Last week, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-Wis.), the right-wing chairman of the House Budget Committee, scoffed at the notion that he's an acolyte of Ayn Rand. "I reject her philosophy," Ryan said, adding he prefers Thomas Aquinas' philosophy. He concluded, "Don't give me Ayn Rand."
This led me, among others, to note some of Ryan's previous comments on the infamous author, including the congressman's famous boast, "The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand." But what else has Ryan said about Rand?
Our pal James Carter passed along this piece from the Atlas Society, which has now, for the first time, released the full audio of a speech the Wisconsin Republican delivered at a 2005 Atlas Society event.
It's an interesting set of remarks, in which Ryan explains Rand's books "taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are." The novels "inspired" him, became "required reading" for his staff and interns, and compelled him to seek public office.
"[Y]ou can't find another thinker or writer who did a better job of describing and laying out the moral case for capitalism than Ayn Rand. [...]
"It's so important that we go back to our roots to look at Ayn Rand's vision, her writings, to see what our girding, under-grounding [sic] principles are. I always go back to, you know, Francisco d'Anconia's speech on money when I think about monetary policy. And then I go to the 64-page John Galt speech, you know, on the radio at the end, and go back to a lot of other things that she did, to try and make sure that I can check my premises so that I know that what I'm believing and doing and advancing are square with the key principles of individualism. [...]
"[I]f we're going to actually win this we need to make sure that we're solid on premises, that our principles are well-defended, and if want to go and articulately defend these principles and what they mean to our society, what they mean for the trends that we set internationally, we have to go back to Ayn Rand."
"I reject her philosophy"? Sure you do, Mr. Chairman. Sure you do.
James also passed along this clip of Ryan gushing about Rand in 2009 and how relevant he considers her work in his attacks on Democrats and the modern welfare state.
Update: A spokesperson for the Atlas Society, which actively promotes Ayn Rand's vision, still wants Ryan to run for president.
Leave a Comment:
Much Republican ideology comes from Rand. Linear economics, Randian class war = envy the rich, taxes "punish the rich for success", equality = bring the rich down to the level of the plebs, denial of public benefits to lazy and unworthy poor, tax cuts for the rich make jobs.
Rand's philosophy has no contact to real economics or politics and is entirely fictional.
Alan Greenspan was also an acolyte of Rand. Milton Friedman's economics greatly resembles Rand. Maybe Rand learned economics at the Chicago school.
Rand based much of her philosophy on the same man as Hitler did.
Seems to me if Hitler liked it, I don't.
It's never enough for people to have a personal philosophy, or a personal strategy for life. They always want to extend it, to exclaim that there's is "objective" and preternatural.
What happened to free will? What happened to responsibility?
Which is more noble? The idea that moral behavior was some buried treasure that existed a priori, and was "discovered" by philosophers.
Or a code of behavior that was developed through sacrifice, through years of thought, and centuries of observation of human behavior?
Nope, it's always. Our model is the greatest, and if anything doesn't fit into our model it must be broken and twisted to fit.
If only we would take a more scientific approach to ethics.
But no, despite all the authoritative sources available, do we teach logic in elementary schools? Do we teach ethics?
Gibberish.
Whenever you hear politicians or Tea Baggers dividing up the world between "producers" and "collectivism," just know that those ideas and words more likely than not are derived from the deranged mind of a serial-killer groupie. When you hear them threaten to "Go John Galt," hide your daughters and tell them not to talk to any strangers -- or Tea Party Republicans. And when you see them taking their razor blades to the last remaining programs protecting the middle class from total abject destitution -- Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid -- and brag about their plans to slash them for "moral" reasons, just remember Ayn's morality and who inspired her.
Too many critics of Ayn Rand-- until I was one of them -- would rather dismiss her books and ideas as laughable, childish, hackneyed. But it can't be dismissed because Rand is the name that keeps bubbling up from the Teabagger crowd and the elite conservative circuit in Washington as The Big Inspiration. The only way to protect ourselves from this thinking is the way you protect yourself from serial killers: smoke the Rand followers out, make them answer for following the crazed ideology of a serial-killer-groupie, and run them the hell out of town and out of our hemisphere.
