PLANNED TOPIC: Special guest Yaron Brook, President and Executive Director of The Ayn Rand Institute, and co-author of the soon-to-be-released FREE MARKET REVOLUTION, joins me in studio to talk about Paul Ryan and the potential implications of him as VP for our long-term battle to improve the culture. Don’t miss it!
UPDATE: The page for the special pre-order deal that Yaron mentioned during the interview is now live. Pre-order FREE MARKET REVOLUTION for less than $22 and get $25 in free downloads from The Ayn Rand Bookstore.
Sunday’s live show, and then later the archive recording, can be accessed here.
To access the show page at BlogTalk Radio, which will allow you to check out a past episode, or to subscribe to the recorded archives via iTunes and other services, use this link.
To access the new iTunes store page for “Don’t Let It Go…Unheard,” where you can find past episodes, subscribe, and leave ratings and reviews (pretty please!), use this link.
Don't Let It Go 
Reblogged this on Glory to man in the highest.
[Note to Amy: I tried to post this comment a few hours ago, but evidently it got lost in the aether, so I’m reposting]
Paul Ryan and Objectivism
Rejecting Rand in Favor of Aquinas
by Thomas M. Miovas, Jr.
08/12/2012
http://www.meetup.co…925312#80683292
There is a very interesting story about Paul Ryan and Objectivism now that Ryan has been chosen to be the Vice-Presidential candidate along side Mitt Romney for President come this November election cycle. In the story, it is claimed that Ryan has rejected Ayn Rand in favor of Thomas Aquinas to be his intellectual guidance for national policy. When Ryan first announced that he liked Ayn Rand, the Marxist / Leftist jumped all over him trying to get him to drop her in favor of the policies of the Left — which is more Socialism and a government run economy. Looks like to some extend they succeeded in that Ryan has explicitly dropped Rand as an intellectual guidance position. However, Ayn Rand still had some influence on him and he has spoken out in favor of capitalism due to this influence.
That Ryan has chosen Thomas Aquinas as his new intellectual leader is also encouraging, in that it was Thomas Aquinas who brought mankind out of the Dark Ages and into the Renaissance, where reason was held in high esteem for the first time since Ancient Greece and Athens. I’m not really sure if Aquinas would have been in favor of capitalism or not, but he was most definitely in favor of reason as an absolute, bringing forth the argument that God gave you a mind and that it is important to use it to understand His Creation based upon the evidence of the senses which give us a direct connection to the Beauty and Rational Operations of God’s Universe. And Aquinas helped to re-introduce Aristotle to the West, thereby setting up the grounds for a rational culture based upon reason and reality. These positions did eventually lead to The Age of Reason and The Enlightenment, and to the founding of the United States of America and the full recognition of individual rights. So, Ryan is in great company to defend capitalism and man’s rights qua individual against the collectivism and unreason of the Marxist Left, even though he will waver a bit here and there due to his dropping of Ayn Rand as an explicit guide.
But even if Ryan does waver in his support of individual rights and capitalism, the very fact that he was once in support of Ayn Rand will help to bring the ideas of Objectivism to the forefront of intellectual debates this election cycle. The Leftist will bring it up against Romney and Ryan in order to throw selfishness into their face, but they will bring it up. This will give Objectivist intellectual activists a great setting for exposing more people to Ayn Rand and to hit upon key issues that might be made more explicit due to the mud slinging. And I certain encourage admirers and followers of Ayn Rand and Objectivism to take full advantage of the intellectual debate that will ensue due to this attempt to cower Romney and Ryan into dropping capitalism in favor of socialism.
Added on Edit: In this context, it is worth noting that The University of Dallas, my Alma Matter, and a staunch Catholic university, has a pretty decent Masters of Business degree program. While I was living in the Dallas area, I often thought about joining that degree / career course, and my career would have been entirely different had I done so, but the costs and the fact that I thought getting a degree in Physics and Philosophy might get me into management without an MBA prevented me from taking advantage of this course. Besides, I didn’t really want to get an MBA from a Catholic perspective, but the point is that at least they do have a business oriented degree program.
Ryan “rejects” Objectivism because he is a Christian. That means he refuses to become an Atheist/Objectivist. But it doesn’t mean he’s not a Rand fan and a Capitalist. I am also a Christian who has learned about the evils of collectivism.
