Sunday, April 5, 2009

Businessweek Debate Room--2

The Economy Needs Ayn Rand

My Commentary:

Mike zemack
April 4, 2009 11:13 PM
It's hard to call this exchange a debate. If I were a serious opponent of Ayn Rand's ideas, I'd be ashamed to call Christina Patterson a representative of my side. Her hissing, uninformed tantrum is more reminiscent of a spoiled child than a worthy participant in Businessweek's "Debate Room."

The fact is, if Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism was dominant in American culture, there would have been no financial crisis.

Objectivism teaches how to live and advance one's life through one's own thinking and efforts, and through voluntary, non-predatory, rights-respecting, mutually advantageous association with one's fellow man. Its cardinal personal virtues include rationality, integrity, and honesty, among others. The consequence would be a benevolent capitalist society.

As a husband, father, and grandfather, I strongly urge anyone seeking a comprehensive guide to a virtuous, self-sustaining, happy life to study the works of philosopher Ayn Rand and Objectivist intellectuals like Onkar Ghate.

http://www.principledperspectives.blogspot.com/


Other's Commentary:

Barney Murrell
April 5, 2009 02:36 AM
All the pro-Rand commentators are ignorant of U.S. History, and/or lacking in morality. Today's economic failures are the result of two things: One, failure to recognize that most humans are greedy SOBs and run amok without oversight (remember prisons?) and two, implementation of deregulation legislation that ended with predictable results.

Same thing happened to S&Ls in the 1980s, thanks to Reagan’s deregulation and tax policies. The following Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation links explain the failures that helped bring about the S&L crisis:

The S&L Crisis: A Chrono-Bibliography
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/s&l/

History of the 80s
http://www.fdic.gov/bank/historical/history/

Also, what follows are links to photographic evidence of what results in an unregulated free market pre-Great Depression economy:

Child Labor (Ann would be proud of their “freedom” to work instead of going to school)
http://www.historyplace.com/unitedstates/childlabor/index.html

Earlier in the 1900s was Upton Sinclair’s “The Jungle” – about labor slavery and the filthy conditions under which American meat was processed.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jungle

“The Jungle” was the catalyst for Theodore Roosevelt’s implementation of the Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_Food_and_Drug_Act_of_1906

And then there was the Great Depression

Children of the Great Depression
http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/learning_history/children_depression/depression_children_menu.cfm

Hoovervilles from American Memory
http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/f?fsaall:0:./temp/~ammem_xPlK:

Hooverville: Shantytown of Seattle’s Great Depression
http://www.historylink.org/index.cfm?DisplayPage=output.cfm&File_Id=741

If there are any pro-Rand fans that still believe her ignorance is correct then you are one of those who may be aptly described as "greedy no-good SOBs." Just remember, it was the cannon fodder from the lower economic classes (victims of "free markets") that won America’s wars which made it possible for capitalism to exist and Rand to write.



My Commentary:

Barney Murrell offers not even a hint of a refutation of even a single principle of Objectivism.

Instead, he makes the claim that “most humans are greedy SOBs” incapable of freedom (including Mr. Murrell?). This is belied by the historical fact that rising general prosperity and (even relatively) free markets are inextricably linked corollaries (Ex., the contrast between North and South Korea), while central planning of all kinds inevitably leads to economic decline and poverty (example, the Hoovervilles and today’s unemployment statistics). His support of government regulation implies that a gun can impart wisdom and virtue into otherwise “greedy SOBs”. Give any “greedy SOB”, which he claims most humans are, a position of coercive police power over the lives of other men by making him a regulator automatically allows wisdom and omniscience to flow from the (metaphorical) gun in his hand into his selfless brain.

Humans are not evil by nature, but are rather in need of a rational, scientifically validated code of ethics to guide them in their lives and in their relationships with others. Objectivism provides that moral guidance. See the works of Ayn Rand or of Objectivist intellectuals Tara Smith (Ayn Rand’s Normative Ethics, the Virtuous Egoist) and Craig Biddle (Loving Life, the Morality of Self-Interest and the Facts that Support It. ).

