Hi guys,
Today in class, Ayn Rand's philosophy came up, and it seemed like not too many people knew of it, so I thought I might give a description. Ayn Rand was born in Russia in 1905. Her family suffered at the hands of the communists, shaping her views on the free market. When she learned of the American economic system, she embraced it full heartedly. She was able to leave Soviet Russia for what was to be in the eyes of the government a short visit to relatives in America, but she never went back. In America, after spending some time in the film industry, Rand became an author. Her book, The Fountainhead, was published in 1943 to great success. In it, she backed individualism, a philosophy that basically rests upon the idea that a society only functions when every person has individual rights, especially to a free life. 1957 she published the book Atlas Shrugged. This book emanates the idea that the only thing driving people to do anything is compensation in some form, and without it, society would collapse. Rand personified the perspective of lasses-faire government economic policy, which is the perspective that the government should pretty much not affect the free market at all. Rand's philosophy has shaped the views of many, including Paul Ryan, the last vice presidential candidate from the Republican party.
If you want to read more about Rand, you should check out my source: http://www.aynrand.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_ayn_rand_aynrand_biography
Please post your opinions on Rand's philosophy in the comments.
Kenneth Moussavian
Thanks for clarifying the "moment" you had with Mr. Stewart in class. Ayn Rand appears to be in favor of the robber baron's perspective on the rise of huge corporation. Her support of individualism would be in contrast to the ideals that Vanderbilt. J.P. Morgan, and Carnegie build their vast companies on.
ReplyDeleteI disagree a little bit with Mr. Ambiel, simply because Kenneth stated that Ayn Rand was a fan of laissez faire and the large corporations were a byproduct of that economic system. While individualism does appear to be devalued in large corporations, it is the power of individuals that allows such large businesses to be created in the first place. J.P. Morgan, Carnegie, and Vanderbilt were all individuals who were able to rise up and make their way in the world. Though they appear to oppress the "rags to riches" idea in their own workers, they themselves are actually examples of the kind of success individuals can achieve.
ReplyDelete(Hi Kenneth)
Thanks Kenneth for bringing this insight to us. I agree with Rebecca on this. It is this idea that lead Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Morgan, and Rockefeller to their power. They were free to play their own game and were not really regulated by any rules set by the government. However, whats ironic is that in the end at the height of their power, their competitors basically didn't have any freedom for they were completely dominated.
ReplyDeleteThanks for explaining this, Kenneth. I agree with Rebecca -- Rand's ideology is in support of monopolists such as Carnegie and Rockefeller. Rand supported free-market capitalism, and the free market is what allowed these men to build their monopolies like they did.
ReplyDeleteThanks for this post, Kenneth. I, too, agree with Rebecca's post and it prompted me to do a bit of research of laissez faire economics as I have minimal knowledge on the subject. After reading about it on a couple websites and an old textbook, I learned that it basically is just when transactions between companies or private parties are free from the government and all restrictions or taxes it entails. So, I do not think that large corporations were necessarily a "byproduct" of laissez faire economics, but rather a concession as it would be impractical for our market to operate without taxes and regulations; large corporations were almost like a dig at American economy back then. This idea kind of ties into the conflict between who can regulate prices and the 14th amendment; if the companies make the product, isn't the product property of the company and shouldn't they regulate their own property free from government intervention?
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rand's idea that the only reason that people do anything is for compensation in some form. For the things that many people do, it is very obvious that the only reason they do it is to receive compensation. People who do things just to be nice and don't want to receive any physical compensation in fact do receive compensation, just the mental form of feeling good about helping other people. I do not, however, agree that the government should never meddle in economic affairs, because sometimes the government can help the economy.
ReplyDelete