SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home Did Ayn Rand's Novel Prove The Case Against Climate Policy?

JONATHAN CHAIT APRIL 12, 2011

Did Ayn Rand's Novel Prove The Case Against Climate Policy?

BY JONATHAN CHAIT

Fifty years from now, historians are going to study the way our political system handled -- or chose not to handle -- climate change. They'll be struck by moderates who were obsessed by other issues but attached no particular urgency to permanently altering the Earth's climate. They'll also be amazed that it was considered fairly unremarkable for a U.S. Senator to draw his understanding of carbon policy from cult novelist Ayn Rand. Yet here is Rand Paul attacking electricity standards:

Ayn Rand wrote a novel, Anthem, it’s a dystopian novel where individual choice is banned and the collective rules society. There’s a young man and his name is Equality 72521. He is an intelligent young man but he is been from achieving or reaching any sort of occupation that would challenge him. He is a street sweeper.

Over time he discovers an abandoned subway and rediscovers the incandescent light bulb. And he thinks, naively, that electricity and the brilliance of light would be an advantage for society and that it would bring great new things as far as being able to see at night, being able to read and the advancement of civilization.

He takes it before the collective of elders, and they take the light bulb, and basically it’s crushed beneath the boot heel of the collective. The collective has no place basically for individual choice.

Now I’m not suggesting that this collective body is against electricity per se, or that your goals are to quash individualism. But I am suggesting that we’re against choice. And I think you seem to be oblivious to this sometimes that you’re taking away people’s freedom to buy products they want to buy.

He's not only an ideological fanatic, he's not even a terribly bright one. The issue here is that, according to the scientific consensus, emitting carbon into the atmosphere harms other people. Even 18 year old college libertarians tend to grasp that you have to work through the issue of polluting the commons, not treat polluting the commons as a simple act of individual choice. And I know I've been harping on Ayn Rand a lot, but as far as I'm concerned, being governed by people who tout her work as the seminal influence in their worldview is not much different than being governed by Scientologists. It's kind of scary.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 25 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

25 comments

What do you mean, "kind of"?

- Fishpeddler

April 12, 2011 at 3:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Seriously. Kind of?

- culturebot

April 12, 2011 at 3:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I can't decide which is scarier, libertarians who want to formulate economic and climate policy on Ayn Rand, or evangelical republicans who seem determined to base US foreign policy on the Book of Revelations.

- Tristan

April 12, 2011 at 3:53pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I suppose I should acknowledge that Paul is not completely off base here. I, for one, am regularly guilty of wanting to crush some dim bulbs under my boot heel.

- Fishpeddler

April 12, 2011 at 3:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I have to give Rand Paul the benefit of the doubt. The benefit of doubting climate science being very small, I mean, and that's about all I would give him.

- Nusholtz

April 12, 2011 at 4:06pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Rand Paul strikes me as the kind of naive, strange and not-so-precocious college freshman who thinks that it's OK to wear his elven cloak to class and quote Dungeons and Dragons in his classic literature class because he thinks 'chose your own adventure' books are how reading should be. Following the diktat of the author is just soooo authoritarian. Then when someone questions WTF he's going on about, he proceeds to ramble about freedom and the white dragon lords of Amb'rth coming smite the evil collective of trolls that hinder his personal choice to be a douche-bag. Rand Paul and his doppleganger Paul Ryan are the best examples of why Ayn Rand's books are so decidedly popular amongst emotionally and mentally immature men.

- singlspeed

April 12, 2011 at 4:12pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Randians are whiners, whether the mega-rich bankers who don't feel appreciated or the lunatic losers who blame others for their failures. It's the perfect "philosophy" for the narcissistic generation.

- rayward

April 12, 2011 at 4:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I wonder if the Ayn Rand novel had anything to do with the Rush song 2112, which has a similar plot. The novel sounds terrible, BTW. Awesome song, though.

- lpowens3

April 12, 2011 at 4:24pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Ipowen: Neal Peart is a huge Ayn Rand fan, sadly enough.

- subterran

April 12, 2011 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

We are doomed. National policy is being decided by Ayn Rand novels????

- Sophia

April 12, 2011 at 4:45pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Well, it seems to me, if anyone is crushing the light-bulb of scientific progress here, it's Rand Paul. Basically, the Republicans have no use for any scientific finding that contradicts their world-view. Their "collective" has no place basically for ANY point of view that includes doing anything about Global Warming. And so those points of view are crushed. Besides which, I didn't think any approach (like Carbon Credits) toward moderating Greenhouse Gasses would actually PREVENT anyone from purchasing anything. It would make it more expensive to manufacture, based on the Greenhouse Gasses emitted, but that's not removing Choice.

- AllanL5

April 12, 2011 at 4:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Oops, I stand corrected -- it IS about the ability to buy high-wattage incandescent bulbs. Well, perhaps that is going too far.

- AllanL5

April 12, 2011 at 4:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Good God, Ayn Rand again. Once one starts to look, her ideas start to show up everywhere on the right, and no longer on the fringes. That woman is every bit as dangerous as Karl Marx, and her books are a lot easier to read.

