Category: The Atlasphere

ARI MediaLink op-ed columnist Robert Garmong has published a new editorial titled “Politics Without Mirrors” which begins:

In a current Supreme Court case, Michael Newdow has challenged the constitutionality of reading the Pledge of Allegiance in public schools. Newdow, an atheist, argues that the Pledge’s reference to America as “one nation under God,” constitutes governmental establishment of religion. The Bush administration counters that the pledge is “a patriotic exercise, not a religious testimonial,” and should be allowed.
This might seem to be a trivial case. But as part of a “culture war” between the religious Right and the secular Left, it has taken on an ominous significance. Both sides have demonstrated naked hostility to the independent mind: the Right, by its desire to force school-aged children to profess religious belief; the Left, by its demands for governmental support for secular ideas.
The First Amendment established what Thomas Jefferson termed a “wall of separation” between Church and State?a deliberate break with the then-standard European practice of establishing an official church by governmental edict and supporting it by taxes. The purpose of Church/State separation was to protect the right to disagree in matters of religion: to ensure that the power of the government would never be used to force a person to profess or support a religious idea he does not agree with. Government officials may make whatever religious pronouncements they wish, on their own?but they may not use the power of the government to promote their ideas.
On religion or any other topic, an individual’s ideas are the matter of his own mind, decided by the application (or misapplication) of his own rational faculty. To force a man to adhere to a particular doctrine is to subvert the very faculty that makes real agreement possible and meaningful, and thereby to paralyze his mechanism for recognizing truth. The kind of forced “agreement” obtained by governmental edict is every bit as meaningless as was the Iraqis’ “love” for Saddam.

See Garmong’s full editorial for additional analysis.

The latest issue of The Objectivist Center’s monthly journal, Navigator, is out.
In the cover article “Death by Environmentalism,” Robert Bidinotto explores the philosophical foundations of the environmental movement and argues that the consequences of accepting them are human deaths. Bidinotto writes:

In the same way that so many intellectuals once turned a blind eye to the massacres perpetrated by communists, most intellectuals now evade the three decades of mass destruction and misery perpetrated by environmentalists. Sharing the movement’s underlying philosophic precepts and focusing their gaze upon its proclaimed goals, they remain blissfully ignorant of its wretched consequences, or—when brought to their attention—excuse them as unfortunate “excesses” wrought by a few overly zealous “idealists,” whose hearts are nonetheless in the right place.

On the 40th anniversary of Ayn Rand’s Playboy interview, Don Hauptman shares omissions from the interview and his thoughts from looking over the original manuscripts and galley proofs of this influential interview. In his article “The ‘Lost’ Parts of Ayn Rand’s Playboy Interview,” Hauptman tells what it was like to see these valuable documents:

It was an exciting experience to examine the archive for the first time. What a fascinating collection! I saw Rand’s and the editors’ revisions. I spotted numerous differences from the published version, as well as questions and answers that were omitted in their entirety. Every manuscript page and even the most minor corrections Rand made were initialed “AR.”

See the full issue of Navigator for these and other articles.

Long-time Objectivist scholar Stephen Hicks has reprinted his article “Ayn Rand and Contemporary Business Ethics” on his web site.
This article was originally published in The Journal of Accounting, Ethics, and Public Policy. In the article, Dr. Hicks writes:

My purpose in this essay is to defend the egoism that the business world depends upon. Business is about production and trade. Production is a consequence of individuals? taking responsibility for their lives and exercising rational judgment about their needs and how to fulfill them. Trade is a consequence of productive individuals? willingness to interact cooperatively to mutual benefit. These principles ? responsibility, rationality, cooperation ? are core principles in any healthy moral system, and form the core principles of the business world.

See the full article for further details.