Ayn Rand And Socialism...

[ParadiseFound]

I'm sure a lot of you will know of a well-known quote from Ayn Rand, part of which goes like this:

[size="2"]'The right to life is the source of all rights - and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. [/size][b][size="2"]The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.[/size][/b]'

(the bit in bold is the bit this focuses on).

[size=4]I've heard someone say that this could be interpreted as a call for the workers to 'sieze the means of production', socialist style, which seems very much unlike Rand[/size].

[size=4]Does anyone have any counter-arguments to this? I'm a little confused.[/size]

[Aloysius]

I'm by no means a student of Ayn Rand, so I won't pretend to know what it means in its context; but my reading of it would be that it's a correct criticism of what has happened in modern Capitalism, though I wouldn't really expect that from Ayn. But criticizing that situation is not the equivalent of supporting socialism, just because you do criticize the fact that a large majority of the workers are kept from ownership of their own means of production doesn't mean you believe in government socialism to correct that problem. perhaps she struck onto this chord blindly, not meaning to criticize that situation but inadvertently doing so. Perhaps she would see Capitalism as giving everyone the opportunity to own their own means of production, even though the history of Capitalism shows that such ownership gets centralized among only a few.

personally, I believe in Distributism as a solution to this problem, which is entirely different from socialism.

[Basilisa Marie]

Ayn Rand is evil.

[Ice_nine]

The idea of property is not found in all cultures, or at least hasn't been in all cultures before influence from outside cultures. I think of the Native Americans for example who didn't "own" the land and the animals they killed and all that. With this I'm confused as to why property rights are essential for rights at all. Is she saying people who don't have property rights can't exercise any rights at all? That seems screwy.

Sorry to totally not answer your question

Edit: I've said the word "cultures" way too much. My apologies.

Edited January 11, 2012 by Ice_nine

[Socrates]

[quote name='Ice_nine' timestamp='1326242966' post='2366586']
The idea of property is not found in all cultures, or at least hasn't been in all cultures before influence from outside cultures. I think of the Native Americans for example who didn't "own" the land and the animals they killed and all that. With this I'm confused as to why property rights are essential for rights at all. Is she saying people who don't have property rights can't exercise any rights at all? That seems screwy.

Sorry to totally not answer your question

Edit: I've said the word "cultures" way too much. My apologies.
[/quote]
I'm not a Rando (though I believe she does have some legitimate ideas), but the Church Herself has consistently taught that property ownership is an essential human right, and that it is wrong for the State to forcibly deny people the right to property.

[quote] The natural right itself both of owning goods privately and of passing them on by inheritance ought always to remain intact and inviolate, since this indeed is a right that the State cannot take away.[/quote] ~ Leo XIII, [i]On the Condition of Workers[/i]

[quote]
We shall begin with ownership or the right of property. Venerable Brethren and Beloved Children, you know that Our Predecessor of happy memory strongly defended the right of property against the tenets of the Socialists of his time by showing that its abolition would result, not to the advantage of the working class, but to their extreme harm.
. . .

First, then, let it be considered as certain and established that neither Leo nor those theologians who have taught under the guidance and authority of the Church have ever denied or questioned the twofold character of ownership, called usually individual or social according as it regards either separate persons or the common good. For they have always unanimously maintained that nature, rather the Creator Himself, has given man the right of private ownership not only that individuals may be able to provide for themselves and their families but also that the goods which the Creator destined for the entire family of mankind may through this institution truly serve this purpose
[/quote]~ Pius XI, [i]Quadragesimo Anno[/i]


If people (such as members of monastic orders) voluntarily choose not to own personal property, that is one thing, but if the State forcibly denies persons the right to private property ownership, then it is tyrannical.

[4588686]

[quote name='ParadiseFound' timestamp='1326235149' post='2366534']
I'm sure a lot of you will know of a well-known quote from Ayn Rand, part of which goes like this:

[size=2]'The right to life is the source of all rights - and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. [/size][b][size=2]The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.[/size][/b]'

(the bit in bold is the bit this focuses on).

I've heard someone say that this could be interpreted as a call for the workers to 'sieze the means of production', socialist style, which seems very much unlike Rand.

Does anyone have any counter-arguments to this? I'm a little confused.
[/quote]

Well, seeing as Ayn Rand was an awful author and an even worse philosopher, it really doesn't matter what her point was.

[arfink]

Well, this will just about sum up my opinion of Ayn Rand's works, specifically her character development:

[img]http://cdn-www.cracked.com/articleimages/wong/aynrand/arflowchart2copy.png[/img]

And before you say it, yes I know, this isn't a real flow chart, but hey. It's the internet.

[Socrates]

[quote name='ParadiseFound' timestamp='1326235149' post='2366534']
I'm sure a lot of you will know of a well-known quote from Ayn Rand, part of which goes like this:

[size=2]'The right to life is the source of all rights - and the right to property is their only implementation. Without property rights, no other rights are possible. Since man has to sustain his life by his own effort, the man who has no right to the product of his effort has no means to sustain his life. [/size][b][size=2]The man who produces while others dispose of his product, is a slave.[/size][/b]'

(the bit in bold is the bit this focuses on).

I've heard someone say that this could be interpreted as a call for the workers to 'sieze the means of production', socialist style, which seems very much unlike Rand.

Does anyone have any counter-arguments to this? I'm a little confused.
[/quote]
Given the context of Rand, I'm pretty sure she's arguing the exact opposite of socialism - arguing that productive people have the full right to the fruits of their labors, which must not be taken away by the government to be used for the "collective good" as in socialism.

[Basilisa Marie]

[quote name='Socrates' timestamp='1326330688' post='2367257']
Given the context of Rand, I'm pretty sure she's arguing the exact opposite of socialism - arguing that productive people have the full right to the fruits of their labors, which must not be taken away by the government to be used for the "collective good" as in socialism.
[/quote]

Sure, but she also argues that self interest is the ultimate virtue and that helping the poor is a waste of time...pretty much the exact opposite of Christianity, last time I checked.

[Amppax]

[quote name='Basilisa Marie' timestamp='1326337982' post='2367360']
Sure, but she also argues that self interest is the ultimate virtue and that helping the poor is a waste of time...pretty much the exact opposite of Christianity, last time I checked.
[/quote]

I don't think he was defending Rand. He was trying to give an explanation to the original question.

[Basilisa Marie]

[quote name='Amppax' timestamp='1326342086' post='2367413']
I don't think he was defending Rand. He was trying to give an explanation to the original question.
[/quote]

Oops. Yeah, my comment does come off that way, doesn't it? I was trying to make a separate point, not argue with you, Socrates (also, welcome back to the phorums. )