The cult of Rand

[Watser?]

I found two articles today about Ayn Rand and the huge influence she has on the American right. Both of them offer some information on Rands personal life.

For conservatives, the causal connection between virtue and success is not merely ideological, it is also deeply personal. It forms the basis of their admiration of themselves. If you ask a rich person whether he ascribes his success to good fortune or his own merit, the answer will probably tell you whether that person inhabits the economic left or the economic right. Rand held up her own meteoric rise from penniless immigrant to wealthy author as a case study of the individualist ethos. "No one helped me," she wrote, "nor did I think at any time that it was anyone’s duty to help me."

But this was false. Rand spent her first months in this country subsisting on loans from relatives in Chicago, which she promised to repay lavishly when she struck it rich. (She reneged, never speaking to her Chicago family again.) She also enjoyed the great fortune of breaking into Hollywood at the moment it was exploding in size, and of bumping into DeMille. Many writers equal to her in their talents never got the chance to develop their abilities. That was not because they were bad or delinquent people. They were merely the victims of the commonplace phenomenon that Bernard Williams described as "moral luck."

Wealthcare | The New Republic

And both of them are pretty clear they consider Rand's 'philosophy' to be very extreme. The New Republic Article describes what can only be called cultist behaviour:

Sex and romance loomed unusually large in Rand’s worldview. Objectivism taught that intellectual parity is the sole legitimate basis for romantic or sexual attraction. Coincidentally enough, this doctrine cleared the way for Rand--a woman possessed of looks that could be charitably described as unusual, along with abysmal personal hygiene and grooming habits--to seduce young men in her orbit. Rand not only persuaded Branden, who was twenty-five years her junior, to undertake a long-term sexual relationship with her, she also persuaded both her husband and Branden’s wife to consent to this arrangement. (They had no rational basis on which to object, she argued.) But she prudently instructed them to keep the affair secret from the other members of the Objectivist inner circle.

At some point, inevitably, the arrangement began to go very badly. Branden’s wife began to break down--Rand diagnosed her with "emotionalism," never imagining that her sexual adventures might have contributed to the young woman’s distraught state. Branden himself found the affair ever more burdensome and grew emotionally and sexually withdrawn from Rand. At one point Branden suggested to Rand that a second affair with another woman closer to his age might revive his lust. Alas, Rand--whose intellectual adjudications once again eerily tracked her self-interest--determined that doing so would "destroy his mind." He would have to remain with her. Eventually Branden confessed to Rand that he could no longer muster any sexual attraction for her, and later that he actually had undertaken an affair with another woman despite Rand’s denying him permission. After raging at Branden, Rand excommunicated him fully. The two agreed not to divulge their affair. Branden told his followers only that he had "betrayed the principles of Objectivism" in an "unforgiveable" manner and renounced his role within the organization.

Rand’s inner circle turned quickly and viciously on their former superior. Alan Greenspan, a cherished Rand confidant, signed a letter eschewing any future contact with Branden or his wife. Objectivist students were forced to sign loyalty oaths, which included the promise never to contact Branden, or to buy his forthcoming book or any future books that he might write. Rand’s loyalists expelled those who refused these orders, and also expelled anyone who complained about the tactics used against dissidents. Some of the expelled students, desperate to retain their lifeline to their guru, used pseudonyms to re-enroll in the courses or re-subscribe to her newsletter. But many just drifted away, and over time the Rand cult dwindled to a hardened few.

And the other article, in the DailyKos, has this this on one of Ayn Rand's own heroes:

Interestingly, despite her general disdain for humanity, there were people she seemed to admire greatly, such as William Edward Hickman, whose credo, "What is good for me is right," she described in her Journals as, "The best and strongest expression of a real man's psychology I have heard." But Hickman was no simple expositor of personal greed and self-interest; no mere modern day libertarian; no pedestrian practitioner of excessive self-love. No indeed. He was a sociopathic murderer. In 1927 he kidnapped a 12-year old girl from a school in Los Angeles by the name of Marian Parker, chopped off her legs, cut our her internal organs, drained all of her blood and then spread parts of her body all over the city.

Of Hickman, this sick murderer, Rand had almost nothing but positive things to say.

She indeed critiqued those who would condemn Hickman's actions for having committed "worse sins and crimes," such as those she ascribed to his jury. Among those "greater" crimes--greater than mutilating a child--she included being, "Average, everyday, rather stupid looking citizens. Shabbily dressed, dried, worn looking little men. Fat, overdressed, very average, 'dignified' housewives." Their ordinariness, in other words, placed them below Hickman, in Rand's mind. "How can they decide the fate of that boy? Or anyone's fate?" she implored in her Journals.

