Rand: Introduction to Objectivism: Politics & Capitalism     © Susan Fleck

 

1)     Politics defines the principles of a proper social system, including the proper functions of government (normative branch)

a)     Living in the right kind of society is a value to man; the wrong kind, like any wrong course of action, is a threat to man

b)     Only one standard to guide a thinker in defining the right kind: man’s code of moral values—the principles of ethics

i)      Politics rests on ethics (and thus, on metaphysics and epistemology)

ii)     It is an application of ethics to social questions: it is not any system’s start or any kind of primary

(1)   What type of society conforms to or reflects the principles of morality?—question asked by philosophical politics

(2)   Objectivist: What type conforms to the requirements of man’s life?

(a)   What type makes possible the virtues we have been studying? . . . represents the supremacy of reason?

c)     Basic principle of politics is the one endorsed by U.S. Founding Fathers: individual rights

i)      Rand: Rights are a moral concept—provides logical transition from principles guiding an individual’s actions to principles guiding his relationship with others

(1)   the concept that preserves and protects individual morality in a social context

(2)   the link between the moral code of man and the legal code of a society; between ethics and politics

(3)   Individual rights are the means of subordinating society to moral law

d)     Rand: A “right” is a moral principle defining and sanctioning a man’s freedom of action in a social context

i)      The opposite of acting by right is acting by permission (such as in dictatorships)

ii)     Innocents can be robbed or enslaved: victims’ rights are still inalienable: they remain with victim—criminal is wrong

2)     U.S. Founding Fathers recognized one fundamental right, which has several derivatives: Right to Life

a)     means right to sustain and protect one’s life

b)     Major derivatives: right to liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness

i)      liberty: right to use one’s method of survival—to use one’s rational faculty to gain knowledge and choose values

ii)     property: man needs to create material means to his survival: this is the right to this process—to gain, to keep, to use and to dispose of material values

iii)   happiness: to sustain his life, man needs to be governed by a certain motive—his purpose must be his own welfare

(1)   this is the right to this motive—to live for one’s own sake and fulfillment

3)     Samuel Adams: Rights form a logical unity—all are evident branches of, rather than deductions from, the duty of self-preservation, commonly called the first law of nature

a)     contradiction: to tell a man he has a right to life, but that he needs permission of others to think or act, or to produce or consume, or to pursue any personal motive without the approval of the government

4)     Right to life, liberty, and happiness are given some lip service, but implicitly denied by most intellectuals in the West

a)     Right to property is regularly opposed: they claim this clashes with the very principle of human rights

b)     Rand: modern mystics of muscle who offer you the fraudulent alternative of “human rights” versus “property rights,” as if one could exist without the other, are making a grotesque attempt to revive the doctrine of soul versus body.

i)      only a ghost can exist without material property (and no such thing as ghosts); only a slave can work with no right to the product of his effort

ii)     their doctrine of ‘human rights’ as superior means that some human beings have the right to make property out of others

iii)   since the competent have nothing to gain from the incompetent, it means the right of the incompetent to own their betters and to use them as productive cattle

iv)   Whoever regards this as human and right, has no right to the title of “human.”

c)     There can be no right to act apart from the right to own: action requires the use of material objects (even speaking: place)

5)     Intellectual freedom cannot exist without political freedom; political freedom cannot exist without economic freedom; a free mind and a free market are corollaries

6)     Logical validation of Objectivist Politics: Each of man’s rights has a specific source in Objectivist ethics

a)     beneath that, in Objectivist view of man’s metaphysical nature, which in turn rests on Objectivist metaphysics and epistemology

b)     A proper philosophy is an integrated system: each right rests ultimately on all principles which precede the issue of rights

i)      All rights rest on the fact that man’s life is the moral standard; and on facts that man survives by means of reason; that man is a productive being

c)     Rights, however, are not “self-evident” as the Framers claimed. They are corollaries of ethics as applied to social organization—if one holds the proper ethics (otherwise, none of them stands)

7)     Life, liberty, property, pursuit of happiness: the only rights treated by philosophical politics: the only ones resting directly on universal ethical principles

a)     The numerous applications and implementations of these rights—freedom of press, trial by jury, or others detailed in the Bill of Rights, belong to the field of philosophy of law; their validations is by way of reduction to man’s philosophic rights

b)     Right to life (to a process of self-preservation) does not mean others must give someone food when he is hungry, medicine when he is sick, a job when unemployed, a home when homeless

i)      Right to property does not mean the right to be given property (money) by the government, but to produce and earn it

ii)     Right to pursuit of happiness: pursuit is not necessarily attainment—otherwise one could claim infringement of one’s right if someone withholds favors

c)     Detaching the concept of “rights” from reason and reality leads to false concepts such as “Economic rights” and “Collective rights.”

i)      “Economic rights” in this context means a man’s right, simply by virtue of existing, to man-made goods and services

(1)   food, clothing, home, job, education, day care, medical care, pension

(2)   involves a contradiction: if my right to life entails a right to your labor or its product, you cannot have a right to liberty or property: “Free milk for part of the population means slave labor for the rest.”

(3)   True Economic ‘rights’ are in the form of the right to property, the right to free association, and free trade—all aspects of liberty

ii)     “Collective rights” means rights belonging to a group qua group—rights allegedly independent of those possessed by the individual: we hear of special rights of workers, farmers, consumers, the young, the old, the students, the women, the race, the class, etc.

