Objectivism: The Unlikeliest Cult In History

An excerpt from Michael Shermer:

One of the closest to Rand was Nathaniel Branden, a young philosophy student who joined the Collective in the early days before Atlas Shrugged was published. In his autobiographical memoirs entitled Judgment Day (1989), Branden recalled: "There were implicit premises in our world to which everyone in our circle subscribed, and which we transmitted to our students at NBI." Incredibly, and here is where the philosophical movement became a cult, they came to believe that (pp. 255-256):

• Ayn Rand is the greatest human being who has ever lived.
• Atlas Shrugged is the greatest human achievement in the history of the world.
• Ayn Rand, by virtue of her philosophical genius, is the supreme arbiter in any issue pertaining to what is rational, moral, or appropriate to man's life on earth.
• Once one is acquainted with Ayn Rand and/or her work, the measure of one's virtue is intrinsically tied to the position one takes regarding her and/or it.
• No one can be a good Objectivist who does not admire what Ayn Rand admires and condemn what Ayn Rand condemns.
• No one can be a fully consistent individualist who disagrees with Ayn Rand on any fundamental issue.
• Since Ayn Rand has designated Nathaniel Branden as her "intellectual heir," and has repeatedly proclaimed him to be an ideal exponent of her philosophy, he is to be accorded only marginally less reverence than Ayn Rand herself.
• But it is best not to say most of these things explicitly (excepting, perhaps, the first two items). One must always maintain that one arrives at one's beliefs solely by reason.

An interesting anti-Objectivist perspective from 1993.

Comments

[Guy]

Sums up some of the main reasons why I am not an Objectivist.
I remember back around '91, when I was reading a lot of Rand and Leonard Peikoff, a friend of mine commented "if they are atheists, why do they speak of her and her philosophy in religious terms?".
Lots of good things there, her works definitely changed my life and how I look at the world - but yes, very cult-like.
I remember seeing Peikoff in a news interview a few years ago - he seemed to be seething with anger and pretty much came off as a loon. I think he was trying to portray a "My Brain Big - your brain small" attitude, but it didn't come off well.

[Tom McMahon]

That's why I appreciate Nathaniel Branden. The worthwhile points without all the Weird Cult of Personality.

[Tom McMahon]

[When Slim Pickens learns Clevon Little is the new sheriff of Rock Ridge in the movie Blazing Saddles]:

Slim Pickens: Now if that don't beat all. Here we take the good time and trouble to slaughter every last Indian in the West, and for what? So we can appoint a sheriff that's blacker than any Indian. I AM depressed.

For some reason that always reminded me of the Objectivists: They got rid of God and the Book of Genesis and for what? So they could endlessly discuss Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged in the the same worshipful tone.

[James Heaps-Nelson]

Funny, I'm an Objectivist or Objectivist sympathizer depending on who's drawing up the definitions and I don't think any of the statements in Michael Shermer's list are true or accepted by most Objectivists. When I meet Objectivists like that I avoid them like the plague.

Most Objectivists I know regard their work and romantic life and other personal aspects of their lives as more important than the explicit philosophy unless their work involves Objectivism as a philosophy.

In fact, one of the very difficulties Objectivism has as an organized movement is that people tend to put involvement in the movement fairly low on their list of priorities.

If an Objectivist behaves badly or in a cult-like, subservient manner they're an embarrassment to themselves. Ultimately, everyone speaks and acts for themselves and reality, not Ayn Rand, is the final arbiter of any philosophical question. And she said as much.

Jim

[James Heaps-Nelson]

Tom,

I posted my last comment before I saw your comment. I could say the same thing about religious conservatives. Here they finally control all branches of government and we've got bigger spending than the liberals could ever muster. It all comes down to whether people practice what they preach.

Jim

[Mike Renzulli]

While I am not an objectivist, I would recommend that you and others read author Jim Peron's response to Shermeer's article, Mr. McMahon (link below). While it is true objectivist chapters or entities can degenerate into cults (like what is seen with the Ayn Rand Institute), I doubt very much this is the case overall in the movement due to (as James Heaps-Nelson points out) the low priority many Objectivists put the movement and philosophy on their list. There is a more (for lack of a better term) moderate Objectivist organization headed by David Kelly called The Objectist Center that is not dogmatic like ARI is.

http://www.noblesoul.com/orc/essays/obj_cult1.html