| | Ayn Rand never got past Wendell Wilkie. She continued to issue statements of praise and blame for Republican candidates. Of course, she also repudiated the Libertarians. And she condemned Hubert Humphrey for looking like a kewpie doll. Regarding the Republicans, she said nothing about Robert Taft - "Mr. Republican" - and his brand of conservatism, even though he was honored in John F. Kennedy's Profiles in Courage.
That leaves "None of the Above" which is arguably the truly consistent, objective appraisal. Rand did say - correctly, I believe - that politics is a consequence of philosophy, that to change the political climate, one must begin at a deeper level of understanding. Certainly, the ethics of egoism are the moral foundation of capitalism - and the GOP is not going to endorse the virtue of selfishness, as the case of Paul Ryan so clearly proved.
This week, I was honored to be the luncheon guest of an international businessman, who came to America after two moves in Europe. We talked politics and he said that he is a European conservative. I did not argue when he suggested that the Ron Paul libertarians in the GOP only care about legalizing drugs. I did not disagree much about anything as I was there to listen.
We did agree on one thing I suggested. He said that Romney's talking about Obama's birth certificate will only come back to bite Romney by forcing his off-shore accounts to become public information. I said that Romney should announce his off-shore accounts and recommend them to others as a good way to protect your money from the ravages of excessive government. He laughed in agreement, but we shook our heads, knowing that this will never happen.
The fact that Romney has been as busy covering his tracks, as Obama was in creating his, explains why anyone objectively interested in their own freedom will not waste much time unraveling today's political rhetoric. The only people running for office are Eugene Lawson, Claude Slaggenhop, Wesley Mouch, Mr. Thompson, and Cuffy Meigs.
Steve suggested: The alternative is that the Republicans will forever be saddled with these strange anti-gay, and anti-abortion, and pro-prayer agendas that actually divide them from too many voters and too many in the coming generations. The demand that religious views be left out of the political arena won't lose the votes of the social conservatives because too many of them are also fiscal and constitutional conservatives.
Atheists are the most hated people in America. Homosexuals, politicians, and used car dealers have higher rankings of approval among most Americans. I do agree, though, that your analysis may be valid given a dynamic substrate of unmeasured disbelief. I mean if you add up the explicit atheists, and the explicit agnostics, and those who do not attend church, but who claim to believe in a Supreme Being, you get to about 16% of the poll samples. (See Pew poll and follow other links from here. And then see more narrowly here.)
Religion is powerful. Any mainstream anthropologist will say that like language and tools, religion is a defining parameter for any and every society and civilization. Just to say, we here want to believe that a new a better future is one without religion (but with government). I could argue that religion, government, and family are just our simian past, that our future trajectory of better - if not perfect - rationalism and realism is one without religion, family, or government, a universe of automonous individuals who would no more violate each other's rights than you would shoot yourself in the foot. ... Just sayin' the future is whatever you want to imagine...
(Edited by Michael E. Marotta on 8/26, 7:51pm)
|
|