(1)   Spokesmen of such groups present demands that violate legitimate rights, either of individuals outside the group and/or of those inside it: demands range from financial favors to special powers or privileges

(2)   Rand: A group can have no rights other than the rights of its individual members. In a free society, the “rights” of any group are derived from the rights of its members through their voluntary, individual choice and contractual agreement . . . merely the application of these individual rights to a specific undertaking. . . . (e.g. unions)

d)     Rights can be violated only by the use of physical force: The protection of rights involves a single function: protecting the innocent from such action. This follows from ethics—the moral evil of initiating physical force (that negates victim’s mind)

i)      An individual can be hurt in countless ways by other men’s irrationality, dishonesty, injustice; he can be disappointed, perhaps grievously, by the vices of someone he had once trusted or loved

(1)   as long as his property is not expropriated and he remains unmolested physically, the damage is essentially spiritual, not physical: the victim alone has the power and responsibility of healing his mental wounds

(a)   he remains free: free to think, to learn from experiences, to look elsewhere for human relationships

(b)   he remains free to continue, or start afresh, pursuing his happiness

(c)   only the crime of force is able to render its victim helpless: moral responsibility of organized society lies in a single obligation: to banish this crime—to protect individual rights

ii)     Reason has one and only one social requirement: freedom—such is the essence of the case for man’s rights

(1)   Metaphysically, the individual is sovereign (a being of self-made soul)

(2)   Ethically, he is obligated to live as a sovereign (as an independent egoist)

(3)   Politically, he must be able to act as a sovereign

e)     Rand: The source of man’s rights is not divine law or congressional law, but the law of identity. A is A—and Man is Man. Rights are conditions of existence required by man’s nature for his proper survival. If man is to live on earth, it is right for him to use his mind, it is right to act on his own free judgment, it is right to work for his values and to keep the product of his work. If life on earth is his purpose, he has a right to live as a rational being: nature forbids him the irrational.

i)      Primacy-of-existence orientation: The world, including man, is a certain way; therefore, if man wishes to survive, he must act accordingly

ii)     An “individualist” social system is one that upholds individual rights

iii)   In the social subjectivist view: the source of rights is the feelings or laws of the group: this represents an explicit denial of rights—man’s rights are nothing but permissions granted to him (temporarily) by other men

f)      Philosophical competitor of individualism is collectivism: an application to politics of the ethics of altruism

i)      Man exists only to serve other men (the “collective”); individual rights are a myth

ii)     the group is the unit of value and the bearer of sovereignty

iii)   Problem with this view: no one can turn man into a cog of society; not into a thinking cog

(1)   Man’s mind must be destroyed in any attempt to accomplish such a society

(2)   Like any form of irrationality, a collectivist system is necessarily self-defeating—no matter what its specific policies or leaders—evil is impotent in every version and in every field, politics included

(a)   victims of Marx, without understanding or ideology, fleeing to some form of market economy (to freedom)

8)     Government as an Agency to Protect Rights: Force can be stopped only by force

a)     Citizens must create an agency with the power to do this job: this agency is the government

b)     Rand: A government is an institution that holds the exclusive power to enforce certain rules of social conduct in a given geographical area.

c)     Gov’t is a social creation; “society” consists of individuals: Any powers of government must derive from those individuals

i)      proper society: government is the servant of citizens, not their ruler; specifically, it is the agent of man’s self-defense

ii)     It has a single power, inherent if the individual’s right to life: power to use force in retaliation against those persons (or nations) who start its use.

(1)   By its nature, government has a monopoly on the use of force: individuals agree to delegate their right to self-defense and the right to retaliate after crimes are committed—to police, to judges, to armed forces

(a)   Individuals use force only in emergencies before police can be summoned

(b)   the use of force against one man cannot be left to the arbitrary decision of another

(c)   without such delegation, every person would need to live and work armed and ready for possible trouble; or would form packs, or gangs—peaceful coexistence among men would be impossible (as is so with gangs)

9)     Freedom requires a government of objective laws: objective in regard to their validation and, therefore, their interpretation

a)     A proper society must remove the retaliatory use of force methodically from the realm of whim

i)      Every aspect of such use must be defined, validated, codified: under what conditions force can be employed, by whom, against whom, in what forms, to what extent. Rand: this requires---

(1)   objective rules of evidence to establish that a crime has been committed and to prove who committed it

(2)   objective rules to define punishments and enforcement procedures

(a)   Men who attempt to prosecute crimes without such rules are a lynch mob

b)     The individual is able to know, prior to action, whether or not the law forbids it and what are consequences of disobedience

c)     Meaning of laws is independent of the claims of any interpreter—it can be grasped from statement of the law itself

i)      Laws that are not defined in terms of specific physical acts are not valid objective laws—e.g., laws against--

(1)   blasphemy, obscenity, immorality, restraint of trade, unfair profits

(2)   Even when the terms are philosophically definable, it is not possible to know from statement of the law what existential acts are forbidden: Men are reduced to guessing what was in the legislator(s) mind(s)

(3)   In practice, meaning of such laws is decided arbitrarily, on a case-by-case basis (case precedence vs. constitution)

(a)   decided by tyrants, bureaucrats, or judges, according to methods that no one, including the interpreters, can define or predict

d)     Some laws are objectively definable but are indefensible; e.g. a law forbidding the sale of alcoholic beverages

i)      Such a law must ultimately rely on a nonobjective standard of ethics such as the “public welfare”

(1)   Thus the law is nonobjective at its core

ii)     Only objective laws that confines legislation to the protection of rights are defensible

e)     Totalitarian theorists and leaders understand this—they insist on nonobjective legal codes: their goal—to inculcate servility

i)      citizens spend their lives trying to anticipate the government’s next whim: a potent method of breaking men’s spirit

10)  Need for a government of objective laws extends beyond the issue of stopping criminals (or other nation aggressors)

a)     Even if every citizen were completely virtuous, disagreements among men would still be possible

i)      Man is not omniscient or infallible: contracts can be made, yet one or more parties may fail to understand the terms

(1)   People take actions honestly believing justice is on their side, while others honestly believe those actions violate their rights

b)     Immense field of civil law indicates the range and kinds of disagreements possible to non-criminals

i)      An essential function of government: the protection and enforcement of contracts, including the resolution of disputes

ii)     Here, too, government acts to defend men’s rights and thus to prevent any arbitrary use of physical force

iii)   Rand: proper civil courts are the most crucial need of a peaceful society: Criminals are a small minority, but contractual protection for honest undertakings is a daily necessity of civilized life

