Skip to comments.Wealthcare (New Republic decries influence of Ayn Rand)
Posted on 09/14/2009 6:09:25 AM PDT by reaganaut1
Most recently the worldview that I am describing has colored much of the conservative outrage at the prospect of health care reform, which some have called a "redistribution of health" from those wise enough to have secured health insurance to those who have not. "President Obama says he will cover thirty to forty to fifty million people who are not covered now--without it costing any money," fumed Rudolph Giuliani. "They will have to cut other services, cut programs. They will have to be making decisions about people who are elderly." [...]
In these disparate comments we can see the outlines of a coherent view of society. It expresses its opposition to redistribution not in practical terms--that taking from the rich harms the economy--but in moral absolutes, that taking from the rich is wrong. It likewise glorifies selfishness as a virtue. It denies any basis, other than raw force, for using government to reduce economic inequality. It holds people completely responsible for their own success or failure, and thus concludes that when government helps the disadvantaged, it consequently punishes virtue and rewards sloth. And it indulges the hopeful prospect that the rich will revolt against their ill treatment by going on strike, simultaneously punishing the inferiors who have exploited them while teaching them the folly of their ways.
There is another way to describe this conservative idea. It is the ideology of Ayn Rand.
(Excerpt) Read more at tnr.com ...
They despise moral absolutes...................
Government control in access to health services is fascism.
Taxation IS theft, Harry Reid’s claim that the income tax is voluntary not withstanding.
Rand was a prophet.
They feel much more comfortable arguing from some utilitarian view point than from moral absolutes.
A citizen who wishes to be responsible for himself and be free from government opression is the natural enemy of the collectivist thief. We are the victims of legalized strong armed robbery.
It’s a textbook example of a hit piece, something the left specializes in. They can’t succeed attacking the ideas, so they attack the person. It’s a key skill used by trial lawyers to manipulate the jury.
That's the real selfish crowd, those that ignored the rise of the socialist scum trying to own the population, not those refusing to go along with totalitarian socialists on a joy ride to collapse. This article is just another example of a leftist thinking that this is their country not a free country for all.
If the very idea that capitalists should flee for the good of the leftists isn't enough to prove Ayn correct, what is? Here is an author who on page after page tries to make self reliance and reliance on ones own family the same thing as reliance on the government. I think it's about time this sort of person be rudely awakened to the fact that the government isn't our Mommy, isn't our Daddy, it isn't even a member of our family. Government is our servant, and if the servant turns into a thief, it's time to get rid of the thief and start over.
Taking property from rightful owners is called stealing. Jonathan Chait thinks that is not immoral. I’d like to know, has Jonathan Chait ever been stolen from and did he report the theft to the police. If he did, he’s a hypocrite. Okay, everyone let’s take Jonathan Chait’s property, he’s rich enough and it’s not immoral. A win/win all the way around.
Nothing you can say or do will ever sway this writer. He is invincibly ignorant.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.