The Anti-Christian Selfish Cult of Ayn Rand, Drug Addict

Share

The Pink Flamingo defies anyone who says they are a fan of Ayn Rand and her political philosophy and a Christian is either lying to themselves or everyone else.  Rand’s philosophy of life was completely devoid of humanity, decency, morality, altruism, kindness, love, and the basic values that make life worth living.  She was only in it for herself.

One of the best descriptions The Pink Flamingo has seen to date is the following:

“…If Objectivism seems familiar, it is because most people know it under another name: adolescence. Many of us experienced a few unfortunate years of invincible self-involvement, testing moral boundaries and prone to stormy egotism and hero worship. Usually one grows out of it, eventually discovering that the quality of our lives is tied to the benefit of others. Rand’s achievement was to turn a phase into a philosophy, as attractive as an outbreak of acne….”

Barbara Bamberger Scott wrote:

“…Reacting poorly to the world’s failure to fall at her feet, and perhaps affected mentally by years of ingesting large numbers of dexadrine pills, Rand gradually fashioned herself into the legend she thought she deserved to be. Reading the book, I found myself thinking she was, by turns, either a high-functioning autistic, a psychotic, or a self-degraded drug addict, despite her genius and her occasional acts of kindness. She vilified nearly all of her early supporters (anyone who might have remembered her when she was not famous), dropping them in favor of a coterie of young admirers (who some would call sycophants). She never thanked anyone. She handily forgot her own missteps and recalled only her glory moments. Fiercely anti-communistic, she paradoxically played the role of a petty Stalin at the center of a clutch of young worshippers, staging psychologically destructive purges and lengthy show trials of those she identified as disloyal….”

It did not matter if one lied, cheated, or betrayed, as long as it was self-centered and did not “harm” anyone physically.   If you are like The Pink Flamingo, you have been wondering why libertarians, tea partiers, and John Birchers have those lovely attributes.  We finally have the answer.  The more devoted the person is to Rand, the more immoral, unethical, and self-centered that person is.

“…Rand had become addicted to amphetamines while writing The Fountainhead, and her natural paranoia and aggression were becoming more extreme as they pumped though her veins. Anybody in her circle who disagreed with her was subjected to a show trial in front of the whole group in which they would be required to repent or face expulsion. Her secretary, Barbara Weiss, said: “I came to look on her as a killer of people.” The workings of her cult exposed the hollowness of Rand’s claims to venerate free thinking and individualism. Her message was, think freely, as long as it leads you into total agreement with me….”

This is one scary witch.  (No insult to actual witches, is intended).

“…To love more than to anything else. When you are in love, it means that the person you love is of great personal, selfish importance to you and to your life. If you were selfless, it would have to mean that you derive no personal pleasure or happiness from the company and the existence of the person you love, and that you are motivated only by self-sacrificial pity for that person’s need of you. I don’t have to point out to you that no one would be flattered by, nor would accept, a concept of that kind. Love is not self-sacrifice, but the most profound assertion of your own needs and values. It is for your own happiness that you need the person you love, and that is the greatest compliment, the greatest tribute you can pay to that person….”  Ayn Rand

The Pink Flamingo’s friend, Allen Barra emailed me a link to an article he did on Rand for the Daily Beast a couple years ago.  Allen began his article thusly:

“…Any objectivity about the founder of Objectivism is impossible. I’ll lay my cards on the table—Ayn Rand and her followers have given me the creeps since high school. Rand herself always looked to me like Lotte Lenya’s Rosa Krebb in From Russia with Love, and her disciples like extras from Village of the Damned….”

About six weeks ago, the difference between what is legal, ethical, and moral was brought home to The Pink Flamingo in a very shattering and personal way.  Without going into personal details, there is a difference, a major difference in something that can be legal, maybe even ethical, but may not be moral. It reminds me of my problems with libertarians and devotes to Ayn Rand.

“…Rand cherished a particular disdain for Christianity. The cross, she said, is “the symbol of the sacrifice of the ideal to the nonideal. . . . It is in the name of that symbol that men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their inferiors. That is precisely how the symbolism is used. That is torture.” Yet some conservatives marked Holy Week by attending and embracing “Atlas Shrugged.”…”

Ayn Rand was a grossly immoral individual.  She based her entire philosophy of Objectivism on what is basically abject self-interest.  According to her devotees, there is no greater moral goal than achieving happiness.

“…Objectivism holds that reality exists independent of consciousness, that human beings have direct contact with reality through sense perception, that one can attain objective knowledge from perception through the process of concept formation and inductive and deductive logic, that the proper moral purpose of one’s life is the pursuit of one’s own happiness or rational self-interest, that the only social system consistent with this morality is full respect for individual rights, embodied in laissez faire capitalism, and that the role of art in human life is to transform man’s widest metaphysical ideas, by selective reproduction of reality, into a physical form—a work of art—that he can comprehend and to which he can respond emotionally….”