11)  Government’s purpose to bar men’s use of physical force against others entails only three functions

a)     The police, to protect men from criminals

b)     The armed services, to protect men from foreign invaders

c)     The law courts, to settle disputes among men according to objective laws

d)     Any other additional function would have to involve the government initiating force against innocent citizens

i)      Such a government acts not as man’s protector, but as a criminal

ii)     Government is inherently negative: The power of force is the power of destruction, not of creation

(1)   It should be used only to destroy destruction

(2)   For society to inject this power into any creative realm, spiritual or material, is a lethal contradiction

(3)   The state must not intervene in the intellectual or moral life of its citizens: it has no standards to uphold and no benefits to confer in regard to education, literature, art, science, sex, or philosophy

(a)   Its function is to protect freedom, not truth or virtue

(b)   If the agency with a monopoly on coercion undertakes to enforce ideas, it becomes the enemy, not the protector, of the free mind and thus loses its moral basis for existing

(c)   The goal of a proper society is not to compel truth or virtue (which would be a contradiction in terms), but to make them possible—by ensuring that men are left free

(4)   For same reason, the state must not intervene in another aspect of intellectual life: the realm of production and trade

(a)   It must not undertake to provide men with economic standards or benefits

(i)    It protects against thieves, swindlers, and killers, not from reality or the need to create one’s values by one’s own mind and labor

(ii)  Politicians must have nothing to do with production or distribution: they may not build, manage, or regulate schools, hospitals, utilities, roads, parks, post offices, railroads, steel mills, banks, etc.

1.     nor may they hand out subsidies, franchises, tariff protection, social insurance, minimum-living standards, minimum-wage laws, parity laws for farmers, fair-price laws, etc.

(b)   No one but the creator may dispose of the products of his thought or determine the process of creating them and distributing them


12)  In a proper society, citizens have rights, but the government does not: it acts by permission, as expressed in a written constitution that limits public officials to defined functions and procedures

a)     First and best example was the original American system with its brilliantly ingenious mechanism of checks and balances

i)      Its purpose was to protect the individual from two potential tyrants: the government and the mob—to thwart both the power lust of an aspiring dictator and any momentary, corrupt passion on the part of the general public

ii)     A Republic not a Democracy: A full democracy means a system of unlimited majority rule--

(1)   unlimited means unrestricted by individual rights: such an approach is not a form of freedom, but of collectivism

(2)   A Republic is a system restricted to the protection of rights: majority rule applies only to some details (live voting for certain personnel)—Rights, however, remain an absolute

(a)   Rights—the principles governing the government are not subject to vote

(b)   “consent of the governed” does not mean that the citizens can delegate powers they do not posses; not that anything to which the governed consent is thereby proper or a proper function of government

iii)   Source of a government’s power is not arbitrary consent, but rational consent, based on an objective principle: the rights of man

13)  Statism as the Politics of Unreason: any system that concentrates its power in the state at the expense of individual freedom

a)     theocracy, absolute monarchy, Nazism, fascism, communism, democratic socialism, ‘unadorned’ dictatorship

i)      variants differ on matters of form, tactics, and/or ideology

(1)   Some nationalize means of production—others allow façade of private ownership but give the state control over the use and disposal of property

(2)   Some invoke social subjectivism, citing the needs of the race, the nation, the class, “mankind”

(3)   Some rulers oversee subjects’ every more; others allow men a long leash—one that can be reined in at will

b)     Essence of their policy is the same: war against man—against his mind, body, and property alike

i)      Result of such war has always been the manufacture of corpses: an expression, in negative terms, of the principle that freedom is the social requirement of man’s tool of survival

ii)     History of Russia, China, Germany, Iran—by now, one should understand the philosophy, the cause, and the effect of statism

14)  System that rules the West today: Middle-of-the-roaders in politics: union of individualism and statism: the mixed economy

a)     A mixture of freedom and controls: defenders argue, rejects absolutes and offers ‘best of both worlds’

i)      It combines self-interest and duty

(1)   independence for the individual and compulsion in service of a higher cause

(2)   private property as engine of production and a compassionate government to regulate the producers and redistribute their products

b)     Theory of the mixed economy is a blatant contradiction: It advocates rights and no rights

i)      an unphilosophical, unprincipled approach to political questions:

(1)   How is a “mixed” society to determine its proper course in any given issue?

(2)   How is it to know when to respect rights and when to infringe them?

(3)   In the absence of principle, men act without knowledge or vision: they act short-range and by feeling—their own or their gang’s—guessing case by case what policy will “work” at the present time

(a)   This spectacle is what people now call “pressure-group warfare”

(b)   act by feeling about what is “too much selfishness”

(4)   Solution offered by our press and politicians: imperative no matter what the claims: Don’t’ be rigid—compromise

c)     Theory of mixed economy rests on the philosophy of pragmatism (subjectivism and intrinsicism)

i)      causes men to disdain principles—it leads in politics to eclecticism: attempt to combine in one system essentials taken from contradictory approaches

(1)   Subjectivist pragmatists assert any social demand that wells up from their subconscious or subculture

(a)   they specialize in manufacturing false rights: everyone is entitled to a satisfying job; better medical care, education, TV programs; obscenity-free library; evolution-free curriculum, sodomy-free bedroom, abortion-free hospital; etc. –therefore, “government ought to pass a law

d)     As virtue of integrity tells us, compromise between good and evil leads to the triumph of evil—applies to every field of human action, politics included

i)      If one believes that individual rights may be overridden by government sometimes—when the public welfare (or God) necessitates it—then one has conceded that rights are not inalienable, but are conditional on requirements of a higher value: man exists not by right, but by the permission of society or God