Don't believe a word of it. filthyliberalDOTcom
He's the perfect Mini Mitt, and would look good sitting on Romney's knee.
Except he'd be the one making Mitt's lips move.
Ryan rejects Rand's atheism. Which part of that is difficult to understand?
He said, "I reject her philosophy." Quote, unquote. How did you manage to learn how to write without learning how to read?
Apparently you were too lazy to read the entire quote...
Ryan was quite obviously in favor of the philosophy of Ayn Rand, and then he found out she was an Atheist. The Religious Right doesn't like Atheists, so he has to distance himself from Rand's Atheism - but he (and the Religious Right) still embraces all of the other aspects of her philosophy, including its elitism, tax cuts favoring the rich, anti-regulation, anti-government, anti-poor (welfare and charity are immoral, according to Rand), and disdain for the average working class person.
Mitt Romney hasn't said much, if anything, about Ayn Rand, but his economic policies fit her Objectivist philosophy, except for the Atheist part.
Most of Ayn Rand's philosophy is not connected to Atheism, and it fits very neatly with the "Prosperity theology" that is so popular with the Religious right. It does not fit at all with "The meek shall inherit the Earth, blessed are the poor, give charity, love your neighbor" types of religions.
As far as we know, Rand was an atheist for most of her life. She supported atheism repeatedly throughout her writing career. Now, in 2012, a few republicans finally realized that she was an atheist. The real story here isn't the ideological disagreement, it's the poor reading comprehension skills of the republican party. I guess a few of them were "left behind."
As long as he sticks with her love of serial killers he'll be on the right moral path.
The problem is still your reading comprehension. (Not to mention your manners.)
Ryan did not say anything like 'I reject only that part of her philosophy which is atheistic,' nor did he intend to. He instead said, as you correctly quoted, "I reject her philosophy," which is a rejection without qualification, followed by "It's an atheist philosophy," which is an explanation for his (purported) rejection.
When a person says that he or she or otherwise is doing something, you should expect that the next thing said is giving a reason why that thing is being done. Paraphrasing Ryan's statement to highlight the obviously-intended meaning, 'I reject her philosophy because it is an atheistic philosophy.' He wants us to believe that he has rejected Ayn Rand completely, and that her atheism is the reason for his rejection. Ryan uttered one thought in two sentences, and that (me being generous, perhaps without cause) is what threw you.
"[Y]ou can't find another thinker or writer who did a better job of describing and laying out the moral case for capitalism than Ayn Rand. [...]--what a laugh!!
There is NO 'moral case for capitalism.' It is the no. 1 original dream of pure amorality, isn't it? The marketplace does it all...
I have to ask, why do you think you have a computer, or clothes, or food. Did you think all these things should come to you from the goodness of a stranger's heart?
Aaaaaand... Shooter supports JJFFMM's point without even knowing it.
Well, let's see.
Physicists, chemists, engineers [1], manufacturing workers, transport workers, and some people in finance and other fields for the computers.
Clothing? Farmers, chemical engineers, mechanical engineers, programmers, production workers, transport workers, and the usual smattering from finance and other fields.
Food: farmers, agronomists, chemical engineers, mechanical engineers, transport workers, etc.
I seem to recall from history that food, clothing, and even computers existed without anyone having to worship the fabulously wealthy.
[1] You don't have to thank me.
Capitalism is simply a mode of production. It is not the only one that has existed, and it will not always exist. But people will still make things and sell things, just in ways different than at present.
Actually, it has always existed, and will always continue. Barter is capitalism.
That remarks betrays an unbelievable amount of ignorance. If you really believe that pre-reservation Omahas or the Hittites or 12-century France operated under a capitalist mode of production, you are simply beyond help.
