Ayn Rand Is Running The TEA Party

(Boston Globe)

There have been many valid questions raised as to just exactly who is running the much talked-about “TEA Party.” Is it Rush Limbaugh? Sara Palin? Glenn Beck? Joe Wilson? Rupert Murdoch?

Nope. It’s a dead author. An egomaniac novelist-philosopher that makes up some of the founding principals of libertarianism, but certainly was not directly involved with the conservatism movement in the least.

From beyond the grave, she now rules over the ever-pandering Republican Party and this so-called “tea party.”

Ayn Rand claimed to “individualism,” but had no interest in allowing for individual disagreement over her logic within her “inner circle,” and preached “objectivism,” but refused to be objective in terms of literary-criticism of her novel “Atlas Shrugged.”

Here is this new “ethic” born of Ayn Rand that we see dominating the political right:

1. If you are poor, it is always your fault.
2. Asking for and receiving help is always wrong and a weakness.
3. Drive all compassion out of yourself.
4. You and your view are perfect, and cannot be wrong about anything.
5. Greed is holy.


Before anyone thinks I’m making all this up, let’s take a look at Ayn Rand in the news:

Gentlemen’s Quarterly (GQ) has named Ayn Rand “Writer of the Year of 2009” and Andrew Corsello spoke in his article of the “youth appeal” to Rand and as to his own experiences with her writing that greatly mirror my own.

2,000 pages of you’re-either-a-lion-or-a-leech ideology, loathing over Shakespeare, Beethoven, Marx, government, “subnormal” children, “simpering” social workers, homosexuals, and all of it with no grace, no subtly.

Philandering Republican Governor Mark Sanford was hiking the Appalachian Trail with Ayn Rand in the November 2nd issue of Newsweek.

While Rand’s philosophy was based on individual’s absolute freedom, Rand herself exercised a dictatorial control over her followers. Her chief acolyte (and lover), Nathaniel Branden, once circulated a list of rules for Rand’s inner circle to follow; one of them read, “Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world“; another said, “Ayn Rand, by virtue of her philosophical genius, is the supreme arbiter in any issue pertaining to what is rational, moral, or appropriate to man’s life on earth.”

Ayn Rand has shifted in and out of favor, but she may be more relevant today than ever.

Lastly, do not forget that the anti-reformist  TEA Party have long since adopted this mantra of “Who is John Galt?”


I feel I have the answer these people seek, as to the identity of John Galt.

It is rather simple:

“John Galt” is nothing but what you read now, something that came from the mind of another.

I created “Little Suzy” for the sake of a online discussion in regards to the health care debate in the U.S.

“Little Suzy” and “John Galt” are one in the same, yet different sides of the same coin. Pure fictions created solely for the purpose of enforcing a point of view. In the case of “John Galt,” he is a construct for the protagonist to encounter and in the case of Ayn Rand’s writing to promote the concept of the “individual capitalist.” In the case of “Little Suzy,” she is a collaboration of non-fictional individuals in the real world who have suffered at the hands of the for-profit medical insurance agencies and she exists as the protagonist and the insurance company actuary the antagonist in a story where she dies from treatable cancer after being exempted from insurance coverage.

Who is Little Suzy?

She is the little girl who died because anytime someone speaks of health care reform in the U.S. the hounds of arrogance and venom are unleashed by the nearly completely partisan right-wing, thereby serving no purpose except to prevent all rational debate and civil discourse over the facts.

Ayn Rand and her TEA Party enjoy saying statements such as: “Some opinions are just wrong.”

Completely false and obviously founded in high levels of hubris. Nobody can ever be “wrong” about their own opinion. You can, however, be inaccurate about the facts.

The rejection of all facts is not “objective,” nor is it representative of “individualism” so much as it is a practice of willful ignorance.

