After years of attacking public schools and their teachers, after years of demanding public funds for private choices, the discontented right found another approach to getting the kind of schools they want by adopting the curriculum provided by Hillsdale College, a small Christian college in Michigan. No more focus on racism and the other dark chapters in American history, past and present. Grievance is gone; what remains is an updated version of the American story taught in the 1950s. It relies, in large part, on the so-called 1776 curriculum commissioned by Trump in the last days of his term, which relied on Hillsdale advisors. Kathryn Joyce wrote in Salon about this development. She is one of the few journalists who has devoted time to understanding the rightwing effort to undermine or control public schools.
Kathryn Joyce: How a Tiny Christian College Has Led the Fight to Undermine or Control Public Schools
Charles Foster Johnson is the founder of Pastors for Texas Children. He actively supports full funding of public schools and separation of church and state. He, along with other faith leaders, wrote the following article in The Dallas News.
Don’t Defund Public Schools
Voucher scheme wastes money, violates Constitution
The education community in Texas has remained patient and courteous throughout the spring general session of the Legislature despite the record $32.7 billion surplus. They have upheld the values of kindness and respect that society expects. However, there comes a point when patience wears thin, and the truth must be spoken: it is time to allocate the necessary resources to educators and school districts.
Simply put, it’s time to provide the funding our educators and school districts need. This funding is not a luxury; it is a necessity. It is essential for Texas teachers to keep pace with the rising cost of living. School districts must fulfill their role in shaping the future workforce of Texas, which boasts the ninth-largest economy in the world. It is imperative to honor the trust placed in you by Texas taxpayers, who expect their hard-earned money to be invested wisely in the education of over 5 million Texas students.
The time for political games and holding funds hostage for private schools must end. Public schools are the heart of our educational system and need their fair share of resources. Even after passing tax relief measures earlier this summer, there remains a surplus of $14 billion, not to mention the over $21 billion in the state’s rainy day fund. Moreover, inflation ensures that surplus funds will continue to accumulate in the foreseeable future. This is not the government’s money to wield for hardline negotiations; it belongs to the people of Texas.
Over 90% of Texas students attend public schools, yet the state has not increased funding to school districts since 2019. Operating costs have significantly risen during this period. Additionally, our teachers, who demonstrated unwavering dedication during the global pandemic, have yet to receive sufficient salary increases to keep pace with inflation.
It is high time to allocate the necessary resources to public schools to address these issues.
Due to legislative inaction during the spring, school boards across Texas were forced to approve deficit budgets merely to survive this academic year. For example, Dallas ISD approved a $186 million deficit budget, Garland ISD faced a $69 million deficit, and Plano ISD had to manage a $24 million shortfall. This approach is akin to depleting one’s savings to pay the electric bill — it is unsustainable and morally unacceptable.
What is most disheartening is the lack of significant funding for schools this year and the mounting frustration within the education community: educators, administrators and parents alike. It should not have come to this point.
Instead of prioritizing public schools, Gov. Greg Abbott has traversed the state promoting a program that redirects tax dollars to private schools, masquerading under the banner of “education freedom.” Comparable programs in other states have proven to be financially burdensome. Arizona’s private school subsidy program, initially allocated at $65 million, is estimated to cost $900 million next year. In Florida, a similar program has been used for non-educational purposes like theme park tickets, kayaks and televisions (https://www.firstcoastnews.com/article/news/verify/yes-school-vouchers-in-florida-can-be-used-for-tvs-skateboards-theme-park-tickets/77-49577639-1a29-4acd-86ac-af50efc107e9).
Voucher programs like these do not align with the principles of fiscal conservatism. Moreover, the effectiveness of private school subsidies in improving student achievement remains highly questionable. In other states, established private schools have yet to embrace these subsidies due to limited capacity and high costs. Consequently, makeshift private schools have arisen, unable to match the offerings of public schools, resulting in most students returning to the public system.
The notion that funding for Texas public schools has been delayed to channel resources to private schools should anger the parents of millions of children and the thousands of educators who tirelessly serve them. Our students have only one chance to experience their current grade level; they should not be made to wait.
In a disturbing breach of the American principle of separation between church and state, Abbott has called upon ministers and pastors to advocate for this subsidy program from their pulpits on Sunday, Oct. 15. Texans understand a fundamental truth that eludes the governor: Genuine faith must be voluntary and cannot be endorsed or supported by state authority. Using tax dollars to subsidize religious instruction is a violation of this principle.
Abbott’s threats against state representatives who support public education constitute a desperate attempt to intimidate them. The Texas House has consistently opposed private school subsidies for over two decades, and there is no reason for that stance to change now.
The time for delay has passed; enough is enough.
Charles F. Johnson is executive director of Pastors For Texas Children. George A. Mason is senior pastor emeritus at Wilshire Baptist Church. Victoria Robb Powers is senior pastor at Royal Lane Baptist Church. Andy Stoker is interim executive director at Interfaith Alliance Texas. Neil G. Thomas is senior pastor at Cathedral of Hope United Church of Christ. They wrote this column for The Dallas Morning News.
Robert Hubbell is an always sensible blogger. In this post, he addresses the dysfunction in the House GOP. Kevin McCarthy paid the price for empowering the far-right faction of his party. He put his fate in their hands, even though they are a small minority. Hubbell believes there is only one way forward. Bipartisanship.
