I believe that Objectivism is best and most earnestly advanced by individuals acting independently and in the spirit of entrepreneurship. Ayn Rand herself wrote:
“I regard the spread of Objectivism through today’s culture as an intellectual movement—i.e., a trend among independent individuals who share the same ideas—not as an organized movement…. I want, therefore, to make it emphatically clear that Objectivism is not an organized movement…
“I shall not establish or endorse any type of school or organization purporting to represent or be a spokesman for Objectivism…
“If students, supporters, or friends of Objectivism wish to form local groups of their own—for such purposes as the study, discussion, and dissemination of Objectivist ideas—they’re welcome to do so. They can be of great value and help the spread of Objectivism, and will earn my sympathetic interest and sincere appreciation—provided they do not attempt to act as spokesmen for Objectivism and do not associate or collaborate with Objectivism’s avowed enemies.”
—Ayn Rand, a statement of policy, part 1, The Objectivist, vol. 5, June 1968.
Prometheus Foundation looks for independent thinkers and creators who take an entrepreneurial approach to disseminating the ideas of liberty in general, and Objectivism in particular. When we meet such individuals, we work to support and guide their promotion of Ayn Rand and advancement of Objectivism. (Examples of such collaboration can be found here.)
Although Prometheus will not work with anyone who demonstrates that they will deliberately or significantly undercut Miss Rand and her ideas, we do not expect every individual we support to be a philosopher or professional intellectual, much less one who has spent years specializing in Objectivism. Our expectation is that those we support be enthusiastic, active-minded, and willing to learn how to more effectively and accurately convey Miss Rand’s ideas in their chosen activities.
As always, I welcome your thoughts and comments.
Carl B. Barney
April 13, 2022
Hi Carl,
My suggestion is to associate Ayn Rand’s philosophy with the ideas of Michael Saylor. He went to MIT, is CEO of MicroStrategy and awesome (ie, hair-raising) spokesman for an engineering revolution that encompasses Austrian economics, individual rights, world finance, philosophy, etc. Objectivists appear to be slow to recognise life-changing trends. (I’m sorry to say that Objectivist writers don’t offer me any value any more—they know the Objectivust system but they don’t apply it to the real world in a timely and effective fashion. It is as if they are naive. They certainly are characteristically arrogant.)
See an interview of Saylor with Tucker Carlson or his 17 part discussion series with Robert Breedlove or the Bitcoin vs Gold debate with Frank Guistra. Saylor is a true Ayn Rand hero.
Best wishes,
Jonathan Bolton
Aristotle Man on Twitter
I am not a trained intellectual but I have thoughts about the issue of interesting people in AR’s work. If one looks at our country now, regardless of how suspected vote fraud affected the result, one sees the Donald Trump received over 70 million votes in 2020. I agree that DT can be legitimately criticized in a number of ways but let’s ask why people voted for Trump? I think a large number of those who did are highly dissatisfied with, and are seeking improvement in, how they are governed. Are not these people ‘fertile ground’ for an appeal to read AR’s work on government and the rest of her work which supports her thoughts on government? Yes, I believe that Rand did say that politics changes after other improvements in a culture but I think one should consider that such a large group may be a good place to start. After all, if you make a product, say cars, and there are a lot of people who want better cars, should you not appeal to them in your advertising? And yet some Objectivists, particularly at ARI which purports to speak for Miss Rand, are intense in their criticism of Trump and as far as I know, ignore his supporters or even view them as intellectually and morally unfit. I find this approach to be anti reason and anti fact since in my view, DT’s Democratic opponents, and in fact Democratic politicians in general, are malevolent nihilist tyrannical scum who hate America and both freedom and individual rights. I hope to see more of an appeal to an audience at least some of the members of which are to me ‘ready made’ for Miss Rand’s work.
Rand made a number of comments about the American Revolution, e.g., the Boston Tea Party and Henry’s “Liberty or Death” speech.
I think it would be a good idea to publicize a challenge to her admirers to ask, “why and what for”.
What could possibly be so important in an 18th century event that a New Intellectual of the late 20th Century see and point to?