98
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 73:
Line 73: − + Line 82:
Line 82: − By her theory, then, if people were at least free to leave a society that executed people without trial, then if they did not leave, no country ought to be obliged to relieve their suffering by invasion. But if they ''could not'' leave, then their country would be liable for invasion, because they could not rationally help themselves. The freedom of emigration follows from the freedom of association—and the obligation, such as it was, of other nation-states and their militaries to come to such people's aid follows from the Objectivist ethic of emergencies, defined above.+ − −
→Politics: clarify foreign policy
From the above, one may conclude that Objectivism rejects the [[code duello]] as an improper feature of society, and even as an attribute of [[anarchy]]. In fact, Rand herself specifically stated that government must be a [[monopoly]], because any "competitive [[economy]]" of government would inevitably lead to a state not much different from gang warfare.
From the above, one may conclude that Objectivism rejects the [[code duello]] as an improper feature of society, and even as an attribute of [[anarchy]]. In fact, Rand herself specifically stated that government must be a [[monopoly]], because any "competitive [[economy]]" of government would inevitably lead to a state not much different from gang warfare.
However, Rand herself advocated many things the support for which, from a strict read of Objectivism, is doubtful. She repeatedly stated, in a number of essays and in at least one magazine interview, that <blockquote>Just as the [[United States]] had the right to invade [[Nazi]] [[Germany]], so the United States has the right to invade [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|Soviet Russia]] or any other slave pen.</blockquote> She justified this aggressive foreign policy stance by drawing up a set of four evil policies that, if any country engaged in all of the same, would make it liable for invasion by a society that did not do these things:
However, Rand herself advocated many things the support for which, from a strict read of Objectivism, is doubtful. She repeatedly stated, in a number of essays and in at least one magazine interview, that <blockquote>Just as the [[United States]] had the right to invade [[Nazi]] [[Germany]], so the United States has the right to invade [[Union of Soviet Socialist Republics|Soviet Russia]] or any other slave pen.</blockquote> She emphasized that a just nation has a right but not the ''duty'' to depose the regime of an oppressive dictatorship. To assume such a duty when self-defense doesn't require an expenditure of military right is deemed altruistic. She opposed the [[Vietnam War]] on such grounds. She describes the degree of oppression that makes a regime illegitimate:
# Execution without a proper, fair trial
# Execution without a proper, fair trial
By "censorship" Rand meant not only restrictions on political speech, but in fact any restriction on any form of artistic expression—even on forms of expression that she explicitly despised and suggested that any rational being would despise.
By "censorship" Rand meant not only restrictions on political speech, but in fact any restriction on any form of artistic expression—even on forms of expression that she explicitly despised and suggested that any rational being would despise.
Of course, any country that invades or otherwise attacks another nation (one that does not initiate force against other nations or its own people) lays itself open to a counter invasion. This follows from the principle of the Law of Retaliation defined above.
Of course, any country that invades or otherwise attacks another, either directly or through surrogates, lays itself open to a counterinvasion by the country so attacked. This follows from the principle of the Law of Retaliation defined above.
=== Aesthetics ===
=== Aesthetics ===