Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

America Disarmed
The Ayn Rand Institute ^ | Released: October 22, 2001 | By C. Bradley Thompson

Posted on 10/24/2001 12:55:21 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers

America Disarmed

By C. Bradley Thompson

On September 11, 2001, the forces of barbarism declared war on civilization. The targets of this act of war—the World Trade Center and the Pentagon—were carefully chosen. They represent the central values of American civilization: reason, individual rights, capitalism, science, technology, wealth, and the right of a free people to defend itself.

Black Tuesday was the culmination of a twenty-five-year war against the United States and everything that it stands for. Since 1983, a Marine barracks in Beirut, two commercial passenger jets, a military base in Saudi Arabia, two embassies in Africa, and the USS Cole have been bombed. The total loss of life will exceed seven thousand American civilians and military personnel.

And how has the United States responded to this 25-year Reign of Terror? It has done almost nothing; it has responded with shameless appeasement. They bomb, we investigate; they bomb, we call for "restraint"; they bomb, we negotiate. America has done nothing significant to defend itself over the years because, despite having the most powerful military force in the world, it is unarmed. It has disarmed itself philosophically and morally.

For almost 100 years, America's intellectuals have waged a war of attrition against the core values of American civilization. College professors regularly teach that reality is unknowable, that truth and intellectual certainty are a mirage, that there are no moral absolutes, and that all cultures are of equal worth.

So entrenched in our culture is this view that even a Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States, Fred M. Vinson, could assure the American people that "Nothing is more certain in modern society than the principle that there are no absolutes. . . . To those who would paralyze our Government in the face of impending threat by encasing it in a semantic straightjacket we must reply that all concepts are relative (Dennis v. United States, 1951)."

We should not be surprised that many of today's young people—the very people that we will call upon to defend this nation in war—sit confused and intellectually paralyzed when their professors tell them that in morality there is no black and white and that one man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter. At Yale, historian Paul Kennedy invited students to empathize with the feelings of Palestinians and to ask, "How do we appear to them, and what would it be like were our places in the world reversed?"

From Harvard to Berkeley, the professoriate preaches that America has only itself to blame for the events of September 11, that America's economic prosperity and military power provoke justified hatred. Consider, for instance, the views of professor William Blum of the University of North Carolina, who proclaimed to an enthusiastic audience of over 700 students, "If I were the President, I would first apologize to all the widows and orphans, the tortured and the impoverished, and all the millions of other victims of American imperialism."

Osama bin Laden has waged this war against America, in large part, because he thinks he can win, and he thinks he can win because he's counting on America's intellectuals to indirectly aid and abet his cause.

This nation was founded on the truth that all men are created with equal rights, "that among these are Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness." As a consequence of putting these principles into practice, America has become the freest, most just, most prosperous and most powerful nation in the history of the world. But Americans are now confronted with an ominous question: Do we still believe these principles to be true, and will we fight to defend them?

Just as those who signed the Declaration of Independence unilaterally declared to a candid world the causes which impelled them to embark on a deadly war for their survival as a free nation, we too must confidently declare that America has a moral right to defend itself. This means that America's defenders must fight a two-front war: a military war against Islamic terrorists (and their sponsor states) and an intellectual war against the cackling clerics of our universities.

In the weeks and months ahead, many young men and women will enlist and go to war to defend America and its principles. Some may not come home. Before they go, it would be good for them to hear from their professors why their cause is just and good. In the long term, what America most needs is a new generation of intellectuals—an intellectual army that can defend the principles of the Declaration of Independence. Then, and only then, will America be armed to defend itself.

C. Bradley Thompson is the author of John Adams and the Spirit of Liberty, Chairman of the Department of History and Political Science at Ashland University in Ohio, and a senior writer for the Ayn Rand Institute in Marina del Rey, Calif. The Institute promotes the philosophy of Ayn Rand, author of Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead.


TOPICS: Editorial; Philosophy
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

1 posted on 10/24/2001 12:55:22 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
My usual bump, with essential links for anyone interested in liberty:

A TREASURY OF PRIMARY DOCUMENTS . The ultimate source of history links.
A Chronology of US Historical Documents.
The Avalon Project at the Yale Law School, more historic documents.
Laissez Faire Books.
Ayn Rand Bookstore. (formerly Second Renaissance Books)
Reason Foundation.
Ayn Rand Institute.
Religion and the Founding Fathers
Religion vs. Morality, from the Ayn Rand Institute.

2 posted on 10/24/2001 1:00:46 PM PDT by PatrickHenry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Good Post
3 posted on 10/24/2001 1:03:05 PM PDT by Free the USA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OWK
bump
4 posted on 10/24/2001 1:06:33 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Very astute analysis. This is a war between civilization and barbarism. Islam, in its current incarnation, is a religion of domination, war, hatred and murder. Those who cling to it must be exterminated, before they exterminate us. So far, they have the upper hand. But then, so did the Japanese on December 8th, 1941, after their atrocities against us. In the end, the same weapons that defeated Japanese imperialism may be needed to vaporize the terrorists.
5 posted on 10/24/2001 1:12:09 PM PDT by clintonh8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: PatrickHenry
Philosophy, who needs it?
Source: Ayn Rand's Speech to West Point; Published: March 6, 1974
Author: Ayn Rand

6 posted on 10/24/2001 1:12:26 PM PDT by Stand Watch Listen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
Islam, in its current incarnation, is a religion of domination, war, hatred and murder. Those who cling to it must be exterminated, before they exterminate us.