I don’t know too much about Paul Ryan, but just the fact that an elected-official said a kind-word about Ayn Rand is amazing in itself and his Aquinas-reference merely points to his honesty (i.e., he’s not seeking to be a counterfeit Objectivist). If I remember correctly, Ayn Rand once said good things about Aquinas. Romney’s Ryan-pick thusly seems to say that he’s going to be more than merely a default anti-Obama candidate (i.e., he might actually offer us something to vote “for” as opposed to “against”).
Pingback: Chess Club vs. Choom Club — The New Clarion
My Fantasy on the 2012 US Presidential Election is either for a 269:269 electoral college draw or for Gary Johnson to take New Mexico and/or Maine and deny Romney and Obama 270 electors. The election of president would then go to the new House and the VP to the new Senate. There would be no danger of helping Obama because NM and Maine are already in the Democrat column as per Larry Sabato’s http://www.270towin.com website.
Interesting fantasy, but I’d rather get Obama out in a way that doesn’t leave anything to chance. Which is why we’re doing our upcoming “Intervention” series…
Practical Ways to Help Achieve a Republican Senate
Charlie Summers, current Secretary of State for Maine, is the Republican candidate for the 2012 US Senate race in Maine. He is pro military, pro free market and and not an advocate for religious positions such as anti-abortion. He has previously served in the US military in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
This is a 3-way race between Republican Charlie Summers, so called Independent Angus King (X Gov. and probably a stealth Democrat) and some relatively unknown Democrat. Given that this is a 3-way race and that Maine has a relatively tiny population, a few hundred thousand live one on one phone calls could give Summers enough extra votes to win. We would need about 100 callers making 50 calls a day for 45 days. The last 2 weeks before the election are useless because of all the ROBO calls from the other campaigns. I think that September 1 through October 23 is the ideal calling window.
Current polling has Angus King at about 50%, Charlie Summers at 25% and Democrat Cynthia Dill at 9%.
Harold
Could someone please post links to the two articles mentioned by Yaron in the podcast, Onkar Ghate’s article and Ryan’s view on abortion.
Here’s the Ryan paper: http://paulryan.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=207539
Re Yaron’s final comments on “Dark Knight.” There was one scene in the film, relevant to this discussion, that really grabbed me, and I hope I am recalling it correctly. The hero policeman is leading a group of orphan schoolboys and their priest out of the city. They are evacuating the town because a nuclear bomb is about to go off. They are stuck motionless on the only bridge out of the city. A section of the bridge has been destroyed. The bomb will go off in 30 seconds. With no options remaining, the young policeman calmly directs the boys to get back on the bus. The priest objects: Back on the bus? Are you kidding? A NUCLEAR BOMB is about to go off! What does it matter? Our hero glares back at the priest: “Do you think I am going to let those boys die without hope?!”
That is a dramatic example of what good leaders do: they instill optimism. There’s a lesson for Objectivist thought leaders here. Adopting an optimistic frame of mind – the sense that you can deal with anything reality throws at you, as long as you can think – is exquisitely pro-life, even when facing the end of life itself. Our plight in this election is dire, but not as desparate as facing immediate annihilation. We have a fighting chance! Let’s adopt an optimistic, enthusiastic program for supporting Romney/Ryan!
Check out our “Intervention” series, starting today. I think you’ll like it!
Just saw an interview of Paul Ryan on Fox News Channel, and I don’t think his position will be a threat to Objectivism in any way whatsoever. He says he was inspired by Ayn Rand’s novels and the politics presented in there, and acknowledged that Ayn Rand came from the Soviet Union and that he doesn’t want us to sink that far into State control, but he says he is not for Objectivism on the grounds that it is atheistic and claims that Objectivism contradicts what she presents in her novels — which leads me to believe that he doesn’t understand either the novels or Objectivism, so it is good that he is distancing himself from Objectivism. Besides, his policies are not full capitalism, he only wants to tinker around the edges, so I’m glad he is stating publicly that he is against Objectivism.
