Forum Post: "Paul Ryan and Ayn Rand" or "Compassionless Conservatism"
Posted 12 years ago on Sept. 26, 2012, 8:19 p.m. EST by TommyNYC
(730)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
Ayn Rand: "If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject."
So, in other words, helping your fellow human being is morally wrong.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/ryans-secret-tape-is-even_b_1910643.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fojrlX6rmmM
So it looks like the libertarians found there guy. Why are they still here complaining that there is no reason to vote? They should be running to the polls to vote (R) all the way.
[Removed]
Dude, watch the TYT episode. The footage of her is REALLY CREEPY.
[Removed]
[Removed]
Dude, do you see how her eyes get all BIG AND CREEPY when she starts talking about how worthless empathy is? She looks like Golum!!!!
http://no-estoy.blogspot.com/2010/08/1_15.html
[Removed]
There is nothing bad about ayn rand - NOW
google : "hickman ayn rand"
and you do know who ron named his son after .....
I'm not sure I follow... What isn't wrong with Ayn Rand?
NOW .........................................................hint - where is she now?
lol.. right
Or
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oD-R_OeP6tU
Very well done. We have peeled back this very smelly onion and it's stench is repugnant. People certainly need to know who Paul Ryan is and what weirdness he believes. Ayn Rand is certainly one he has admired and pined over. Smell it yet?
Thanks for the Great Post!
Come Together NOW
"Conservatism is to be rejected resoundingly if we are to survive as a viable vibrant civilization..."
Ayn Rand was really good in that movie "Bioshock".
The thing we can all agree with Rand on is Government partnering with Business and choosing winners and losers is very bad for the nation.
Im for a SEC/FDA/EPA, a very strong one. Ones that are preferably voted on by us, not appointed by puppets (although Im not sure it would do any good with this population). But I am 100% against the Gov getting involved and choosing who it wants to help while others are left on their own.
It's not just Ryan, you know it's Romoney too.
http://www.politicususa.com/paul-ryan-fails-distance-randian-ideology.html
"Ro' Money, Ro' Money, Ro' Money!
Another post that is a glaring example of how the people in this country will take one thing, and link it to another, simply because A) that person says thats whats up ... or B) The media says it.
Ryan is about as libertarian as, well, pick another Republican. Just because he says he liked the book doesnt mean his life or his record mirror the brand.
This is just as fuckin dumb as the Republicans that call Obama a Communist or a Socialist.
The scariest thing about this post is not that its typical of a misinformed public, its that people like this are probably the political leaders in their ciricles, and are only perpetuating more cheap talking point bullshit that makes no sense.
Nice hack job as usual Tommy. I hope you dont agree with Republicans when they call your guy, whom I voted for, a Sociallist or a Communist. Because thats exactly what you are doing right here. You are keeping the stupidity going.
Problem is hchc, that one quote from Ayn Rand sums up her dreadful philosophy very well. It's also commonly known as Social Darwinism, which she widely embraces. It is the very core of her misguided beliefs.
So your foundation for your failed logic lies under water.
I advise a dose of Evident Truth for you.
Andddd.................
Come Together NOW
Yes it does. But if you look at how Paul Ryan behaves, its almost the exact opposite. Ryna LOVES big gov, and warfare/welfare state. Its all over his entire career.
Im not debating if Rand said that. Or if Ryan CLAIMS to be a big fan. Im saying if you put the two next to each other,they are closer to being opposites than they are the same.
Here's a direct quote; “I grew up reading Ayn Rand, and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are,” the congressman told a convention of Rand followers in 2005. Rand was “the reason I got involved in public service http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2012/08/16/what-paul-ryan-learned-from-ayn-rand.html
You're conveniently neglecting to mention that he also explicitly disavowed the philosophy of Objectivism. Yet you're trying to tie him to Ayn Rand as though he worships her and her overall philosophy.
It seems his only quibble is about atheism.
He's a Roman Catholic. He rejects Objectivism for atheism. Yet you accuse him of believing that, "helping your fellow human being is morally wrong." Are you defending your accusation?
Why do so many otherwise-rational adults devolve into this kind of idiotic behavior once every four years? You're behaving exactly like the swift boaters and the people who accused Obama of supporting everything that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright said. Are you proud of that?
I guess you're saying I posted that because it was in the link. OK, I gave the link to show where I got the quote. I made no direct accusation that he is against "helping" humanity. Maybe the article did. I won't pass that judgement. That said, no I do not like the policies of Ryan and I don''t think his policies do help humanity, whatever his intent may be. I also don't have a lot of appreciation for Mises or Hayek.
I don't necessarily either. But I'm even less impressed by the idiotic spin doctoring that partisans engage in every four years. This kind of hyperbolic, inflammatory distraction just makes us all stupider and distracts us from the real issues that really matter, like the corruption at the core of our government.
I think I can safely say, Iv'e pretty much been an "equal opportunity" critique. Distracting from the real issues, though, is a strategy employed by the candidates themselves.
I agree, you're an equal-opportunity critic. I don't intent to paint you as the kind of blind partisan that is plentiful on this site. But seriously man, this is beneath you. "Obama is a Black Panther", is about on the same level.
