Slartibartfast Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Her love of capitalism is connected to her anti-Christian views. She believes that people ought to be selfish, that might (physical or intellectual) makes right and the weak deserve to perish. Christians are evil and weak because they believe that love is at the center of the universe, God sacrificed himself on the cross:eek:, and self-giving is at the center of morality. She thinks capitalism embodies her values and that is why she approves of it. As a Christian, that would give me serious pause to think before I embraced anything she argued for. I think people are better off studying *history*: the labor movement, the French Revolution, the robber barons. Sure, studying fiction can be an amusing way to pass the time, but studying history is the best way to know what people's actions look like under various economic systems. And, frankly, I don't know why so many Christians buy into Objectivism. It is intentionally and vehemently anti-Christian. :iagree: with these points. I am surprised when I see Christians espousing them, this philosophy is contrary to Christ's teachings. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mamajudy Posted September 10, 2012 Author Share Posted September 10, 2012 Her love of capitalism is connected to her anti-Christian views. She believes that people ought to be selfish, that might (physical or intellectual) makes right and the weak deserve to perish. Christians are evil and weak because they believe that love is at the center of the universe, God sacrificed himself on the cross:eek:, and self-giving is at the center of morality. She thinks capitalism embodies her values and that is why she approves of it. As a Christian, that would give me serious pause to think before I embraced anything she argued for. Maybe the fact that Ayn Rand was born in Russia and witnessed first-hand the Bolshevik revolution and the confiscation of her father's business when the Communists took over has something to do with her views. Do you not embrace capitalism simply because Ayn Rand does? Is capitalism anti-Christian? Should America be a Communist nation? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ereks mom Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 And, frankly, I don't know why so many Christians buy into Objectivism. It is intentionally and vehemently anti-Christian. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jane in NC Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 Maybe the fact that Ayn Rand was born in Russia and witnessed first-hand the Bolshevik revolution and the confiscation of her father's business when the Communists took over has something to do with her views. Do you not embrace capitalism simply because Ayn Rand does? Is capitalism anti-Christian? Should America be a Communist nation? One can reject Rand's brand of laissez-faire capitalism and still favor capitalism. To suggest otherwise is a false dichotomy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I reject objectivism, when it is put into practice it is dentrimental to society. But, Rand does present many truths and realities in regards to capitalism vs. communism in her book. I can take truth away from a work of fiction without embracing the ideology of the author. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrookValley. Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I think capitalism is great. I think Ayn Rand's version of it has proven inherently dangerous to society. We live in a collectivist nation. It always has been. "We the people," is framing us as a collective. I love regulated capitalism. I also love collectivism. They are not opposing ideas, unless you are looking at extremist ideas. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
angela in ohio Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I can take truth away from a work of fiction without embracing the ideology of the author. Smart lady. :001_smile: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mrs Mungo Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I can take truth away from a work of fiction without embracing the ideology of the author. Certainly. But, many of the posts were agreeing with the ideology to the point of claiming a criticism of the book was a political post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 (edited) Certainly. But, many of the posts were agreeing with the ideology to the point of claiming a criticism of the book was a political post. I don't see this, I haven't heard much criticism of the book here in literary terms, I've heard people railing against objectivism and Rand's personal worldview, which is a political topic. I'm not railing against those who do or do not enjoy the book or do or do not agree with Rand. My point is that I don't read this book from a political point of view, but from a psychological point of view, which is to examine how talented, smart people react to a totalitarian regime that limits the incentives we have for hard work and achievement, and what a society becomes in that type of atmosphere. Communism vs. Capitalism doesn't have to be a political discussion, it could be a historical, sociological, and economic discussion. Our society is so politically divided right now, it makes it hard to take the politics out of anything. To me this book is more of a study of human behavior, and I can enjoy the book without my objections