Originally Posted By: Kaotic
Originally Posted By: sinij
Allow me to disagree. Ayn Rand blind faith in "rational" self-interest ignores the very obvious fact that self-interest is not, and cannot be rational without society, social contract and laws. Why create when you can take away?

Please explain it.


Objectivism (Ayn Rand political philosophy) at its core is based on notion of rational egosim. Ayn holds that it is irrational to act against one's self-interest and that combination of individuals acting in self-interest would produce desirable outcome.

Here is an example to demonstrate why such thinking is flawed: For example there is a general vote to set tax rate to 0%. As a well-off individual guided only by self-interest you'd always vote for this. Direct consequence of such tax rate is that there would be no money for infrastructure and society would collapse into anarchy.

Adherence to Ayn Rand ideology leads to conclusion that successful individuals acting in self-interest should renege on Social Contract, because they least benefit from it.

Objectivism ignore the notion of Social Contract; the notion that unlimited natural freedom and self-interest includes freedom to screw others, effectively creating "war of all people against all people". To avoid this society is created, and we as individuals give up some of our natural freedoms (for example freedom to rape and murder each other) in order to establish civil society (where we don't have to worry about getting raped and murdered). Civil Society and Social Contract are not costless, it takes common effort to maintain it and its integrity starts to break down when individual members feel they do not adequately benefit from it (see Somalia).

My own ideology is that individual success is only possible due to access to all benefits society provided to said individual. Once individual becomes successful such individual should honor social contract and put best interest of society ahead of his or her own interest.

[Linked Image]