True Objectivism
Objectivism has so much potential. It is so close to being a truly inspiring and practical individualistic philosophy. But somehow it has degraded into neo-conservative dogma.
The benefits of Objectivism are clear: personal responsibility, the value of productive achievement, reason and rationality (read, ardently atheistic, which is a prerequisite for any practical philosophy).
But somehow these ideals have been taken (been used by Rand herself) to support wanton destruction: environmental degradation, and aggressive military policy being at the forefront.
Environmentalism, in it's truest form, is not anti-industrialist nor anti-progress but rather anti-destruction. Environmentalism is simply an attempt to stop one person from hurting another. It is no more complicated than preventing one man from enslaving or attacking another. This is a basic tenant which is supported by objectivism, but somehow overlooked.
The foreign policy of invading and laying waste to threatening countries is similarly destructive, and similarly contrary to objective thought. But somehow "objectivists" continually call for the US to preemptively invade Iran, North Korea, Syria, etc., etc..
The people killed in these invasions would be, by and large, civilians. The people killed would not be the ones threatening to us, and we could not justifiably claim to be acting in self defense. We would be, without a doubt, killing other human beings that have done us no harm, simply because their governments, not they, have threatened us.
To these "objectivists" the right to be considered an individual somehow ends at the US border. They ignore the fact that an individual in a country is not the same thing as the government of that country. They ignore the fact that the individuals they are killing may be just as opposed to the government, if not more so, than we are.
Furthermore the goal of making the world safer for the objective individual would not be accomplished. War causes more unrest and threat, not less. These governments must be defeated by progress, not destruction.
These are things that any rational objectivists should realize and know without doubt. But somehow the prevalent voices of objectivism have become blind and deaf to reason. I am at a loss as to why such an inspiring and hopeful philosophy has sunken into such dogma and irrationality.
The benefits of Objectivism are clear: personal responsibility, the value of productive achievement, reason and rationality (read, ardently atheistic, which is a prerequisite for any practical philosophy).
But somehow these ideals have been taken (been used by Rand herself) to support wanton destruction: environmental degradation, and aggressive military policy being at the forefront.
Environmentalism, in it's truest form, is not anti-industrialist nor anti-progress but rather anti-destruction. Environmentalism is simply an attempt to stop one person from hurting another. It is no more complicated than preventing one man from enslaving or attacking another. This is a basic tenant which is supported by objectivism, but somehow overlooked.
The foreign policy of invading and laying waste to threatening countries is similarly destructive, and similarly contrary to objective thought. But somehow "objectivists" continually call for the US to preemptively invade Iran, North Korea, Syria, etc., etc..
The people killed in these invasions would be, by and large, civilians. The people killed would not be the ones threatening to us, and we could not justifiably claim to be acting in self defense. We would be, without a doubt, killing other human beings that have done us no harm, simply because their governments, not they, have threatened us.
To these "objectivists" the right to be considered an individual somehow ends at the US border. They ignore the fact that an individual in a country is not the same thing as the government of that country. They ignore the fact that the individuals they are killing may be just as opposed to the government, if not more so, than we are.
Furthermore the goal of making the world safer for the objective individual would not be accomplished. War causes more unrest and threat, not less. These governments must be defeated by progress, not destruction.
These are things that any rational objectivists should realize and know without doubt. But somehow the prevalent voices of objectivism have become blind and deaf to reason. I am at a loss as to why such an inspiring and hopeful philosophy has sunken into such dogma and irrationality.
posted by -E at 1:55 PM
4 comments
