Ayn Rand was consistent. She was an individualist and an atheist. Notice what I am NOT saying: I am not saying that an atheist is necessarily an individualist. In truth I am aware of more atheists who are collectivists than individualists.
Rather, I would say that belief in either God or spirituality goes hand in hand with collectivism. Spirituality is about "the whole enchilada," a term the Watergate scandal helped popularize. It witnesses the connectedness of all things -- that in the poet's words, "no man is an island"; that, in Jesus' words, "as much as you have done it to the least of these you have done it so to me."
In biblical understanding, not even God is an individualist. God created companions, dwells among us and invites us to enjoy the common spiritual wealth that is already available. In both Jewish and Christian understandings, God treats us collectively: if one sinned, all are collectively responsible in the Old Testament; in the New Testament God makes rain and sunshine fall on the just and the unjust. In both testaments we are to love our neighbor as ourselves, which requires compassion -- identification, solidarity, justice and mercy.
The Reformed tradition of Christianity emphasized collective salvation over individual salvation, but this has been a theme of Christianity from the beginning. Despite the emphasis on individual salvation in present-day evangelical circles, Jesus was said to reconcile the whole world to God's self. It's not "all about me," but "all about us," and I would add that the whole creation is included in "us."
This does not mean that I don't believe in individual responsibility, but that we are individually responsible for the whole world, that every action we take or don't take -- "sins of commission or omission" -- must be accountable to needs broader than our own.
I don't know how anyone following the news does not cry or become indignant and angry at the inequality and injustice and violence, as well as grieve the losses of every nation in conflict or enduring calamity and the environment suffering global warming and deforestation.
Something else I am NOT saying: I am not saying that Christians who claim individualism over collectivism are not Christian. I am saying they are inconsistent.
See also 'The Making of You,' an earlier post on Glaser's blog, "Progressive Christian Reflections." Glaser is the author of 12 books, including 'The Final Deadline: What Death Has Taught Me About Life.'
Charles Redfern: Paul Ryan and the Breach Between Intelligence and Wisdom
Daniel C. Maguire: Paul Ryan's Catholic Problem
We evolved and became successful, not because of our individual intelligence (though that certainly helped), but primarily because of our ability to be social. We communicate, teach, learn, and help each other, and that is the ONLY thing that makes the difference between a great society and one that goes extinct. She was blind to this fact.
"We inherit the products of the thought of other men. We inherit the wheel. We make a cart. The cart becomes an automobile. The automobile becomes an airplane. But all through the process what we receive from others is only the end product of their thinking. The moving force is the creative faculty which takes this product as material, uses it and originates the next step. This creative faculty cannot be given or received, shared or borrowed. It belongs to single, individual men. That which it creates is the property of the creator. Men learn from one another. But all learning is only the exchange of material. No man can give another the capacity to think. Yet that capacity is our only means of survival."--Ayn Rand
"There is nothing wrong in helping other people, if and when they are worthy of the help and you can afford to help them."--Ayn Rand
Look up what she said about charity on the Ayn Rand Lexicon, available online.
who decides when they are "worthy"?
As far as charity...it is a good thing, but it doesn't raise society as a whole.....your forgetting human nature...as she forgot human nature.
Assuming a perfectly rational group of individuals, it may work....but we are NOT perfectly rational.
That you have no understanding of Libertarianism is hardly surprising. The central belief of the Libertarian is self-reliance.
Not that the government can do no right, but that as adults responsible for ourselves, there is little need for government to "take care" of everyone.
"Did you hear about the Muslim Mystic who found common ground with an American Atheist? That question sounds like the beginning of a joke. It isn’t. "
There just has to be something smart about it, right?
From Wikipedia we find that "Ayn Rand describes seven virtues: rationality, productiveness, pride, independence, integrity, honesty and justice."
Justice can entail empathy and compassion. But Ayn Rand points out that one cannot simultaneously feel compassion for a victim and compassion for the victim's persecutor.
I am almost 70 years old, am an atheist, and have lived all my adult life according to the principles of Objectivism. Yet I consider myself to be an empathetic and compassionate person. If you do not understand this, then you do not really understand Objectivism. As Ayn Rand would say, "Check your premises."
As an Objectivist, I appreciate you making the observation that Christianity and collectivism go hand-in-hand. They do. You are consistent, albeit -- in my opinion -- misguided.
Try pride.
"The virtue of Pride can best be described by the term: “moral ambitiousness.” It means that one must earn the right to hold oneself as one’s own highest value by achieving one’s own moral perfection—which one achieves by never accepting any code of irrational virtues impossible to practice and by never failing to practice the virtues one knows to be rational—by never accepting an unearned guilt and never earning any, or, if one has earned it, never leaving it uncorrected—by never resigning oneself passively to any flaws in one’s character—by never placing any concern, wish, fear or mood of the moment above the reality of one’s own self-esteem. And, above all, it means one’s rejection of the role of a sacrificial animal, the rejection of any doctrine that preaches self-immolation as a moral virtue or duty."
When did I not respect the rights of an individual? When did I impose limits on your freedom?
It seems to me that spirituality has become something of an amorphous word. If used in a secular context of love, compassion, tolerance, awe, wonder, etc, then I'm spiritual. But I hesitate to use the word because I think most people's perception of it involves religious experience, which in my case would be misleading.