Thom's focus on Ayn Rand's influence on Libertarianism only touches the surface of this movement, its origins, advocates, and organizations designed to further its philosophy. For an in depth analysis of this movement I would suggest Nancy MacLean's "Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America." …
Thom's focus on Ayn Rand's influence on Libertarianism only touches the surface of this movement, its origins, advocates, and organizations designed to further its philosophy. For an in depth analysis of this movement I would suggest Nancy MacLean's "Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America." It is recent (2017) and extraordinarily documented.
Rather than the the Russian Revolution's influence on the origins of Ayn Rand's thinking, Mac Lean traces the origins closer to home and solidly imbedded in our own history--John C. Calhoun's doctrine of"interposition" which led to the Civil War; Sen. Harry Byrd's "states rights" justification for maintaining segregation in opposition to "Brown v. Board of Education", and the person to whom she
attributes the intellectual foundation for the modern movement--James Buchanan, not the former president, but someone I had never heard of until I started reading the book.
Buchanan's origins, philosophy, and the cohort that developed from him are eye-opening.
The Libertarianism Thom describes is truly a "wolf in sheep's clothing" using terms like "freedom".
"liberty" and "rights" which may naively be heard by the majority as intended for all, but is actually, from the Libertarian perspective, the birthright only of those who approach the mindset of the Ayn Rand's character's Thom describes.
There were many which embraced ideas which we call libertarian, and they predate Warren Calhoun, but they are qualities of the rich who have everything to lose with progressivism.
It was indeed Ayn Rand, who popularized and made libertarianism into a cult. A cult which people like Tim Miller a Bulwark contributor and frequent guest on MSNBC still embraces.
Bulwark and Lincoln Project staff are neverr Trump Republicans, but still believe in the tenets of faith first voiced by Rand in her many books, not just the Fountain Head, but Atlas Shrugged and the Art of Selfishness, which I confess to reading before I WOKE up.
You left out Paul Ryan, my man! The good-lookin' guy who knew when to fold his hand but is young enough to come back, who said Rand was the great inspiration of his philosophy somewhere along the way. I keep an ear to the ground for the timely return of Paul Ryan.
Thanks for this: Books are important and when they are read produce a meaningful narrative. You cannot get away from a book when it concurs with your own thoughts.
This is what the internet cannot do.
We need to hear from people who have NOT had similar backgrounds. This is Literature.
Michael, I love MacLean's book, Democracy in Chains, and want to re-read it for the information regarding other, earlier sources of what came to be euphamized as "Libertarianism." You're completely right that the term attempts to gaslight citizens into believing that it's THEIR liberty that's being protected when all it is is a power-grab by the wealthy elites who really DON'T want freedom for the masses, they just want LICENSE to behave as selfishly as they desire without governmental (read: "parental") limitations.
Thom's focus on Ayn Rand's influence on Libertarianism only touches the surface of this movement, its origins, advocates, and organizations designed to further its philosophy. For an in depth analysis of this movement I would suggest Nancy MacLean's "Democracy in Chains: The Deep History of the Radical Right's Stealth Plan for America." It is recent (2017) and extraordinarily documented.
Rather than the the Russian Revolution's influence on the origins of Ayn Rand's thinking, Mac Lean traces the origins closer to home and solidly imbedded in our own history--John C. Calhoun's doctrine of"interposition" which led to the Civil War; Sen. Harry Byrd's "states rights" justification for maintaining segregation in opposition to "Brown v. Board of Education", and the person to whom she
attributes the intellectual foundation for the modern movement--James Buchanan, not the former president, but someone I had never heard of until I started reading the book.
Buchanan's origins, philosophy, and the cohort that developed from him are eye-opening.
The Libertarianism Thom describes is truly a "wolf in sheep's clothing" using terms like "freedom".
"liberty" and "rights" which may naively be heard by the majority as intended for all, but is actually, from the Libertarian perspective, the birthright only of those who approach the mindset of the Ayn Rand's character's Thom describes.
There were many which embraced ideas which we call libertarian, and they predate Warren Calhoun, but they are qualities of the rich who have everything to lose with progressivism.
It was indeed Ayn Rand, who popularized and made libertarianism into a cult. A cult which people like Tim Miller a Bulwark contributor and frequent guest on MSNBC still embraces.
Bulwark and Lincoln Project staff are neverr Trump Republicans, but still believe in the tenets of faith first voiced by Rand in her many books, not just the Fountain Head, but Atlas Shrugged and the Art of Selfishness, which I confess to reading before I WOKE up.
You left out Paul Ryan, my man! The good-lookin' guy who knew when to fold his hand but is young enough to come back, who said Rand was the great inspiration of his philosophy somewhere along the way. I keep an ear to the ground for the timely return of Paul Ryan.
Oh, god...that's ominous! A sociopath-in-waiting...
Thanks for this: Books are important and when they are read produce a meaningful narrative. You cannot get away from a book when it concurs with your own thoughts.
This is what the internet cannot do.
We need to hear from people who have NOT had similar backgrounds. This is Literature.
Michael, I love MacLean's book, Democracy in Chains, and want to re-read it for the information regarding other, earlier sources of what came to be euphamized as "Libertarianism." You're completely right that the term attempts to gaslight citizens into believing that it's THEIR liberty that's being protected when all it is is a power-grab by the wealthy elites who really DON'T want freedom for the masses, they just want LICENSE to behave as selfishly as they desire without governmental (read: "parental") limitations.