On the Subject of Ayn Rand

So, I've read Atlas Shrugged and a good part of The Fountainhead, and both are fairly well written. Both have stories that serve as allegories and really nothing more.

The ideology behind it, in my opinion, is distinctly flawed.

Essentially Randian Objectivism speaks to "living for oneself." In essence, it points a finger at those in society who use law to leech off of the "productive" members of society. The climax of the story has the productive, prime movers of society abandoning the rest. Clearly this represents a metaphor for a shift away from so-called "socialized medicine," welfare systems, and "nanny states." It makes assumptions, though, about the way societies work in real life - it assumes that one can simply bootstrap their way up on their own intellect and talent alone.

Really no one gets to where they are alone. In civilization as it stands today, talent can take you very far, but can rarely take you from the dregs of society to its apex. Our society is most certainly not a meritocracy; useless people born into luxury often remain in luxury, and remarkably gifted people born into poverty often remain there. Frequently, those on the high end of the totem pole are not providing for and living for themselves, but taking advantage of the thick pyramidal base of "easy marks" in order to do so. Hard work and talent does not in twentieth or twenty-first century settings equate to wealth.

Another thing that bothers me? Categorical and complete rejection of altruism. Rejection of lending a hand to someone not because it helps you, but because it's the way humans are. Rand rejects morality as unnecessary and an obstruction to the selfish pursuit of one's own happiness. Is it truly impossible to accept that I help a stranger on the street not because of guilt I have for being better off, and not because the laws tell me to, but because I want to, because I feel happy for helping another person? I am happy to pay out my taxes to support public health, public transportation, public happiness.

Reason and emotion are not opposed nor can one exist without the other. As physical form we, as humans, embody both of these concepts. One can employ reason in making a choice in attaining the best possible results, but those "best results" are subjective. There is rarely a discrete value placed upon two options - one will result in seven units of happiness, the other five. Emotion plays a pivotal role in decision-making; what do you feel is the better option? Which makes you feel happier?

To ignore our emotions and our communal kinship is to ignore the essence that makes us what we are - tribal animals. It not only takes a village to raise a child, but it takes a society filled with people to lend a hand on the way up. Some people need a little more than others; that's okay. Civilization did not grow out of our need to separate from one another, but from our need to commune.

I don't really like Objectivism. :\