Chris Bolt: You write: “Perhaps the reason we are going down Ayn Rand’s path is because we removed God from the center in the first place. That is the inherent contradiction in Ayn Rand’s belief: if you leave man to his own devices he will think of ways in which to inflict harm on other men.”
First, no one, not even Rand, removed God from the center. And, the “center” of what? You don’t specify. I suspect that, like “Kipling” and a few other commentators here, you subscribe consciously or unconsciously to the notion of Original Sin, which is one of the most heinous religious concepts ever foisted on men in the name of morality — that men are born evil (without having ever committed a crime or a “sin”) and must be constrained by morality, whether Christian or not. But man is born tabula rasa, ignorant of the world and ignorant of what are good and evil. He learns. He has volition and can choose his own path, and take responsibility for his actions and values. Reason is his only guide, not an arbitrary set of nonsensical rules designed to make him work against himself, which is what altruism and the code of sacrifice compel him to do.
You cite the National Review as having “a pretty good summary about Ayn Rand’s philosophy.” Do you not know that that the National Review has borne Rand a vicious, smearing animus ever since the Whittaker Chambers “review” of Atlas Shrugged in 1957, a periodically recurring animus trotted out by William F. Buckley when he was alive and now by his successors at the NR? Buckley never refuted Rand or ever came close to it. He couldn’t. He settled for sarcasm and ad hominem, disguised in the thick frosting of his snarky vocabulary and vituperative style. You should read “The Fountainhead” and “Atlas Shrugged,” and not take the National Review’s word for it.
As for Benjamin Franklin’s advice to the author of the anti-religious screed not to publish it: I know about this incident, and Franklin was merely cautioning the author, not necessarily disagreeing with him. He knew the temper of his times. While Franklin was a great man in many respects, he is probably the least admirable of the Founders. He was something of a political pragmatist all his life, and a hedonist, to boot. He was not above cooperating with the British Crown if he thought he could benefit from it.