It was Hickman's willfulness, his disregard for others, which so seems to have resonated with Rand. It fit perfectly with her own developing philosophy, which she would articulate perfectly in her original notes for The Fountainhead, wherein she wrote, "One puts oneself above all and crushes everything in one's way to get the best for oneself. Fine!" Thus Hickman's crime, to Rand, was "a daring challenge to society," rather than the act of a seriously deranged person from whom the society should seek protection.

Indeed, Rand speculates that Hickman's real crime may have been merely that he was "too impatient, fiery and proud" to accept the slow, soul-crushing death that his life had become. She even went so far as to blame the crime on Christianity, which she described as "ludicrous tragic nonsense," capable of turning this "bad boy with a very winning grin, that...makes you like him the whole time you're in his presence" into a sadistic killer.

Daily Kos: Sociopathy on the Right: Ayn Rand and the Triumph of Conservative Cultism

I have to say pretty much all of this was new to me as I had never heard of Rand myself before I started frequenting internet forums, she is not very well-known over here. By now I have had my share of discussions with people who I have found to have some pretty ludicrous (and so very obviously ludicrous) ideas of how the world works and how it should work. Very enlightening stuff.

[erimir]

I read Ayn Rand's Anthem when I was in middle school.

Mostly I thought that it was kinda stupid, since the motivations of the characters didn't really make any sense. The leaders in the novel are implausibly stupid.

I didn't really give her any thought after that until finding Objectivist idiots on the internets.

A roommate of mine had to read Atlas Shrugged in a philosophy class, but apparently it was sort of like an example of bad philosophy for the class.

But there's some new info there. I never knew that Ayn Rand was a big fan of sociopathic murderers. That's good to know for future discussions.

ETA: Oh, that article was written by Tim Wise. I've met him and discussed how Dinesh D'Souza is a douche with him after he signed my copy of White Like Me.

[Watser?]

I think it's pretty funny that it is such an amazingly elitist 'philosophy' while its disciples are the same people who are always bitching about 'liberals' being elitists.

[ZEZOZE]

Originally Posted by Watser?

I think it's pretty funny that it is such an amazingly elitist 'philosophy' while its disciples are the same people who are always bitching about 'liberals' being elitists.

it's cuz you're all the same anyhow. mirror and all that

[freemonkey]

I had to check Amazon to see if Anthem was the one Rand book I'd ever read. It was. I was young, and newly on my own, and I remember being somewhat inspired by it because of needing confidence in my independence. It was not until later that I learned more about her philosophy.

I did not know about her murderer love, either. Ick.



Reading the reviews on Amazon for Anthem, I found this:

This slender book (maybe emaciated would be a better word) is a meager re-hash of a few of the ideas that Evgeny Zamiyatin used -- brilliantly, incisively, and with far more vinegar and fire in his writing -- in his classic WE, which predates both BRAVE NEW WORLD and 1984. If you've already read ANTHEM, dig up WE and read that. For all of her vest-pocket nattering, Rand didn't have a tenth of the genuine creative power of Zamiyatin -- or his more genuine philosophic sense. ANTHEM is a bloodless, flabby little parable that gets blown clean out of the mind by the sinister power of WE. Zamiyatin died in exile -- he left the country rather than continue to endure censorship -- with his works censored by the Russian state apparatus and his legacy all but forgotten. Rand went on to found her own mini-empire of publishing and lecturing. Knowing Rand's thinking, she probably would have blamed him for it all.

[BrotherMan]

Originally Posted by freemonkey

[godfry n. glad]

This is another dark strain in the American consciousness....libertarianism.

Objectivism is the 'philosophy' of Rand. She's basically a pretentious novelist who thinks she's defined a philosophical system. When I was a young man, attending "libertarian meetings" at the public library in Fairbanks, Rand was the center of vituperative 'debates' amongst 'libertarians'. It was free amusement for me.

A literature major described her to me as "the only writer I know who writes at the top of her voice." Having read Anthem, and attempted both The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged, I see what she meant.

I think every generation, the Russians send us one of their major whackjobs to 'blend in' and fuck with our heads. The prior generation, it was Madame Blavatsky. Of course, after the Second World War, they got competition from the Germans and we got stuck with Henry Kissinger.

[rigorist]

One woman. One movement. One head. One destiny.

[S.Vashti]

That was so very, very weird. And funny, but too long. I wanted some sort of overarching theme to be revealed, but I couldn't spot it.


