The reasons are entirely personal. Like arguing with a three-year old, it was all very tiresome. Still, some of those emotionally and intellectually stunted Rand devotees are now ruining the country for us all.
During my remarks, I pointed to something that should have struck the audience as curious. In the corner of the room, near the entrance, stood an armed police officer wearing a bulletproof vest.
Audience members had to submit to bag checks and scanning by metal-detecting wands to enter the room. I noted the irony. To be sure, not every discussion of even controversial topics on a campus requires—or, at least in earlyrequired—that level of security.
Our event featured Flemming Rose, the former editor of the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten, who sparked the Danish cartoons crisis in late when he decided to publish cartoons of Muhammad as part of a story on self-censorship.
The incident led to riots in many Muslim countries throughout the world and landed Rose on an Al-Qaeda hit list alongside Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and others who have committed blasphemy in the eyes of many Muslims.
What a difference a year and a half makes. At the beginning ofthe use of force to shut down talks and even attack speakers on college campuses was still relatively rare. Today, it is starting to seem like the new normal.
As it happens, at the very moment we were speaking about free speech at UCLA, the University of California at Berkeley was erupting in flames as students and members of the anarchist group Antifa rioted in response to a scheduled appearance by Milo Yiannopoulos.
Within about a month, something similar happened at Middlebury College in Vermont.
Students and faculty disrupted a talk by Charles Murray, forcing him and Middlebury professor Laura Stanger to retreat to a kind of safe room from which they could live stream their remarks on the internet.
Students tried to prevent even that from happening by banging on the walls and pulling fire alarms. The two made it through the talk, but when they were leaving for dinner, they and their security detail were attacked by a group of students in the parking lot.
By early April, it seemed like a pattern was emerging when a group of students at Claremont McKenna College blocked people from attending a talk by Manhattan Institute scholar Heather Mac Donald.
Protestors created a human chain around the building, forcing Mac Donald, like Murray, to broadcast her speech from an empty room. By the end of her talk, protesters had become so rowdy that security officers feared they might break the windows and storm into the room.
Mac Donald was ushered out the back door and whisked away in a waiting security vehicle. Mac Donald recently participated in a free speech event with Dave Rubin and me at U.
But he saw the new version as a form of intimidation. When he moved his class off campus, he received threats, prompting campus police to tell him it was not safe for him to return. Students later took over the library and several administrative offices.
Weinstein also appeared at one of our free speech events. Incidents like these have continued since then. At Rutgers University, students shouted down a panel discussion on multiculturalism.
Why is this happening? The most fundamental answer is: Students—indeed, many people today—have accepted ideas that rationalize violence against speakers whose ideas they oppose.
If we forget the difference, we will end up with guns settling our disputes, rather than arguments. The book is a collection of essays Rand wrote about the New Left in the s originally published under the title The New Left: Then, as now, students physically occupied university offices and classrooms.
The universities, she argued, were teaching the very ideas that led students to attack and occupy them. In the s, the primary philosophical vehicles for these ideas were logical positivism and existentialism.
Today, they are postmodernism and multiculturalism. But the common core is the same.Racism by Ayn Rand. Racism is the lowest, most crudely primitive form of collectivism. It is the notion of ascribing moral, social or political significance to a man’s genetic lineage — the notion that a man’s intellectual and characterological traits are produced and transmitted by his internal body chemistry.
This essay may be cited as Ayn Rand, “Racism,” The Objectivist Newsletter 2, no. 9 (New York, NY: Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Branden, September ), 33– The footnote is found in chapter seventeen of Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selﬁshness: A New Concept of Egoism. This essay may be cited as Ayn Rand, “Racism,” The Objectivist Newsletter 2, no.
9 (New York, NY: Ayn Rand and Nathaniel Branden, September ), 33– The footnote is found in chapter seventeen of Ayn Rand’s The Virtue of Selﬁshness: A New Concept of Egoism.
In a article analyzing the so-called free speech movement at U.C. Berkeley, Ayn Rand identified fundamental causes that help explain today’s attacks on free speech at college campuses across America. The universities, she argued, were teaching the .
Ayn Rand’s Anthem discusses many controversial ideas throughout the book.
Often times the ideas shown are extreme examples and often polar opposites. Most often the ideas used by Rand can be perceived as one is completely bad and the other good. One of the best examples of this is the extremes of caring only for [ ].
A thoroughgoing condemnation of racism across several dimensions — philosophical, moral, psychological and political — as the “lowest, most crudely primitive form of .