I judge Ryan more on his behavior than what he may have read. However, the fact that he gives any part of her philosophy credence at his current age, is something I find disturbing. The fact that anyone would still cling to von Mises and Hayek is also a big problem for me.
Why is that? You're a hard-core Keynesian?
Yeah, pretty much a Keynesian. Do you take issue with Keynes?
I'm a computer scientist and I won't claim to be an economist, but I just finished reading A Tract on Monetary Reform and I'm familiar with the conclusions of this other publications although I haven't personally read them. I agree with his point about employment being tied to demand rather than to production but I think that modern politicians have used him as a way to rationalize spending money that they don't have.
Well, stimulus spending (aka deficit spending) could be described as "money they don't have". Keynesian economics has been distorted, bent and twisted to justify various agendas. One facet that has been conveniently overlooked, is the subject of what Keynes described as "leakage", which refers to trade deficits. Those who claim to be Keynesian, but who ignore his warnings about the dangers of trade deficits, are either very stupid or just taking advantage of the fact so few people have that much knowledge of Keynes. There is no way to overcome the insane, historically unprecedented trade deficits this country has with traditional Keynesian stimulus.
I only posted a quote. I do think it's pretty clear he falls into the category of free market economics. To me, that's pretty close.
You posted an Ayn Rand quote about rejecting altruism, which is a core tenet of Objectivism, and you directly implied that Paul Ryan is a disciple of that line of thinking and therefore does not believe in helping other people. When what he actually said is that he rejects Objectivism specifically for being "atheistic". Saying, "I only posted a quote", is disingenuous and you know it.
I posted a Paul Ryan quote. Not an Ayn Rand quote. people can take from it whatever they want.
You posted a quote aimed at connecting Paul Ryan to this Ayn Rand quote:
I was offended by the John Kerry swift boaters and I was offended by the Jeremiah Wright hyperbole and I'm offended by that also.
[Removed]
If somebody is actually wrong, then shouldn't you be able to establish that without misrepresenting what they've said? Paul Ryan has explicitly disavowed the philosophy of Objectivism and atheistic principles like, "helping your fellow human being is morally wrong." It's obvious enough how that principle goes against his Roman Catholic faith, which he does not disavow. But you're determined to generate hyperbole to make him look bad for partisan political reasons. That doesn't impress me at all.
Very few people who read this site are going to be swayed one way or another by anything that anybody says here about Paul Ryan. Except me. I'm a former Obama voter who is dangerously at risk of voting for Romney/Ryan. So convince me. If you're going to convince me not to vote for them then you're going to have to come up with something more substantial than this nonsense. I've read Atlas Shrugged (twice actually, once recently, during a period of frustration over having to hold up the world at my company) and The Fountainhead, and so I'm not as easily duped by the misrepresentations. I'm going to need to see a substantial argument, not hyperbole and exaggeration.
[Removed]
Yes, because I was not impressed. You've got about a month to convince me not to vote Romney/Ryan. Calling me names isn't going to convince me. Manufacturing hyperbole isn't going to cut it either. If you provide a rational and coherent argument then I promise to consider it and discuss it with you respectfully. If you spend the next month calling me names and perpetuating superficial mythology then it's very likely that my vote will cancel out your vote.
[Removed]
I have not decided who to vote for, no. Sarah Palin decided it for me in 2008 and I started to regret it almost immediately when Obama spent nearly a trillion dollars on the promise of creating millions of jobs and then of course none of the money went to actual job creation. It would have been more effective to simply hold a federal lottery and dole out the trillion dollars to millions of individuals based on luck.
So you still have a month to convince me to vote for him a second time.
[Removed]
Then why are you wasting your time on posts on the Internet about Paul Ryan's political ideology if you're not interested in swaying anybody's opinion? You're just looking for a good-ole-boy club where everybody agrees with you, where you can joke about what idiots everybody is on the other side?
Just one question though. How could one read Ayn Rand, and then only "later in life" figure out what her philosophy was. That doesn't pass the smell test.
Have you ever read Atlas Shrugged? The Fountainhead?
They're novels. Objectivism came afterward. Inspired partly by the reader reaction to the John Galt character in Atlas Shrugged. It's actually quite easy to see how a person could read both books without necessarily agreeing with statements like "helping your fellow human being is morally wrong." If you've ever actually read the books, I mean.
The premise of Atlas Shrugged is a what-if story, about the hypothetical scenario where the people who are disproportionately contributing to society all go on strike. It's not difficult to see how a young person could read the story and have an epiphany about socialism without necessarily coming to the conclusion that, "helping your fellow human being is morally wrong." Despite what partisan pundits on television are apparently telling you.
"They're novels. Objectivism came afterward." Sure, kinda like Scientology came after Dianetics.
Sure, and John Kerry lied about serving in Vietnam, and Obama is secretly a Black Panther. All of these attacks are idiotic and you should be just as ashamed of yourself as those 'swift boaters'.
