"A culture is made -- or destroyed -- by its articulate voices."
I read Ayn Rand's tomes as a young, leaning-to-libertarianism, man in college. At first glance her freedom tirades appeared great, and I remain with them on the social issues. But in economics.. freedom for what?
It was not long before I realized, and world events proved, that libertarians like Rand are simply footmen for the oligarchy. Their freedom spiel paves the way for fascism, for plutocracy, for the ruin of democracy - exactly what we see occurring in the United States, a country now completely captured by big money and big corporations... and, you might say, by Ayn Rand acolytes. God help us.
Libertarians are either fools or complicit fascists. Idealistic to a fault, they must believe that people are angels and therefore need no regulation. But even Adam Smith was not so naive or dumb.
And Objectivism? First, there is no such thing as objectivism, or objectivity because people are not objects, We are subjective, personal, and products of our experience, education, and emotions. We are particles and waves and back again without real solidity and object-ness. What we have then is a chaotic subjectivism wherein a billion petals bloom. Nevertheless, in your view, people are subjects, to be subjected to whatever the rich and powerful achieve and proclaim.
In effect, your concept of freedom lays the groundwork for fascism. Objectivism in your hands is not only a form of fascism but a pretense of objectivity which does not exist but, nevertheless, allows one to assert an inerrant dogma, a kind of papal economics, a freedom for anything... even neo-slavery.
Understanding where you came from in life, and your experience in Russian revolutionary and communist society, it is surely understandable that a revulsion for all things related to a power of the state would emerge. But when you conflate democratic determinations of society and economics with communist manueuvers you have gone around the bend. You have thus removed the majority from any determination of their condition. Apparently, even the American Constitution may not be to your liking? Too much freedom for the majority, you would say, even though constrained by a ruling elite Senate, a less than Supreme court, and a "unitary" executive, and despite all these institutions being controlled by the money power and its media.
Your views reek of disdain for the common man and all those whose daily work supports society, and that includes government employees charged with protecting people from predation by the rich, powerful, and irresponsible. You say "money is not the tool of the moochers" and you're certainly right on that one because the "moochers" have none compared to the top one per cent of "our" society.
Are we to celebrate the entrepreneur in our society? Absolutely. Are we to allow capital to create wealth and societal betterment? Absolutely. But are we to allow a sick and twisted ruling elite to shape "our" society and deform our economy, environment, and capitalism itself? Not on your life.
In sum, your ideas and ideals no longer fit our circumstances. We have moved from having a modicum of effective government and majority rule to utter fascism and rule by the few. For this reason the prescriptions for re-balance for our time are, in many cases, diametrically opposed to those of your day and time.
But thank you for inspiring me to write Cap-Com, the Economics Of Balance - a tome of my own, for a new day and time.