to Rand's politics or philosophy getting in the way. Just as I enjoy many other writers whose overall worldview and political stances I do not agree with. Edited September 10, 2012 by VeritasMama Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoPlaceLikeHome Posted September 10, 2012 Share Posted September 10, 2012 I think people are better off studying *history*: the labor movement, the French Revolution, the robber barons. Sure, studying fiction can be an amusing way to pass the time, but studying history is the best way to know what people's actions look like under various economic systems. And, frankly, I don't know why so many Christians buy into Objectivism. It is intentionally and vehemently anti-Christian. :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JenniferB Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) I thoroughly enjoyed this book. Although I disagree with Ayn Rand's anti Christian philosophy, I found Atlas Shrugged to be a compelling argument for capitalism. It is downright frightening how the news headlines coincided with the book as I read it. Now I have to get the movie out of the library (even though it got bad reviews) and look forward to part 2 to be released next month. If you are a Christian, do you think it hurt or helped your faith? Edited September 11, 2012 by JenniferB simplifying my question Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elizabeth Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I agree with William F Buckley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ipsey Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) If you are a Christian, do you think it hurt or helped your faith? I can share a little bit of my husband's view. He grew up catholic, left at 16--became an atheist--and started reading Rand when he was 17. Really liked her. He think he got introduced it through the band "Rush" who had an album loosely based on Anthem (an interesting book, and the only Rand I've ever read in its entirety--though I got through most of The Fountainhead in high school). He really liked her, and we still have some of her books. He still goes back and reads The Virtue of Selfishness from time to time. (Husband just told me, "she's got just the right attitude for a kid who thinks he's smart."--I haven't told him what I'm writing--or to whom.) He became a Christian and found Rand's writings less appealing, partly because she was an atheist. Rand originally appealed to him the most was recognizing the work of the individual rather than the hyper-capitalism that seems to be the only thing most American Randians of today recognize. He views it as a bit more libertarian as well. His perspective on Rand is that "individuals have no responsibility to society or anyone else. Let every one else go their way and suffer accordingly. You do whatever you want for you." For my husband, he believed Randian philosophy is primarily selfish and individualistic, and felt that Christianity was about community and the corporate body, and he put her aside when he became a Christian. My husband and I met as Evangelicals. He thinks that American Evangelical Christianity, which is so focused on an individual's walk with Jesus, and the hyper independence, and the self, that that's why Rand is so popular with the Evangelical Religious Right wing. Husband still particularly enjoys Rand's take on how one can acquire real knowledge. Thinks she would be a real proponent of Montissori schools. Now, as an atheist again, husband really doesn't care for her at all. Quite dislikes her "selfish, heartless" worldview. But, Rand was more than just a fiscal philosopher. I don't give a flip for her writing. I find it cold. I have to share my husband's POV 'cause I don't have one of my own, apart from that :) ETA: I just remembered something really funny. 12 years ago, I wrote a slice-of-life article on being a conservative Christian but also being quite engaged in academics and ideas that most people who saw me couldn't quite put together. Some of these included. Having a night light that looked like a flaming red scrotum, but believing in Jesus as the Light of the World. Having David Sedaris' Me Talk Pretty One Day next to my bed along side My Utmost for His Highest by Oswald Chambers saving virginity for the wedding night and the man with 3 p3nises joke (his pants fit him like a glove) One other thing I mentioned was trying to find other like me, Christians who loved Jesus but might have antithetical ideas and books in their house, eg. anything by Ayn Rand. :) When I first shared this article with my Christian friends, no one had heard of Rand. Now. . . heh. A different matter. What a difference a decade can make! Edited September 11, 2012 by Ipsey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bluegoat Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 (edited) Maybe the fact that Ayn Rand was born in Russia and witnessed first-hand the Bolshevik revolution and the confiscation of her father's business when the Communists took over has something to do with her views. Do you not embrace capitalism simply because Ayn Rand does? Is capitalism anti-Christian? Should America be a Communist nation? I am sure her early experience had a big impact on her views, though she also seems to have been simply a jerk. I wouldn't say I embrace capitalism - though people sometimes use the word differently - though that has nothing to do with Ayn Rand. I think that