(1)   principle of rights are thrown out in favor of the principle of statism—which wins out in practice

e)     Within limits, the course of a mixed economy is erratic: a country may waver between freer and more controlled periods

i)      it may reach ultimate outcome slowly or rapidly—but nature of outcome is unaffected if statist elements are not rejected in principle and repealed in total

(1)   The economic mechanism ensuring a result of statism: principle that controls necessitate further controls

ii)     History of the West in past century demonstrates that the mixed economy is not a “third way” between capitalism and socialism—it is merely a transition stage, careening from freedom to dictatorship

f)      Usually calls for more controls are not originated by the general public (people who are busy earning a living), but by two groups of intellectuals. In America these groups are called “liberals” (now “progressives”) and “conservatives”

i)      Both are opposed to capitalism; both endorse a highly controlled stage of the mixed economy; both reject the principle of individual rights

ii)     Liberals tend to advocate intellectual freedom, while demanding economic controls

iii)   Conservatives, though they endorse some economic controls, tend to advocate economic freedom, while demanding government controls in all the crucial intellectual and moral realms

iv)   Both, then subscribe to and reflect the mind-body dichotomy

(1)   Conservatives, whose roots lie in religion, are what Rand calls “mystics of spirit”

(2)   Liberals, whose roots lie in Marxism, are “mystics of muscle”

(3)   Is it a paradox that spiritualists advocate economic freedom, while the materialists advocate intellectual freedom?

(a)   Rand: each camp wants to control the realm it regards as metaphysically important

(b)   . . . each grants freedom only to the activities it despises

(c)   . . . neither camp holds freedom as a value.

(d)   The conservatives want to rule man’s consciousness; the liberals, his body

v)     Conservatives pretend to be defenders of “free enterprise” or “the American way of life” while spreading opposite ideas and laws: they are the more harmful since they purport to be fighting “big government”

(1)   they are the main source of political confusion in the public mind: they give people the illusion of an electoral alternative—thus the statist drift proceeds unchecked and unchallenged

(2)   From the Sherman Act, to Herbert Hoover, to the Bush Administration—government has gotten ‘bigger and badder’

(3)   In philosophic terms, “conservative” here subsumes any “rightist” who attempts to tie the politics of the Founding Fathers to unreason in any form

(a)   e.g.--whether he is a Protestant fundamentalist, a Catholic invoking Papal dogma,

(b)   a libertarian invoking anarchism, a Southerner invoking racism,

(c)   or a Republican invoking “states rights (a man seeking fifty tyrannies instead of one)

vi)   Objectivists are not “conservatives”—they do not seek to preserve the present system, but to change it at the root

(1)   In the literal sense of the word, Objectivists are radicals—radicals for freedom, radicals for man’s rights, radicals for capitalism: No choice in this matter because, in philosophy, Objectivists are radicals for reason.

15)  Capitalism: Politics is to economics as mind is to body: The right political system includes the right economic system.

a)     Morality determines politics as its application to organized human interaction; politics then determines economics, as its application to the field of production and trade

i)      Purpose of science of economics is to identify how the principles of a proper politics actually work out in regard to men’s productive life; and what happens to production under an improper system

(1)   Morality and proper politics tells us that man has the right to property

(2)   An economist should answer questions about the economy by completing the case for man’s rights—by showing that, here as elsewhere, the moral is the practical

(3)   Hierarchically, science of economics is a derivative which succeeds philosophy; since economics presupposes politics, it also presupposes morality (ethics)—beneath that, metaphysics and epistemology

(a)   Economics cannot alter philosophic truths—without the right philosophy, an economist can neither identify economic laws nor predict a country’s long-range economic future

(4)   Despite intimate relationship to philosophy, economics is not a part of philosophy (in college subject matter)—its concern is not universal principles of human action, but a specialized subject matter—as if divorced from Reality

(5)   What philosophic and moral principles does the capitalist system embody? What is the effect of the system on man’s life?

(a)   Flaws in classical economics (Adam Smith), even in its best modern heir, Ludwig von Mises

(i)    Capitalism is not perishing from such flaws in those theories—it is perishing from the absence of a rational philosophy

(b)   Like a body without a mind, science of economics is worthless and impossible apart from philosophy

b)     Capitalism as the Only Moral Social System

i)      Rand: Capitalism is a social system based on the recognition of individual rights, including property rights, in which all property is privately owned

(1)   definition in terms of fundamentals, not of consequences: it may not be defined as “system of competition”

(a)   Competition for power and wealth exists in most societies, including totalitarian ones

(b)   Capitalism involves a unique form of competition, along with other desirable social features—but all of them flow from a single root cause: freedom

(2)   Under capitalism, state and economics are separated just as state and church are separated and for same reasons.

(a)   Producers must obey the criminal law, uphold contractual agreements, and abide by decisions of courts

(i)    Otherwise, the policy of the government is: hands off! Term “laissez-faire capitalism” is a redundancy

(b)   Capitalism is the system of Laissez-faire—it is not the mixture of political opposites that now rules the West

(i)    In a free market, there are no government controls over the economy—men act and interact voluntarily, by individual choice and free trade

(3)   Historically, pure capitalism has never existed—it was approached during the period of the Industrial Revolution, with best example as America in the 19th century

(4)   A free market is a corollary of a free mind—a free mind is a corollary of a free market—every other social system clashes with every essential aspect of the mind’s function

ii)     Identifying relationships between capitalism and most important expressions of rationality covered in Ethics—the six derivative virtues and the principle of egoism

(1)   Independence: man’s primary orientation to reality, not to other men

(a)   A man yoked by law to decisions of others must place people first in mental hierarchy, above reason & reality

(i)    others become his means of survival—controlling his material tools, the means of production

(ii)  the man-made (laws and controls) replace conformity to the metaphysically given—the man-made sets the terms of behavior—the rulers demand obedience at the point of a gun

(iii) Degrees are irrelevant here: From the moment of a free society’s first conscious breach of individual rights, the principle of independence has been dropped in favor of the principle of social conformity

1.     The arena open to independence starts to shrink and goes on shrinking—barring a fundamental change in the society’s philosophy

2.     Either independence, like every other virtue, is upheld as an absolute or not at all—the only system that can uphold it as an absolute is the one that respects freedom as an absolute

(b)   Intellectually, independence requires that one form one’s own judgments

(i)    A paternalistic society accepts the opposite premise: men are incompetent to think for themselvesthe government will do the thinking for them, by defining the right ideas and behavioral standards—then sending out the appropriate enforcement squads

1.     the food police, the green police, the safety police, the rent-control police, etc. etc.