The litany of horrors allegedly perpetrated by capitalism, such as slave labor and child labor, were legacies of pre-capitalist societies that capitalism inherited and eventually wiped out. The extraordinary advance in men’s economic well-being that occurred in the 19th century was unmatched by any century before or since, and enabled the creation of the American middle class. While terrible conditions did coincide with the rise of capitalism, they must be viewed in historical context…something that the enemies of capitalism routinely fail to provide. For a properly contextual viewpoint, see Andrew Bernstein’s The Capitalist Manifesto.

Every one of the 20th century disasters cited by Murrell were the result of government interference into the economy, not free people “running amok”. The S&L crisis and the (Hoover-Roosevelt) Great Depression are two irrefutable examples. The failure to understand the true causes of the S&L crisis helped pave the way for today’s financial calamity. See Richard M. Salsman of the American Institute for Economic Research (The Collapse of Deposit Insurance—and the Case for Abolition)and Amity Shlaes(The Forgotten Man—a New History of the Great Depression).

As for today’s crisis, listen to this lecture given by BB&T Chairman John Allison at:

Or visit The Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights and visit the special section detailing their response to the financial crisis.

Also read Richard M. Salsman's penetrating essay in the current issue of The Objective Standard.

Government regulation is inherently unjust, because it is based upon the un-American principle of presumption of guilt, whereby coercive control is extended over an entire industry because of the wrong-doing (or alleged wrong-doing) of the few. The establishment of the FDA (and its precursors) is a prime example. That its creation may have been supported by many in the pharmaceutical industry does not justify it. Can it ever be calculated how much suffering and premature death has been caused by the FDA, which routinely delays, prohibits, and discourages investments in medicines from entering the market? Fraudulent behavior of the few is dealt with by criminal law in a free, capitalist society. Prisons are for criminals, and criminals only. Placing controls on people or companies innocent of any wrong-doing is a form of pre-emptive law, which is consistent with dictatorship and is incompatible with a free, lawful society.

It’s not that “greedy SOBs” don’t exist in a free market. It’s that capitalism, which protects individual rights, works to their disadvantage. Honesty wins in a society based upon freedom of association. It is the political corruption of the private economy caused by coercive government interference in the free market that empowers and entrenches the “greedy SOBs” (Ex., Countrywide’s Mozilo and the GSEs).

I take particularly strong exception to Murrell’s degrading of our military personnel as mere “cannon fodder” incapable of appreciating and fighting for their own freedom. We owe an incalculable debt of gratitude to our fighting men and women, who by fighting for their own freedom and our American ideals, they protect the rights of us all…thus enabling Barney Murrell to freely advocate for tyranny and against America’s foremost defender of individual rights.

5 comments:

Unknown said...

Thanks for addressing those smears. I posted a response to another comment made--we'll see if it gets through.

principled perspectives said...

Harold. I read your comments. Good points.

It's not easy responding to the vague, "on-the-one-hand, on-the-other-hand" type of ramblings of someone like CompEng, who has obviously never read or never made an attempt to even begin to understand Objectivism.

But respond we must.

We are steadily reaching more and more of the right kinds of minds.

Unknown said...

Thanks. I don't know enough yet to consider myself an Objectivist (24 y.o. btw), but what I have learned so far makes a lot of sense.

"We are steadily reaching more and more of the right kinds of minds."

That's right.

principled perspectives said...

Harold;

The thing about Objectivism is that it is comprehensive and much more complex than Ayn Rand’s clear-cut writing style makes it seem. 40+ years after discovering her, I still learn from works that I’ve already read many times. She packs so much into so few words.

If you haven’t already, you might want to pick up a copy of Leonard Peikoff’s book Objectivism, The Philosophy of Ayn Rand. He was her best student, and he systematized her philosophy into an organized treatise. This was something she never got around to doing. This book is a good way to study Objectivism.

For me, discovering Ayn Rand was a life-changing event. I have found that understanding how Objectivist principles relate to my personal life makes applying them to current events much easier. It’s all about the individual.

Welcome to Objectivism, and please visit my blog anytime.

Unknown said...

Thank you sir.

Well, I have OPAR, ITOE, and ROTP. I've started with Peikoff's book first. It's slow going, but I'm getting there. Of course, I've been listening to his podcasts and watching the videos online by ARI and other Objectivists.

I've also got The Capitalist Manifesto and Economics in One Lesson and have started with the latter.