After reading the critique of Objectivism by Rothbard, I am finding myself at odds with the Objectivist movement. Are there any Objectivists within this group?
Too many.
Not that many.
One is too many, in all seriousness, there’s a fair few around here with some objectivist influences.
Well I’m about to read Radicals for Capitalism by Doherty and I hear that he is a critic of Rand also.
What’s the appeal? Emotionalism, on behalf of those who have read her novels and are then unable differentiate between fiction and reality.
I think there are some who do fall pray to this event, they say things like ‘What would John Galt do?’ or ‘Who is John Galt?’
Joe Salerno wrote a review of that book, as did another Austrian (I’m at a loss for who though), from what I’ve heard you’d best be careful, he’s not entirely honest throughout the book, especially in regards to Rothbard.
I’ve got Objectivist influences. I don’t see how anyone can read The Fountainhead and not be influenced.
Because it’s poor literature?
Is it? I thought it was great fiction, and particularly good capitalist fiction.
It’s not great fiction, at all. Great fiction would be Lord of the Rings by Tolkien or Heart of Darkness by Conrad or All Quiet on the Western Front.
And poor fiction would be Keynes’ General Theory and Bernanke’s Essays on the Great Depression.
I’m a big fan of Atlas Shrugged, and agree with the basic tenets of Objectivism. While I have some Objectivist leanings, I don’t call myself one because:
-
I’m not a kool-aid drinker, and Objectivists are far too cult like and ideologically lockstep for me. I don’t think every line Rand ever wrote was gospel, and don’t need anyone else to tell me what my opinion is on something.
-
Most contemporary Objectivists are hard-core warmongers (despite the fact that Rand was a non-interventionist).
-
Objectivists cling to the State myth that has been long since refuted.
The conservatives hate Rand because she laughed at their silly religious fairy tales.
Give it a read. I’ll agree that Atlas Shrugged is overrated but The Fountainhead really resonated with me.
I’m a Frank Herbert’s Dune sorta guy. I can understand the attraction of dwarves and hobgoblins to a guy wearing a crown tho… [;)]
Lord of the Rings is good. Heavily influenced by paganism of course…
And?
Tolkien was a Christian anarchist, it’s understandable that I agree with him. Not to mention, he can actually write.
The same open mindedness you preach about economists might be well served on the front of literature.
I enjoy The Fountainhead because it is a fantastic critique on the mentality of collectivism, the strategy that allows it to become pervasive, and those who would push a collectivist agenda from the top. The bad guys in AS are much less ideological than the bad guy in FH. And I think most of us would agree that collectivism relies on ideologically based consent more so than thuggish force.
Not to mention that Howard Roark is an anti-hero, an unattractive guy whose moral compass never wavers, whereas Dagny Taggart is Rand, and thus uber heroic even when she’s doing misguided stuff.