
May
3
It is the first part of Ayn Rand’s first television interview, in which she encapsulated the essence of Objectivism. In this first part, she discusses the post conformist Morality, emphasizing the Individual’s right to live for his happiness, that a Man is an end in himself and has a right to live for his own rational self-interest.
What is rational self-interest?
Rational self-interest is the basic premise, that every man has freedom to use his mind for his own benefits. He has capability to choose for himself and to decide for his development, that he is not a sacrificial animal to live for others benefits, nor he can force others to live for his sake. That a Man lives, by virtue of his mind, and enjoy his own earned rights and happiness with self-esteem.
“Self-Sacrifice is Evil.” Self-sacrifice is the precept that man needs to serve others in order to justify his existence that his moral duty is to serve others.
The reasonable concept of love arises from the base of virtues. The virtues a man acquires in his character by applying the reason for an Independent, Honest living.
One cannot love anyone because of pity. If one loves, a person, it means that, he considers that person as worthy, worthy of his love. That worth does not comes merely from the materialistic possession of that person, but that worth is dependent on the vital principles, a Man holds for his life.
One cannot love a rapist, a criminal, a terrorist. Only a crook may love a crook. A corrupt person only can love the corrupt.
One loves people not for what they do for him, or what he did for them, but he should love people for the virtues and values the other person have achieved in their own character.
In this second part, Ayn Rand clearly strengthen the Democracy.
She clearly states that although there’s nothing wrong in Democracy, but majority should be prevailed only in public or political processes, and Democracy must be limited, by inalienable Individual Rights. Majority cannot vote a Man’s life, or property or freedom away from him. If a Majority votes for an issue, that doesn’t means that issue is right. Majority doesn’t make it right. Reason decides it righteousness. Democratic process must be held by voluntary concerns, voluntary co-operation of a man, unforced. That government must have no right to initiate force or compulsion against any citizen except a criminal. There should be no right by the government like tax. There should be separation of state and economics. Just like state and religion must remain separated, state and economics must also remain separated. Nobody, neither employers nor employees should use governmental compulsion and force for their own benefits, that a laissez-faire economy, a completely free economic sector is necessity of a free-society.
She explains how collectivism trend reaches to dictatorship and economical disaster.
An example of deep-rooted Collectivism
In this part, she discusses her own life.
She explains that how helping someone also, is a rational action, if it is not sacrifice, if it is intended with rational self-interest and selfish happiness.
She further explains how and why, monopoly is impossible in a laissez-faire economy and that is why, it is best economic system. A free economy will NOT break-down. All depressions are caused by Government interference.
For the two thousand years, the world has been dominated by other philosophies and moralities based on altruism. Look around, consider the results.
A TRIBUTE TO AYN RAND
Related Posts
1 viewsNo Responses to “The Indomitable Self-Esteem, Rational Self-Interest”
Leave a Reply





GHOST RIDER Says:
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:54 pmnice post..but heavy video files..takes 222222222 much time to load
Sushant Says:
May 3rd, 2008 at 6:32 pmYour article really states the essence of objectivism. However I do have some doubts about it. Objectivism relies on ‘reason’ ‘truth’ and ‘rationality’ but we all know that truth and reason may not be available instantly and it can be biased based on each individual perception. Will this not lead an individual to different conclusion for the same problem space. Individual being a free entity has right to believe in his own reason and thus it may lead to contrasting outcomes in a real world. Please correct me if I am wrong.