism is based on individualism, the free market, and a libertarian attitude. It seems to make sense. I have to read more of it.

Don highly recommends that I read her book. I will do that.

Keep reading for information and comments on this article, and add some feedback of your own!
A case for objectivism
Published: October 08, 2003
Type:
Section: Politics
Filed Under: Books: Philosophy
Writer: Tom Bux
Tom Bux's BC Writer page
Tom Bux's personal site
Spread the Word
Like this article?
Email this
Submit to del.icio.us Save to del.icio.us
RSS Feeds
All RSS Feeds (240+)
Comments on this article
BC articles by Tom Bux
Books: Philosophy
All Politics Articles
All BC articles
All BC Comments

Comments

#1 — October 8, 2003 @ 15:54PM — Eric Olsen

Thanks Tom and welcome! You and Al Barger will be best buddies.

#2 — October 8, 2003 @ 15:58PM — Murphy Horner [URL]

Keep your wits about you, but that book is awesome! I love Rand!

I wouldn't buy into everything, but she has some very interesting points.

#3 — October 8, 2003 @ 16:09PM — Steve Rhodes [URL]


I don't want to be mean, but your education should have covered basic writing and proofreading (demogoging, ides, put) before objectivism (which was covered in a critical thinking philosophy course I took at North Central High School in Indianapolis).

The whole post could use a good edit, but particularly this passage:

I think that when people like Howard Dean call Bush a "gang leader", only die-hard socialists who are starving for red meat cheer. The rest of America who look at it more objectively see political hacks that have no real new ides, just a put full of mud to throw.

#4 — October 8, 2003 @ 16:21PM — mike

Just don't become a "pro-war" libertarian. That stuff is ridiculous. "No big government, but let's build schools and hospitals in Iraq!" Totally off the wall.

Start at LewRockwell.com or Wanniski.com before Al leads you down the wrong path.

#5 — October 8, 2003 @ 16:24PM — Tom [URL]

I am pro-war in the case of our current state. September 11th has changed forever our place in the world. We are targets by fundamentalists who aim to destroy us. We must destroy them before something worse than 9/11 happens.

#6 — October 8, 2003 @ 16:26PM — Eric Olsen

Very wise Tom, very wise. Per Steve's suggestion, I did a small edit.

#7 — October 8, 2003 @ 17:44PM — Mac Diva [URL]

You are a college graduate, Tom? Oh my!

#8 — October 8, 2003 @ 17:52PM — Eric Olsen

Whoa, this place is pretty Darwinian - not that it could really be otherwise and not suck. But ...

#9 — October 8, 2003 @ 18:14PM — Natalie Davis [URL]

Scary.

#10 — October 8, 2003 @ 19:15PM — Al Barger [URL]

And does "scary" = "not true"?

Atlas Shrugged may be the most important book of the century, heartily recommended.

You may however wish to start with her previous book, The Fountainhead. Ms. Rand later in life described it as an "overture" to Atlas. The Fountainhead is shorter, and perhaps more succint.

There are no characters in common between the books, but the social situations of The Fountainhead are a kind of premonition of the apocalypse of Atlas Shrugged.

Stand back Mike, for my [and Ayn's] evil influence will prevail. Mwa-ha-ha!

#11 — October 8, 2003 @ 20:27PM — John Mudd

If you're going to do puns on my last name, you definitely should learn how to spell puddle.

Cheers.

#12 — October 9, 2003 @ 00:06AM — Particleman [URL]

I'll chime in here and vouch for what others are saying. While Rand might make some good points, I wouldn't take it all at face value. I read The Fountainhead some time ago so i don't remember the details, but I do remember thinking Rand went over board with a lot of her ideas. And you might as well read Fountainhead first. It's shorter and, from what I've heard, says about the same things.

#13 — October 9, 2003 @ 02:06AM — Natalie Davis [URL]

Particleman, I have read both Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead. I will not debate the matter in this forum, but will say only that while she made many good points, her selfishness and shallowness undercut the valuable ideas she had. And much of what she posited flies in the face of many of my most deeply held beliefs about humans and why we are on this earth.

#14 — October 9, 2003 @ 03:38AM — Ralph Del Rio [URL]

There is no doubt that Atlas Shrugged is on a short list of books including Brave New World, 1984, Cats Cradle and Clockwork Orange. As time goes on William Gibson and Phillip K. Dick will be on this list. You know books like Catcher in the Rye, A Separate Peace and The Great Gatsby used to say alot more than they do now.

#15 — October 9, 2003 @ 08:50AM — Eric Olsen

I think Rand's "enlightened self-interest" was a necessary and powerful antidote to the totalitarian collectivism of communism and fascism, which had particular appeal among intellectuals at the time. Democracy is built upon the indivisible unit of the individual and she helped reenforce that point.

#16 — November 1, 2003 @ 00:50AM — Sam

Tom

I accidentally stumbled on to this page while looking for something else. I am an Objectivist and a big admirer of Rand. If you have any specific questions about the philosophy send me an E-mail and I will be happy to help.

Want comments emailed to you? No spam, promise! Address:

Add your comment, speak your mind

(Or ping: http://blogcritics.org/mt/tb/9007)

Personal attacks are not allowed. Please read our comment policy.





Remember Name/URL?

Please preview your comment!

Fresh
Articles
Fresh
Comments