Opinion
Get Opinion in your inbox -- sign up for our weekly newsletter
Top of the Ticket
Opinion Top of the Ticket

Romney-Ryan Republicans pray to Jesus but bow to Ayn Rand

Many Republicans believe theirs is the party of Jesus Christ, but, in practice, they are the party of an atheist, Hollywood intellectual named Ayn Rand.

After establishing a career as a screenwriter, Ayn Rand authored two novels, “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged,” that are the intellectual bibles of libertarian conservatives, corporate executives and callow undergraduates. Among the many aspirational young conservatives inspired by Rand’s philosophy was a kid named Paul D. Ryan.

“The reason I got involved in public service, by and large, if I had to credit one thinker, one person, it would be Ayn Rand,” Ryan said in a 2005 speech. “I grew up reading Ayn Rand and it taught me quite a bit about who I am and what my value systems are… It’s inspired me so much that it’s required reading in my office for all my interns and my staff.”

Now that Ryan, the chairman of the House Budget Committee, is the No. 2 guy on the ticket of evangelical America’s favorite party, he denies Rand was ever that big an influence and says he rejects her beliefs. While it may be true he does not share her atheism or her support for abortion, it is disingenuous of him to claim he rejects the economic core of her philosophy because it is the central animating principle of his, and his party’s, crusade to reduce the size and scope of the federal government.

Ayn Rand’s “Objectivism," in her own words, centers on "the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute." Rand saw free-market capitalism as the only moral system for organizing society because it protects individual rights and allows exceptional people to create, build and thrive.

In Rand’s view of the world, there were “makers” and “takers,” and the makers had no obligation to share their wealth with the takers. It is easy to understand why she is a goddess of the tea party movement and every high roller on Wall Street. It is less easy to understand what she would have us do with those many, many people who are not as brilliant, not as talented, not as powerful, not as lucky, not as blessed with good health as the “heroic beings” who achieve great things.

Despite his renunciation of Rand, Paul Ryan has written federal budget plans that are quite Randian. They cut services for the poor and give benefits and tax breaks to the rich. For this, the Roman Catholic congressman is being criticized by America’s Catholic bishops, as well as the Jesuits and American nuns who preach a social gospel that reeks of the selfless altruism that Rand despised. The religious right, on the other hand, has blessed Ryan’s work. The Americanized gospel of the politicized evangelical churches tends to see success and affluence as evidence of God’s favor, while poverty and joblessness are suspicious signs of weak moral discipline and a proclivity to leech off the hard work of the virtuous.

So, with the enthusiastic backing of Christian conservatives, virtually every major piece of economic legislation proposed by Republicans in Congress favors the successful and wealthy. The much esteemed “job creators” are to be unburdened and unleashed while immigrants, welfare recipients, jobless people, the working poor, powerless consumers and struggling students are penalized for wanting a break, working too little, expecting protection and asking for too much.

Republicans act as if this approach to government is somehow part of a divine plan, but their philosophy contains very little of Jesus and a lot of Ayn Rand.

Copyright © 2015, Los Angeles Times
Related Content
  • Could Obama-Romney race end in uncharted electoral territory?

    Could Obama-Romney race end in uncharted electoral territory?

    In 2000, Democrat Al Gore won the popular vote but lost the election when the   Supreme Court awarded Florida’s electoral votes to  George W. Bush. Is there a chance something that wild could happen again? Given the even ideological split in this country, such a scenario is easy to imagine.

  • Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan vision harks back to the days of Taft

    Mitt Romney-Paul Ryan vision harks back to the days of Taft

    The Republican team of Mitt Romney and Paul D. Ryan is less about the future than it is about nostalgia for a past that many Americans imagine was better -- a time when businessmen were free of government meddling and all citizens, even the poor, old or handicapped, were expected to fend for themselves...

  • How Jimmy Carter championed civil rights — and Ronald Reagan didn't

    How Jimmy Carter championed civil rights — and Ronald Reagan didn't

    In 1954, as segregationist organizations were springing up all over the South in response to Brown vs. Board of Education, the chief of police and a Baptist minister in Plains, Ga., visited a peanut farmer at his warehouse and urged him to join the local White Citizens' Council. The farmer refused....

  • Would President Huckabee or Cruz put their faith above their duties?

    Would President Huckabee or Cruz put their faith above their duties?

    There are many objectionable elements to the drama playing out in Kentucky, where a four-time married county clerk, citing her faith, has gone to jail rather than do the job she was elected to and issue marriage certificates recognized as valid by the U.S. Supreme Court. But the most egregious...

  • Bush vs. Trump, en Español

    Bush vs. Trump, en Español

    It's tempting to treat Donald Trump's claim that Jeb Bush “should set the example by speaking English while in the United States” as just another bigoted remark from a presidential candidate who infamously referred to Mexican immigrants as “rapists” (though he added that “some, I assume, are good...

  • Iran nuclear deal is an opportunity the U.S. should seize wholeheartedly

    Iran nuclear deal is an opportunity the U.S. should seize wholeheartedly

    Arms control agreements are by their very nature controversial. They often fall short of achieving everything that was hoped for. Potential gaps in enforcement can make the threat worse, and even if the parties abide by the terms of the agreement, evasion is always suspected.

Comments
Loading
76°