Rand herself was an extremely self-centered person who believed in morality only if it served her selfish whims.

Rand Playboy Interview - 1964

According to her philosophy of self-interest Christ betrayed us by His self-sacrifice.

“…Christ, in terms of the Christian philosophy, is the human ideal. He personifies that which men should strive to emulate. Yet, according to the Christian mythology, he died on the cross not for his own sins but for the sins of the nonideal people. In other words, a man of perfect virtue was sacrificed for men who are vicious and who are expected or supposed to accept that sacrifice. If I were a Christian, nothing could make me more indignant than that: the notion of sacrificing the ideal to the non-ideal, or virtue to vice. And it is in the name of that symbol that men are asked to sacrifice themselves for their inferiors. That is precisely how the symbolism is used. That is torture….”

She did not believe in compassion.

“…I regard compassion as proper only toward those who are innocent victims, but not toward those who are morally guilty. If one feels compassion for the victims of a concentration camp, one cannot feel it for the torturers. If one does feel compassion for the torturers, it is an act of moral treason toward the victims….”

This is one sick individual.  She was also a drug addict.

“…While completing her second novel (Fountainhead), Rand began taking the prescription amphetamine Benzedrine (aka speed, meth, crystal, & many others) to fight fatigue. Her use of the drug enabled her to work long hours to meet her deadline for delivering the finished novel to Bobbs-Merrill, but when the book was done she was so exhausted that her doctor ordered two weeks rest.[46] Her continued use of it for several decades also may have contributed to volatile mood swings observed by her associates in later year…”

Yes, meth.

“…Benzedrine is the trade name of the racemic mixture of amphetamine (dl-amphetamine). It was marketed under this brandname in the USA by Smith, Kline & French in the form of inhalers, starting in 1928. Benzedrine was used to enlarge nasal and bronchial passages and it is closely related to other stimulants produced later, such as dextroamphetamine (d-amphetamine) and methamphetamine. Benzedrine should not be confused with the fundamentally different substance benzphetamine….”

Rand on Christianity:  h/t My Life and Faith

“…There is a great, basic contradiction in the teachings of Jesus. Jesus was one of the first great teachers to proclaim the basic principle of individualism — the inviolate sanctity of man’s soul, and the salvation of one’s soul as one’s first concern and highest goal; this means — one’s ego and the integrity of one’s ego. But when it came to the next question, a code of ethics to observe for the salvation of one’s soul — (this means: what must one do in actual practice in order to save one’s soul?) — Jesus (or perhaps His interpreters) gave men a code of altruism, that is, a code which told them that in order to save one’s soul, one must love or help or live for others. This means, the subordination of one’s soul (or ego) to the wishes, desires or needs of others, which means the subordination of one’s soul to the souls of others.

This is a contradiction that cannot be resolved. This is why men have never succeeded in applying Christianity in practice, while they have preached it in theory for two thousand years. The reason of their failure was not men’s natural depravity or hypocrisy, which is the superficial (and vicious) explanation usually given. The reason is that a contradiction cannot be made to work. That is why the history of Christianity has been a continuous civil war — both literally (between sects and nations), and spiritually (within each man’s soul)….”

Utne

John Weaver wrote:

“...Ayn Rand is most famous for her novel Atlas Shrugged. Here I am offering not so much a critique of Rand, though I find her philosophy reprehensible, as I am offering a critique of evangelicals reception of it. I think the reason Rand was popular among my evangelical college friends was because she highly emphasized personal responsibility and just as fervently rejected altruism. Thus, Rand’s philosophy worked in perfectly with the Christian colleges’ positive view of capitalism. Rand condemns anyone who accepts a handout from the government, not realizing – or simply not caring – that many of these people have no other alternative. Evangelicals, similarly, often condemn the poor as lazy or unfeeling, without adequately addressing the root causes of poverty. The end result of Objectivist, Randian philosophy is that it creates people who are totally obsessed with their own ego, and totally condemnatory of people who can not make it through life alone….”

Rand may not have approved of Christ and His ultimate sacrifice for our souls, but she was a big fan of William Edward Hickman.

“…In 1928, the writer Ayn Rand began planning a novel called The Little Street, whose hero named Danny Renahan, was to be based on “what Hickman suggested to [her].” The novel was never finished, but Rand wrote notes for it which were published after her death in the book Journals of Ayn Rand. Rand wanted the hero of her novel to be “A Hickman with a purpose. And without the degeneracy. It is more exact to say that the model is not Hickman, but what Hickman suggested to me.” Rand scholars Chris Matthew Sciabarra and Jennifer Burns both interpret Rand’s interest in Hickman as a sign of her early admiration of the ideas of Friedrich Nietzsche, especially since she several times reffered to Hickman as a “Superman” (in the Nietzschean sense). Rand also wrote, “The first thing that impresses me about the case is the ferocious rage of a whole society against one man. No matter what the man did, there is always something loathsome in the ‘virtuous’ indignation and mass-hatred of the ‘majority.’… It is repulsive to see all these beings with worse sins and crimes in their own lives, virtuously condemning a criminal…”

Hickman was a serial killer.

