When I was in college I read The FountainheadObjectivism), and I took up the challenge. Afterwards I was left with a bad taste in my mouth, and I knew that something about the whole thing didn’t sit right with me.
I pretty much left objectivism alone from that point on. I hadn’t really thought about it much until I got up this morning and started reading the news to find that the objectivists are now objecting to helping tsunami victims. You can read the article for yourself. It’s not that it doesn’t make sense, it’s that it just seems so…well…heartless. Especially the part saying that private donations “may be entirely proper.” (emphasis mine) May be? I’d love to hear under what circumstances private donations may not be appropriate.
Suffice it to say, I’m glad I don’t live in a world ruled by objectivism. I shudder to think what kind of world that might be.
(I wonder how long it’ll be before some objectivists find this post)
Via Josh Marshall.
The problem with this article is that it assumes that America got rich by it’s own blood, sweat and toil, and IGNORING the fact that it got rich [Like every First World COuntry] by conquest, imperialism and pillage [to be ever so general]…..only these days we use fancy terms such as World Trade Agreements, Free Trade Agreements…… not only that, the whole article is full of irony on a number of other points which I won’t go into here……but yeah Mr T, you are right, they are so heartless..