LOL courtesy of our buddy andBegorrah's LOLerature Tumblr.
As y’all know, I’m pretty much incapable of passing up a snarka-tunity when it comes to hypocritical Republican politicians who can’t keep it in their pants. This week, Newsweek gift-wrapped the snarka-tunity and placed it right in my mailbox.
The latest issue features a review of Ayn Rand and the World She Made, Anne Heller’s new biography of Ayn Rand, a writer who I would happily trade in the first round of the Gender Draft. For those of you unfamiliar with Rand and the Objectivist philosophy she spawned, it’s explained here. Objectivism, IMO, can best be summed up as “You don’t have to give a rat’s ass about anyone else.” This applies equally to the economy (unfettered capitalism FTW!) and one’s personal life (as long as you’re happy, it doesn’t matter who you fuck over). Needless to say, it’s extremely popular among rich white dudes, since it rationalizes and blesses what they’ve been doing for centuries already.
But what makes this review of the Rand biography so very, very special is its author: Governor Mark “Appalachian Trail” Sanford, who pursued his own personal objectives at the expense of his wife, his four kids, and the entire state of South Carolina.
Sanford essentially transforms the book review into a soapbox from which he can spout the usual right-wing claptrap about how the government shouldn’t really be doing anything for anyone, and quotes Howard Roark–the hero of Rand’s novel The Fountainhead–to further his argument:
“I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy. Nor to any achievement of mine. No matter who makes the claim, how large their number or how great their need … I recognize no obligations toward men except one: to respect their freedom and to take no part in a slave society.” Cold though they sound, these words contain two basic truths. First, an individual can achieve great things without governmental benevolence, and second, one man has no right to another’s achievement. These are lessons we should all remember today, when each week is seemingly marked by another government program designed to fix society.
The last soap-boxy sentence doesn’t really jibe with his “two basic truths”, since things like quality public education or affordable health care do not in any way rob the individual of his/her ability to achieve great things or to benefit from them (if anything, they aid achievement).
But political grandstanding aside, the review scores a 10 on the Unintentionally Humorous Subtext scale, with gems like this:
I’ve grown more critical of Rand’s outlook because it doesn’t include the human needs we have for grace, love, faith, or any form of social compact.
I bet Mrs. Sanford would agree, given how that social compact between y’all turned out. But let’s not end without a thinly veiled shout-out to Christianity:
There is one more major flaw in Rand’s thinking. She believed that man is perfectible…and Galt himself, in the 57-page speech near the book’s end, explicitly denies the existence of original sin. The idea that man is perfectible has been disproved by 10,000 years of history. Men and women are imperfect, or “fallen”…
Thanks, Governor. Those of us who caught your rambling, Jesus-loving confessional speech about your lost weekend with your Argentine mistress know how you feel about sin and being “fallen.”
I wish I had been a fly on the wall in Newsweek‘s editorial offices when they commissioned and edited this review. The Washington Post Company is hardly Republican-friendly (and probably not Objectivists either), and I can’t help but think that their tongues were firmly planted in their cheeks when they published this. I wonder if Sanford noticed.
Then why be a governor? The idea of being in public office, to do good for the citizens who elected you. If you refuse to share your best efforts and largess with anyone else, that makes you a poor candidate for public service, as South Carolina is no doubt finding out.
Oh, and let’s not forget that this is completely contrary to the teachings of Jesus, which, if I’m not mistaken, Governor Sanford purports to believe in.
So, in essence, you can’t have your cake and eat it, too, Governor.
Physical fitness is key to Objectivism, in that you need to be able to outsprint a hungry, jobless mob and still have time to swipe your key card to get into your high rise.
I have a great solution for anyone who loooooves Ayn Rand and her philosophy. Anyone who really thinks society should be objectivist in practice can be dropped on a desert island, where they don’t have to be distracted with anyone else’s petty accomplishments that they don’t have a right to anyway (like, you know, agriculture or medicine). We’ll space it so that a new objectivist arrives every ~6 months or so and they can Lord of the Flies it out with each other if they need to. Let’s see how long they last before deciding that, actually, cooperation is pretty cool!
“I do not recognize anyone’s right to one minute of my life. Nor to any part of my energy”
Unless you have a uterus. And then we have the right to the next 390,000 minutes of your life as soon as it houses a potential life.
@NefariousNewt: Right? So much for “I am the Good Shepherd” and “Anything you do for the least of my brethren you do also for me.” It always boggles my mind when a religious person is a fan of Objectivism, b/c Objectivism is entirely incompatible with the teachings of pretty much every religion.
@baraqiel: I would happily produce that reality show!
