NP Rank:
Anti-Obama Libertarianism and the cult of John Galt
Commentary: Anti Obama Libertarianism and throngs of pseudo -John Galts.
John Galt is the fictional hero of libertarian writer Ayn Rand. He appeared in her book, Atals Shrugged ( c. 1957) . Galt sees the world around him becoming increasingly socialistic/fascistic and hides out in Colorado. It is Galt who has become the new prototype of the new-fangled libertarians of talk-radio and the blogosphere. Millions of Americans have come to identify with Galt, without having read a single page of Rand's fictional works or essays, like "The Virtue of Selfishness" and "For the New Intellectual". They are inspired to fight Obama, based on a Romantic author's ill-conceived fantasies about what the world should be like.
This idea of Galt as hero has permeated much of popular culture, second-hand. He is a vague, romantic notion which people have absorbed like a new fast food. Galt is based on a fantasy of Capitalism as a pristine liberty, which runs counter to our Wall Street scandals and tales of corporate greed. Thousands who could benefit from Obama are now too "Galted-out" to pay attention to anything he has to say. An astute blogger has put it well: "Rand's stories are pure capitalist propaganda.". They are also apologia. In other words, they try to pursuade, while dismissing and waving away all the glaring inconsistencies. One philosopher has heard people asking for Ayn Rand's books in Barnes and Noble , and none of them can seem to pronounce her name. This illustrates aptly the pathetic swindle of it all. Obama could help many of these people, but they will never have a chance to know it, because some right-wing pundits think they are the new Galt. Many of the Tea Party attendees are John Galtists. Galt is the neo-libertarian, anti-labor union poster boy of these times. For anyone who might like to know why so many have passionate hatred for Barack Obama, it can be put in these words: "Obama is all John Galt warned us about.". From Galt's speech:
Your world is only the product of your sacrifices. While you were dragging the men who made your happiness possible to your sacrificial altars, I beat you to it. I reached them first and told them about the game you were playing and where it would take them. I explained the consequences of your 'brother-love' morality, which they had been too innocently generous to understand. You won't find them now, when you need them more than ever. We're on strike against your creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. If you want to know how I made them quit, I told them exactly what I'm telling you tonight. I taught them the morality of Reason -- that it was right to pursue one's own happiness as one's principal goal in life. I don't consider the pleasure of others my goal in life, nor do I consider my pleasure the goal of anyone else's life. I am a trader. I earn what I get in trade for what I produce. I ask for nothing more or nothing less than what I earn. That is justice. I don't force anyone to trade with me; I only trade for mutual benefit. Force is the great evil that has no place in a rational world. One may never force another human to act against his/her judgment. If you deny a man's right to Reason, you must also deny your right to your own judgment. Yet you have allowed your world to be run by means of force, by men who claim that fear and joy are equal incentives, but that fear and force are more practical. You've allowed such men to occupy positions of power in your world by preaching that all men are evil from the moment they're born. When men believe this, they see nothing wrong in acting in any way they please. The name of this absurdity is 'original sin'. That's inmpossible. That which is outside the possibility of choice is also outside the province of morality. To call sin that which is outside man's choice is a mockery of justice. To say that men are born with a free will but with a tendency toward evil is ridiculous. If the tendency is one of choice, it doesn't come at birth. If it is not a tendency of choice, then man's will is not free. And then there's your 'brother-love' morality. Why is it moral to serve others, but not yourself? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when experienced by others, but not by you? Why is it immoral to produce something of value and keep it for yourself, when it is moral for others who haven't earned it to accept it? If it's virtuous to give, isn't it then selfish to take? (From Working Minds. ) For twelve years you've been asking "Who is John Galt?" This is John Galt speaking. I'm the man who's taken away your victims and thus destroyed your world. You've heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis and that Man's sins are destroying the world. But your chief virtue has been sacrifice, and you've demanded more sacrifices at every disaster. You've sacrificed justice to mercy and happiness to duty. So why should you be afraid of the world around you?
NowPublic on Facebook
Most Recommended Comment
Crowd Power
-
Susan Marie Kovalinsky
Ledgewood, New Jersey, United States




Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (7)
at 11:11 on August 28th, 2009
I don't agree with him, but this is Free Speech.
at 11:23 on August 28th, 2009
Yes, free speech is important. I only wish people were better informed. :(
at 19:21 on August 28th, 2009
It was hard to get the idea across, the intro is not well structured."free-speech-o" tho.
at 08:00 on August 29th, 2009
Right Wing 'Neo' Libertarians worship Ayn Rand's 'Virtue of Selfishness' capitalist fiction like the Christian right worships biblical fiction...
at 08:06 on August 29th, 2009
Yes, you are right on that!
at 19:09 on August 29th, 2009
First of all, there is no such thing as a "free market", particularly not in America. There are only rigged markets. If markets were truly "free", there would be hundreds of small oil companies instead of four or five gigantic ones. Besides would we really want a marketplace where there were no rules but greed and self-interest? That would be like having a football game with no goalposts, no yard markers, no rules and no penalties. It would be chaos! I wonder if these right-wingers would like Ayn Rand so much if they knew she was also an atheist?
at 04:46 on August 30th, 2009
Yes, and she is no authority on today's market.