Skip to main content

Ayn Rand and Objectivism

While I believe in more of a realistic Scandanavian socialist state (one where government services are used to benefit the population), Ayn Rand would disagree with me. The champion of Obejectivism, Ayn Rand values one over gropus, personal benefit over societal welfare, and profit over human well being. Some would describe her as libertarian. I would describe her as a raving lunatic.

Although she champions free will over mob mentality, she does so in a way that anything that society says is inherently manevloent. Free health care? Bad. Feeding the hungry? Bad. Public education to all? Very, very bad. The problem is, government is built to serve the people, and no social services means that government's not doing its job.

Sure, you could reduce welfare, but the state's function is to be a backup in case people fall. Some would say all people should stand merely on their own, but what about that small town shop owner who loses everything because his competitor sold food that used rats instead of beef? Should he suffer because of the dirty, underhanded tactics of others?

I'm not saying that there won't be people abusing others under a welfare state. However, under a system without a welfare state, the key difference would be that anyone who was exploited or cheated would have no way of getting back at those who did it to them. They would essentially be powerless against the bigger people, which effectively leaves all citizens of a nation in peril. You might argue that a big government could do this as well, however, a big government can be easily overthrown. Single people entrenched in power positions aren't.

I'm all for free will, but make sure you help others as well.