Introductory quote:
Obligatory quote from John Rogers: "There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."
I somehow don't think I am socially crippled. You see, I read the one that involves orcs.
However, I am being socially speaking crippled by both Randians and anti-Randians.
Why am I saying this? Well, it came up in the comment section of a post by Mark Shea, it was posted as a comment by one Illithid ... under this post:
The whole Western Tradition….
October 23, 2018 by Mark Shea
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/markshea/2018/10/the-whole-western-tradition.html
It involves a comic where Ayn Rand is painted in a somewhat monstruous manner. It also involves a comment on
Paul Ryan, but first I'm letting wiki sort out what
his real position on Rand is:
At a 2005 Washington, D.C. gathering celebrating the 100th anniversary of Ayn Rand's birth,[192][193] Ryan has credited Rand with having inspired him to get involved in public service.[172] In a speech that same year at the Atlas Society, he said he grew up reading Rand, and that her books taught him about his value system and beliefs.[194][195] Ryan required staffers and interns in his congressional office to read Rand[195] and gave copies of her novel Atlas Shrugged as gifts to his staff for Christmas.[196][197] In his Atlas Society speech, he also described Social Security as a "socialist-based system".[198]
In 2009, Ryan said, "What's unique about what's happening today in government, in the world, in America, is that it's as if we're living in an Ayn Rand novel right now. I think Ayn Rand did the best job of anybody to build a moral case of capitalism, and that morality of capitalism is under assault."[196]
In April 2012, after receiving criticism from Georgetown University faculty members on his budget plan, Ryan rejected Rand's philosophy as atheistic, saying it "reduces human interactions down to mere contracts".[199] He also called the reports of his adherence to Rand's views an "urban legend" and stated that he was deeply influenced by his Roman Catholic faith and by Thomas Aquinas.[200]
So, as a Catholic, he does NOT endorse all Randian views (I suppose he endorses some, like 2+2=4, or, somewhat more controversially, architects should not be required to build to a style determined by bureaucracy), but even so Randian reading made him see how values are important for life and politics.
I don't see any contradiction. A Voyage to Arcturus (which I tried in vain to read, having a taste for CSL doesn't mean sharing all of his tastes), taught CSL how sci-fi (and by extension fantasy, but his first reading of it is closer to Perelandra than to Narnia) can be a vehicle of philosophy. This does not mean CSL shares the philosophy of whoever wrote Voyage of Arcturus.*
So, Paul Ryan was taught the importance of value (for life and politics) by reading Rand, this does not mean he shares all the values of Rand.
Now, what did Mark Shea say about Paul Ryan?
It took the genius of the Freak Show Right and and its Court Prophet Christianist predators like Paul Ryan to elevate this wretched enemy of God and her philosophy of Selfishness to a virtue ... [follow first a comic strip about Rand, then a video with a clip of Ryan] ... That this 4th rate writer and 10th rate philosopher and enemy of God is now the leading intellectual light of Cult 45 is but another proof that Christianism is a diabolical cult of a dimestore antichrist. Those who espouse this evil must repent. [follows Galatians 1:8-9]
Did anything Paul Ryan said in that clip agree with the monstrosity of Rand in the comic?
Paul Ryan on Ayn Rand
gallicho1 | 26.IV.2012
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WmW19uoyuO8
As far as I can see, Ryan was saying no to Obama-care.
Does this need the philosophic support of Rand? No. Did Ryan invoke Rand in general terms? Yes. Did Ryan invoke this particular tenet of Rand's as shown in the comic strip? No.
He did say sth about collectivism. Specifically, if you look at The Fountainhead (by Rand), it seems to be as much of an Anti-Communist manifesto as 1984.
The Fountainhead is a 1943 novel by Russian-American author Ayn Rand, her first major literary success. The novel's protagonist, Howard Roark, is an individualistic young architect who designs modernist buildings and refuses to compromise with an architectural establishment unwilling to accept innovation. Roark embodies what Rand believed to be the ideal man, and his struggle reflects Rand's belief that individualism is superior to collectivism.
Roark is opposed by what he calls "second-handers", who value conformity over independence and integrity. These include Roark's former classmate, Peter Keating, who succeeds by following popular styles, but turns to Roark for help with design problems. Ellsworth Toohey, a socialist architecture critic who uses his influence to promote his political and social agenda, tries to destroy Roark's career. Tabloid newspaper publisher Gail Wynand seeks to shape popular opinion; he befriends Roark, then betrays him when public opinion turns in a direction he cannot control.
So, the comment arguably is not about not feeding hungry, it is more about not making hungry and non-hungry alike depend on bureacracy. Which is sth different.
I think Chesterton, C. S. Lewis and Tolkien, and even an agnostic like Lloyd Alexander are far better to teach values than Ayn Rand - but then they are so than George Orwell too. And yet, sometimes Catholics will cite Orwell.
