What are the major disagreements between Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard and between Ayn Rand (edit by LS) and Ron Paul?
Rothbard and Rand disagree on ethics. And how they are formulated. And I don't think Rand was that much into economics or making that argument. As a result, Rand is not consistent on ethical or economic premises -- taking them to their logical conclusion. And so Rothbard was an anarchist and Rand a minarchist.
Rand and Ron Paul disagree about Israel's unquestioned superiority over all things, the existence of God, war in general, about "libertarianism"... and that may be it.
John Ess: Rand and Ron Paul disagree about Israel's unquestioned superiority over all things, the existence of God, war in general, about "libertarianism"... and that may be it.
Can you be more specific?
DD5: John Ess: Rand and Ron Paul disagree about Israel's unquestioned superiority over all things, the existence of God, war in general, about "libertarianism"... and that may be it. Can you be more specific?
Rand was basically a neocon when it came to Isreal, the Middle East, and Muslims.Rand believed that anyone who believed in God was irrational.
My favorite online shop: www.cafepress.com/libertyphile
Ron Paul: thinks Israel should pay for their own nukes, is a Christian, anti-war, and is okay with libertarianism and the LP.
Rand: thought Israel is infallible and needs to be funneled as much money as possible, was atheist, was pro-war, hated libertarians and the LP.
John Ess:libertarians
Hippes of the right [ Soviet accent ]
'It is difficult to imagine any normal person wishing to meet Marx for a third time.' - Alexander Gray, The Socialist Tradition
I thought Rothbard was an atheist?
Praetyre: I thought Rothbard was an atheist?
He was. But he didn't dismiss the contributions that some religious philosophers / theorists made.
Does Rand Paul follow Austrian economics, or is a supply sider/monetarist?
They aren't talking about Rand Paul, although that is what I thought when I first saw the thread. It is not well laid out in the OP where Rand and Ron are used together.
Rand Paul is a constitutionalist minarchist. I don't know if it is because he is trying to get elected, but he is nowhere near the radical his father is. I'm not sure I would count on him to no-vote like his dad does.
If you find something evil that wobbles, push it. - Gary North
John Ess: Ron Paul: thinks Israel should pay for their own nukes, is a Christian, anti-war, and is okay with libertarianism and the LP. Rand: thought Israel is infallible and needs to be funneled as much money as possible, was atheist, was pro-war, hated libertarians and the LP.
People seem to take for granted that Rand was pro-war, but this just doesn't fit with what I have read. Are you sure you aren't confusing Rand's followers with the lady herself? I seem to remember some very negative comments about Vietnam and "wars of altruism".
"I cannot prove, but am prepared to affirm, that if you take care of clarity in reasoning, most good causes will take care of themselves, while some bad ones are taken care of as a matter of course." -Anthony de Jasay
I am not expert on Rand. But it was my understanding that Objectivism offered a complete philosophy on how one should live their life. This included exclusion of concepts like God. The only thing Objectivism and Libertarians had in agreement was the idea of a Free Market.
I think it was even reputed that Ayn Rand was a high opponent of the Libertarian Free Market because she said it was far more dangerous than what the current (at the time) political and economic system was.
I also feel that whether or not Rothbard was atheist or not was irrelevant. While Rand decried the belief in God as a major component of totalitarianism, Rothbard wouldn't support the idea that someone is not allowed to choose to believe in God, even if he himself did not.
The major differences between Rand and Rothbard are also the main differences between Rand and Paul.
In the end, Rand didn't offer choice so much as the Libertarians did. She seems to assert more of the idea that her whole Objectivist Philosophy should be followed in all of it's glory and that Libertarian Free Markets would be bad.
On the other end of it, Libertarians respect Rand because of her Free Market idyll's and respect her outlook based on Objectivism.
If I am wrong on any of these points, I would appreciate some advice on what exactly I should be reading to correct my view. Hope I helped.
Wow, sorry, I just woke up. My grammar is usually much better. I daresay that it looks as if I have no formal schooling at all after re-reading my post. I apologize to everyone about that.
Objectivism:
Rothbardian libertarianism:
Ayn Rand was basically a very vulgar classical liberal, whereas Murray Rothbard was probably the greatest anarchist thinker of all time.
Solid_Choke:People seem to take for granted that Rand was pro-war, but this just doesn't fit with what I have read. Are you sure you aren't confusing Rand's followers with the lady herself? I seem to remember some very negative comments about Vietnam and "wars of altruism".
I think it was in her Donahue interview, she rambled something about aggression and oil.
The one thing you could count on with Rand, was that if she thought she was right, she wouldn't rule out any means of pursuing her goal.
liberty student: Solid_Choke:People seem to take for granted that Rand was pro-war, but this just doesn't fit with what I have read. Are you sure you aren't confusing Rand's followers with the lady herself? I seem to remember some very negative comments about Vietnam and "wars of altruism". I think it was in her Donahue interview, she rambled something about aggression and oil. The one thing you could count on with Rand, was that if she thought she was right, she wouldn't rule out any means of pursuing her goal.
