Objectivism, the First

You know the drill, everyone. This is my first post in over a month, and I'm going to spend the first paragraph here explaining to you all why I'm terribly sorry about it, and that I'll do better next time, but you know, I won't. I do enjoy writing for this blog, or the attention at least, and I'm gonna keep it going for that, and for the two or three people who consistently read it.

See kids, that's called self-deprecation. Don't respond to it, because the person is probably just fishing for compliments. And so I was. Bad Josh.

In other news, this will be my fiftieth post, excluding the introduction I made but including the midpoint thing I made after one of my posts startlingly became popular, for some reason. What better way to celebrate the occasion that to break open the wine and start partying? Probably writing the post, that's what.

I don't remember how I was first introduced to Ayn Rand and her philosophy and style of life, Objectivism, but I started reading her magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged a couple months back, and recently finished it. I found Objectivism to be a really interesting philosophy, and one that I would personally employ if not for some points I'll bring up later.

The broad points of Objectivism can be summed up in one phrase; "Live for yourself". A staunch anti-Communist, Rand believed that no person should be forced to live for another person, or that anyone besides you has any right to dictate what you do.

Your profits from your work are yours, your creations are yours, your house is yours, and you don't have to pay taxes on any of it, because you've earned it.

The principle tenant of Mrs. Rand's philosophy was that the standard of morality relied upon hard work. In the conventional, for lack of a better term, system of morality, kindness is its standard. If you deny your friends a dollar at lunch, you are mean, and if you lend them that dollar, you are nice. You are mean if you chase them to pay you back, a saint if you let it go.

Objectivism isn't like that. You are judged as good or evil based on whether you work for what you own or whether you mooch off of someone else for it. The worst criminal in both the conventional and Objectivist viewpoint is the thief, the person who takes from someone else unjustly.

Don't believe me? Murder is theft of someone's life. Rape is theft of someone's sexuality and free will. Stealing is, well thievery, and I hope I don't have to explain that one to you.

On that broad level, I like Objectivism. And there is another thing I like about Objectivism, one belief that I think should be adhered to much more often in our culture; the thought that you are not perfect.

I see these posts on Facebook of all different types of people, and a caption "Like if you Think that Everyone Is Beautiful <3". It may be accompanied by a picture of a young child with cancer (the one I'm thinking of is clearly photo-shopped), a girl whom most would consider unattractive, or someone with a debilitating injury.

Want to know a secret? I don't think everyone is beautiful. I think it is really, incredibly stupid to entertain that notion. I also don't think that a great personality can make someone beautiful. The moment we give in and call everyone beautiful is the moment the word ceases to mean anything. I've called maybe two girls I know beautiful ( I'll admit I'm a bit lax when I say it about celebrities, but Keira Knightley... wow.), even if it wasn't to their faces. That makes it MEAN something.

Also, it doesn't entertain the notion that intelligent people should be shackled down by their less intelligent (Editor's note: Spelled Intelligent wrong twice there) peers. This one our society has fewer problems with, as colleges and honors classes and A.P. classes have no problem saying that people aren't good enough to take them.

But Rand didn't stop at morality, she also had a lot to say of romance and politics. I'll come back to politics in a little bit, but I'd like to talk about her ideas on romance for a little.

There's a great quote somewhere, and I'll see if I can dig it up (Ed. note: nope!) where she said that the person you love, like, marry, are interested in, etc, is a reflection of who you are. The person who loves a goddess is the greatest (or god, whatever), because they strive to improve themselves and to better themselves. They aim high. The people who settle for promiscuous folk, those who hang around with sluts and harlots, those are the ones who don't deserve to be loved because they love those who aren't worthy of it.

Rand also didn't believe that the mind and body were things to be treated as separate entities, as much of the world does today. Who you found attractive is a reflection of what you loved, ergo what you are.

Now, the more astute of my readers may be wondering how Rand can allow anyone to be in a relationship. "If you can only do things for yourself, then relationships can't work out! They are about compromise, and pixie dust, and all the other ingredients for the Power Puff Girls!"

Here's an old How I Met Your Mother quote, from when the show was good. "It's hard. Making sacrifices, living with someone else, it's...hard. But if it's the right person, it shouldn't matter, because when it's the sacrifices or they leave, it's the easiest choice in the world." Slightly paraphrased.

Be with someone because they make you happy, not to make them happy. Do things for other people to make you happy, not for them. I have a little idea on this; I'll make me happy, and you make you happy. That way, you don't have to worry about me, and I don't have to worry about you.

If you do love someone, you'll want to do things to make them happy. That's fine, that's great in fact. Do it for you! But if you are in a relationship with someone who makes you unhappy, leave. Don't fidget around. Your happiness is your responsibility, take control of it.

 'Everyone deserves love', one person once said to me. No. That simply isn't true. If everyone deserved love, then why would anyone work for it? Why would people work to become funnier, prettier, or smarter? They wouldn't and the world would stagnate.

If no one you know deserves your love, wait for someone who does.

Thanks for reading and considering,
-J. Valett