(c)   Materially, independence requires that one support himself by the work of his own mind

(i)    presupposes a political system without government favors or favorites—without looters, moochers, rulers

1.     Character of rulers is irrelevant: no moral or practical difference whether kind or cruel

(ii)  “responsible” planners running a socialist economy have to set terms for legitimate use of public property

1.     must define men’s permissible course of thought and action

2.     specify scientific theories worthy of laboratory research; inventions worthy of economic investment; art worthy of public funding; men worthy of employment and promotion in every field; what can be taught in public schools, etc.

3.     planning in a semisocialistic country: what companies to invest public (tax) funds (Solyndra example)

a.      study volumes of regulations issued by Washington—defining what businessmen, physicians, educators, et al. must, can, and cannot do when they spend federal funds

(iii) if planners not responsible or rational—decrees and regulations according to whim of moment

(d)  Throughout history, great innovators flourished in the freer periods—contrast:

(i)    freer cities of ancient Greece with stagnation across millennia of theocracy of ancient Egypt

(ii)  progress of Renaissance with retrogression under Church & Kings’ rule in the Middle ages

(iii) wealth from blossoming of Industrial Revolution during 19th century with Marxism, Nazism, Facism, wars, Socialism, Progressivism, Conservativism, Religious Dictatorships of 20th century

(iv) Best evidence: “brain drain” as scientists and intellectuals (and others) fled to the United States

1.     Within the U.S. now, a similar flight—away from “almost fully socialized” fields like manufacturing and medicine to the less controlled professions

(e)   Individualism and independence rise and fall together: Any other politics represents opposite—form of slavery

(2)   Justice: the virtue of judging men morally and of granting to each that which he deserves

(a)   Moral judgment by the individual is intolerable to the statist. Authorities must have men who will obey them in all matters, including human interaction and association

(b)  Politicians of a mixed economy count on pressure groups who will compromise: to praise, blame, “negotiate,” or stay neutral, according to requirements of “the community” (2021 – WOKENESS)

(i)    Regarding self-protection garnered by justice, by one’s own judgments: Politicians answer—since the government educates the citizens morally, it thereby assures everyone’s well-being

1.     or, go further and claim it is wrong to consider one’s own well-being at all (“selfish”)—one must love one’s fellow beings (no matter how hurtful) because they are the moral beneficiary for whose sake the individual is living and toiling

(c)   An individual under freedom chooses his own actions, his own career—he is responsible for choices

(i)    Man under compulsion cannot be held responsible

(d)   Just man seeks and grants the earned, both in spirit and in matter: essential rule is the Trader Principle

(i)    Trade assumes voluntary exchange of values; you do not “trade” your wallet to a hold-up man in exchange for him letting you flee for your life

(ii)  It requires a government that is forbidden to emulate hold-up men (force in areas of economics)


(iii) Free-market system—every man must pay his own way—he can claim from others only what he has earned, as judged by the parties’ mutual, uncoerced evaluations

1.     To the nonearners and nontraders—the system is fully as “cruel” (i.e., as just) as its enemies say

2.     It offers people no alibis, no welfare workers, no booty

3.     No man’s achievements or troubles, whatever their nature or source, are assets or liabilities belonging to other men

4.     Rand: an end will be put to the infamy of paying with one life for the errors [or accidents] of another

(e)   Intellectuals who claim that socialism is unjust in practice but idealistic in theory, does not understand that injustice is the essence of its theory

(3)   Productiveness: Root of capitalism’s productiveness is that it is the system of free thought and thereby of creativity

(a)   A creative life entails a private career chosen as a long-range purpose: this demands an individualist politics

(i)    Privacy without the principle of egoism to sanction it is impossible—so is a long-range approach without freedom from interference

(ii)  No personal career for a person whose destiny is public service—so, no chosen, sustained course of action for a person at the mercy of clashing pressure groups (or a dictator switching orders)

(iii) No purposefulness in the moral sense apart from the right to set one’s purposes, i.e., the right to the pursuit of happiness

(b)   No one in a free society has a customer, a supplier, a job, an insurance policy, or bank loan by force

(i)    no laws to entrench mediocrity and bar the path of talent—every chance exists for the innovator

1.     to place on the market the work of his mind, to fight slothful opposition, to rise to the top and be rewarded

2.     Source of capitalism’s creativity may be described as “competition,” but it is the kind which rests on the fact that each man is free to offer his best, and that other producers (workers who earn money) are free to decide whether or not to buy it

3.     The real source, in a word, is freedom, which clears the road for the active, creative mind

(c)   Capitalism is the system of wealth because it is geared to requirements of the creative process

(i)    This system has no competition in regard to the achievement of material abundance

1.     Enemies of capitalism turn this fact into an objection:

a.      advocates of the mind-body dichotomy say that capitalism gives too much importance to “materialistic concerns”

b.     anti-effort mentalities add that economic growth under capitalism is excessive

i.       complaining that someone is always revolutionizing the methods of production: there is never time to “rest”

c.      Both of these objections are true in essence; capitalism is the system of this material world, and it is, a “rat race”—but so is life

i.       Life is motion, one way or the other, forward or backward, in the direction of self-preservation or of destruction

ii.     Capitalism is the forward system; it is the “progressive” system, using “progress” for once in the literal sense!