TMI: I used to be an Objectivist, a long time back, until I eventually thought the philosopy through and concluded that since it didn't conform with reality, it was based on bogus presuppositions, and therefore could not be relied upon to make good models for thinking. If the foundation can't stand, the conclusions can't stand.

Amusingly enough, Objectivism uses the same formation of presuppositional logic that Christian apologetics uses.

[Demimonde]

Interesting. I only skimmed the blurbs, but I may pass this on to the three, (count 'em three!) students who chose Rand's works for my textual analysis class. I'll have to sit through a trifecta of shit for presentations.

Of course, as they are forbidden from changing their projects at this point, they may hate my guts for it passing on the articles. But as I already will be forced to sit through their naive drek, I might as well spread the pain.

[S.Vashti]

nm

[lisarea]

The whole thing with objectivism, and even with libertarianism for the large part, is that it has a genuine appeal for adolescents in their fuck the world stage. It flies in the face of pretty much everything they've always been told; and lacking perspective and the real life experience to sort the wheat from the chaff, they do kind of tend to throw a lot of babies out with bathwater.

Objectivism definitely appeals to that sort of vindictiveness. It's pure, unadulterated selfishness and childish petulance. Like in one of her books (I've read three of them, but they're all the same so I can't really remember which is which), some asshole loves this sculpture or something SO MUCH he smashes it so nobody can ever see it again, including himself.

How teenagerey is that?

I've always figured that it's a normal developmental stage, though. It really doesn't bug me that much when I see a very young person claiming to be objectivist. It's about as significant as being punk or emo or a metalhead or something, really.

When adults do it, though, there's something wrong with them. They're either developmentally stunted and are going through a sort of intellectual adolescence; or they're actual sociopaths.

[Nullifidian]

Originally Posted by lisarea

Objectivism definitely appeals to that sort of vindictiveness. It's pure, unadulterated selfishness and childish petulance. Like in one of her books (I've read three of them, but they're all the same so I can't really remember which is which), some asshole loves this sculpture or something SO MUCH he smashes it so nobody can ever see it again, including himself.

I think you must be referring to The Fountainhead, which I had to read in 11th grade. The Ayn Rand Institute buys its entry into English classes by offering scholarship prizes for students who submit essays on Anthem, The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged.

Anyway, Howard Roark, the protagonist from this novel, blows up the building he designed when a mural is added to it without his permission.

I saw through the whole essay scheme, so I submitted a Marxist analysis of The Fountainhead just to piss the ARI off.

[Nullifidian]

By the way, here's a parody chapter of Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged which is too good not to mention:

Galt steered the sedan around a wide curve, through a sun-flooded glen lined with aspens. Dagny leaned back, surrendering to the warm current of air that kissed her face. Then suddenly she jerked upright in her seat.

"Stop the car! Oh, please stop!"

Chuckling, Galt shifted into park. Dagny threw open the passenger door and leaped out, took two quick steps forward, then stopped, gazing in astonishment at the tall, gaunt figure who stood before her on the side of the road.

"It's you, isn't it?" she whispered. "You're here in Galt's Gulch, too."

"Why, yes, Miss Taggart," the man said with a knowing smile.

"You know me?"

"We all know you, if only by reputation. But I'm surprised you know me."

"Of course I do. You're Will Koch, CEO of Holiday World & Splashin' Safari, the last of the fully rational theme parks."

Will Koch inclined his head gravely.

"I used to go there every summer," Dagny said breathlessly. "I would ride the giant water slide and swim in the endless pool - always wearing my Holiday World water wings, of course. It was my refuge from the looters and the hell they'd made of the world."

"As it was meant to be," Will Koch said. "We had a strict no-looters policy. Anyone who had accepted government funds for any reason was barred from admission. I refused to allow my water slide and the other attractions, the products of my intelligence and my dedication to reality, to serve the amusement needs of the parasites and moochers. But when the government told me I had to stop screening visitors and admit anyone with the money to pay - regardless of the source of that money - then I knew I would have to close the park. It was the hardest decision I've faced in my life. I'm honestly not sure I could have gone through with it on my own. But that night, as I sat alone on one of the giant lily pads long after the park had closed, out of nowhere he appeared." He nodded toward Galt, still seated behind the wheel of Midas Mulligan's roadster. "By the time he finished speaking to me, dawn was breaking ... and my decision didn't seem so hard anymore. I took a last walk through the Jungle Jim Maze and left that park and never looked back."

"But how can you stand it?" Dagny moaned. "Leaving it all behind?"