Now, there is a thing which does not get attention from whoever wrote this strip, and which was and shouldn't have been overlooked by Mark Shea when publishing or quoting it (I don't care whether he overlooked someone else's copyright or not, if so, he arguably did so with reasonably presumed consent, or quoting one page can be seen as fair use - and if I'd like attribution, it is possible Mark Shea did withhold it by the modesty of a modest Christian sub-creator). It is the question "
how should the poor be fed"?
In that comic, someone was giving that poor man bread. On Randian terms, as far as I can see, that is their concern if it makes them happier. It is very possible there are élites who pique themselves on being Randian, and who would act like that, but it is also very possible Rand is not quite part of them.**
Now, the analysis I like about social things is the famous Hudge and Gudge passage in Chesterton. If the man was crippled, perhaps he can't have three acres and a cow, and perhaps his employer (as per Pope Pius XI) has a duty to provide for the rest of his life to a man who was crippled in his or its*** service.
Perhaps contracts where employers of many who normally can afford a few cripples on a non-active quasi payroll too are not obliged to provide for someone crippled in their service are contracts that the state should forbid. But in 2012, the question was more about Obama-care. And arguably, it is totally beside the point about bread, if you want to attack a Randian or wannabe Randian on that account, take the town where panhandling is forbidden (if any). It is however about the freedom to choose your doctor or whether to go to the doctor and doctors' freedoms to provide in different ways - or not in certain ways. You see, there are apothecaries who are forced to sell condoms, bc the pharmacy is regulated and condoms are one service regulated for in France. There are doctors in Sarthe who are under attack for stopping abortions in a hospital by invoking the conscience clause - which still exists in France - and the Obama devotees are now attacking the conscience clause. I recall from 2012 or some of the following years an affair called Hobby Lobby. Were the employers in that case Randians for not providing a "health service" going against their conscience?
Was Ryan a satanic Randian for - presumably - standing with Hobby Lobby? I think Ryan was being maligned by yesterday's post by Mark Shea.
Hans Georg Lundahl
Torcy
St. Raphael, Archangel
24.X.2018
PS - Here comes a little PS, as very often in Tolkien and at least in this one of his fans. It is possible some of the organised readers of my blogs are in fact - I will not say "Randians" since I don't know enough of her to actually tell if their attitude to me is Randian, but élite Randian wannabes. It is possible, as they see I am homeless, that they are looking at whether I write or not. And at each blog to see how much. Some Russians were for instance probably looking 1965 times in one week on five particular posts where I don't write very much, one being my backup guestbook after the guestbook was taken offline, four others being links to blogs in countries where I have readers. Meanwhile the same Russians (it is not the first time Russian readership on this blog coincides nearly perfectly with reading of the five posts) are also neglecting so many other posts on this blog:
2018 (237) 0230 07
2017 (313) 0540 10
2016 (383) 0920 13
2015 (336) 1250 19
2014 (258) 1500 27
2013 (028) 1520+35=1555
Makes 1555 posts. Some similar to the four ones of "blogs in countries where I have readers" in containing more links than text and most not similar to them. It is possible these Randians then argue "look, he's taking credit for the work of ..."
Martinand Sculpteur,
Collaborative Learning,
Tania’s Collections - no, but I do take some credit for checking them out so my blog readers can have more blogs than mine to read. Or they may think "this is the stuff he want's to make a book of?" - no, while I offer up all my posts (usually on conditions of voluntary royalties, sometimes perfect gratuity, sometimes checking with those who were also involved in the work) to any paper editor who likes, I don't pretend each post is equally printable as book content. A post like
Des petites choses comme ça is meant like a cry-out to benevolent online readers about my situation. They do not constitute the majority of posts even on this blog, let alone all the other ones. They constitute a clear minority. Sure, if ever you need to write a book about my situation, they can serve as material ... but anyway, there are also Randians on other blogs (let's give Ayn the benefit of the doubt and hope that attitude makes them fake Randians - I will, I have not read her) who will look after what the latest post on that blog is. I am keeping up several blogs in parallel, partly bc my interests and languages are diverse, partly bc this allows an important post to stay last on its blog while I write on other ones. If you really want to know how much I write on a daily basis, look at the widgets of
Latest on Antimodernism. Anyway, while it may strike them as insufficiently Randian on my part (I don't pretend to be a Randian in the first place, just bc I dislike public compulsory schools, anymore than I am a Muslim just bc I hate condoms), to write even a little once in a while and hope someone publishes despite my lack of work ethics, this taking account of those who looked on some blog
where last post is from 2011 and concluding I haven't written much since, it is also not a very Randian pov to actively make a bureaucracy to stop my blogs from being read by more normal readers. They are as inconsistent with her often stated philosophy as her persona in the strip was when stealing bread she hadn't earned or bought from the person who hadn't earned it, just to make a point./HGL
* Olaf Stapledon? ** It is also possible they owe more to Shaw and Wells than to Rand. *** A collective employer could perhaps be considered an "it", right?
