Skip to main content

Galt's Gulch is at the foot of the Big Rock Candy Mountain

I appreciate people who think.

I appreciate more people who can think for themselves.

I respect people who can dream.

I revere people who can take those dreams and put them into action - making the world a better place.

I am not sure why, but I keep getting little ads on the right side of my screen from people who want me to download something from Ayn Rand. I find it amusing because I am morally repulsed by Ayn Rand and everything she stands for. I find her views repugnant in the extreme. And yet, there the ads are, like a constant thorn in my side.

The kind of extreme capitalism that Ayn Rand and her followers promote results in the very worst kind of humanity imaginable. This kind of narcissistic objectivism allows for only the promotion of one's own self interest and views others not as people but as tools. This is the same kind of thinking that led Hitler and his regime to come to view Jews as expendable. Rationally, people who are unproductive and unuseful are a drain on the resources of a society. So burn them all - like so much cord wood. Don't believe me? Read Heidegger. But remember, we can judge Heidegger from the historical perspective, in our enlightened and post-modern world. He never repudiated his ideas, though many current philosophers have. He was a product of the time - as was Ayn Rand.

They were reacting to the excesses seen in Leninism, Maoism, and in particular Stalinism. We can also react to the same excesses using the same historical view - that people have intrinsic worth. That people are valuable because they are people. And that we must value the contributions of each individual, no matter how meager, because of what the alternative speaks about us.

The extreme capitalism that Rand puts forth would have us forget these truths - that we are endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, among which are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Happiness is not attained in the frivolous expungement of worldly and carnal desires and appetites. Rather, true happiness is found in leading a life that is morally true and spiritually sound. We grow together only as strong as the weakest among us.

Capitalism and a free market, in the vein that Rand would like to see, perpetuates the exploitation of the people - treats them as a resource to be expended. Anything that one can do to increase the bottom line is fair. People who have worked for a company for years are only as valuable as their contributions to that bottom line - irregardless of what they contribute intangibly to the company, such as a continuation of the company spirit and the wisdom that only comes through experience. Corporations only have their share holders to account to - they have neither soul nor body. Yet we have afforded these corporations many of the same rights that used to belong to people, and the creed has become life (of the corporation), liberty (of the market), and the pursuit of capital. Benevolent plutocrats are supposed to take care of us. But they don't. Why should they? They're living the dream!

And in the process, entire cultures, languages, and peoples, not to mention the environment, are being expended at an alarming rate. All under the cry of "freedom" and "modernization". People are told live free (open your market) or (you will) die. The sad thing is, what this becomes is "live like me or you will die." The arrogance of this kind of thinking is staggering. Where is the choice? Where is the autocracy? What about democracy? Are their lives better? Really? Why?

Comments

Kassandra Troy said…
Dear Bill, you have a wonderful blog, but your philosophy is somewhat out of whack. It is Heidegger who was a National Socialist ideologue. It is the result of subjectivist and collectivist thinking (try to get into Kant if you can, he's the real culprit). Ayn Rand on the other hand stood for the exact opposite, which results in individuals who respect each others ideas. Heidegger's way of thinking has led to over 100 million deaths (let that sink in for a while); Rand to none. Sorry, couldn't let your misguided philosophy pass unhindered. Keep up the good work.
Bill Cobabe said…
I suppose I could be wrong about Heidegger and Rand... I mean, I don't THINK I am, but anything is possible...

No, you are right. Kant, Heidegger, and those who are associated with them seem to be able to objectify anything. But the only difference between them and Rand is the scale - Rand speaks of individuals, Heidegger seems to be speaking of society. My contention is that they are the same philosophy - a belief in capitalism and one's self to the exclusion of all else (including altruism, religion, and similar illogical things). As I wrote, the logical conclusion of such thinking is that people become a resource - an expendable source of labor for production, like so much cord wood, to be used up and tossed aside.

I submit that this is inhuman and inhumane. It speaks to a world held in thrall to capitalism and the greed associated with it.

While Rand may not have been the cause of that many deaths, how many billions are currently languishing in the dark night of ignorance, poverty, and oppression because of the "free market" society that Rand and our current plutocracy have imposed on the world? How many cultures, languages, and peoples are being consumed by the lust for money? Is it better to live or die under such circumstances?

So I may be misguided. But at least I am not being guided by something whose effects are so repulsive. I choose to dream of a world that is motivated by love rather than greed.

Popular posts from this blog

2020 - A retrospective

 There will no doubt be many retrospectives written about the year that was 2020. It was a tough year for most, a good year for many, and generally speaking a very interesting year. Which reminds me of the the old curse - may you live in interesting times. Because, you see - interesting does not always mean good. It does not mean better. It does not mean happy. It just means interesting. So to highlight just how interesting things were, I offer the following post about things that went on. Or didn’t went on. It’s not intended to be chronological, necessarily, or even accurate. It’s just some of my observations.... Let’s start with the pandemic. Pandemic is a word that was previously the realm of science fiction and/or horror writers (The Stand comes to mind). Late 2019 a disease was identified in Wuhan, China, which is a place I’d never heard of before. Apparently coming from some kind of exotic meat market, this strain of Coronavirus was something that the world hadn’t seen before. Ma

Is this thing still on?

 Does anyone even blog anymore? I remember when it first got started and everyone was having a blog. I like writing, and I do a lot of it in my professional life, but not everything makes it onto this blog, which is where a lot of my personal thoughts come out. I put more into Facebook lately, too, because it's a little easier. But there's something to be said for this long-form writing exercise, and I think I will continue here periodically. You don't mind, do you? Well, in my last post I wrote about how difficult things were for me at the time. That changed in July when I finally got a job working for the State of Utah. I was the program manager for the moderate income housing database program, and that meant I worked from home a lot but also went in to Salt Lake when needed, mostly on the train. It was a good experience, for the most part, and I'm grateful for the things I learned even in the short time I was there.  In October I started working for Weber County in t

The Other Art

I'm not sure we appreciate photography as much as we do other art forms. Part of this comes from the reality that surrounds and permeates a photograph - it's very, very real, and the photographer strives for clarity and crispness in the representations. Perhaps this is why black and white images continue to be relevant - they strip away extraneous information (color) and leave us with something that is at once familiar and also non-existent - for nothing exists in black and white. Nothing. I also think that pictures are becoming too common-place... Everyone has a camera in their pocket, and while that's a very democratic thing (everyone can express themselves in a picture easily and readily, and can find an audience for these images, which are casually taken and casually viewed, and perhaps just as casually forgotten) I think that we embrace that casual attitude, and it spills over to all aspects of the media, making it impotent. So I read this article this morning: h