The main problem with Rand is how The Peikoff School / Era of Objectivism has white-washed her legacy with his obvious Neo-Con flavored rhetoric, while claiming that they are the main 'canon' versus all other interpretations. They can make nicely modern book covers for her books, I admit, but I see little else good coming from them. Other people who were shunted out of the "mainline" Rand narrative were typically people who did not buy into the Piekoff nonsense, had different interpretations of Rand (in some cases, more canon interpretations), & who realized the incredibly stupidity of basing one's entire view of Objectivism from works of Rand's fiction (The Fountainhead, Atlas Shrugged). The main offspring branches I speak of are The Nethaniel Braden Split, The Kelley School (or the 'open system' of Objectivism, vs. the 'closed system' of the ARI & Peikoff), & POP (Post Objectivism). AFAIK, Rand gave subtle but relevant criticism from deriving such an understanding of her philosophy from her purely fictional works in, ironically, her books "The Art of Fiction" & "The Art of Non-Fiction" (however, it's been a while since I read both of these, as well as Rand in general). As introductions or as high brow relevant intellectual entertainment, I'm sure the fictional works did their purposes, but sometimes it feels like the Piekoff branch just replaced The Bible with her books & called it a day in the critical thinking department :\Admittedly, Rand had her own quirks, including being a rather pompous intellectual & trying to ascribe art with an objective philosophy (which while probably an interesting read on one's own preference elitism, fails miserably in the supposed goal), just as any other human does, so I would still say the best understand of Rand can be derived from one critically analyzing all interpretations (specifically her own), & keeping them in context that she wasn't & never will be, perfect.
WARNING: This signature violates Rule 5. Stay classy!
This @ 8 minutes 15 seconds:
And this:
Justin: I am not expert on Rand. But it was my understanding that Objectivism offered a complete philosophy on how one should live their life. This included exclusion of concepts like God. The only thing Objectivism and Libertarians had in agreement was the idea of a Free Market. I think it was even reputed that Ayn Rand was a high opponent of the Libertarian Free Market because she said it was far more dangerous than what the current (at the time) political and economic system was. I also feel that whether or not Rothbard was atheist or not was irrelevant. While Rand decried the belief in God as a major component of totalitarianism, Rothbard wouldn't support the idea that someone is not allowed to choose to believe in God, even if he himself did not. The major differences between Rand and Rothbard are also the main differences between Rand and Paul. In the end, Rand didn't offer choice so much as the Libertarians did. She seems to assert more of the idea that her whole Objectivist Philosophy should be followed in all of it's glory and that Libertarian Free Markets would be bad.
"Shouldn't believe" doesn't mean "Not allowed to believe". If you want to be irrational, go ahead, believe in god. No one should stop you. If anyone did stop you, it would necessarily be a violation of rights.
I've never read anything where she even remotely suggested that a "Libertarian Free Market" would be more dangerous (unless you specifically mean anarchism, in which case you are correct).
Eioul:"Shouldn't believe" doesn't mean "Not allowed to believe".
I stand corrected, you are right. They are not the same thing.
Eioul:If you want to be irrational, go ahead, believe in god
A persons belief, no matter what it is, should not be taken as irrationality. Unless of course you are talking about a belief that drives someone to make violence upon others or take anothers property. I did not say I was a believer in God or anything, I just said a person should be able to believe as they see fit without persecution. The point of religious beliefs have been raised in this thread, not by me.
Eioul:I've never read anything where she even remotely suggested that a "Libertarian Free Market" would be more dangerous (unless you specifically mean anarchism, in which case you are correct).
I must apologize here, I was misunderstood. In the Objectivist point of view, from what I have read, a free market (one of the cornerstones of Austro-Libertarianism) by itself without the rest of the Objectivism philosophy, was purported to be a bad thing. I wish I could explain further.... I read that on an article on LRC actually, and now I can't find it. In this case, I do mean "anarchism" in all it's connotationally negative glory.
Justin: A persons belief, no matter what it is, should not be taken as irrationality. Unless of course you are talking about a belief that drives someone to make violence upon others or take anothers property. I did not say I was a believer in God or anything, I just said a person should be able to believe as they see fit without persecution. The point of religious beliefs have been raised in this thread, not by me.
It depends what the belief is. Really the only point I was making is that while it is irrational to hold certain beliefs (i.e. blacks are inferior, god exists, Paul Krugman knows what he's talking about), it is immoral and a violation of rights to be persecuted for them.
Justin: I must apologize here, I was misunderstood. In the Objectivist point of view, from what I have read, a free market (one of the cornerstones of Austro-Libertarianism) by itself without the rest of the Objectivism philosophy, was purported to be a bad thing. I wish I could explain further.... I read that on an article on LRC actually, and now I can't find it. In this case, I do mean "anarchism" in all it's connotationally negative glory.
It's more that she believed that capitalism requires a philosophical foundation. Capitalism without a philosophical foundation would not be a proper free-market system. Ayn Rand certainly believed that any kind of anarchism would be worse than a mixed market that we have now because there would be "constant gang warfare", to paraphrase. (I don't buy that argument at all).
Ludwig von Mises Institute | 518 West Magnolia Avenue | Auburn, Alabama 36832-4528
Phone: 334.321.2100 · Fax: 334.321.2119
contact@Mises.org | webmaster | AOL-IM MainMises
Mises.org sitemap