“…She meant it. Her diaries from that time, while she worked as a receptionist and an extra, lay out the Nietzschean mentality that underpins all her later writings. The newspapers were filled for months with stories about serial killer called William Hickman, who kidnapped a 12-year-old girl called Marion Parker from her junior high school, raped her, and dismembered her body, which he sent mockingly to the police in pieces. Rand wrote great stretches of praise for him, saying he represented “the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatsoever for all that a society holds sacred, and with a consciousness all his own. A man who really stands alone, in action and in soul. … Other people do not exist for him, and he does not see why they should.” She called him “a brilliant, unusual, exceptional boy,” shimmering with “immense, explicit egotism.” Rand had only one regret: “A strong man can eventually trample society under its feet. That boy [Hickman] was not strong enough.”…”

From author, Michael Prescott, comes more information about the remarkable young man Ayn Rand admired.

Michael Prescott

Rand’s followers do their best to legitimize her lack of human decency, selfishness, and hatred of Christ.  The latest piece of trash I’ve seen is this by Ann Barnhardt (she who hates Lindsey).

“…In John’s creation narrative, he immediately identifies and establishes Jesus Christ as divine, co-eternal with God the Father, begotten, not made.  Today, we simply say that Jesus Christ is the Second Person of the Holy Trinity.  But what we must focus on in terms of this discussion is the word that John uses to name and identify Jesus: John calls Him “the Word.”  In the original Greek, the word John uses is “Logos.”  The word “logos” in Greek is the same word used for the concepts of logic and reason.  This Greek root is indeed the etymological source for the modern English word “logic.”  What John did in the very first sentence of his Gospel is to specifically identify Christ, the Second Person of the Trinity, as Logic and Reason Itself.  Logic and reason are intrinsic, constitutive qualities of God.  They are His essence.  They are who He is.  This is why Christ identified Himself as “The Truth.”  Logic and reason are the process and mechanism by which statements are determined to be either true or false.  A true statement is simply a statement that is aligned with God.  1+1=2.  True.  Why is this true?  Because it is in alignment with the existential reality that is God Himself.  Or, for you math buffs, consider Euler’s Identity, which I and many, many others consider to be the very thumbprint of God:…”

It is fascinating how people like Barnhardt legitimize Rand, who had a crush a serial killer, but damn Lindsey Graham.  I think that says more about libertarians, objectivism, and Ayn Rand than anything else.  Lindsey Graham is a Christian.  I have my doubts with anyone who claims to be a Christian and legitimizes and admires Rand.

Share

8 thoughts on “The Anti-Christian Selfish Cult of Ayn Rand, Drug Addict

  1. An excellent article – something to think about. The worship of Ayn Rand by Tea Partiers, Libertarians etc. unmasks them. It reveals what they really stand for – power and greed. Whatever they are, they are NOT Christians. To me, it is obvious that they are only using Christianity as a means of getting control. Ayn Rand stood for everything the Tea Partiers are supposed to be against. She was an advocate of abortion rights and sexual hedonism. No Christian would do to a fellow Christian what the Libertarians have done to Lindsey Graham, which goes far beyond mere disagreement. It exceeds the bounds of human decency. Anyone who disagrees with them must be destroyed. I read Atlas Shrugged more years ago than I care to admit, but I haven’t changed my opinion of it. It is nothing more than the glorification of money, selfishness and fornication. In that book, nothing is above the price of the dollar. It was the very end of the book which sickened me the most. I think it was John Galt, who (imitating a priest’s blessing) raised his hand and made the sign of the dollar over the land. Personally, I found this obscene.

  2. Lordy, that Hickman revelation was a shocker. I suppose Hickock & Smith could have completed Ayn’s unholy trinity.

    The uppers (meth) addiction is also important. Speed kills brain cells – seriously, they literally get blown out by forcing too much blood, too rapidly, through the capillaries. And the cells don’t regenerate.

    This whole post is fascinating. I especially like the secretary’s terse, wry observation:

    Her secretary, Barbara Weiss, said: “I came to look on her as a killer of people.” The workings of her cult exposed the hollowness of Rand’s claims to venerate free thinking and individualism. Her message was, think freely, as long as it leads you into total agreement with me….”