Ryan's rejection of Ayn Rand is perfectly logical from a Ryandian point of view. Ryan wants to pass his budget which is based on his understanding of Ayn Rand. The social philosophies of Ayn Rand and Jesus Christ are fundamentally incompatable, at least the Jesus Christ taught in Catholic school. Ryan understands that the Catholic vote is larger than the Randian vote. He needs the Catholic vote or at least the support of the Catholic Bishops. Ayn Rand was sort of practical. She understood that sometimes you have to throw a dead philosopher under the bus to convince the rubes to adopt the philosopher's model.
Does Ryan want me to believe that he formulated his budget based on Rand, then was told Rand was an atheist, and so decided to reject her philosophy, and then kept pushing the same budget, makes any sense.
I'd be much more inclined to believe his recent rejection of Rand was real if he also rejected his budget. But, he has not.
"Distinctions drawn by the mind are not necessarily equivalent to distinctions in reality."
"Beware of the man of one book."
"Man should not consider his material possessions his own, but as common to all, so as to share them without hesitation when others are in need."
Above quotes are from Saint Thomas Aquinas
Do the Ryan philosophies as expressed in his words and actions (budget) represent those of Saint Thomas Aquinas? I think not!
"I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians. They are so unlike your Christ." Ghandi
Damn good thing that Thou shall not bear false witness is no longer a commandment for today's Christians.
It has been replaced by Thou shall not fund Planned Parenthood.
The Republican propensity to lie, and the effrontery and shamelessness about which they go about it is breath-taking and close to unbelievable. You almost have to tip your hand to them because personally, to be honest, I would have dismissed such brazenness as a tactical maneuver that could ever be effective. They have precisely zero fear that it will come to haunt them . If there's a better testament to the completely irresponsible job the media is doing in American society, I wish somebody would tell me what it is because, on that matter, I'm suffering from a failure of imagination.
Soon he will embrace the Romney philosophy- "Whatever works- today!"
Funny Ryan ever claimed Rand as a philosopher he admired. She was an atheist who believed in individual rights to choose and to be successful without interference from the state. How does the Republican assault on women's rights align with this? I do believe Mr. Ryan is "blowing in the wind" or at least "blowing wind."
He never did -- and anyone who quotes him is lying.
Seems like everyone in the GOP has a bad case of Gingrichitis.
So Ryan wants us to believe after all of his gushing about Rand the current criticism from the church, that he has deconverted from Rand and converted to St. Thomas Aquinas. When did this epiphany occur? Ryan must have forgotten the commandment against lying.
No, that he has always been a disciple of St. Thomas'. After all, Ryan's Path to Prosperity is obviously based on Acquinas' writings.
And we have always been at war with EastAsia.
If anyone can translate what Ryan said about morality vs. morality? Please take the time to explain it sounds like gibberish, I know gibberish when I write it. But it makes no Earthly sense.
Ryan was shocked, shocked, to find out Rand, who promoted greed as the highest morality, was not Catholic. I guess he had a little too much focus on the Vatican, a little too little on Jesus.
For me the ultimate definition of Rand comes from her admiration for, almost a crush on, the murderer William Hickman. (The Kos writer and I would both suggest you read the original article by William Prescott, "Romancing the Stone-Cold Killer" but it is currently not available. If someone knows how to find it on the cache, please tell us/me where.)
If you are unaware of Hickman -- one criminal from the 20s who never received -- understandably -- a "Hollywood treatment" the Kos article gives you a picture of his most hideous crime -- even then somewhat softened but still not for the nightmare- or nausea-prone. It merely asserts what the original shows, Rand's fascination with someone so far outside even the normal range of killers, her approval of his 'philosophy,' and doesn't mention that Rand had started a novel basing the hero on Hickman. To quote from her Journals -- and Wikipedia, but I read the same in the Prescott article -- "Rand wanted the hero of her novel to be "A Hickman with a purpose. And without the degeneracy. It is more exact to say that the model is not Hickman, but what Hickman suggested to me." Renahan, which she intended to be based on Hickman, "is born with a wonderful, free, light consciousness -- [resulting from] the absolute lack of social instinct or herd feeling. He does not understand, because he has no organ for understanding, the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people ... Other people do not exist for him and he does not understand why they should."
