The Cult of Selfishness

Susan of Texas boils Objectivism down to its base over at naked capitalism:

1805 the selfish were constrained by Christian teachings on duty and charity. Fortunately for their bank accounts, modern economic conservatives like Goldberg and McArdle feel comfortable ignoring religious teachings because they can appeal to the authority of a failed screenwriter. When they are not sure what to say, they can drag out their worn copy of Atlas Shrugged and tell themselves that Ayn Rand was right: the poor are looting and mooching scum.

Rand believed that the world should be ruled by the elite, a tiny group of genetically superior men and women whose drive for excellence in the business world would inevitably lead to world domination. The only thing that hampered their rise to greatness was the mediocrity and weakness of the rest of the world. The scum, looters and moochers who made up the other 99% of the population obviously wanted to bring down the wealthy because of jealousy and shame.

Understandably, this philosophy became extremely popular in the business world. The elite saw Rand’s fairy tales of inherent superiority and personal glorification as a permission slip to denigrate and dismiss the poor. Rand taught the elite to be proud of being greedy and callous. She dreamed up a million reasons to be cold and selfish, why the emotions that were natural to her should be natural to everyone else.

Even though altruism declares that “it is more blessed to give than to receive,” it does not work that way in practice. The givers are never blessed; the more they give, the more is demanded of them; complaints, reproaches and insults are the only response they get for practicing altruism’s virtues (or for their actual virtues).

In other words, forget the poor–what about ME? Rand ignores reality, in which the rich and successful are fawned over by every segment of society. She prefers to take personal affront at any complaints, reproaches and insults directed towards cold, selfish people.

To me, that chart speaks for itself.  Economic crises occur when wealth becomes too highly concentrated.  Once super wealthy people have more money than they can ever spend, they start "investing" it in risky securities, which eventually crash.  Likewise, when the wealth isn't more evenly distributed, the majority of people have to borrow increasing amounts of money to live.  When the security markets crash, the credit dries up, bringing the economy to a halt.  It seems brutally obvious to me that income inequality and economic crises are linked.

As for Rand, she gives selfish people justification for their greed, which deep down, they know is wrong.  That is the only reason her "philosophy" is well-known.  I may try to force my way through The Fountainhead this winter, but only to know what people I disagree with like.  If it's anything like Atlas Shrugged, I'll hate every minute of it.