I am perfectly willing to debate differences in opinions about the role of government and the role of the private sector, but often those heavily influenced by Rand feel that they are justified in their self-critiques of themselves as “geniuses” and “gifted.” One Randite, who goes by the name Malice (oddly enough), spoke in the GQ article of how Ayn Rand appeals to adolescents who are feeling dejected and find that the words of Rand are a reminder that, “you were right and everyone against you is wrong.” I believe he phrased it quite well as to what the true motives and core beliefs behind this movement truly are: self-superior logic. If someone disagrees with you, they obviously are not as smart as you. Or some other perverted form of backwards-logic that truly only serves to allow for people to behave like fools and be smug rather than civil and then call that “sound logic” and “spreading the truth.”

I feel I must disclose that part of my distaste of Ayn Rand is more complex than simply that I believe she is over-rated and outright immoral; it how she very much resembles myself in certain ways.

I am a writer, but like Ayn I do not simply “write.” From one writer to another reaching out across time I must admit I feel some connection to this woman. In my more jocular moments I speak of how the real problem with the world today is that nobody is listening to me as how to get things done. In a strange way, I suppose I could explain her appeal to someone who was completely flabbergasted by the nature of all of it. But I laugh good and hard about how silly and arrogant I sound in those moments, whereas Rand was actually serious about similar statements. There is a big difference, in the end.

I am composing a piece of societal-commentary right next to the creation of my own philosophical foundations along with simply writing fiction and short essays. I am prone to start coining -isms and start throwing them around as if there is a movement going on. I am a “populist for peace,” a “realist for media-integrity.” And so on.

Perhaps most profoundly is that in haste and inflamed passion I might lean toward alignment with this notion that I am vindicated by some gift of intellect over any misdeeds I commit; that I can treat my opponents in a way that I would never wish to be treated and they are the ones at fault not I.

When one takes a hard step outside of the ideological boxes that people like Ayn Rand and myself tend to create around ourselves it becomes clear that the two of us did share some common bonds beyond simply both being fiction writers.

In the name of compassion and mutual understanding I have to come to know this piece of what I call “wisdom” as to Ayn Rand’s similarity to any person who strives to take their writing and use it as a tool to display what they see in the world.

Alan Greenspan was one of many Randites who have come to see the failing in their former logic.

Greenspan, to his credit, came forward in the height of the global economic meltdown to speak out against the exact same kind of “free-capitalistic” business practices that caused the crash. He clearly stated that he found “[a] flaw in the model that I perceived as the critical functioning structure that defines how the world works.

Conservatives and libertarians greatly ignored and widely dismissed Greenspan and his unsubtle rejection of these “Ayn Rand Economics” or “Free-Market Capitalism” styled politics that he had once been a strong advocate of. I contend that these people do not care to explore flaws in their ideological stances and instead (in greater and greater numbers it seems) only seek to create an atmosphere of me-versus-you if any person is in anything but outright agreement if not an atmosphere of outright violence.

Ideals like “selfishness is a virtue” and “greed is good” above all else drove us into a lasting national recession while the GOP and the TEA Party continue to advance the abandoned ideologies of Greenspan that ultimately serve only to make the rich richer and the poor poorer.

The disgusting and shameful element being that was the stated goal of these ungracious self-serving monsters to begin with: a ruthless war on the poor and the middle class.

Dishonesty and willful ignorance dominates the TEA Party, right along with the radical GOP, leaving me to assume that no less than Ayn Rand coming from beyond the grave is the one who is truly running the party.

James O’Keefe: The ACORN Slander Artist

There are four vicious slanderers that have promoted a smear campaign on a community organization group using so-called “investigative journalism” recently.

In this age of misreported facts and “gotcha-journalism” those who claim to hold the truth dear and have a love for American democracy would do well to take note of these modern propagandists and spreaders of lies.

o'keefe

1. James O’Keefe III

2. Hannah Giles

3. Andrew Breitbart

4. Mike Flynn

James O’Keefe and Hannah Giles have both lied on the air of the FOX News show “Hannity” regarding the issue of being asked to leave from ACORN offices in the process of their film making.

Both of these slander artists have received training from the same training organization that Ann Coulter attended. They are skilled at crafting a message to be as provocative as possible, but not by any means accurate or provable.

Katherine Conway Russel, Office Director of ACORN Housing Corp. Philadelphia, explains what her group actually does and what a vital role they can serve in the community.

