Ayn Rand and Mike Wallace 25 Feb 1959
This Mike Wallace interview with Ayn Rand is from 1959, with Rand sounding like Reagan before Reagan did. This interview is from February of that year, when Grover Norquist was 2 ½ years old, no doubt splashing around in his mother's bathtub and dreaming of browbeating politicians and world conquest.[27 min]
At around 15:15 Rand says that "this country was not founded by robber barons, but [by] independent men who succeeded on sheer ability." Well, that, and they stole the Indian's land, and in some cases, stole Africans to have cheap labor to toil on the land for them. Otherwise, sure.
Also, at around 7:50, she refers to a hypothetical selfless husband(i.e., the kind she despised) and says he'd say to his wife, "I am so unselfish that I am nailing you only for your own good." Later I realized she meant marrying not nailing, and I had misheard her.
More recently:
Ayn Rand vs Jesus
via
CNN, "Jesus or Ayn Rand - can conservatives claim both?"
Eric Sapp, AVN’s executive director, said the Republican Party cannot portray itself as a defender of Christian values and then defend the worldview of "the patron saint of selfishness" who scorned religion and compassion.
FYI, AVN stands for the American Values Network.
And, this AVN video below:
Ayn Rand & GOP vs. Jesus
Labels: Intellectual foppery, libertarianism, nostalgia, Reagan
posted by Jonathan Versen @ 2:00 PM
3 comments
3 Comments:
Am I the only person who thinks Ayn Rand was not a good novelist? The characters are barely one dimensional.
Moreover, say what you will about capitalism, and there is a lot to say, but few achieve much wealth within it when they are constantly telling their loser employees that they are weak.
Micah, I remember liking The Fountainhead when I was 18, but I think I grew out of it, and I couldn't persuade myself to read any more Rand, not even Anthem, which is pretty short.
When I watch the interview I think that maybe Rand suffered from Bette Davis Envy, a disorder I just made up.
At around 15:15 Rand says that "this country was not founded by robber barons, but [by] independent men who succeeded on sheer ability."
Well, no. "Independent"? The first invaders had royal charters granting them the land they stole. I guess it depends partly on what you mean by "founded" -- who does she have in mind? "Sheer ability"? The first invaders got help from the Indians, without which they'd have died off in no time. As it was, they nearly died off anyway. Rand's history is as faulty as her philosophy.
Or her fiction. Anthem is the only book of hers I've read, mainly because it was her shortest. It's pitiful. Reminded me of the fiction I wrote in junior high school. I still mean to give her big tomes a go, but there's so much other stuff to read.
Post a Comment
<< Home