- K_Wilson

April 12, 2011 at 5:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

You can't harp on about it enough. It's very scary. And it's just as scary for the rest of us who don't live in America but still have to suffer the consequences of these cultists mentalology.

- IggyPop

April 12, 2011 at 5:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Tristan, what's scary is that the Revelations-thumpers and the Rand-thumpers are sharing the running of the same political party. By both founding documents, they're incompatible with each other, but I guess the asylum holds all versions of crazy.

- miceelf

April 12, 2011 at 5:57pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Kind of" is a formulation that an extremely bright policy wonk uses, who is concerned by a trend, but who is not an hysteriac. I love the wags who call the Republican Party the bed-wetting party because so many of its adherents are scared spitless of terrorism. Often enough, they strike John Wayne-tough poses, but they are terrified of civilian trials of terrorist suspects on US soil, of closing Gitmo, of habeas corpus, of the rule of law that in other contexts they so love to champion. Similarly, on the left, there are significant numbers of people who go incontinent after gazing across the fence of the ideological divide. Buck up, people.

- liberalref

April 12, 2011 at 6:49pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Yeah, well, Fritz Lang's *Metropolis* says that rich people are assholes who will exploit the lower classes and then trick them into directing their resulting rage against their own interests. So nyah.

- frippo

April 12, 2011 at 7:34pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...There’s a young man and his name is Equality 72521". A US Senator is quoting this? Yeesh. Scary at a political level, but even more because the writing is so dated and lame. Help us.

- stevedwight

April 12, 2011 at 10:00pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

A while ago Economistview posted a video of Mike Wallace interviewing Ayn Rand back in the 1950's. Very informative, I thought. Among other radical commentary, Rand comes across as aggressively anti-Christian. How did she ever come to be a hero of the GOP? Amazing. Video here.

- stevedwight

April 12, 2011 at 10:19pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

“And I know I've been harping on Ayn Rand a lot, but as far as I'm concerned, being governed by people who tout her work as the seminal influence in their worldview is not much different than being governed by Scientologists. It's kind of scary.” Anne Rand libertarians are worse than Scientologists. Most people religious or not know enough not stay clear of these charlatans. Libertarians present themselves as "real Americans.” The new biography of Rand should be required reading and portions of it should be presented to the public, especially the Christian right since it will turn them away from this tyrannical social Darwinist. This is the time to use what the natural animosities within the right wing establishment.

- arnon

April 12, 2011 at 10:46pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Jonathan: Please write the Ayn Rand takedown book; it's immoral selfish BS, but very popular among the white male self-employed class. Ask your insurance broker friends about Ayn Rand, or real estate brokers, or building contractors, or even hair dressers who rent a booth; they all think Rand's philosophy is the key to a happy life and that we'd all be better if everyone was simply self-sufficient like they are. They do not see the immorality or utter detachment from reality of this world-view. It is scary and they are making this country a worse place to live than it was eleven years ago.

- sharib

April 13, 2011 at 7:02am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Scarier: I know a non-white healing professional under 35, who is a woman and believes that Atlas Shrugged is the best book ever written.

- miceelf

April 13, 2011 at 7:48am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I love Rand's grammar as well: Now I’m not suggesting that this collective body (ie the group in the book) is against electricity per se, or that your (how the hell did I get into the book?) goals are to quash individualism. But I am suggesting that we’re (now it is WE??) against choice. And I think you (now it is back to me) seem to be oblivious to this sometimes He, by which I mean Rand Paul, is a fucking idiot.

- blackton

April 13, 2011 at 9:46am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"they all think Rand's philosophy is the key to a happy life and that we'd all be better if everyone was simply self-sufficient like they are" Herein lies the fallacy of the entire Rand philosophy of selfishness and the false meme of "self-sufficiency." Rand never was never 'truly' self-sufficient. She made money peddling bad fiction and was just as dependent upon society for buying her fiction & philosophy. She was no Titan of industry. She didn't create in a bubble. Those that claim, because they are self-employed or self-unemployed, as "self-sufficient" are not. If they were, they would require zero interaction with the market world. They would simply ride into the forest of chaos and be self-sufficient. But in the real world, they must and indeed are required to interact with their fellow human beings as members of society. A society that, even for Randians, has certain societal norms (spoken or otherwise) that are accepted and expected of people. Rand's biggest narcissistic trick was to wrap selfishness in a wrapper of freedom and self-determination and release it from any kind of altruism. Her philosophy is based on the pure premise that any form of altruism is contra-selfish and therefor wrong. She only wishes to legitimize selfishness and egoism because then any action can be considered to be done only for the benefit of 'self' regardless of the collateral damage caused to others or the society in which these "self-sufficient" individuals operate. It's a way to excuse oneself for acting, literally, like a douche bag. So when I hear folks talk about being 'self-sufficient' I take that with a grain of salt. Standing on the shoulders of giants doesn't make one tall.

- singlspeed

April 13, 2011 at 10:05am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

The funny thing is, Equality72521 could now be a TNR subscriber's handle.

- ironyroad

April 13, 2011 at 12:04pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close