![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neonvincent
A while ago, I promised "[t]here will be more, including a political-themed post and one that disses Objectivism." It's time to make good on that promise, with the one about Objectivism first. With no further ado, here are the posts at Crazy Eddie's News about Objectivism and Objectivists since the last one a month ago.
no subject
Date: 2011-12-28 02:09 am (UTC)Never mind the sex, it's her atheism that's even more baffling
Date: 2011-12-28 02:37 am (UTC)jroc133:
This is a party (GOP), that constantly chastises Dems for having policies based on Karl Marx when they are now on the verge of adopting policies based on Ayn Rand (a soviet immigrant). The irony is hilarious.
...
Being from GA myself - that's the problem w/ the pseudo social conservative/libertarian movement. They have no idea that Ayn Rand was an aethiest and a soviet immigrant. Its so funny it seems almost surreal.
This is the bible belt and they are basically adapting philosophies that go against everything they claim to stand for (the movement I just listed above).
All in all, the Tea Parties were nothing more than Anti-Obama rallies. Nothing more, nothing less.
And when you boil it all down to its basest in nature, these people are pissed essentially b/c Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, and FOX news told them to be.
So to recap: you have the bible belt going along w/ the rhetoric of an aethiest, soviet immigrant that's been brought to them on a daily basis by the forms of outlets that they listen to.
Can someone please tell me how these people (the movement I listed above) are any different than wrestling marks?
...
The Cato and Reason people will protest that libertarianism equals Ron Paul. To them, libertarianism has roughly two and a half strands. One is the strand advocated by Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, the Von Mises Institute, and the Libertarian Party; it's deeply racist and ruralist, and calls for states' rights because of the Civil Rights Act. With fellow travelers like Ayn Rand, it has a very authoritarian fascination with the will to power and great individuals. Despite its often liberal and anti-authoritarian language, it is deeply culturally conservative. Ron Paul's 1988 Presidential candidacy was the result of an attempt by Murray Rothbard and Lew Rockwell to wed libertarianism with Southern cultural conservatism.
The second strand, advocated by Milton Friedman and Virginia Postrel, and Cato and Reason, is far more urbane. It's more suburban than urban or rural, often very culturally liberal, and more moderate on fiscal issues. Following Milton Friedman, this strand embraces monetarist economics; Ron Paul libertarianism is Austrian. This strand supports free trade; Ron Paul libertarianism often opposes it on populist grounds. It's this kind of libertarianism that helped Republicans lock the Northeastern suburbs from WW2 to about 2000, and which the Republicans will need to appeal to to be able to win a Northeastern state ever again.
The complicating factor is that the second strand is really a strand and a half. There's a split there between the official position of Cato and Reason, which is dovish and consistently culturally liberal, and the more common culturally liberal/economically conservative voter, who is often hawkish and supports harsh policing measures to fight drugs and crime. Reason opposes the war on drugs; the kind of Republican who appeals to the suburbs supports it. Cato wants all zoning restrictions abolished; suburban voters want them retained to protect property values. Usually what they end up doing is pretend they agree - e.g. Cato pretends zoning is something only inner cities do, and rarely publishes anything about social issues - but they really don't. They're broadly moderate-to-conservative people who are pro-choice and pro-gay rights, but have little more in common.
Berkeley Bear in Illinois:
Atheism they wouldn't get, but the virulently anti-soviet, anti-collectivist, pro royalist tendencies of Ayn Rand fit in quite nicely with the aspects of the GOP who saw the Cold War as the absolute pinnacle of American power. AKA "American Exceptionalism", which is still powerful enough that even President Obama claimed he believed we are an exceptional people in the Saddleback forum.
Still, I do agree that the ignorance of Ayn Rand's true background and motivation seems to be pretty widespread among those suddenly embracing John Galt and other bad literature. Now, if they'd only read some Steinbeck, Dos Passos, Sinclair or anyone else who saw how crappy life was for most people under original laissez faire policies and they might have to think again.