Objectivist movement

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The neutrality of this article is disputed. Please see the discussion on the talk page.

Part of the Philosophy series on Objectivism

Important groups Objectivist movement Ayn Rand Institute Nathaniel Branden Institute The Atlas Society Important figures Ayn Rand Nathaniel Branden Alan Greenspan Leonard Peikoff Harry Binswanger Peter Schwartz Yaron Brook David Kelley George Reisman Chris Sciabarra Special topics Neo-Objectivism Libertarianism Related Capitalism

This box: view • talk • edit

The Objectivist movement is a movement to popularize Ayn Rand's Objectivism. It began informally in the 1950s with the ironically-named^[1] Ayn Rand Collective, before the formation of the Nathaniel Branden Institute (NBI) in 1958. Thereafter Objectivism became an organized movement with its own events, speakers and publications. As with other movements, the Objectivist movement has experienced schisms and ostracisms since its foundation, with various individuals being publicly denounced for their views.

Ayn Rand was novelist and philosopher whose novels The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged inspired many readers with their message. A young Canadian student named Nathaniel Branden, who had been greatly inspired by Rand's work, became a close confidante and encouraged Rand to expand her philosophy into a formal movement. A group of Branden's friends formed the Ayn Rand Collective and helped to establish the Nathaniel Branden Institute to promote Rand's philosophy formally, which she had by then dubbed "Objectivism".

Rand and Branden eventually had a romantic affair which ended with a difficult breakup. Along with their relationship, Branden's status as "second-in-command" to Rand was terminated and he was ostracised from the Objectivist movement. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the formal movement faltered in popularity and many other supporters left. Eventually Leonard Peikoff rose to become Branden's replacement, assuming control as the leader of the Objectivist movement when Rand died in 1982. In 1985, he formed the Ayn Rand Institute to replace the NBI.

Contents 1 Cult accusations 1.1 Objectivism and Scientology 1.2 Objectivism and LaVeyan Satanism 1.3 Ayn Rand's response 1.4 Peikoff's response to Cult Allegations 1.5 Other responses 2 Factions 3 Notes 4 See also

Cult accusations

Several authors, such as Murray Rothbard who helped define modern libertarianism and anarcho-capitalism,^[2] and Jeff Walker, author of The Ayn Rand Cult, ^[3] and Michael Shermer, founder of The Skeptics Society,^[4] have forwarded arguments to the effect that Rand's devoted followers created a cult of personality around her and that the purges and ostracisms of Rand's colleagues reflect this lionization of the "supreme leader". Jeff Walker, in The Ayn Rand Cult, portrays the movement as "a substitute 'totalist set of beliefs'... not unlike Hubbard's Dianetics or Yogi's Transcendental Meditation."^[5] In his article "The Sociology of the Ayn Rand Cult" (1972), libertarian economist Murray Rothbard – who was briefly associated with Rand – wrote:

"If the glaring inner contradictions of the Leninist cults make them intriguing objects of study, still more so is the Ayn Rand cult... [f]or not only was the Rand cult explicitly atheist, anti-religious, and an extoller of Reason; it also promoted slavish dependence on the guru in the name of independence; adoration and obedience to the leader in the name of every person's individuality; and blind emotion and faith in the guru in the name of Reason."^[6]

Michael Shermer argued that the Objectivist movement displayed many of the characteristics of religious cults, including the "Veneration" and "Inerrancy" of the Leader; "Hidden Agendas"; "Financial and/or Sexual Exploitation"; and the beliefs that the movement provides "Absolute Truth" and "Absolute Morality."^[7]

Objectivism and Scientology

Walker also claims that there are several relevant similarities between Objectivism and Hubbard's Scientology:

