Marxism And Criticism In Ayn Rand's Rights

Ayn Rand is easily one of the most controversial, provocative and rejected philosophical minds of the 20th century. She is completely absent from Donald M. Borchert’s Encyclopedia of Philosophy where only a short reference to Rand’s compatriot Vladimir Solovyov’s “…objective forms of moral life” (125) even hints at any thing remotely to do with Rand. Rand’s utter rejection at the hands of the mainstream philosophical community stems from her controversial viewpoints on various topics and her fierce criticism of intellectuals

Jonathan Chait in his book review “Ayn Rand and the Invincible Cult of Selfishness on the American Right” describes Rand’s philosophy objectivism as, “…premised on absolute centrality of logic to all human endeavors.” (Chait) Chait also draws parallels between parts of Rand’s philosophy and Marxism, “The bifurcated class analysis did not end the similarities between Rand’s worldview and Marxism. Rand’s Russian youth imprinted upon her a belief in the polemical influence of fiction. She once wrote to a friend that "it’s time we realize--as the Reds do--that spreading our ideas in the form of fiction is a great weapon, because it arouses the public to an emotional, as well as intellectual response to our cause." (Chait) Now considering the time that Rand lived in it comes as no surprise that any views that even remotely resemble Marxism would be rejected with prejudice. Ironically even with these similarities Rand was definitely not a communist and even wrote The Screen Guide for Americans in 1950 in which she delineated how the motion picture industry could avoid subtle communist influences in their films. Chait writes concerning this, “The directives, which neatly summarize Rand’s worldview, included such cate...

... middle of paper ...

...ersial but coupled with Rand’s controversial personality and other views would be ripe to discard.

So Rand is in the peculiar position of having different views on how to live life than others that on the surface don’t seem terribly controversial and yet are completely shunned from the mainstream philosophical community. Did the fact that she was a woman with something to say in the 20th century work against her? It certainly seems like it did, as I firmly believe if she had been a man the backlash would not have been as severe or even existent. I could hardly use the Encyclopedia of Philosophy as there is absolutely nothing that even references Rand in the entire work! In the end Rand is a fascinating figure with interesting ideas embraced by many loyal followers that have been for better or for worse at least for now, relegated to the fringes of scholarly thought.