2.     Not even Ivy League professors any longer try to pretend that dictatorship leads to prosperity

a.      State of a country’s freedom has always been correlated with its standard of living

(4)   Integrity: the refusal to permit a breach between thought and action

(a)   Presupposes an individuals’ freedom in regard to both mind and body

(i)    A breach between the two is inherent in statism—even leaving aside torture or brainwashing—

1.     dictatorships take over a country’s physical resources, making it impossible for an individual to act on his mind’s conclusions

(5)   Honesty: the selfish refusal to fake reality, requires a system geared to selfishness and to reality

(a)   Under statism, some form of faking reality is unavoidable: survival entails some public adherence to state opinions, no matter what the pretense, flattery, hypocrisy, or plain lying this involves

(i)    How can one live a normal life in a dictatorship?

(6)   Pride: the sum of the virtues, requires the moral ambitiousness of seeking to observe every moral principle

(a)   Presupposes a system in which moral principles can be practiced

(b)   Who can achieve self-esteem in a system that degrades him to the status of helpless social atom?

(7)   Principle of egoism: a requirement of life & a presupposition of rights—it is inherent in the system of life and rights

(a)   Under capitalism, as a mater of fundamental law, man is an end in himself

(i)    He is free to live for others if he chooses, but each is expected by the nature of the system to be the beneficiary of his own actions: he gains values by pursuing his own life, prosperity, and happiness

(ii)  Capitalism rewards the pursuit of rational self-interest

(iii) He can act irrationally under capitalism; but he cannot run to the government for any bailout

1.     There are no “no fault” clauses: either one adheres to nature/reality, or, in due course, nature takes care of the matter

(b)   Capitalism counts on the profit motive—a man’s incentive to work in order to gain something for himself

(i)    to make money and, if a business owner, to earn capital to be invested in new products, expansion, etc.

1.     money is earned (just)—one pays his own way and uses for material values

2.     money invested by business—rational, but risk-laden decisions: profit represents success

(ii)  Socialists used to speak of “production for use” as against “production for profit”—what they meant was “production by one man for the unearned use of another”

c)     How statists use terminology of life-sustaining virtues to defend a politics that destroys those virtues; they say--

i)      We demand a rationally planned economy, let us plan the future—while denying the social condition (freedom) required for man to act long-range or to function rationally himself

ii)     Let us have true independence, the independence of the poor from the rich—by making necessary for everyone, rich and poor alike, to become a second-hander (work for others, live by means of others)

iii)   Let us protect our integrity from the seductions of the moneyed elite—by making men’s abandonment of principle a condition of survival

iv)   Give us justice, social justice—which consists in sacrificing Fountainheads of the world to the Roosevelts & the Stalins

v)     Let us have abundance for everyone—by making production impossible

vi)   Let us take moral pride in our species—by enacting into law the anti-morality of sacrifice

vii) They tell us proudly and loudly that when they come to power, they will eradicate selfishess

(1)   This is what they have struggled to accomplish when in power, with results on a world-wide scale that are by now self-evident

d)     Moral justification of capitalism is not that it serves the public—yet, this is how it is defended (wrongly)

i)      Rand: public ownership of the means of production means public ownership of the mind

ii)     Capitalism does achieve the “public good” –but this is an effect, not a cause; a secondary consequence

iii)   Justification is that it is the system which implements a scientific code of morality—it recognizes man’s metaphysical nature and needs; it is based on reason and reality

(1)   any group of men who lives under it and acts properly has to benefit (“public good”)

iv)   From Adam Smith to present, champions of capitalism hold up the value of “public good” as the standard

(1)   Individual freedom has been defended an ethically neutral means to this end (common Enlightenment attitude), or, after Kant, as a necessary evil

(a)   Interpretation is that it converts the amorality of “prudence” or the “wickedness” of “greed” into the nobility of social work

(2)   They minimize the primary cause (egoism/freedom) and emphasize the social effect—which, to them, is the moral primary

(3)   Thus, they find themselves drawn irresistibly to compromise—cutting back one step at a time on the element (freedom) they regard as neutral; allowing “some controls” and then more and still more

(4)   For the “reluctant individualist,” after a certain point, his altruism requires him to rethink the causal laws involved

(a)   he accepts the notion that egoism (“Selfishness”) is evil—he has not understood the objective ethical cause behind the profit motive; therefore, he decides that unrestrained capitalism “sometimes” (then “often”) hurts the “public” (which are individual people)

(b)   John Stuart Mill, the Utilitarian, had once been an ardent supporter of laissez-faire. He stated: We are all socialists now.

e)     Capitalism as the System of Objectivity: it implements the right code of morality, based on right view of metaphysics and epistemology: It is the system of virtue because it is the system of objectivity

i)      Laissez-faire does not mean that “anything goes;” in a republic, “nothing goes” that infringes man’s rights

ii)     Objectivity of economic value—term subsumes all forms of price, including wages, rents, and interest rates

(1)   prices on a free market are determined by the law of supply an demand: market price of a product is determined by conjunction of two evaluations—by the voluntary agreement of sellers and buyers

(a)   If seller wants to charge $1,000 for barrel of flour, there will be no buyers; if buyers decide to pay only a nickel, there will be no sellers

(b)   market price is not based on arbitrary wishes but on definite mechanism: it is at once the highest price sellers can command and the lowest price buyers can find (quality factors being equal)

(2)   Man is left free to judge the worth of various products—the worth to him in accordance with his own needs and goals—as he himself understands these to apply in a particular context

(3)   Market value thus entails valuer, purpose, beneficiary, choice, knowledge—all marks of objective value

(4)   under capitalism irrational men suffer the consequences: e.g. set prices too high, or not willing to pay market value

iii)   Important distinction between two forms of the objective: philosophically objective value and socially objective

(1)   e.g. it can be rationally proved that the works of Victor Hugo are objectively of immeasurably greater value to man (at his best) than the true-confessions magazines.