I prefer to be a bit more selective in my calls for extermination -- focusing in particular upon only those who directly threaten to harm me or my fellow citizens. As such, I reject a call to exterminate every muslim, just as I reject the call to exterminate every inhabitant of Afghanistan.

7 posted on 10/24/2001 1:21:40 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Of course a bunch of joiners who run around in the made up name of an ego-maniac who, while postulating a new 'true' morality of virtue and honor, actually helped herself to another woman's husband and regularly stepped on her own husband as one would squash a bug, surely have contrubuted NOTHING to the general malaise of the American psyche.
8 posted on 10/24/2001 1:22:55 PM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mercy
Is it your jealousy that prevents you from reading and responding to the content of the article?
9 posted on 10/24/2001 1:24:23 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: clintonh8r
the problem is that now they tell us that most muslims are not the enemy. With Japan all Japanese where the enemy.
10 posted on 10/24/2001 1:31:52 PM PDT by Khepera
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Is it possible to have a convention of all the liberal college professors and liberal anti-gunners, conservative and republican haters at say the Rose Bowl and call in some of those F16 strikes? Just wondering.
11 posted on 10/24/2001 1:34:19 PM PDT by RetiredArmy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
So far I haven't seen any evidence that Islam as a culture has any remorse for the events of 9/11 or has any objective other than imposing its philosophy on the rest of the world, not by persuasion, but by intimidation and violence. When moderate (by Western definition) Muslims dominate the religion, I may moderate my own position.
12 posted on 10/24/2001 1:34:35 PM PDT by clintonh8r
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Jealousy ..... hmmmmmmm??? Could I be jealous of a bunch of whacko libertines? Nope? Don't see how. Sowwy.
13 posted on 10/24/2001 1:36:32 PM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mercy; Jolly Rodgers
I agree that mercy's comment did not address a reasonably decent insight about the impotence of power, but I had to address her comment on Rand.

Actually, I think the Randians have so far been relatively irrelevant when compared to the Popular Front. The reason that the public has (correctly) not gone wholesale for objectivism is that Rand's was an incomplete philosophy. She never addressed the externalities of production, and her system therefore lacked the integrity to supercede the political justification for regulatory governance.

That does not mean that the market is incapable of such. I think it is, but we need a better understanding of the nature of mobile property.

14 posted on 10/24/2001 1:36:43 PM PDT by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
Besides .... I DID comment on the contents of the article. could it be your blind rage that kept you from seeing this plain fact?
15 posted on 10/24/2001 1:39:03 PM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: mercy
Jealousy ..... hmmmmmmm??? Could I be jealous of a bunch of whacko libertines? Nope? Don't see how. Sowwy.

So, I guess you just agree with the leftist professors who blame America and comfort the enemy.

16 posted on 10/24/2001 1:41:22 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: mercy
Of course a bunch of joiners who run around in the made up name of an ego-maniac who, while postulating a new 'true' morality of virtue and honor, actually helped herself to another woman's husband and regularly stepped on her own husband as one would squash a bug, surely have contrubuted NOTHING to the general malaise of the American psyche.

This is what you call a comment on the content of the article? I see an attempt to smear Objectivists. I see a comment on Rand's sexual proclivities. And, I see a reference to American psyche. What I don't see is even the slightest hint of a reference to the content of the article or the issues it addressed. I suppose when you have no grounds to address the content you have to settle for trying to smear the messenger.

17 posted on 10/24/2001 1:45:56 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
I agree. Hoiwever i believe that the US response to terrorism should be so overwhelmingly swift and forceful that no-one would dare retailiate. Some suggestions: Nuke the 20 mile square territory that UBL is hiding. The collateral damage would be slight. Most of Afghanistan is barren and not populated. But the image of a mountain range being turned into glass would remain forever. Capture all family members of the Laden clan, starting with mom and dad and have them call UBL at gunpoint and demand he surrender or become an orphan.Next move on to brothers and sisters. Reverse terrorism: thru diplomatic channels let rogue nations know that their capitols will be razed if any terrorist attacks the US again.
18 posted on 10/24/2001 1:48:10 PM PDT by ffusco
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Jolly Rodgers
You really are dumb aren't you? The writer began his whole premise by commenting on the deplorable state of collective American morality and how it had been debased by various persons and movements. I simply stated that your group had done no better. That in fact you have contributed wholesale to the degeneration of our collective mores.

There, I spelled it out for you but I know it doesn't matter because you are a group thinker and you are subserviant to the group and I think your group is a pile of $hit so I must be attacked. Dolt.

19 posted on 10/24/2001 1:52:20 PM PDT by mercy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
Actually, I think the Randians have so far been relatively irrelevant when compared to the Popular Front.

On this point I'll agree that Objectivism has had minimal impact on the culture. However, it does have a very strong impact on the individual lives of those who embrace it.

The reason that the public has (correctly) not gone wholesale for objectivism is that Rand's was an incomplete philosophy. She never addressed the externalities of production, and her system therefore lacked the integrity to supercede the political justification for regulatory governance.

I don't see that as a shortcoming in the philosophy. Rand laid down a full fledged philosophical foundation, but the detailed implementation of that philosophy through externalities is up to us. It would have been nice if she would have fleshed out examples of how the philosophy could be implemented at the concrete level. On the other hand, that might have had the unintended consequence of suppressing creative application by leading us to think that her example is the only possibility.

20 posted on 10/24/2001 2:05:27 PM PDT by Jolly Rodgers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-40 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson