Re: Lessons

January 24, 2001

> > Hi All,

> >

> > So what's wrong with Ayn Rand?

>

> Libertarian let-them-eat-caker from hell!

Ayn Rand is the discoverer of Objectivism as revealed in the

following article:

Is Objectivism an external authority? No. It is a philosophy for

living on Earth. It offers principles you can use to guide your life

(e.g., reason, honesty, and independence). It does not dictate

anything to anyone.

Is Objectivism a cult? It is according to Jeff , author of The

Ayn Rand Cult (Open Court, 1999). published a 400-page

treatise arguing that Ayn Rand, her close associates, and her

philosophy of Objectivism is both a cult and harmful. He explicitly

and repeatedly attacks Rand, Branden, Peikoff, Schwartz, and other

long-time Objectivists. Using a plethora of ad hominem attacks,

attempts to invalidate the entire Objectivist movement.

does provide some interesting aspects from the early days of

Objectivism. For instance, he describes the expulsion of Libertarian

philosopher Murray Rothbard from Rand's inner circle. Rothbard,

explains , was ostracized from orthodox Objectivism due to

allegations of plagiarism. Rothbard allegedly plagiarized portions of

Atlas Shrugged in an article he wrote. Other people who were purged

from Objectivism's inner circle include iel Branden,

Barbara Branden, the Blumenthals, the s, Kelley,

Reisman, Edith Packer, and more.

Some authors have written tomes attempting to discredit Ayn Rand, her

philosophy, and her students. These books desperately try to

undermine the validity of Ayn Rand and Objectivism by linking it to

religion or a cult or asserting that Objectivism is " obviously

fallacious " . But people who read books that attack Ayn Rand and

Objectivism should realize that without Ayn Rand, her attackers would

be unknown ciphers. Everyone who attacks Ayn Rand needs her work to

rise to fame if not fortune, albeit by attempting to smear Rand and

undermine her intellectual achievement.

Also important to note is that without Ayn Rand, most of her

associates and benefactors would be unknown throughout the world.

Without Ayn Rand, most people would not know iel Branden,

Barbara Branden, Alan Greenspan, Kay Nolte , Leonard Peikoff,

, and so on. In fact, there would be no Objectivism. This

means that there would be no Neo-Tech, which in turn means there

would be no Local Group. And L. Hunter would be an unknown

gardener in Europe or America. Finally, millions today might be

living in the USSA: the United Socialist States of America run by

politicos exemplified by Nazi-sympathizer Pat Buchanan.

True, Rand was not a perfect human being; she had some personal

faults. But who is perfect? Who has no personal shortcomings? The

last person who allegedly was perfect found himself nailed to the

cross 2000 years ago. The bottom line to all this is laissez-faire

Objectivism: leave Objectivism alone! Critiquing a valuable person is

fine, but spending years or a lifetime to undermine a valuable person

or achievement is a tremendous waste. The fact is Ayn Rand's

intellectual achievement is monumental: it has benefited millions of

people and will continue to do so, possibly forever.

Does this make Ayn Rand a legitimate higher authority? No. She is the

developer of Objectivism. People can learn from her work and profit

intellectually -- even be inspired by her life. Nevertheless all real-

and-imagined higher authorities must be boiled including Ms. Rand and

her Objectivist philosophy in order to continue growing and advancing

in life. One can properly apply the principles of Objectivism to

one's specific situations for permanent benefits. But individual

consciousness is the only valid authority for one's life. This

means using one's mind to (1) understand reality and (2) formulate

actions based on that understanding.

One might make mistakes if one relies on one's mind, but those

mistakes can be corrected if one is honest. The biggest mistake of

all, however, would be to use the thinking of external authorities as

the basis for one's actions. In that mode, one transforms oneself

into a non-person, a non-entity -- a zero who is unable to genuinely

think, feel, or love. And that, more than attacking greatness, is the

ultimate tragedy and waste of life.

Hunter

January 24, 2001