Yes, and I’ve seen links going around to comments he made a couple of years ago, also distancing himself from Objectivism. I think he’s done a pretty good job of this — not that the main stream media is happy about how well he’s done it. They’d rather pin the “evil” ideas of Ayn Rand on him!
Ayn Rand’s First Appearance on The Tonight Show
with Johnny Carson, 1967
“If you put a gun to my head and demand that I choose between Obama and Romney, I’d say: please shoot me.” — Marc Faber
Skilled Work, Without the Worker
A new wave of robots, far more adept than those now commonly used by automakers and other heavy manufacturers, are replacing workers around the world in both manufacturing and distribution.
A sort of update to this thread / discussion. As I announced on FaceBook, I left a comment on a leading national online Catholic magazine that was wondering what a Catholic ought to think about Ryan and Objectivism and Ayn Rand. Catholics who are familiar with her are in a bit of a quandary, as they can like her novels, but do not like the explicit egoism or the rational aspects of the Objectivist ethics (especially without reference to God as the source of virtue). Been nearly 100 comments to date, and most were discussing Ayn Rand rather than Paul Ryan. I doubt I convinced them of anything when I told them I converted from Catholicism to Objectivism, given the application of reason and rationality to ethics, but have not been explicitly flacked for it or have been told I am immoral (though a few hinted that Objectivism was heretical, as all philosophies are after the Reformation, according to them). I think it is Miss Rand’s sense of life and sense of moral urgency that draws them to her novels, as they drew me in almost forty years ago now. But, as I’m sure happened with Ryan, they are not going to convert over because they want to retain their Faith in God and Him being the source of all human good.
It would have been much more interesting if Ryan had gone all the way through his integrations, rather than sticking with the status quo. As it is, he won’t present a problem for Objectivism, though his candidacy has drawn out a few things to consider even in the Catholic mind, and, who knows, they may decide it’s OK to read Rand since Ryan did it and was able to remain a Catholic. Maybe a small cultural step has been achieved.
It is always a pleasure to hear Yaron Brooks speak. He is probably the most eloquent Objectivist I know of and the more he is put out there the more our movement will benefit.
The National Catholic Register did post a follow-up comment I posted a few days ago regarding Ryan, Rand, and What’s a Catholic to Think? I haven’t received any rebuttals this time around, so maybe I really horrified them 🙂
“I’m sure the moderators of these comments would not permit me to take on all the smears and misconstruments of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism, but perhaps I can take on one or two in rebuttal. Miss Rand did not admired Hickman, the murderer, due to the fact that he was a murder; but rather due to the fact that he had the attitude that “What is good for me is the good,” an egoistic approach, which she found wanting in the American culture. In Objectivism, man’s life — what man is factually and can be proven with reasoning about the facts — is the standard of morality. And she found it curious that such a prosperous country as the United States when she immigrated here from the Soviet Union did not understand that more explicitly — like Aristotle’s eudaimonia, of happiness on earth as a motivation and assertion of man’s ability to live his own life. That Hickman was a murder severely contradicts her morality — the Objectivist ethics — and she condemned him for taking that route. As to Objectivism being a type of materialism, nothing could be further from the truth. Miss Rand and Objectivists are very concerned with human consciousness and its proper functioning, and we do not think that material reality is all there is insofar as we do have a consciousness and can experience and have spiritual values related to man’s well-being of consciousness. That a man can love another or even value well-made art are spiritual values which Objectivism rightfully embraces. What we do reject is the idea that man has a separable soul in the Christian sense. Man is an integrated being of mind and body, it’s not one or the other. We don’t reject the material in the name of the spirit nor do we reject the spiritual in the name of the material — we recognize that each man is something specific in reality and that he can understand and value different aspects of existence. For more information, I highly recommend actually reading Ayn Rand’s books so you can come to a more informed conclusion about her and Objectivism.
Thank you.”
Don’t know if anyone is still following this thread, but the Catholic Church has just come out with a formal statement against Ayn Rand and Objectivism insofar as a proponent of hers, Paul Ryan, has spoken out in favor of her novel Atlas Shrugged.
Miss Rand once said that only three places on earth understand the full impact of their positions and what side they are on: Moscow, The Vatican, and The Empire State Building (her offices). This article proves her point:
http://www.onourshoulders.org/