(a)   But if a given man’s intellectual potential can barely manage to enjoy true confessions, there is no reason why his earnings, the produce of his effort, should be spent on books he cannot read or enjoy

(b)   or, that his taxes should be spent on subsidizing the airplane industry when his own transportation needs require only a bicycle

(2)   the free market value of goods or services does not necessarily represent their philosophically objective value, but only their socially objective value—the sum of the individual judgments of all the men involved in trade at a given time; the sum of what they valued, each in the context of his own life

iv)   Competition: The free market is greatest of all educators: Rand—

(1)   it is a continuous process that cannot be held still, an upward process that demands the best (most rational) of man and rewards him accordingly

(a)   While the majority have barely assimilated the value of the automobile, the creative minority introduces the airplane: the majority learn by demonstration—the minority is free to demonstrate

(b)   Within every category of goods and services it is the sellers of the best product at the cheapest prices who wins greatest financial rewards in that field

(i)    rewards are not automatic nor immediate, but by virtue of the free market, which teaches every participant to look for the objective best within the category of his own competence, and penalizes those who act on irrational considerations

(c)   If one invests his cash in the horse and buggy while sneering at the automobile—he loses out: the system institutionalizes, but it cannot compel, respect for reality; men’s economic (and other) evaluations are set accordingly

(d)   The creative minority grasps the philosophically objective value of a good or service (e.g. personal computer), then teaches it to the public, which is eventually lifted to the creators’ level of valuing it.

v)     The dominant view today is that economic value (like all values) is not objective, but arbitrary:

(1)   Subjectivists claim:

(a)   Monopolists or other “exploiters” charge any amount they feel like charging

(b)   Landlords and bankers set rents or interest rates at whim

(c)   Employers pay whatever niggardly wage their avarice decrees

(2)   Economic theory and history alike prove that capitalism does not work this way: they make clear what happens in a free market to over-chargers, under-payers, and any other fiat-mongers—they lose their customers, their workers, and ultimately their shirts

(a)   Subjectivists, cannot acknowledge any such proof—they do not acknowledge the possibility of consciousness perceiving existence—cannot accept the possibility of an objective economy

(3)   Standard cure for capitalism’s “arbitrary prices:” Government must legislate an inherently “fair price” independent of market conditions—this is intrinsicism posing as the solution to subjectivism

(a)   Fairness doctrine applies to “minimum wages,” “fair taxes,” “fair rent,” etc.

(i)    “Fairness” (justice) in an economic context means free trade—the government under capitalism does not legislate prices; it does not legislate any value-judgments, economic or otherwise

(b)   To determine the intrinsic “fair” value, subjectivists count on revelation, not from God, but from the caprice of politicians reacting to the caprice of pressure groups

(i)    The subjectivist intellectual, in effect, causes people to turn in self-defense to the intrinsicist leader, who acts as a spokesman for a different group of subjectivists

1.     This kind of vicious circle extends far beyond the realm of politics and economics

vi)   Profit, as well as economic value, is objective: no such thing as an intrinsically “fair” profit, or an “excess” or “arbitrary” profit: There is only the profit men earn

(1)   Since material goods and services are evaluated objectively, their creators’ (long-range) compensation is equally objective

(2)   A man’s wealth depends on two factors: his own creative achievement (knowledge and labor), and on the choice of others to recognize it

(a)   Some highly specialized fields do not necessarily produce wealth in relation to knowledge and labor—e.g. the best epistemologist will never attain the market or income available, say, to a novelist or shoe maker

(i)    Their money, however, is not taken from him

vii) The love of money is the root of all good—theme of Francisco’s speech in Atlas Shrugged

(1)   Have you ever asked what is the root of money?—it is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are good produced and men able to produce them

(a)   Such a tool presupposes everything on which goods and their exchange depend

(b)  America is a country of money—Philosophically, this means that it is a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement

(c)   Americans’ proudest distinction:  created the phrase “to make money.” No other nation used these words before

(i)    men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity—to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained by favor

(ii)  Americans were first to understand that wealth has to be created. Words “to make money” hold the essence of human morality


(2)   Like Art and Happiness, Money (as a concept) is a kind of summation: it is a token of an entire philosophy—a philosophy of selfishness, worldliness, and cold calculation (rationally committed to reality).

(a)   This is why intellectuals of unreason denounce the “almighty dollar” and why heroes of Atlas Shrugged adopt the dollar sign as their trademark: the symbol of free trade and therefore of a free mind

(3)   Under capitalism, critics complain, the rich man has too much power: “money talks.” So it does.

(a)   When it doesn’t, something else does. Francisco’s money speech ends with: When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns—or dollars. Take your choice—there is no other—and your time is running out.

f)      Difference between economic power and political power: in essence the difference is that between purchase and plunder

i)      Economic power is the power resulting from the possession of wealth

(1)   Rand: It is exercised by means of a positive, by offering men a reward, an incentive, a payment, a value

(2)   It is aimed at man’s faculty of choice (volition)

(3)   It appeals to motivation by love (values)

ii)     Political power is power resulting from the government’s monopoly on coercion

(1)   It is exercised by means of a negative, by the threat of punishment, injury, imprisonment, destruction

(2)   (in statist context) It aims to negate the faculty of choice

(3)   It motivates by fear

iii)   Those who believe that riches are causeless, see no fundamental difference between the two kinds of power

(1)   There is only a difference between two kinds of whim: the businessmen’s or “the people’s”

iv)   In a free society, no man’s (moral) powers, however great, are a hindrance to anyone else—they benefit others