This is the background that helps me to understand why, long ago, a friend said to me, "Other poitical philosophies fail, because men can't be as good as they demand. Rand's fails because people are incapable, in general, of being as evil and selfish as she needs them to be." But then, she did write, THE VIRTUE OF SELFISHNESS.
Let's see what happens... Self interest is not selfishness. Everyone lives their life in self interest. One makes choices and pursues options based on one's preferences.
Are you even reading anything? Rand praised selfishness, not mere self-interest. That's not an opinion or a misinterpretation. You are rapidly losing your value as a provider of laughs and are becoming a parody of a parody, which is simply sad.
it's a shame people don't actually understand what Ayn Rand wrote about, and quickly jump to nothing more than insults.
Ok the title of this forced this into my head..
(Sung to "A modern Major General")
"he is the very model of a modern Ayn Rand acolyte
His philosophy on taxing the poor has made him popular with the right
Abandoning his morals for cheap points in the political fight
he is the very model of a modern Ayn Rand acolyte"
Funny that Paul Ryan cites St. Thomas Aquinas. Here's what Aquinas says about the desire to accumulate more than one needs: “it is devoted to satisfying the desire for profit, and such desire knows no bounds, and always strives for more. And so business, absolutely speaking, is wicked, since it does not essentially signify a worthy or necessary objective.” That's in the Summa. A good Catholic would know that. I'm quire sure he's read much more Rand than Aquinas.
So predictable, disavowing a former icon of high esteem. Oh, suddenly he is worried about Rand's atheism. He's just one more lying soul selling politician.
Giving out Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged for Christmas presents… is that just wrong?
If Paul Ryan had actually read St. Thomas Aquinas instead of Ayn Rand, he might have come across this assessment of excessive wealth accumulation from the Summa Theologica: “it is devoted to satisfying the desire for profit, and such desire knows no bounds, and always strives for more. And so business, absolutely speaking, is wicked, since it does not essentially signify a worthy or necessary objective.” His claim that he rejects Rand and embraces Aquinas is pretty implausible.
I wonder if Ryan would be so adoring of Rand's philosophy if he was anything but a straight, white, capable male that came from a fairly safe haven of comfort?
The theory of individualism is wonderful - in theory. There are many things that an individual has to do on their own - like making a decision and taking a step in the direction of that decision. Recognizing and accepting the opportunities that will enhance that decision. That's individual responsibility. But the rest - people and events that help or hinder an individual's progress comes from outside that individual's world. It would do Ryan well to remember that he is where he is because a whole lot of people trusted what he told them and voted him into office. It would also do him well to remember that when he faces his god he will be truely on his own and unable to lie when god asks him "Tell me again how Ayn Rand's philosophy trumped my Laws?"
My dream, my evil nasty dream, is to come across someone like Paul Ryan or either of the Pauls lying injured and bleeding on the street. The how and why of it don't really matter. It's not that kind of dream. In this dream I say to him, whoever he is, "It's your own choices that brought you to this, so I'm not going to help you. And I won't allow anyone else to help you. You just exercise that personal responsibility you're always on about and lie there until you get better."
(Full disclosure: I'm ripping off Mel Brooks a little bit there. So sue me, Mel.)
Calling it an evil nasty dream shows you are a compassionate person. It is an apt dream, befitting a karmic or "reap what you sow" type of outcome.
Rmoney isn't the only one shakin' the Etch-A-Sketch.
Really. Is this okay? Live how you want until you get caught then disavow and everythings just rosy and great?? Thats garbage!!! Grow up and live in real world!!!!!
bravo, mchase39! I was singing along as I read it.
I've known many a Rand fan/believer, & I can't imagine any of them throwing their objectivist-based beliefs overboard for quick expediency like Ryan. I in no way agree with him, but I have to say if you really believe it, like you have said in the past, then stand up for it. What a loser. Romney, Jr. sheesh
Funny, because the only thing Francisco D'Anconia's money speech made me think was "OMG is this EVER going to end?" That speech was the most inane thing Rand wrote; and that's saying something!