[an error occurred while processing this directive]
About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5


Post 100

Thursday, January 6, 2005 - 8:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Fair enough, Chris.



Post 101

Thursday, January 6, 2005 - 11:33amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The TOC event commemorating Ayn Rand's centenary includes Rep. Ed Royce and Paul Ryan as a speakers. Hudgins has said that Royce and some other Republicans (Paul Ryan, Bob Barr, Ron Paul, etc.) like Objecivist ideas on limited government and free markets. The whole the reason for the move to DC is the get more influence in Washington.

Well at http://activote.ontheissues.org/AVA/House/Ed_Royce.htm you can read Royce's Objectivist influenced voting record.

Voted Yes on:
making it a crime to harm a fetus during ANOTHER crime.
forbidding human cloning for medical research
constitutional amendment prohibiting flag desecration
making federal death penalty appeals harder
allowing school prayer during the war on terror
banning gay adoptions in DC

And the other Objectivist influenced Republican speaking?  (add Paul_Ryan where Ed... is in above link)

Voted Yes on: well on fetus, cloning, prayer, and gays their the same.

Could it be because their religious affiliation is Catholic?




Post 102

Saturday, January 8, 2005 - 7:42pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Bob,

I've noticed that Christianists often use out-of-context quotes from Ayn Rand for "protective coloring." Just as "some of my best friends are Jewish" is the conventional cover for anti-Semitic discourse, so quoting Ayn Rand - often with statements of Rand's fictional villains - is fast becoming the conventional cover for legislative interventions motivated by the wish to impose Christian religious norms on non-believers. TOC is legitimizing the turds by inviting them. Shame.
(Edited by Adam Reed on 1/08, 8:13pm)




Post 103

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 5:10amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Storm warning! Adam has just posted an article about this in the queue. I'm going to move it up front & post it tomorrow. It's a scorcher. Batten down the hatches!

Linz



Post 104

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 1:17pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The Objectivist Center indeed invited Reps. Ryan and Royce to speak at our February 2 celebration of Ayn Rand's 100th birthday. It is a sign of progress that members of Congress not only know of Rand but also find her insights valuable in their thinking about public policy. I note also that Rep. Chris Cox (R-CA) likes Rand and has written about her. Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX), who was mentioned in a post, is a libertarian-leaning member of Congress but NOT a Rand fan. Among other Rand fans in Washington is Justice Clarence Thomas.

The Center event is to celebrate Rand and to have panels and discussions about her significance and influence. It's not a meeting of true believers only. Thus, while I'm aware of the mixed record, by our standards, of Royce, Ryan (and all other members of Congress), I'm pleased that they find Rand of value and will state their reasons publicly. I also note that in the link provided that Royce has a lot of votes with which Objectivists can agree -- pro-free trade, anti-agriculture subsidies. And Ryan is leading the charge for some sort of Social Security privatization. (Yes, I know, it does not get the government out of the retirement business but it's a move in the right direction.)

I note here the benefits of having non-Objectivists speaking at Center events: 1) Non-Objectivists have many good and insightful things to say that are consistent with Objectivism -- we've had John Stossel, Charles Murray and a long list of libertarians speak at our events and Summer Seminars; 2) Sometimes we want to delve into subjects, policies or particular questions to which Objectivism still needs to be applied, and panels that include thoughtful non-Objectivists can help do just that; and 3) Debates with opponents who are thoughtful on the topics to be discussed often attract audiences better than panels of all-Objectivists, which are seen by the media and potentially interested individuals as propaganda-fests. Since our ideas are shown to be correct when they go head-to-head with opponents, debates can spread our ideas.

At the February 2 Rand birthday bash we have a panel, which I will chair, with David Kelley, Michelle Kamhi and Madeleine Cosman and another panel hosted by Fred Smith of CEI with Howard Dickman (formerly a Reader's Digest editor), Ed Crane from Cato and Bob Poole from Reason. Will Thomas also will make remarks on Rand's life.

So come one, come all and celebrate a century of Ayn Rand!

Ed Hudgins
The Objectivist Center




Post 105

Sunday, January 9, 2005 - 10:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Diana Hsieh has a "dissection of the So-Called Objectivist Center's altruistic Christmas op-ed by soon-to-be Executive Director Ed Hudgins."

At www.dianahsieh.com/blog  for the date of January 9, 2005.

Which might explain the reasoning behind post 104.




Post 106

Monday, January 10, 2005 - 5:20amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
While Diana Hsieh is correct about TOC in her "dissection of the So-Called Objectivist Center's altruistic Christmas op-ed by soon-to-be Executive Director Ed Hudgins," she still has to explain or retract many earlier statements on her weblog in favor of TOC and Kelley.  For example, praising Kelley in the entry "Kelley on Lee" dated 2/21/2003. Or her positive reviews of Kelley's "A Life of One's Own" dated 8/2002, and Kelley's "Choosing Life" dated 3/2002.  Diana Hsieh lashed out at TOC over the last year after being intimately involved with the organization for ten years. She shares some of the responsibility by giving her support to TOC for so long.

Also, denouncing TOC does not entail supporting everything about ARI. Consider the entry on the week of April 27, 2003 titled "Problems with OPAR" or the entry on the week of June 23, 2002 titled "OPAR Schmopar." As someone who found a lot of value in OPAR despite some flaws, I find these entries offensive.

I am also disappointed with TOC and will no longer support it, the last straw being the inclusion of anti-Israeli speakers in the TOC/Cato conference on the war in Iraq. But I take responsibility for my past mistakes rather than lash out in public at former friends and associates.
 





Post to this threadBack one pagePage 0Page 1Page 2Page 3Page 4Page 5
[an error occurred while processing this directive]


User ID Password or create a free account.