Will Koch smiled, a radiant smile of morning, the smile of a child awakening on a perfect summer day. "Oh, but I didn't, Miss Taggart. I brought it all with me. The plans, the blueprints, the marketing strategies, all of it." He tapped his forehead. "I carry them here. And now, here in this valley, I'm building a new Holiday Park and Splashin' Safari theme park, a recreation place for the men of the mind - and only for the men of the mind. It will be my gift to the producers of society, and my monument to them - a more lasting monument than anything I could have built in the looters' world. It's the proudest accomplishment of my life. Would you like to see it?"

"Yes, please, very much."

"It's right over there," he said, pointing to a small mud hole, three feet wide and six inches deep, ringed by disorderly piles of sapling branches.

"Oh." Dagny felt a brief plunge of disappointment. "It's a bit small, isn't it?"

"Well, what the hell do you expect? I'm a CEO, Miss Taggart. I've never worked with my hands in my life. I don't have a clue how to actually build anything. I got the job because I know how to schmooze the shareholders at the annual meeting. That's how all of us got our jobs. Besides, it would take a small army of construction workers to build an actual theme park, and we have no construction workers in Galt's Gulch. No sanitation workers, either - but that's another story. You don't really believe that a handful of disgruntled corporate executives could build a theme park, much less a whole community, without the proper equipment, training, or skills, do you? Only a small child would buy a crazy story like that."

"Yes," Dagny said, accepting the hard, bright logic of his words. "Yes, of course you're right."

Will Koch smiled. "So ... would you like to go for a dip?"

[Garnet]

Either my education was really bad or really good. I never even heard of Ayn Rand until a couple of years ago. Should I even bother to read any of the books now?

[specious_reasons]

Originally Posted by Garnet

Either my education was really bad or really good. I never even heard of Ayn Rand until a couple of years ago. Should I even bother to read any of the books now?

Atlas Shrugged is ~1000 pages of unappealing prose. Starting on page 1, Rand starts beating you about the head and shoulders with Objectivist principles and doesn't stop until the end of the book.

I read it a few years back, and almost finished it. I skipped the 50-100 pages of Galt's manifesto, because frankly I was completely fed up with it by the time I got there.

Had I read the book when I was in my late teens/early 20s, it probably would have had a profound effect on me. Instead, I read it in my 30s and just shrugged. I kinda agree with various parts of it, but think that the position she takes in the book is impractical for humans to implement.

I, of course, would be an apostate to Rand.

It really depends on how much pain you can take. As a person with an unhealthy fascination with crap, Atlas Shrugged doesn't even rank in my top 10 wastes of time.

If you want just a sample, I'm lead to believe that the movie adaptation of The Fountainhead is a good primer.

[godfry n. glad]

Originally Posted by Garnet

Either my education was really bad or really good. I never even heard of Ayn Rand until a couple of years ago. Should I even bother to read any of the books now?

No, Garnet...You were one of the lucky ones. You got this far without being scarred for life. Don't ruin it all now. It's just not worth it.

[erimir]

Originally Posted by lisarea

The whole thing with objectivism, and even with libertarianism for the large part, is that it has a genuine appeal for adolescents in their fuck the world stage.

Of course, the adolescent fuck-the-world stage is mainly a Western phenomenon, it is not a universal quality of adolescents...

That isn't to say that you're not right about that being the reason for its appeal to American teenagers. I mean, I don't even know that she's all that appealing to nearly as many non-English speaking Westerners.

/random

[Garnet]

Hmmmm. I think I'll pass then. I read for enjoyment now and I don't think I'd enjoy Rand's books.

[lisarea]

Originally Posted by erimir

blah blah blah

[erimir]

[The Man]

Originally Posted by Nullifidian

I saw through the whole essay scheme, so I submitted a Marxist analysis of The Fountainhead just to piss the ARI off.

Incidentally, if you still have that around, I'd like to read it.

[maddog]

Originally Posted by Garnet

Either my education was really bad or really good. I never even heard of Ayn Rand until a couple of years ago. Should I even bother to read any of the books now?

Ayn Rand?



Only if you like

Take that book and



#2261

[lisarea]

I sort of disagree.

I certainly don't recommend slogging through all of Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged, but just saying that Ayn Rand is repetitive, dull, childish, nasty, brutish, and not nearly short enough doesn't really convey how astonishingly bad that shit is. Actually reading some of it will help put it in a much clearer context when someone tells you it changed their life or something like that.

Maybe read Anthem to get the bulk of her message, and then just skip around in one of the long ones here and there to get a feel for how hamhanded her writing style is.

[Pan Narrans]

itt