  3. Well, if it is of any consolation, I never trusted Ayn Rand from the start precisely because of her atheism. Guess that more than proved that my distrust was well-founded. For her to embrace atheism after the USSR basically massacred a lot of Christians made her no different from the Communists despite her claims to the contrary and regardless of any persecutions she may have faced. It’s like how the Frankfurt School pushed socialism even after nearly being victims of Nazi Germany. IF I’m going to take over the Tea Party, one of my first steps is to make sure the Tea Party completely throws out the objectivist views as well as Ayn Rand’s teachings.

  4. The irony is not lost on me, trust me. One of my observations has been that Rand is all about socialism for the wealthy.

  5. Yeah, tell me about it. How can we fight off the socialists, the communists, the atheists, and all of those jerks if we’re relying on the sick teachings of one ourselves? How can we be expected to fight off against Roe v. Wade if we’re supporting a pro-abortion woman? And BTW, Jean-Jacques Rousseau to some extent promoted selfish hedonism and sociopathically getting ahead at the expense of others, with Voltaire promoting some of the same amoral stuff as well (and both were polar opposites in every way save for anti-Christian agenda pushing), yet look how that turned out: French Revolution, Reign of Terror, over hundreds of thousands dead, thousands of which by Guillotine, unbelievable persecutions against Christians, and France possibly going to take a very long time to ever regain its Christianity in more ways than just a name on a census bureau. That’s not even getting into how that inspired the Communist revolutions, something that even so-called liberty believers such as Jean Paul Sartre supported (Sartre believed in absolute autonomy and independence of the individual via existentialism.).

  6. I’m impressed. You’ve done your homework. I don’t understand how Rand managed to gain such a fan base. The woman was a psychopath, who based her male role models on a serial killer, a truly evil man. Yet, we’re to think that her economic philosophy is ideal? You know that William F. Buckley feared the uniting of Rand’s followers and the John Birch Society as being a tremendous danger to our society. He was right. Add Christian Reconstructionism and we’re in bad shape.

  7. Yeah, agreed overall. And as I noted in the posts above, her atheism is one of the primary reasons I don’t trust her, with her promoting abortion and sexual hedonism making close enough seconds to actually tie first place, as Christianity does not support those things at all. And BTW, her promoting selfishness as a virtue is absolutely no different from the philosophy of Sartre, Foucault, and the like, and heck, Sartre, publicly at least, actually renounced communism, although he was at heart a Communist from start to finish. I believe it was Sartre and Foucault who promoted absolute liberty of the individual, yet supported Communism despite that, Maoist communism to be precise. Heck, her teaching is no different than the amoral teachings of Rousseau and Voltaire, which BTW also resulted in the persecution and attempted extermination of Christianity. She’s best comparable to the Frankfurt School, as like them, she suffered from persecution from it, and like them, under the guise of helping America she promoted exactly the same things as the ideologies that she got persecuted by.

    I never read Ayn Rand myself, certainly not Atlas Shrugged, I’m doubtful I’ve read any of her works. Probably the closest I’ve gotten to reading any of Ayn Rand’s works is in my Freshman Year of High School, where we had to read this book where some guy and gal decided to get individualistic in a setting where they place community above all else, selflessness to the extreme in other words. Said society, BTW, was depicted as being exceptionally backwards in everything, apparently going back to the time of candles, dances for mating rituals, and apparently somewhere in Middle Ages Europe, with it happening recently enough that the old people would talk about skyscrapers in a manner that were considered legendary. And their forbidden word was “I,” which had an immediate death sentence for those who say it via burning at the stake. They eventually found an “old” house which had solar panels and was very advanced, implied to have been built by the “egos,” and the last chapter had the main character promoting the ego constantly to the point of getting annoying (basically “me me me me me”). I’m not even sure if Rand actually wrote that book, although the description of the author was very similar to her, including suffering some persecution in the USSR and fleeing to America and promoting selfishness to the extreme. That’s probably the closest I’ve ever gotten to reading Ayn Rand, and I definitely recall having a huge distaste for the book even back then. Animal Farm by George Orwell actually resonated far better for me than any of her works ever did, and even that failed to accurately reflect the suffering we Christians underwent from Communism (Moses the Raven’s character is an understatement of what Christianity had to go through: In the USSR, Christians are lucky if the USSR even lets them hold service/mass. Most times, they’ll raid any churches they find, even tricking some tourists into leading them into a congregated church as a sting operation (I’d know this because my uncle nearly fell for that. He only realized at the last minute what they were actually planning when he set foot and saw everyone hiding. He drew away their fire by saying it was the wrong church). and proceed to throw anyone caught attending service/mass into the Gulags, if not shot on sight.).

    I know that the post above me was made 3 years ago, but it still needs to be said.

  8. And – very well said, it is. Thank you. It is quite a comment for you to reply to something, three years later. Thank you.

Comments are closed.