Showing posts with label Ayn Rand. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Ayn Rand. Show all posts

Tuesday, July 21, 2009

Ayn Rand Interviews

Following is a series of interviews with Ayn Rand, hosted by Phil Donahue, soon after her husband, Frank O'Connor died in 1979:









Monday, July 20, 2009

Ayn Rand Interviews

There is a whole series of interviews with Ayn Rand on YouTube, the following is her first appearance on TV in 1959:

Thursday, April 16, 2009

Liberal or Libertarian?

I occasionally dip into the archive, so here is an article of mine previously published elsewhere but not appearing on my blog before. It is dedicated to Sir Clement Freud RIP:

"THE NINE most terrifying words in the English language are, 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help'." This quote from Ronald Reagan sums up the thoughts of many of us who might describe ourselves as libertarian. But many people still ask what a libertarian, or what libertarianism, actually is.

Like Christianity, or socialism, there is a wide range of views within libertarian thinking. Debate rages on, and will continue to rage amongst libertarians, about what the philosophy is and how libertarians interpret their philosophy in an ever-changing world. There are those who advocate zero tax, on the basis that tax is theft. Others accept that a certain level of taxation is necessary but that it should be minimal. There are those who advocate that a woman has the right to choose abortion, then those of us who would advocate that abortion is an infringement of the right to life, the fundamental human right.

The most common "strapline" used by many libertarian organisations is "for life, liberty and property". In short, libertarians believe in the maximum freedom for the individual and freedom from state interference in business, property and the markets - whereas most modern political parties believe, to varying degrees, in state regulation of most human activity.

The three old parties in Britain are all authoritarian in nature and increasingly see taxation not as a source of vital income for benign essential government activity, but as an intrusive means of controlling the population. For example, the Tories advocated a so-called "green" tax on parking cars in out-of-town shopping areas, supposedly to save the traditional high street. This would actually be a shopping tax, a source of government income.

Libertarians believe in the right of the individual to act freely and that we should be controlled in our behaviour by the responsibility not to harm others by our actions.Some examples of the government acting in opposition to this principle include the recent ban on smoking in public places and the hunting ban.
Certainly smokers should be considerate to those who do not smoke, but pub landlords, for example, should have the right to choose whether or not to allow smoking in their premises and people can then choose whether to drink in a smoking environment or not. Interestingly, the government does not ban smoking completely, largely because of the huge income it gets from tobacco tax.

On the question of fox hunting, there is no logical reason why the sport should have been banned. The libertarian approach would be to use such persuasive arguments against the activity that people gave up hunting of their own free will, the activity would then fade away. Banning seems to be an acceptance that the argument has been lost, persuasion failed therefore make it illegal. Two examples of what could be considered libertarian behaviour in government were in Paraguay, a country I visited in the 1990s. These examples offer an idea of libertarian policy, but I would not regard the government of Paraguay then, per se, as libertarian.

There were few, if any laws in relation to food hygiene in Paraguay at that time, the principle being that people who own cafes and restaurants tend to want to make a profit and poisoning your customers is not good business practice. We found some of the best food and cleanest restaurants in Latin America in that country. They also had an open border policy at that time. The only control was that if you entered the country but could not find work, you received no state support whatsoever. As a consequence, they had a small but thriving immigrant community that had greatly contributed to the economy.

Libertarianism is rooted in classical liberalism but is often seen as a modern philosophy, largely because it has gained prominence in the last two or three decades as people grow to resent the ever-increasing intrusion of the state into their lives. There has also been renewed interest recently in the work of the philosopher and writer Ayn Rand and her theory of "ethical egoism". But it goes much further back than Ayn Rand to John Stuart Mill, Adam Smith and others far earlier. Indeed the Roman senator and philosopher Tacitus stated "the more corrupt the state, the more it legislates", a sentiment shared by many libertarians.

Liberal is now a dirty word to many people, having been hijacked by those who are far from liberal, such as the Liberal Democrats. As "democracy" often appears in the name of countries that are far from democratic, so the word "liberal" often appears in the title of organisations that are far from liberal in the classical sense. Others hear the word liberal and think of do-gooders looking at the bloodied victim of a crime and solemnly declaring that "the person who did that needs help". This is why there needs to be a clear separation between classical liberalism, or libertarianism, and modern liberalism.

Monday, April 06, 2009

Unite Against The State

While blogging, yet again, about the police state my mind wandered to Pastor Martin Niemoller and his famous poem. Niemoller was a pastor in the German Confessing Church and spent eight years in a Nazi concentration camp. I almost included it in my earlier post today but thought it deserved to stand alone, so here it is:

First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out--because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out--because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out--because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me--
and there was no one left to speak out for me.


He also addressed the US Congress in 1968. Below is the text of what he said, taken from the Congressional Record,October 14, 1968, page 31636:

"When Hitler attacked the Jews
I was not a Jew, therefore I was not concerned.
And when Hitler attacked the Catholics,
I was not a Catholic, and therefore, I was not concerned.
And when Hitler attacked the unions and the industrialists,
I was not a member of the unions and I was not concerned.
Then Hitler attacked me and the Protestant church --
and there was nobody left to be concerned."


Thinking about this, and how Labour have destroyed our freedoms and liberties while claiming to have built some kind of utopian paradise of equality and diversity, I also found the following quote from the great Ayn Rand:

"The smallest minority on earth is the individual.
Those who deny individual rights cannot
claim to be defenders of minorities."


To find out more about Ayn Rand and Objectivism visit the Ayn Rand Institute.