Followup on "Textbook of Americanism"

E-mail from Bobby Garner to subscriber list
June 27, 2008

One reader whom I know to be an intellectual man, and whose work I support replied: "Ayn Rand (Alisa Rosenbaum) made one of the seven deadly sins (greed) a virtue. She was Alan Greenspan's mentor. She was certainly evil."

Virginia (who enjoys seeing her name in print) replied: "Bobby, you're nutty.  The RAND Institute wasn't named for Ayn Rand and had *NOTHING* to do with her."

Another reader, also avoiding the core argument for individual rights replied: "And this is also the same Rand corp. who has been in charge of ALL ....ALL underground bases built since before 1946"

At the risk of committing yet another sin, I will now address all of these issues and allegations.

_

In my introduction to Textbook of Americanism, I stated (with necessary correction in [ ]):

"Ayn Rand is perhaps the most hated person by the New Age. One of the frequently stated reasons is based on the activities of the [Ayn]Rand Institute which was named in her honor. The [Ayn]Rand Institute obviously fell under the control of people who wished to capitalized on her ideals of individualism in order to justify their greed and avarice for economic and political power such as we have seen in the perverted Wall Street Capitalism driven by speculators who care nothing for productive labor, but only "productivity" which is anti-man and pro machine".

Virginia read "RAND Corporation", and called me "nutty" for associating it with Ayn Rand. Does that mean she supports Ayn Rand? Not likely. In retrospect, it was she who made that wrong association for reasons as we shall see.

I apologized for my error, excused her personal attack, and asked if she agreed with my argument. She responded by challenging my use of the word "inalienable", and once more avoided the argument concerning individual rights. It is therefore necessary for me to assume that she has no interest in defending individual rights and would nit pick her way around it rather than offer an intellectual response.

If I had written "Ayn Rand Institute" instead of "Rand Institute", the statement would have been correct, and as so read, I stand by it without retraction as I will elaborate below. But first...

All dictionary editors understand that usage defines the word. Ayn Rand used the word "inalienable" in the following context:

Individualism holds that man has inalienable rights which cannot be taken away from him by any other man, nor by any number, group or collective of other men. Therefore, each man exists by his own right and for his own sake, not for the sake of the group.

Merriam Webster Online defines in·alien·able:

incapable of being alienated, surrendered, or transferred <inalienable rights>

The same dictionary defines un·alien·able as : inalienable

It also defines in·ca·pa·ble 1: lacking capacity, ability, or qualification for the purpose or end in view: <incapable of engaging in intellectual discussion by expressing ones own thoughts in ones own words> (clarification added by me)

I rest my case. "Rand Institute" more closely resembles Ayn Rand Institute than RAND Corporation, and inalienable and unalienable are interchangeable terms in common usage.

_

Now the question of Ayn Rand v.s. Ayn Rand Institute, and my previous assertion that the Institute serves the interests of "economic and political power".

An EIR Press Release of Oct. 17, 2006 states: "A lecture titled "Destroying Islamic Totalitarianism: The West's Moral Imperative," featured Yaron Brook, executive director of the Ayn Rand Institute. According to the Daily Bruin newspaper (Oct. 17, 2006), Yaron suggested that a way to defeat these regimes [Islamic totalitarian regimes] is to kill up to hundreds of thousands of their supporters. He said only resurgence in the pride for Western civilization can help the West defeat those Islamic states."

Contrast that with Ayn Rand's own words concerning the Roots of War: "If peace were the goal of today's intellectuals, a failure of that magnitude -- and the evidence of unspeakable suffering on so large a scale -- would make them pause and check their statist premises.  Instead, blind to everything but their hatred for capitalism, they are now asserting that "poverty breeds wars" (and justifying war by sympathizing with a "material greed" of that kind).  But the question is: What breeds poverty?  If you look a the world of today and if you look back at history, you will see the answer:  the degree of a country's freedom is the degree of its prosperity."

LaRouche also associates Wall Street Capitalism with Ayn Rand:

"Sir Alan Greenspan, the octogenarian one-time paramour of hedonist philosopher-author Ayn Rand..."
"Federal Reserve Chairman Alan "Ayn Rand" Greenspan, and of the inner circles of President Bush ..."
"Will Ayn Rand Disciple Greenspan Repudiate Genocidalist Brook?"
"Ayn Rand's Assault on the General Welfare"

Rand formulated the principle of "Rational Self-interest" to describe the function of Individualism in the exercise of individual rights. Rational self interest does not violate the ideals of individual rights as she defines them.

She defined laissez-faire capitalism as: "The ideal political-economic system.... It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church." - Introducing Objectivism

The most vocal criticism of Ayn Rand revolves around one solitary fact: that 1) she blazed her own trail and did not conform to any accepted form of expression or philosophical thought, and 2) she failed to base her own thoughts on previous works of more acceptable experts, and 3) because she appears to quote others with whom she has fundamental disagreements. Those same critics, exhibiting the same delusional insanity, use the activities of the Ayn Rand Institute to defame and discredit her ideals as she expressed them.

Leonard Peikoff: Founder of ARI. Born in Canada, 1933, Peikoff befriended Ayn Rand in 1951. He obtained his doctorate in philosophy at New York University, 1964, studying under Sidney Hook (founder of the University Centers for a Rational Alternative, the predecessor to Lynne Cheney's American Council of Trustees and Alumni). Less than a month after the attacks of Sept. 11, with a full-page ad in the New York Times, Peikoff was calling for attacks, not on the Taliban or al-Qaeda, but on Iran... - EIR

So, Leonard Peikoff "befriended" Ayn Rand, thus forming an association with her, then after her death, constructed the strawman (Ayn Rand Institute), and then along comes socialist LaRouche et al, who burn it down destroying Ayn Rand's Ideals of individual rights along with it. Or so they, and every other Communist/Socialist/Progressive/Libertarian/Republican/Democrat/New Age/Unitarian/Communitarian believes.

There is a lot more detail to this method of deconstruction, but this is sufficient to accurately illustrate the cooperation that goes on between all of todays political ideologies who offer false choices, and put up false fronts of being at odds with one another while working toward a Common Purpose.

Please address all replies to the topic of Ayn Rand's Ideals concerning Individualism and individual rights.
If you desire to refute her arguments please do so on the basis of her own comments, and in your own words.
I'm not interested in the philosophical drivel of some establishment blessed Ayn Rand expert, so don't try repeating their arguments.
If you get the impression that my attitude parallels Ayn Rand's, then thank you for noticing my claim to Individualism and innate Individual Rights in lieu of the bogus, humanist, UN sponsored and "granted", "human rights".

Bobby Garner is a researcher on the phenomenon of One-Worldism with an emphasis on the methods and techniques employed in it's attendant deception. He may be reached via E-mail from his Website at www.congregator.net. He welcomes your comments. This article may be posted in it's entirety on any website provided this statement remains attached.