Conservatism vs. Objectivism: Ayn Rand Explains the Difference

Listen to Ayn Rand's interview “Conservatism vs. Objectivism”
about the difference between American conservatism and Ayn Rand's philosophy.
• "Conservatism vs. Obje...
Subscribe to ARI’s KZbin channel to make sure you never miss a video:
www.youtube.co...
Download or stream free courses on Ayn Rand’s works and ideas with the Ayn Rand University app:
- App Store itunes.apple.c...
- Google Play play.google.co...
ARI is funded by donor contributions. You can support our work by becoming an ARI Member or making a one-time contribution: ari.aynrand.or...
******
Keep in Touch! Sign up to receive email updates from ARI: aynrand.org/si...
Follow ARI on Twitter: / aynrandinst
Follow ARI on Facebook: / aynrandinstitute
Follow ARI on Instagram: / aynrandorg
Subscribe to the ARI Live! podcast: podcasts.apple...
******
Explore these ideas further! ARI's online publication, New Ideal, explores pressing cultural issues from the perspective of Ayn Rand’s philosophy, Objectivism: newideal.aynra...
Join an upcoming virtual or in-person event: ari.aynrand.or...
Visit ARI’s website for more about our content and programs: ari.aynrand.org/

[@marvincool3744]

She walks you through it step by step. It’s impossible to argue her logic, since she spells it out so clearly.

[@forddon]

The best way to define conservatism is a system where society is organized around principles and institutions that have worked in the past. Some conservatives do support some degree of welfare based on the (I believe misguided) belief that it has been a useful part of our previously successful social order. Religion is likewise viewed as having contributed to a better life for most people and a more stable community. There are good arguments both pro and con for these positions and it's up to conservatives to debate such matters. I have considered myself an Objectivist for about 50 years, but I concluded quite early that the percentage of people in any human civilization ever, who will devote any time to seriously contemplating philosophical questions is very small. The question of Conservatism vs. Objectivism boils down to this: Conservatives outnumber Objectivists 100 to 1 If you want a better world don't ignore that fact.

[@leonchan1298]

Well said.

[@johnnynick6179]

@@leonchan1298 NOT well said. Mystics outnumber rational thinkers about one-million-to-one. Does that make mysticism right? Does agreeing with them make the world a better place?

[@leonchan1298]

@@johnnynick6179 a nessary evil, even if they are not right you must work with them, especially once you realize that it is impossible to convert any numbers of Mystics to Rational Objectivism.

[@learningtofish7036]

Clarity is so refreshing.

[@mustang607]

Many do seem to be devolving toward rejecting reason and relying mostly on feelings, whims and magical beliefs.

[@AndSendMe]

Now, 60 years later? They are naked full-blown power-lusters who don't even pretend to have principles.

[@kevinmcfarlane2752]

@@AndSendMeNot true. Some may be power-lusters. Many are not. To take two big names - Mark Levin and Dan Bongino, I see no sign that they are power-lusters.

[@AndSendMe]

@@kevinmcfarlane2752 Thanks for the correction, I was thinking of the politicians and should have been clearer about that.

[@VaraLaFey]

@@kevinmcfarlane2752 Let's see if they are. I'm a proud transwoman who uses the womens' room, where I behave as a woman - would they try to change that? Do they want to criminalize the transitioning of minors regardless of the context of individual cases? Do they support a woman's natural right to abort her fetus? Do they side with Russia or Ukraine?

[@VaraLaFey]

@@AndSendMe Politicians aren't the only ones who want power over other people. Very often their _voters_ want power over other people and elect the politicians to exercise that power on the voters' behalf.

[@BertFurfull]

Brilliant woman

[@demurat]

One of her best speeches!

[@bionborys1648]

Polarization is pushing religiousness and anti-religiousness, so what AR was saying is very true in the U.S. today.

[@Justin_Beaver564]

The binary election system is pushing all kinds of toxic polarization. If we had multiple parties under an instant run-off voting system it wouldn't be like this.

[@HMD2020]

Ultimate wisdom ❤

[@okiepita50t-town28]

I agree. Almost to a person so called conservatives must make it a point that they are good, God fearing, christians. I say separation of church and state is essential. Believe what you will but please don’t use that as a virtue signaling device.