if you look at some of the popular forms of capitalism today, they are undoubtedly anti-Christian. The idea that the "invisible hand" will somehow ensure justice in a completely free market place is not compatible with a Christian view, for example. Nor is is the idea that the marketplace can somehow take self-interested acts and turn them always to the common good compatible with Christianity. The idea that the state or community has no legitimate ability to make demands of individuals, which often seems to be attached to these ideas, is also not Christian. I think we could ask some pretty pointy questions about even ubiquitous things like advertising and whether it is in line with Christian principles. I think that the commodification of human labour is totally impossible to reconcile with Christianity and the commodification of necessary resources, land, and such probably is too. And as Chesterton said, "the problem with capitalism is too few capitalists". I think this is a fundamental and systematic problem with that system - capital always tends to coalesce over time so that you get fewer and fewer capitalists owning more and more capital (that is, the things you need to really make your own living rather than depending on others to employ you), and as this happens the political system becomes corrupted and ineffective. I don't know why being unhappy with a capitalist system would equate with being communists, but I wouldn't really want that either. Edited September 11, 2012 by Bluegoat Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ipsey Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 I am sure her early experience had a big impact on her views, though she also seems to have been simply a jerk. I wouldn't say I embrace capitalism - though people sometimes use the word differently - though that has nothing to do with Ayn Rand. I think that if you look at some of the popular forms of capitalism today, they are undoubtedly anti-Christian. The idea that the "invisible hand" will somehow ensure justice in a completely free market place is not compatible with a Christian view, for example. Nor is is the idea that the marketplace can somehow take self-interested acts and turn them always to the common good compatible with Christianity. The idea that the state or community has no legitimate ability to make demands of individuals, which often seems to be attached to these ideas, is also not Christian. I think we could ask some pretty pointy questions about even ubiquitous things like advertising and whether it is in line with Christian principles. I think that the commodification of human labour is totally impossible to reconcile with Christianity and the commodification of necessary resources, land, and such probably is to. And as Chesterton said, "the problem with capitalism is too few capitalists". I think this is a fundamental and systematic problem with that system - capital always tends to coalesce over time so that you get fewer and fewer capitalists owning more and more capital (that is, the things you need to really make your own living rather than depending on others to employ you), and as this happens the political system becomes corrupted and ineffective. I don't know why being unhappy with a capitalist system would equate with being communists, but I wouldn't really want that either. Oooh, this is so nicely said! :iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VeritasMama Posted September 11, 2012 Share Posted September 11, 2012 He really liked her, and we still have some of her books. He still goes back and reads The Virtue of Selfishness from time to time. (Husband just told me, "she's got just the right attitude for a kid who thinks he's smart."--I haven't told him what I'm writing--or to whom.) He became a Christian and found Rand's writings less appealing, partly because she was an atheist. Rand originally appealed to him the most was recognizing the work of the individual rather than the hyper-capitalism that seems to be the only thing most American Randians of today recognize. He views it as a bit more libertarian as well. His perspective on Rand is that "individuals have no responsibility to society or anyone else. Let every one else go their way and suffer accordingly. You do whatever you want for you." QUOTE] My BIL is a convert to Catholocism, and he was quite enthralled with Rand when he was a Protestant. We were discussing Atlas Shrugged the other day, and he said that Rand was a "self made sociopath". I think that that summed up Rand and objectivism quite succinctly. Objectivism is the antithesis of my Catholic faith, and I don't have any Rand books in the house. But, I do find that there are some truths about natural law and human behavior in Atlas Shrugged. Free will is a big doctrine for me, and I don't want the government to coerce us into helping our fellow man, I want each person to be free to choose whether to do so. I don't want to abolish all social programs, but I do lean towards libertarianism and I think socialism and communism as a system of governments do remove some of our liberty of choice. Objectivism is a dangerous worldview, but I don't feel guilty because Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged before she started to fully develop objectivism as a philosophy. Maybe my BIL is right and I need to avoid her entirely, but I do avoid all of her later works. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.