|
Sorry i didnt respond to the Atlas Shrugged thread. Like you, i havnt officially studied objectivism, yet came to conclusions similar to yours simply by studying history and human nature. I agree wholeheartedly with your statements; unproductive behavior should not be subsidized by the government. I think that government should incorporate more of Rand's ideals, namely less restriction on business and a focus on embettering people through an emphasis on individual effort and achievement, not big-government spending sprees.
When i first realized Rand's ideas, they electrified me; they were so remarkably different from other idealogies, and their effect on me was almost intoxicating (eg "WOW, I've found something really wild that i can believe in!".) In fact, I still consider myself an Objectivist at heart. However, i do not wholeheartedly support Rand's emphasis on unfettered laissez-faire capitalism. I believe that capitalism is by far the best system, and that the government should refrain from interfering as much as possible, but historical precedents have shown that a totally free market causes problems, and that the government does need to intervene in situations regarding consumer safety. For example, airbags were not universally installed in cars until decades after their discovery; because doing so would have reduced the profits of the car companies. Dont get me wrong, I think that greed is good, but sacrificing safety for money is not. Your thoughts?
Also, i find Rand's foreign-policy theories intriguing. Unlike most libertarians, she does not categorically refuse the idea of intervention. Again, your thoughts?
|