[@SlamminGraham]

Fantastic!

[@c.galindo9639]

Ayn Rand does make a great argument against some thinking of conservatives and may be correct in that could be the possible reason why some people view conservatism as a negative connotation viewpoint rather than its actual meaning of which the word is associated with free enterprise capitalism. Yes, you can have conservatives of which they have no similar religious beliefs or no religious beliefs at all, and that the word “conservative” should not fall prey to the negative backlash of being considered as a stereotypical association in its viewpoint. I do however advocate that conservatism should have a system of moral values as freely giving it the moral authority of free enterprise without any sort of virtuous means of implementing its system, would mean that it can be viewed in the same negative connotation as any other word associated away from its intended meaning. The human factor and causation of the word does impact the acceptance of the word’s value system in which it secures towards the individual. I guess some moral understanding should be reached when implementing such systems of societal standards, lest it be given free reign to control in any way to affect how people live amongst its value system

[@mudmessiah]

Conservatism and Socialism are philosophies. Radical emerges from the individual. However is the individual authentic? That is a psychology.

[@galacticgufus]

I like to hear Rand washing her hands of conservatism, but it's an error to assert that a person's faith in something precludes that he also has reason in it. For example, there is plenty of evidence that humanity's condition is better under free markets but it must be taken on faith that it matters whether or not humanity's condition ought to be better. A superior argument against conservatism would be that it holds the status quo ought to be upheld by violence (police and the standing army).

[@science212]

Conservatism and socialism: the anti reason.

[@PrinceBieBrockP]

I would revise this to “although conservatism and liberalism are the anti-reasons that lead to fascism and socialism, respectively, the former form of statism implies the latter form because without rights, one cannot maintain his ownership.”

[@mudmessiah]

She misses the point upon which authenticity bases faith. Like Buddha’s saying.. if it doesn’t entirely make sense to your thorough examination.. it is useless. However all emotion logic removed.. cause and effect are absolute. Every action in faith of cause.

[@robertmorris5055]

No, true conservatism has nothing to do with religion. I as a conservative believe change for the sake of change is wrong. Not the first to say this but doesn’t negate the basic truth.

[@nl3064]

Well, much of their arguments are literally rooted in religious rhetoric and justification and invocation. Traditionalism and Religion tend to be rooted in the same core _Cult_ mentality. And while yes, doing something just for the sake of doing something is stupid at certain times - seems most conservatives refuse to change in many aspects, period - even when it becomes obvious that it is necessary. As Rand herself said, it is weak to call something good just because it's new, but it's an even bigger fallacy to defend something just purely because it's established. Something to that effect. The argument of newness or oldness itself is idiotic, basically.

[@chriswright9096]

I dont think its valid to suggest conservatives promote capitalism as a result of their religious beliefs. I do think there are some correlations between the two, in the same way that conservatives appear to promote gun rights (just to take a random example). But correlation in this case is not causation. To suggest their belief in God undermines the fundamental reason behind capitalism is rather silly actually. Like saying a religious man who believes in God and works in engineering is undermining Newton's laws of motion. Or that you wouldn't want to operate machinery designed by someone who believes in God. All a bit silly.

[@krishza]

I don’t think you’re going deep enough. Free market capitalism relies on a foundation of individual rights. It is individual rights that conservatives justify using religion or faith. And this is very common, ask a conservative where individual rights comes from and they say from god, and best they say something like natural rights. And when explaining this to a collectivist who does not believe in god allows undermines individual rights AND capitalism. Hope they makes sense. So the video is not silly at all, it goes deeper than your first analysis.

[@stephannaro2113]

What really is silly is listening to someone yet not hearing what they are saying. She is NOT saying that people's belief in a god undermines some X that they undertake - what she IS saying is that when they ARGUE that X can ONLY be justified by religious belief THEN there is a risk that they will drive people who recognize the dangers of religious belief away from X.

