The New Populism

I don't believe that the Religious Right really is all that popular. I think that whatever popularity it does have is being blown out of proportion by scare-mongers seeking to cash in on the Religious Right's attempts to grab power.

But to the extent that the Religious Right does have any popularity, what is its real source? It is human beings' need of a code of morality. The self-destruction of modern philosophy has rendered it unable and unwilling to fill this need. But if modern philosophers don't want to teach people how to find their own answers to moral questions anymore, by teaching that Reason is impotent to provide those answers - it's not, but modern philosophers are - human beings will turn to whoever offers them "answers", however illusory and inaccurate those answers may be - even if those answers include being told not to ask questions: in other words, to rely on faith.

For the power of morality in human existence is a truly awesome one: it is such that human beings would rather be good than right. The "ideal" will always trump the "practical".

If it sounds like what I'm trying to say is that it is modern philosophy that is leading people to religion, it's because that's exactly what I'm saying.

Fortunately, there is one philosophy that stands a chance of reversing this trend: by upholding Reason, identifying its true nature - including the actual nature of its relation to emotion (without Reason there would be no emotions as human beings experience them) - and its power to fill human beings' need for morality - which includes the power to integrate the ideal and the practical. That philosophy is Objectivism.

And I think the Ayn Rand Institute is doing an excellent job of "popularizing" it.

What's wrong with the world

This, to me, is what's wrong with the world today in a nutshell. It's from a description of a course being offered at this summer's Objectivist Conference, "The Rise and Fall of Ancient Greek Justice: Homer to the Sermon on the Mount" to be taught by Robert Mayhew.

The traditional ancient Greek conception of justice is best captured by the idea of helping friends and harming enemies. This conception of justice is improved by later thinkers (like Aeschylus), reaches its climax in Aristotle's moral philosophy—and is utterly rejected by Jesus, who told the pagan world: "Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbour and hate thine enemy. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you."

The latter, of course, is the prevailing view of morality today - summed up, in both religious and secular versions, by the word "altruism".

Geldof and Live 8

Has Bob Geldof learned anything from his experiences with the Live Aid concerts in 1985?

Well, I haven't seen any pronouncements from him yet this time, but I well remember when he was promoting Band Aid and Live Aid back in the 80's. His mantra back then was "This is not about politics". "This" being poverty, of course, the implication being that anyone who dared to mention the political realities - by which I mean the actual causes - of hunger in places like sub-Saharan Africa was, by definition, an anti-humanitarian monster. Of course, it didn't help the actual starving victims of Africa's political realities that Geldof got his come-uppance when his first convoys of "humanitarian aid" to the region were seized by the dictators-of-the-moment in the region.

At least, that's the way I remember events. Didn't hear much from Geldof about that, as I recall.

So I'm rather surprised to see him trying the same trick again, twenty years later. Or should I be?

I think the next time Geldof claims that hunger and poverty don't have anything to do with politics, somebody should call him on it and remind him of what happened the last time he said that.

And tell him that there is a sure-fire cure for poverty and hunger, but it's not a rock concert: it's laissez-faire Capitalism.

In other words: FREEDOM.