"Ayn Rand was not the first to propound an ethics for the masses based on survival as a rational being. That honor goes to fellow novelist and cult leader L Ron Hubbard (1911-1986), the science-fiction writer who founded Dianetics and the Church of Scientology. Dianetics preceded NBI's start-up by eight years and the Objectivist ethics by eleven years. Dianetics groups formed on campuses during the 1950s, much as Ayn Rand clubs would in the 1960s. Many who flocked to Objectivism in the 1960s had previously had some contact with Dianetics or Scientology. Dianetics used reasoning somewhat similar to Rand's about the brain as a machine. Hubbard's 'analytical' versus 'reactive' mind has its equivalent in Rand's system. Both have a higher mind reprogramming the rest of the mind. Hubbard and Rand were both extremely intelligence- and survival-oriented, in the interest of... rational man. They counseled the uprooting of irrational premises (or 'engrams'). Both contended that the resulting enhanced rationality leads to greater capacity for healthy emotion. Perceptual data is immaculate for both. Both regard our often being unconscious of incoming data as the real problem. After many years of working at it, the student of Dianetics becomes a 'clear', while the student of Objectivism becomes a full-fledged Objectivist... Both Dianetics and Objectivist psychology draw fire from the psychiatric establishment. The philosophy of each relates immorality to decreasing one's survival potential. Each claims to be science- and logic-based. Both share a benevolent universe premise... Hubbard and Rand are very much against all rule-by-force. Both assert that rational [people] have no real conflicts of interest. Each deplores social complexity being wielded as an excuse for introducing government regulations when it is the latter that generates the former in a vicious cycle... Each was lambasted by biographers for serious personality problems. And both figures have been denounced by former associates who claim that the leader had feet of clay and the doctrine is detrimental to its adherent[s'] health."^[8]

Objectivism and LaVeyan Satanism

According to Anton LaVey, his Satanism is "just Ayn Rand's philosophy with ceremony and ritual added."^[9] Satanism, however, differs from Objectivism in advocating pragmatic skepticism and interprets rational egoism hedonistically, holding that "indulgence in life or 'fun' as perceived by the individual is the highest standard of ethics."^[10] Moreover, Satanists favor of "domination of the weak by the strong" (ibid.), , which is incompatible with the Objectivist doctrine of non-sacrifice. Satanists also believe in magic, a belief that clashes strongly with Objectivism's rejection of the supernatural. The fundamental difference according to Satanists is that "Satanism is a religion... and Objectivism isn't." (ibid.).

Ayn Rand's response

Rand vehemently rejected the cult label. In response to an admirer who offered her cult-like allegiance, Rand wrote:

"My philosophy advocates reason, not faith; it requires men to think – to accept nothing without a full, rational, firsthand understanding and conviction – to claim nothing without factual evidence and logical proof. A blind follower is precisely what my philosophy condemns and what I reject. Objectivism is not a mystic cult."^[11]

Peikoff's response to Cult Allegations

In contrast, Peikoff argued that a complete rejection of alternative interpretations is a necessary part of Rand's Objectivism and does not constitute dogmatism:

"Kelley [David Kelley, see below] decries, as intolerant, any Objectivist's... 'obsession with official or authorized doctrine'... My answer is: Objectivism does have an 'official, authorized doctrine', but it is not dogma. It is stated and validated objectively in Ayn Rand's works."^[12]

Peikoff argued that total adherence to Rand's philosophical views is an inherent part of Objectivism:

"...if you grasp and accept the concept of 'objectivity', in all its implications, then you accept Objectivism, you live by it and you revere Ayn Rand for defining it. If you fail fully to grasp and accept the concept, whether your failure is deliberate or otherwise, you eventually drift away from Ayn Rand's orbit, or rewrite her viewpoint or turn openly into her enemy."^[13]

At the same time, Peikoff stated on his radio show that Ayn Rand was tolerant of rational disagreement with her views:

