Source:Ayn Rand Institute– objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand, being interviewed by James McConnell, in 1961.

Source: The New Democrat 

“In this interview, which took place upon publication of For the New Intellectual, Ayn Rand discusses the nature of cultural leadership, the influence of Plato, Aquinas and Kant, the creeping mysticism infecting science and the lengthy process by which individuals become the “new intellectuals” of tomorrow.

Recorded May 15, 1961.”

From the Ayn Rand Institute

Source:The New Democrat– objectivist philosopher Ayn Rand in the 1960s.

One thing I would give Ayn Rand credit for is her consistency. She believed the same things when she became well-known in the 1940s or so all the way up until she died. We agree when it comes to individual freedom that people should have the power to live their own lives and not be interfered with government as long as they aren’t hurting any innocent person. This is something that Liberals have in common with Libertarians and Objectivists.

But I guess the reason why objectivism has never caught on anywhere in the world and why libertarianism has just become a major movement in America and Canada in the last ten years or so is because even though a lot of people tend to believe in both personal economic freedom now, we also tend at least in America believe in a public safety net for people who truly need it.

Canada and Europe, are a bit different where they don’t believe that individuals should be left to take care of themselves and go further than just a social insurance system, which is what a safety net is. And have welfare states there to meet the basic needs of the people. Mixed in with private enterprise to fund those social programs and a good deal of personal freedom as well. As least for a social democracy.

I like to call Americans Classical Liberals, or Social Liberals at least in the sense that we go further when it comes to both personal and economic freedom then Social Democrats. But one thing that separates us from Libertarians is that again we want a safety net for people who truly need it. Not a welfare state to manage people’s economic affairs for them. But social insurance for people who truly hit hard times.