@BeckySharper: Most of the “Objectivists” I’ve come in contact with were atheists or non-practicing whatever, also libertarian-leaning, rich, white dudes so I guess that’s par for the course
It’s funny, I’ve always pictured Sanford’s Argentine mistress to resemble a young Ayn Rand. The amazing part to me about objectivist thinking is how it discounts all of the necks that were stepped on in order for individual men to prosper. I don’t understand at all how it is compatible with the notions of servanthood and humility deeply embedded in Christianity.
@JDRegent: I think the consensus among Objectivists is that all those individual necks deserved to be stepped on since they didn’t get out of the way.
@uu: Amen on the liberarian white dudes–I’ve found Objectivism to be rampant among suburban white male college students.
It’s always easiest to lecture people on how they need to pull themselves up by the bootstraps when you yourself have a whole closet full of boots.
Yeah, I do understand that (sort of), I just think that it doesn’t jive with the idea that our accomplishments are all our own and nobody else has any claim to them.
Very true, JD. Of course, Ayn Rand was a classic monomoniacal narcissist, so I’m sure she completely failed to notice that our achievements inevitably involve other people.
Wow. Just…wow. Somehow I feel like those two would be perfect for one another. Too bad we can’t bring Rand back from the dead so we can marry her to Sanford and turn it into a reality TV show: The Real World, As Perfected By White Dudes and Self-Actualization (Adultery Not Included).
The timing on this post is eerie because earlier today I had sounded like Ayn Rand. This person was neither joking nor one of her followers. I was so flabbergasted and offended at just how wrong that statement was that I sent not one, but THREE replies as to why this was not so. Ick-a-roo.
Typo: “I was told I had sounded like Ayn Rand”.
Man, this pissed me right off when I saw it. Why is anyone giving this slimeball hypocrite space to spout off about anything? I like irony as much as the next person, but assuming that the average reader will find this deliciously ironic is hopelessly naive.
The icing on the cake is the piece at the end of the magazine about political wives who have been publicly humiliated by their philandering husbands, and seeing Jenny Sanford’s name there. Thanks, Newsweek.
FUCK i hate ayn rand!
ironically, she got me into philosophy (i’ve read ALL of her work including her lexicon, don’t waste your time, trust me)… it’s 4 years later and i have nearly gotten my degree studying it, & imo: she is one of the most evil humans to ever had existed – not to mention, she is NEVER mentioned in an academic setting.
and you’re totally right, objectivism stands in complete opposition to EVERY religion i am familiar with (and so does capitalism, cough).
bleh.
(Thanks, BS! Glad to help the mockery.)
Ayn Rand and C Street House influence =
Mark Sanford
/nuff said
C Street House is actually even MORE offensive to me than Objectivism, if such a thing can be possible.
Put the two together and I hear the Horsemen approaching.
When I was about 16, I came across something online advertising an essay-writing contest from the Objectivist Institute (yes, it exists).
I wasn’t yet the incorrigible leftie vegetarian I now am, but I knew enough to know I didn’t much like her – but decided I might as well give it a try to see if I could get the money, as a kind of personal test. I wrote a few pages about individualism and creativity and bla bla bla in a couple of hours one lazy afternoon…and…I got one of their prizes and a few hundred bucks.
Then, to my mortification, I found that they put the winners’ names on their website. So they got an email from me saying actually, I don’t like Objectivism, and could they please take me down? (Thank goodness, they did).
Now that I am older and wiser I dislike her even more, but at least I put that money to good use!
And for all those who made it this far: there was an article about her in NYmag recently too that I thought was pretty interesting: http://nymag.com/arts/books/features/60120/.
A fellow identifying himself as Ayn-Rand-loving has provided an instant litmus test [testes?!] proving that he is a completely self-absorbed and infantile male who will never, ever grow up to be a man.
A woman who models herself after Ayn Rand is showing herself to be hollow to the core, narcissistic in the extreme, and obsessed with penis-envy.
Both male and female versions of Ayn-Rand fans exemplify failed human beings with zip imagination and zero creativity.
Thank you so *very* much for slamming Ayn Rand and all her bleepin’ fans.
My favorite RandLOL -
http://www.flickr.com/photos/27726789@N04/2586250920/
Funny story, my middle name is “Ayn.” My parents were nuts about her literature, obviously.
I’m not a huge fan of all Randian ideas but the interpretation Sanford takes is really ridiculous. I like her proclamation of the importance of individuals and creative expression, and I like her ideas on God [Other ideas ... not so much]. Sanford’s perversion of Randian ideology – whether you like it or not – is that he dismisses her lack of religion.
Ayn Rand disliked the idea of a supreme being, and that is a brilliant and HUGE part of her philosophy. That’s part of why she didn’t like that political leaders always tried to use religion to sway public opinion.
Basically, she would not have been a Sanford fan. At all.