(1)   Consider knowledge as example: If a man enjoys “cognitive power,” he can achieve his goals better than an ignorant person—then influence his fellow humans in a way that ignoramuses cannot match

(a)   Does not mean that knowledgeable men succeed by exploiting fools

(b)   The cognitive beginner in the era of Galileo, Newton, and Einstein enjoys an incomparably greater return for the same mental effort than his counterpart did in the era of Ptolemy

(2)   The more wealth there is in the world, the easier it is for everyone to flourish economically

(a)   Thus the relative riches of the poorest Western workers, thanks to the “robber barons,” as against the standard of living of the most industrious serf under King Louis IX

(3)   Rand’s pyramid of ability: Material products can’t be shared, they belong to ultimate consumer—only the value of an idea can be shared with unlimited numbers of men—making all sharers richer at no one’s sacrifice or loss

(a)   It is the value of his own time that the strong of the intellect transfers to the weak

(i)    letting them work on the jobs he created, while devoting his time to further discoveries

(ii)  mutual trade to mutual advantage

(b)   in proportion to the mental energy he spent, the man who creates a new invention receives but a small percentage of his value in terms of material payment—no matter what fortune he makes

(i)    The janitor in the factory producing that invention receives an enormous payment in proportion to the mental effort that his job requires of him.

(ii)  The same is true of all men between, on all levels of ambition and ability—the man at the top of the intellectual pyramid contributes the most to all those below him

1.     He gets nothing except his material payment, receiving no intellectual bonus from others to add to the value of his time

2.     The man at the bottom, left to himself, may starve—contributes nothing intellectually to those above him, but receives the bonus of all of their brains

(c)   Such is the nature of the “competition” between the strong and the weak of the intellect; such is the pattern of “exploitation” for which so many have damned the strong

(i)    When the strong are left free to function, everyone benefits; when they are enslaved or regulated, everyone is doomed

(4)   “Defenders” of capitalism have been more openly irrational than its attackers

(a)   Herbert Spencer was the system’s leading 19th century champion: he spread the notion that capitalism means death for the weak—he held that capitalism permits only the “survival of the fittest”

(i)    during the time that intellectuals attempted to deduce all kinds of theories, in many different fields of knowledge, based on Darwin’s theory of evolution

(ii)  since animals survived by fighting over a limited food supply, Spencer argued in essence, so does man

(iii) This “defense” of laissez-faire has been more harmful than anything uttered by Marx

1.     The wrong arguments for a position are more costly than plain silence, which at least allows a better voice to be heard if such should speak out (as Rand did finally)

(b)   There is no clash in a free society among any groups who choose life as their standard

(i)    The welfare of all alike depends on the same social condition: When men’s rights are respected and equal before the law, they are therefore equal in nature and equal in the marketplace—they are “equal” in the sense of being free

(ii)  Under capitalism, men enjoy “equality of opportunity” in legitimate sense of that usually statist term: each has the right to act on his mind’s conclusions and keep its products

1.     This is the only “opportunity” a person needs or has any grounds to demand

g)     Opposition to Capitalism—Dependent on Bad Epistemology

i)      Moral issue has been settled: one cannot combine the ethics of sacrifice with the politics of individualism

(1)   If what one wishes to practice is power lust; going “back to nature;” sacrificing the able; and/or sacrificing everybody (egalitarianism)—then capitalism is not practical—it represents the opposite of all such practices

ii)     The deepest root of politics is not morality, but its root, epistemology (combined with metaphysics)

(1)   Advanced topic, but here is the result: Most anti-capitalism charges are wrong by themselves, but when presented in pairs, we see contradictory, self-cancelling falsehoods

(a)   Capitalism is the system of coercive monopolies—and—Capitalism is the system of cutthroat competition

(b)   Capitalism debases men by creating hunger—and—Capitalism subverts morality by creating affluence

(c)   Capitalist greed causes inflation—and—The  gold standard leads to an inadequate supply of money and credit

(d)   Capitalism is another name for militaristic imperialism—and—Conscription (draft) is necessary because no one would fight even a war of self-defense under a free system

(e)   Capitalism is hostile to invention [followed by stories about industrialists allegedly suppressing new discoveries]—and—Capitalism leads to an intolerable rat-race of inventions

(f)    Capitalism is fine for the productive genius, but what about the common man?—and—Capitalism is fine for the common man, but what about the genius? [because a rock star makes more money than a physicist]

(g)   Capitalism is impracticable in our complex modern world; we are too advanced—and—Capitalism is impracticable in the undeveloped world; they are not advanced enough

(2)   Aristotelian logic is old-fashioned these critics would say: We use a dynamic, dialectic, and/or multi-valued approach to thought [whatever-the-heck that means]

(3)   An honest but non-philosophical man can recognize the rising prosperity of 19th century America; but he will not know the implication of his observation for today’s world

(a)   He will not know why freedom is essential to prosperity, or what freedom has to do with man’s mind

(b)   or how to answer the people telling him that the cause of wealth was natural resources, government subsidies, or the unlimited frontier—that “It’s a changing world” and that capitalism does not apply any longer

(c)   He can see the worldwide failure of statism, but will not know how to answer those telling him that the failure stems not from the nature of statism, but from its perversion, from the wrong leaders or the wrong tactics—the people who claim “Our gang would do it better” [Like the current ‘gang’ in Washington?]

(d)  He can see that something is wrong in America, and may not even know that the system is a mixture of opposites—he is vulnerable to those who clamor that what is wrong is that there is still too much capitalism in the country

(4)   No amount of historical, economic, journalistic data by themselves will change men’s mind on the issue of capitalism vs. statism (mixed economy, or socialism).

(a)   The battle for the world is not a battle between two political ideals. It is a battle between two views of the nature of thought

(b)    If men are ever to reach a world where man is free, free not by permission but on principle, they must first enact the cause of freedom: they must grasp and accept the intellectual base it requires