Any Rand

[Otto]

----- Original Message -----
From: "jbor" <jbor at bigpond.com>
To: <pynchon-l at waste.org>
Sent: Monday, October 21, 2002 11:18 PM
Subject: Re: Any Rand


> In the polemic in which she argues that racism is "the lowest, most
crudely
> primitive form of collectivism" she still manages to describe the "Negro
> leaders" as racists and the civil rights bill of 1964 as an "absurdly evil
> policy". ('Racism', September 1963, in _The Virtue of Selfishness_, pp.
> 126-134)
>

She may be arguing against racism on the surface but her remarks on the
"primitive" music reveal her deep-rooted racism.

Just some other quotes from the website Michael has found:

"There is only one antidote to racism: the philosophy of individualism and
its politico-economic corollary, laissez faire capitalism."

Well, does she explain the deep racism in the American society at the time
she wrote this, the second half of the 20th Century? Not at all -- instead
she claims:

"It is the capitalist North that destroyed the slavery of the
agrarian-feudal South in the United States."

As we all know today that it's a myth that this had been done for moral
reasons. The absence of slavery in the Northern states did not mean the
absence of racism. Racism served very well in capitalism to have large
numbers of low-paid workers at its disposal.

"A fully free, capitalist system has not yet existed anywhere."

What was the political & economical system America in 1963? Socialism?

This is the crux of the matter:

"Just as we have to protect a communist's freedom of speech, even though his
doctrines are evil, so we have to protect a racist's right to the use and
disposal of his own property."

Which only means that according to Any Rand a racist factory owner has the
right to be a racist factory owner, to discriminate women, blacks & other
minorities because it's happening on his own private property, and it's
"evil collectivism" to force him to end this, to pay justified wages, to
stop pollution and to pay for social security.

Apart from the absurd notion that the communist "doctrines are evil" (which
gives away her true motivation in my opinion) what kind of communism is she
talking about when she claims to protect the communist's freedom of speech?
The American communist party never played any influential role in American
politics and what was happening in the Soviet empire at that time hardly can
be called communism, but was in fact a violation of nearly everything Marx
had written. The former DDR called itself "German Democratic Republic" but
in reality has been the contrary of any democracy at all. It's been just a
prison state with lots of priviledges for a small "elite". And Rand has more
in common with that kind of propaganda then she would have been willing to
admit. In the same way the German "socialists" claimed to be democrats Any
Rand's "freedom" only means the freedom of a few, relying on the poverty of
many.

I agree to Rob and Dave and given these superficial political rants by Any
Rand I think I can spare me her novels.

JBF's remark "why haven't they left the Pynchon List & subscribed to a list
that would be more author-friendly, perhaps the Ayn Rand List.  If it
doesn't exist, maybe they could start one", which started this thread can
only be rejected.

Otto

__________________________________________________________________

Gesendet von Yahoo! Mail - http://mail.yahoo.de
Yahoo! präsentiert als offizieller Sponsor das Fußball-Highlight des
Jahres: - http://www.FIFAworldcup.com