The Philadelphia ACORN office is on record as filing a police report against O’Keefe and Giles for misrepresenting themselves and making illegal requests.

O’KEEFE: “In none of the facilities — none of the facilities kicked us out. That’s a lie.”

BREITBART: “There’s no place, as ACORN tried to state, that kicked them out based upon the premise that they were doing something nefarious.”

Both Breitbart and O’Keefe reveal in their quotes that they have no credibility behind their case. They claim ACORN is a “criminal organization” but engaged in illegal videotaping to produce these videos and have made baseless slanders against ACORN CEO Bertha Lewis even as the people in question have been fired for their actions caught on tape.

Were it the goal of these people to see quality, ethical journalism they would not misrepresent themselves nor place a blanket charge of criminality to the entire organization by value of the misdeeds of a few.

These slander artists are clearly seeking to destroy an organization based on political and possibly racial motives, and are clearly not invested in uncovering malpractice for the betterment of the community.

O’Keefe has been asked to leave the Leadership Institute after taping phone calls with Planned Parenthood representatives in which he made the proposition of a possible donation under the condition the money would go toward an abortion of a black child.

James O’Keefe has expressly chosen to target a group that helps mainly impoverished blacks living in the inner-city. He has a record of creating disgusting racial sentiments in his own mind and then imposing that racist view to any person unlucky enough to answer his phone call. There is no small amount of evidence to assume that O’Keefe harbors ill will toward African-Americans.

It is also very likely that this story has been picked up but poorly reported on by certain media figures because of a strong desire to connect President Barack Obama with ACORN’s problems.

If these same newsmedia-types were to convey that the credibility of these film makers is below even the lowest measuring bar I might not call them biased, but to me it just proves once more that bias against the truth is one of the strongest factors present in the news media today.

ACORN is currently suing Breitbart and O’Keefe for illegally videotaping their offices in Maryland.

One of the only people to speak any amount of truth on the matter has been Joe Conason of Salon.

Joe Conason quite clearly lays out that this has been exaggerated from the very beginning, that ACORN helps struggling families, and stating the fact that ACORN has never been found guilty of any voter registration fraud.

Andrew Breitbart, on the other hand, produced a piece on RealClearPolitics that touts the entire slander crusade as courageous. Breitbart is quite clear that he stands with the McCarthyist tactics involved in the Van Jones resignation.

I see the same anti-American tactics at play in this un-Christian and ungodly campaign against minorities and against all of the poor. These people care nothing for the hard facts, and only care to paint others with a brush of guilt by association.

If one person is guilty of something in an ACORN office, they all are guilty in all ACORN offices. Evidence and solid proof be damned!

There is a strong value in good investigative journalism, but no value in anti-minority slander campaigns.

The people in the videos were dismissed and this in itself was a small service to ACORN, however the purpose of the video series was never to improve ACORN but rather to destroy it. Rather than balancing the matter with facts and open disclosure of the footage, these slander artists have elected to lie about the number of times they were asked to leave. This in itself calls to question if they have any desire to cover the story or if they merely wish to present this as irrefutable case of corruption regardless of solid facts.

The American Media also failed utterly to convey this story in full.

Jon Stewart of The Daily Show jumped on board the ACORN smash-wagon.

The Washington Post has ignored the fact that O’Keefe and Giles previously claimed they were never turned away from any office.

FOX News (to my knowledge) has made no effort to obtain the police report, in the procession of CNN, to refute the on-air claim that they were never asked to leave any ACORN office.

And I won’t even get into the matter of the numerous outright lies told on the radio.

I believe this story is an excellent example of how easy it is to besmirch and publicly defame a group.

On that topic, the group Live Action that O’Keefe belongs to is a corrupt organization that uses racial entrapment to levee false claims against innocent citizens. This possibly criminal organization apparently promotes illegal videotaping, dishonest conduct when speaking with the press and engages in false advertising of it’s purposes and functions.

This group is dangerous to our country, dangerous to our communities and dangerous to our democracy. Live Action films is an agent of propaganda and an actor in baseless public defamation.

