I saw this article, “Ayn Rand vs. America” by Kathleen Kennedy Townsend [link below], mentioned by Neal Boortz and thought that others here might be interested.
From Boortz: ‘Here’s a column that should get you riled up: Ayn Rand vs. America. I especially enjoy the part about the wealth having a “special responsibility” to help the “less fortunate” and pay their “fair share.”’
The most annoying statement to me was: “Are we really to believe that the freedom to make money should stand on the same level of religious liberty?”
How does this person not understand that those are both choices that an individual has a right to make? There’s just this unexplainable negative emotion toward making money. I’m trying as hard as I can to understand how there could be a difference between these two freedoms but my mind can’t comprehend such ignorance.
I thought it was annoying/hilarious that she talked about our need of government as if Rand had been an anarchist and wanted to demolish the whole thing.
The most annoying statement to me was: “Are we really to believe that the freedom to make money should stand on the same level of religious liberty?”
How does this person not understand that those are both choices that an individual has a right to make?
Yes, that statement is sad though I laughed because that is how I react to those people these days.
Actually I got a bigger laugh from the sentence prior to the one you quote in which she, I think unintentionally, tells you what her motivation is. The sentence prior is: “But to place economics on the same level as religious freedom seemed to me almost blasphemous.”
The word “blasphemous” implies that “it is against the bible or church or ultimately, the word of God”. I didn’t think “The Atlantic” promoted religion but frankly I know nothing about that publication. Maybe this does make sense since it is actually the religious LEFT that has been trying to bash the Tea Party and Republicans in particular with the image of Ayn Rand.
Check out the comments, someone named John is holding his own against the barbarian onslaught.
'Here’s a column that should get you riled up: Ayn Rand vs. America.
I added a comment on the piece, but it’s way at the bottom so here it is for your convenience:
“Ms.Kennedy doesn’t acknowledge, much less address the reasons for Ayn Rand’s position on the proper functions of Government. This piece is just white noise.”
Here’s a link to the radio debate that inspired the article:
http://interfaithradio.org/node/1713
I’m a few minutes in and Ghate isn’t impressing me, so we’ll see.
There’s just this unexplainable negative emotion toward making money.
It’s not making money that leftists actually resent; it’s the assertion of the individual mind towards self-beneficial production -and thus, putting itself beyond the reach of second-hand manipulators like the author. The whole anti-money meme is just a deceptive euphemism; as a rule, people who have blocked their minds from reality have to “communicate” via euphemisms and code language that appeal to human weakness like fear and envy. Note that for most people, religion isn’t a matter of personal choice as it is a deterministic circumstance of birth.
Here’s a link to the radio debate that inspired the article:
http://interfaithradio.org/node/1713
I’m a few minutes in and Ghate isn’t impressing me, so we’ll see.
I finished it. Ghate was simply awful. God awful. I didn’t hear him present the NIOF principle, or explain what are the proper functions of government per Objectivism, and why. Maybe I missed it, someone please point me to the right place in program. I’m too disgusted to listen to it all again. “Senior Fellow”? You have to be kidding me.
I think these few words I’ve quoted from Ms. Townsend in the audio interview with Onkar Ghate show how anti-individual she really is:
"I think that what you said is so clear, in that what Ayn Rand was fighting was the communists. This is not what is going on in the U.S.
What we are trying to do is create a fair and just country, in which people can produce, in which people’s talents can be recognized and
that means each of us gives something up so that we can have a public transportation, an army, police force, and people that are healthy. If you
don’t do that then you don’t create a fair and just society and therefore everyone’s best talents aren’t realized and that’s what we are trying
to do here in the U.S. and that’s what’s so special about this nation. We are not the communists and we’re not Ayn Rand."
“I believe in capitalism, I just think it should be fair and just.”- Kathleen Kennedy Townsend (italics mine)
I finished it. Ghate was simply awful. God awful. I didn’t hear him present the NIOF principle, or explain what are the proper functions of government per Objectivism, and why. Maybe I missed it, someone please point me to the right place in program. I’m too disgusted to listen to it all again. “Senior Fellow”? You have to be kidding me.
Having watched in person as Ghate debated a philosophy professor on Ayn Rand’s egoism and spend his entire 15 minute time hammering over and over again against a point the professor made about ethics not being something that springs into the mind… but totally fail to call the prof on mischaracterizing Ayn Rand’s particular version of egoism over and over again–A platoon of strawmen that Ghate never once called him on…
I am not surprised.
I saw this article, “Ayn Rand vs. America” by Kathleen Kennedy Townsend [link below], mentioned by Neal Boortz and thought that others here might be interested.
From Boortz: ‘Here’s a column that should get you riled up: Ayn Rand vs. America. I especially enjoy the part about the wealth having a “special responsibility” to help the “less fortunate” and pay their “fair share.”’
NOOO! The strawman didn’t even have a chance! QQ
I just listened to this debate between Onkar Ghate and Kathleen Kennedy Townsend. I think that Mr. Ghate did just fine.
There’s not going to be a debate, like a boxing match, in which one opponent knocks out the other and the issue is then resolved between the debaters and the audience (present or in the future by virtue of getting to listen to it). Ideas do not spread in such a manner, thankfully actually.