[@chriswright9096]

@@stephannaro2113 she is mischaracterizing conservatism. While some conservatives may be religious (correlation) it is arguably not the case that the conservatives argument for capitalism is religious. Many conservatives are not religious, for example. In general she speaks with great confidence but when you closely listen (as you suggest we should) it becomes apparent that she has nothing coherent to say.

[@stephannaro2113]

​@@chriswright9096 What percentage is represented by your statement that "some conservatives may be religious"? What percentage would you say that Rand is (or rather was some decades ago) claiming to be religious?

[@chriswright9096]

@@stephannaro2113 I have no idea. And that's the point. Rand is saying that conservatives like capitalism because they like God. I'm skeptical of that. I haven't done a study of it, but there again I'm not publishing books and having my supposed wisdom quoted on websites. Time after time she makes some unproven assertion, offering no evidence, and then based her following arguments on that tenuous idea. I saw another video on this channel where she cites the conversion of Rome from a republic to an empire as a reason for it's demise. If you accept that premise then her following arguments make sense. The problem is she is incorrect (actually out by at least 400 years). This is a common problem with her. She is a flawed thinker.

[@chachichochacorta8577]

What are the differences between a mixed economy and a socialist economy? Or is mixed economy simply socialism-lite?

[@Mr.Witness]

Socialism doesn't mix in elements of freedom nor do they even make an attempt to dress it up as having rights. A mixed economy is a mixture of controls and freedom.

[@RupeeRoundhouse]

A mixed economy is a mixture of different types of economies. A socialist economy is a type of economy. So a mixed economy may or may not have elements of socialism.

[@chachichochacorta8577]

@@RupeeRoundhouse I greatly appreciate your reply. Some claim that the U.S. is a mixed economy. What different types of economies is it mixed with other than capitalism?

[@johnnynick6179]

@@chachichochacorta8577 The US is best defined as a mix of Corporatism (which used to be called fascism) and socialism. Power is divided between heads of large corporations, who decide which politicians get elected, and the politicians and bureaucrats themselves, who create laws that benefit their corporate sponsors. Those who claim the US is Capitalist have absolutely NO understanding of what the word capitalism means. The US was NEVER actually a Capitalist society, though at its inception it was close. Since 1913 the US no longer even resembles a Capitalist society.

[@Andi_CCR]

👏👏👏

[@myerax]

Isn't objectivism just your opinion? I mean it is like having a philosophy that says it is the way thing are objectively (just use your logic). In other words it is a philosophy that gets it right. But don't all philosophies and world views do that? For me it is just another "ism" created by a Jew. Notice to administrator: If you delete this comment your whole life is a lie.

[@markskillin678]

I respect Rand a lot, but she has succumbed to the enlightenment view of "faith" as non-rational. This is not the biblical understanding of faith. Rather, faith is based securely in what is supremely reasonable. The Lord God has evidenced His existence and Himself as the only reasonable and true basis of our peaceful and prosperous and harmonious existence. For instance, it is rational to believe Jesus rose from the dead, all other explanations of the historical record are less than reasonable.

[@Jazzper79]

You might respect Rand, but you need to think of what she is saying in her books.

[@markskillin678]

@@Jazzper79 I am responding to this clip in which she defines Christian faith as irrational. Of course there are irrational religious beliefs, but that is not Christian. She is a child of the enlightenment faith, which is irrational.

[@danaaronmusic]

Even by the standards of other religions, Christianity is irrational. Other religious faiths are based on false beliefs and fairy tales, but at least their doctrines evince some kind of internal logic. Christianity, on the other hand, is nothing but a mass of contradictions. To wit: is Christianity monotheistic or polytheistic? Does the New Testament rest on a foundation of the Old Testament or supersede it? Is Jesus an agent of mercy or of justice? On these and other questions, Christianity cannot make up its mind. Out of all the world's religions, contemporary or historical, it is the most irrational.@@markskillin678

[@JohnSmith-bs9ym]

It is fundamentally irrational to believe in something that is not real.

[@VaraLaFey]

Also, is there an A/V snippet ARI could post which distinguishes Objectivism from conservatism on grounds of reason v tradition, or other such distinctions? It's extremely important for Objectivism to not be defined by its enemies, and enemies abound.