James O’Keefe, Hannah Giles, Mike Flynn and Andrew Breitbart are currently invested in actions aimed against the well being of the community and against the well being of the poor.

I cannot remain silent as this group of vile individuals wage war against the needy and seek to destroy a community-based group that lends aid to others, rather than seeking to improve it.

Has America Gone Conspiracy-Crazy?

It has been my observation that popular websites and radio shows have experienced a recent increase in the number of people touting the “New World Order Theory” (NWO) or an apocalyptic theory that includes global conspiracies in one fashion or another. I am not a fan of dismissive attitudes and rather than mocking these people I wish to explain why I personally do not subscribe to these theories even after having reviewed much of the same media and materials that they often use as evidence for their theory.
—————————————————————————————————–
http://www.coasttocoastam.com
http://www.jordanmaxwell.com
—————————————————————————————————–
There is no doubt that there remains a large divide in society between the labor classes and the aristocratic classes of people, no matter how wealthy or advanced a society is. As many have written on throughout history there is a mutual disgust shared between these classes.

The labor class most often views the other as uncaring and immoral. The aristocratic class most often views the other as uncivil and illogical.

The clever, and usually fiendish, use this divide on both sides of society to promote their personal agenda. Be it selling DVDs, seeds, books, survival supplies or perhaps gaining ratings, website hits and sponsors the issue of interjecting mass fear without any tangible proof is reprehensible. Not to mention the fact that both modern and ancient politicians have sought to demonize one group or another using these same existing prejudices in what is commonly called class-warfare.

I assert that the entire idea of a “grand-puppeteer council” that rules all of humanity is a form of ancient social-engineering, if you will, developed perhaps some time prior to the Roman Empire. An agenda formed purely to destabilize all forms of government in a time when there was no such thing as democracy or equality under the law for any person not of a ruling class.

I believe the labor class of old created this entire theory around the strange practices of aristocrats that still exist in today’s society in the form of the Skull and Bones Society or other ritualistic practices in society as a whole. The unseen and unknown rulers of all cannot be proven nor disproved. Nor can the shadow regime be seen for it is made of no light that we pathetic laborers can find with the blindfolds that our masters provide. It is a perfect circle of plausible yet improvable concepts leading to the same conclusion of rejecting all the institutions of government as purely evil.

I see certain figures like Jordan Maxwell as not motivated by sheer profiteering motives but rather simply a person who has read more material and done more research than I have, by far, yet he has not considered this simple concept while reading many occult materials. Maxwell is one of the rare exceptions in this subject where he is genuine and earnest about his fears for America coming under some form of global-control. I just simply disagree and obviously I would be proven wrong if such a thing were to happen outside of popular fiction.

I am not certain if America is falling prey to an age-old agenda of anarchistic motives or if a certain few have simply become voiced after being silent but the issues of the press failing to do their job in the modern world or the multitude of other arguments used to promote these theories don’t provide any proof for the theory itself.

No doubt someone who believes strongly in these theories would seek to call me a “NWO shill” and I am trying to convey that I see Alex Jones, for instance, as a profiteering shill. Let people judge for themselves as I make zero dollars on this weblog and Jones runs advertisements for his products on the radio. George Noory would be the converse of Jones where he appears to simply believe in the NWO while further proving my point that Jones is primarily motivated by profit due to fact that Noory doesn’t engage in schemes to sell documentaries yet is still affiliated with and outspoken on the issue.

Many theories defy evidence, like Creationism for instance, and there are many people of varying degrees of study who wish to establish a sense of complete authority on these theories making them into supposed facts. It is the very nature of spreading willful ignorance. Some issues do not have all the standards of scientific proof at this time and must be handled as such.

The answer is, we don’t have the answer. Anyone who tells you otherwise should called into suspect immediately to produce proof or be called to state themselves as a person of convictions and not facts, which is perfectly acceptable.

I am not here to be throwing out names for everyone to repeat of my ‘perfect’ theories or just to start an uproar on any of the issues I’ve touched on but rather to say that when any person simply accepts what they hear, see or read as proof-enough for them that ultimately we all could suffer the consequences if this were to become systemic.

Eric Lightborn
February 17th 2009