I know you're going to bust my chops for bringing this up again, but, I think I can take it. Here's a difference. Ryan required his congressional staff to read Rand, as well as von Mises and Hayek.. His actual policies reflect the core ideology of the idea that free markets take care of everything. This is at the core of Randian thought. Obama didn't require any of his staff to read black panther literature , to my knowledge. That seem to be a bit of of a distinction.
Okay, yes. Fair point.
Conversations with you are a refreshing change for this site. It's a lot easier to acknowledge that somebody else has a good point when they're not foaming at the mouth and spouting ad-hominem attacks.
That comparison sucks! Is there a video of Obama saying clearly that Huey Newton was his greatest idol?
"the reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand."
How am I spinning that? THERE'S NOTHING TO SPIN!
Yes, Iv'e read them. I guess it depends on at what age and how perceptive the individual reading them happened to be.I didn't find it hard to extrapolate the philosophy, but maybe Paul did. I however, probably have a different view on socialism than you do.
Probably so. But if you know who John Galt is and you still favor socialism then I can respect that.
And it's funny how everybody claims to have read those two very-thick books, in a society where very few people any books at all, much less dense works like that. Not that I'm insinuating anything about you, just that the answer to, "Have you ever read Atlas, Shrugged?", is always, "YES!" I'm making fun of Tea Partiers as much as anybody.
Well, yes, I was a reading freak, as a teen, but this is the internet, so I could claim anything, as anyone can. Let me clarify the socialism thing. I favor a degree of socialism. Not centralized communist style socialism. Something along the lines of the Scandinavian models. So now I have to ask, what do you think about John Galt?
That makes sense. I had a Swedish foreign exchange student in addition to being a reading freak when I was a teen, so that makes sense.
I frequently feel like John Galt, so that sways my opinion a bit.
Reply to; Haha,yes... Yeah, occasionally I feel a flurry of elitism.
Oh I know that feeling. I run a small biz myself.
Haha, yes. Exactly.
I understand where you're coming from. Not everything is cut-and-dry at all times. When I was 18, before life came along and beat the crap out of me, I was a lot more of a contrarian leftist. I think that the urge to question the dominant paradigm is actually part of why I come here. (There are two different ways to interpret that and they're both valid.)
Listen, Im not saying that he didnt say all that. Im saying if you look at how he governs, its almost the exact opposite of libertarianism.
Greenspan considered himself a libertarian too. A fuckin central planner claiming to be about open and free markets. I cant tell you how many imbicils have messed that one up.
Free market, to these guys means crony captitalism, aka neoliberalism,as in this definition; http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=376
Crony capitalism is the exact opposite of libertarians. Neoliberalism has so many definiations, its not ever worth trying to use it in a comparision.
The shit that is going on today is two fold- like deregulation. The very top multinationals get no regs, and the little guys underneath get more and more every year.
Well, the definition (of neoliberalism) that I linked is the only one I know of. If anyone defines it otherwise, i think they just haven't done their homework.
Here's a bunch more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neoliberalism
I agree that everything right now is basically neolib/con whatever, facsist nonsense.
Clearly these guys ideas of free markets are different than the one Rand envisioned. Now whether it was inevitable outcome is another story.
Go back and really read that wikipedia article. You will see how neoliberalism is libertarian at its core.
I think you just haven't read enough to decide which type of lizard you are.
This is from the guy I was debating before your ignorant ass jumped in "Free market, to these guys means crony captitalism, aka neoliberalism,as in this definition; "
If you think crony capitalism is the same as libertarianism, then you are only helping to cememnt the fact taht they country does not really understand what is at the heart of our decline.
read the article.
I don't think Rands idea was any more viable. Ayn Rand seemed to make the mistake of not recognizing that while Communism provides both a social system and an economic system, capitalism only provides an economic system. Without any external social system, unregulated capitalism can only become social Darwinism.
I can see that you didn't read the article, as usual, hic-hic. If you did, you would see that Ryan basically calls Rand his idol and the basis for his entire philosophy.
Obama never called Marx his idol. So, your analogy sucks, as usual.
I can call Michael Jordan my idol, doesnt mean I live my life or make my decision like he did.
Only an idiot would take two people economic views, one of which was almost 0 government, the other one being a huge spending, war loving freak show, and say they are the same.
Obama has a few people he idolel.. Do you think the two of them have the same lifestyles?
Ayn Rand is a terrible idol for a person to have. She was a very sick person. Having someone like that as your idol is a reflection on you.
Yeah Tommy...you aren't figuring out what hchc has said about 10 times...who cares if Ayn Rand is his idol....look at the mans track record....Ayn Rand would be disgusted with it. It's not a representation of her beliefs.
So the Ayn Rand fans think that he's not Randian enough. Go figure.
Still, I really think you guys should consider voting for RoMoney/Ryan. They're about as much Rand as you're gonna get!
stop assuming....you know what that does right?
Who said i was an Ayn Rand fan?
Your argument doesn't make any sense....it would be like me saying that Hitlers idol was Gandhi....well that's great...doesn't look like he followed that path. I'm not saying he's not Randian enough for me....i'm saying your linking apples and oranges together.
In what way would Ayn Rand be disgusted with Paul Ryan?