"If it were true that Ayn Rand kicked out of her circle or denounced or would not tolerate anyone who disagreed with her on things like music and painting, I'd like you to account for my continued existence as a close friend of hers for over thirty years plus being designated as heir.
"I loved Beethoven. I have a vast Mozart collection of which she knew perfectly well. I love Somerset Maugham whom she hated.[ ...]
"She knew in great detail of the conflicts -- such conflicts or disagreements as there were -- and as long as you could specify what you liked in terms that were understandable in reason (and that were not an assault on reason, as I indicated to you before) there's no such thing. It's a complete, total lie."^[14]

Other responses

Others disagree with these cult allegations. In an online magazine, Jim Peron wrote an analysis of Objectivism that argues the philosophy is not a cult; Peron claims that similarities to cults are superficial at best and that charges of cultism directed at Objectivists are ad hominem attacks used to discredit Objectivist ideas without refuting them. He specifically points out that Objectivism does not contain the layers of initiation for which Scientology is known. He also argues that many of Rand's most fervent critics, such as Murray Rothbard, plagiarized her ideas; further, he argues that Shermer and Rothbard spread unsubstantiated rumors and falsehoods regarding Rand in order to malign her. Finally, he says that the lack of an organized Objectivist group and the fact that Rand did not attempt to recruit Objectivists refute any claims that Objectivism is cult-like:

"I cannot see how a disembodied philosophy can be a cult. I say Objectivism was disembodied because there was no Objectivist organization to join. The Nathaniel Branden Institute gave lectures but had no membership. You could subscribe to a newsletter but you couldn't join. Objectivism was, and is, structureless. And without a structure there cannot be cult. Cults spend a great deal of time recruiting members and persuading them to join a structure. A structure, or organization, is not optional. It is an essential trait of a cult. If the structure doesn't exist then there is no cult... Did Objectivism recruit members? It doesn't seem so. The obvious reason is that there was nothing to which members could be recruited. The vast majority of self-proclaimed Objectivists are people who read Rand's works and agreed with her. Most have never attended an Objectivist meeting nor subscribed to any Objectivist newsletter. All they did was buy Rand's books and like them."^[15]

Factions

Inside the Objectivist movement there has been considerable dissension and criticism about Ayn Rand's work and her rightful legacy. Peikoff, the executor of Ayn Rand's estate, considers himself her intellectual heir and promotes Objectivism as a "closed system" that consists merely of what Rand herself wrote and said. He considers any disagreement with anything Rand said as a betrayal of Objectivism. The Ayn Rand Institute (ARI) is aligned with Peikoff's view of Objectivism.

Another school of thought was started by David Kelley, an academic once affiliated with Vassar College who later worked as an independent writer. In his essay "A Question of Sanction" and later in his pamphlet "Truth and Toleration" he argued for greater open-mindedness in working with other groups. He argued that Objectivism is an "open system" that can evolve beyond Rand's own writings and beliefs and in principle correct mistakes she may have made. Peikoff responded by claiming Kelley had violated the basic tenets of Objectivism and would therefore no longer be allowed to lecture under the auspices of the ARI or any of its affiliates. Kelley, in turn, founded the Institute for Objectivist Studies, later renamed The Objectivist Center (TOC) and now called The Atlas Society (TAS). Branden lectures at events sponsored by TAS.

As Rand held that the key to her original insights was her honesty rather than any kind of superior intelligence, Peikoff and ARI hold that any conclusion that is inconsistent with Objectivism is false and should not be sanctioned under Objectivist auspices. Hence they hold that Kelley is not even an Objectivist. Peikoff and ARI cite Rand's opposition to libertarianism in the 1960s as a reason to condemn Kelley's work with libertarians and – perhaps more importantly – his explicit categorization of Objectivist politics as "libertarian". Kelley and TOC respond that Peikoff and ARI took Rand's opposition out of context; Rand objected to the ethical subjectivism associated with some early libertarians.

With the exception of Anthem, which has passed into the public domain, Peikoff handles the copyrights to all of Rand's works as her executor. He thus controls the translation of Rand's works into other languages and has the power of editing and releasing Rand's unpublished works. He has written forewords for all current printings of her books.

Notes

See also

• Objectivism (Ayn Rand)