Yaron Brook, president and executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute, gave a speech on May 30 at the Republican Party of Virginia Convention in Richmond. He tells an approving audience that America's slide into statism is the fault of the Republican Party. Because the Democrats explicitly stand of fascism, while the Republicans are suppose to stand up for individual rights. But don't. "They [the Republican Party] have accepted the fundamental premises of the Left."
"You need to rediscover what this country is about, maybe it takes an immigrant to tell you that." Brook is originally from Israel.
"I see hope in the Tea Party movement, which is rebelling against the growth of government and the growth of intervention in our lives and the obvious limitations being put on each one of our liberties."
Excellent speech, listen to the whole thing.
Crossposted at The Dougout
1 comment:
Grant Jones,
While I share much of his sentiment, I don't entirely agree with him, or you for that matter on this.
For one thing, he fails to explain why the republicans have not fully embraced their ideals of limited government. I would argue that any politician, who seriously went about getting rid of all these government programs, without buying someone else off with another government program, would be very unlikely to get reelected. The system for the most part does not favor men of principal, but men who do what the majority, and their donors want. Most people really don't want to separate the economy entirely from the state, regardless, of the rhetoric we may hear at the tea parties, and the more the dependent on government they are, the less likely it will be that they will want to do so. Also politicians have another motive, in controlling the economy.
Critiquing Rand's Capitalism the Unknown ideal, Greg Nyquist wrote,
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Rand regarded the theory of rights presented in this book as one of her great achievements. Perhaps on a purely theoretical level she is correct. But on a practical level, she is surely wrong. Theories of rights, when examined empirically, are merely speculative (and hence impotent) attempts to regulate the division of social advantage. In reality, however, no merely speculative theory of right can be found to regulate the division of social advantage: those individuals with the greater strength, intelligence, and shrewdness take the lion's share, regardless of what any moral philosopher might say. Nor is it clear how any theory of rights, even if it could be established logically, could be enforced in a real world dominated by vested interests and political sharks. It is for this reason that a great deal of what is presented by Rand and her colleagues in this book appears to me quite beside the point--a mere exercise in wishful thinking. The laissez-faire capitalism which Rand advocated is purely utopian. But it is not utopian for economic reasons, as leftists naively believe, but for political reasons: the corporation and politicians who run this country will never tolerate a system of laissez-faire (they are not about to give up their power).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
source
In other words most politicians are motivated simply by a desire for and to maintain power. Its not easy to get them to legislate away their own power.
Plus although I tend to oppose government regulation, Mr. Nyquist also points out a few problems with a completely unregulated economy, over at his Ayn Rand Contra Human Nature Blog, he wrote what I found to be a rather insightful commentary on the idea of the Privatization of Roads. You can read it here
I'm not saying I oppose the Tea Parties, but simply complaining won't solve the problem, of government over regulation, nor do I think that we can entirely separate the economy from the sate.
Post a Comment