He writes:
Each additional day that Republicans fail to elect a Speaker of the House is a “never-before-in-the-history-of-our-nation” event. Kevin McCarthy was the first speaker to be ousted on a motion to vacate. Steve Scalise is the first “post-motion-to-vacate” nominee for speaker to withdraw his candidacy before a floor vote on his nomination. We are in uncharted constitutional waters.
The “Speaker of the House” is one of two legislative officers mentioned in the Constitution. (Art I, Sec 3, Cl. 5: “The House of Representatives shall chuse their Speaker.”) The Speaker is second in the line of succession prescribed in the Presidential Succession Act of 1947. The power of the House to act is dependent on a speaker who manages the calendar, controls debate, and calls for votes on motions to advance and approve legislation.
The inability of Republicans to elect a speaker is due, in part, to their narrow margin of control—four votes. But Nancy Pelosi accomplished great things with a four-vote margin during the 117th Congress (2021-2022)—the first two years of President Biden’s historic legislative run.
The dysfunction in the Republican House is a direct consequence of MAGA’s election of extremist candidates in gerrymandered districts (e.g., Jim Jordan). Those MAGA extremists constitute one of several independent federations operating under the umbrella name “Republican Party” in the House. But as is plain, the term “Republican Party” is a notional concept in the House with no operational consequence.
The atomism of the House GOP will not be overcome no matter how many times the fractious Republican caucus votes for a speaker. Nor will it change if Republicans elect a speaker subject to removal by a motion to vacate made by a single member.
The consequences are real; some Republicans understand that fact. GOP Rep. Michael McCaul said the following after Scalise withdrew his name from consideration:
We are living in a dangerous world; the world’s on fire. Our adversaries are watching what we do — and quite frankly, they like it.
I see a lot of threats out there. One of the biggest threats I see is in the [GOP caucus] room, because we can’t unify as a conference and put the speaker in the chair . . . .
There is only one path forward. It is staring Republicans in the face. But they have yet to debase themselves enough or humiliate enough of their wannabe leaders to accept the inevitable: They do not have a governable majority and must join with Democrats to elect a consensus candidate with support from both parties.
Or, as Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries said, the only path forward is for
traditional Republicans break with the extremists within the House Republican Conference and partner with Democrats on a bipartisan path forward.
Some Republicans understand that fact but have yet to find the courage to speak that truth out loud. The time will come; it must. The only question is how long before Republicans accept that truth—and how much drama and disruption the GOP will inflict on the American people before they surrender to reality.
Addendum: Republicans are floating the notion of an “acting speaker” with expanded powers to allow passage of limited resolutions and specific bills. No such creature exists under the Constitution or the rules of the House. If Republicans can agree on expanding powers for an acting speaker, they can elect a speaker. (For a discussion of the limited powers of acting Speaker pro tempore Patrick McHenry, see House Practice: A Guide to the Rules, Precedents and Procedures of the House – Chapter 34. Office of the Speaker (govinfo.gov))
Further addendum: On two occasions, the House has elected a speaker by a plurality vote. But a plurality vote to elect the speaker requires a rule change that would, in turn, require a majority vote. There is only one path forward: A bipartisan governing coalition.
Please open the link to finish the post.
While in Prague, I went with a group of about 25 people to visit Terezin. I wasn’t sure what to expect. I had seen a book of drawings created by the children of Terezin. Years ago, I had visited Auschwitz, which was an extermination camp, with gas chambers and huge ovens for incinerating bodies. The displays of luggage, hair, and other reminders of those who were gassed were gruesome and horrifying.
Terezin was not an extermination camp, though thousands of people died there. Most people sent to Terezin were later shipped to Auschwitz to be killed. I recalled reading that the Nazis used it as a propaganda showplace, where they demonstrated to Red Cross officials that the Jews there were living in a place similar to a resort, under idyllic conditions.
Terezin is one hour outside Prague. There were two parts to it. First was an all-male prison where members of the Czech resistance were held, as well as Jehovah’s Witnesses, homosexuals, and others whom the Nazis hated. This facility was a centuries-old fort with high walls and abysmal living conditions. Many prisoners died of malnutrition or disease.
Then we went to the other part of Terezin, about a mile away. Also known as Terezinstadt, it is a picture-perfect town of colorful houses surrounding a park. The Nazis evicted all its inhabitants and used the town to house Jewish families from Czechoslovakia and Germany and eventually from other countries. There was no barbed wire, though every entrance into the town was guarded.
The town originally had 3,000-5,000 inhabitants. After it was turned into an internment camp for Jews, as many as 60,000 people were crammed into the same buildings. Nazis sent out flyers in Germany and Czechoslovakia portraying Terezin as an idyllic town. Wealthy Jews from Germany paid to go there and were allowed to bring a few pieces of luggage.
Once there, all their possessions were taken away, and they were assigned to a crowded dormitory. Men and women lived in separate dormitories, as did children. Families, of course, were separated. Adults were required to work, and children were mostly confined to their dormitories. Workers were paid in scrip, which they could use to buy clothing that had been confiscated from new arrivals.
Food was scarce, and many died of malnutrition and disease. There were regular transports from Terezin to Auschwitz. Somehow the Jews in Terezin knew that it was very bad to be shipped East, so the Nazis compelled some of those who arrived at Auschwitz to write their friends in Terezin to assure them that Auschwitz was a swell place.
In 1944, the King of Denmark asked the International Red Cross to inspect Terezin because Danish Jews had been sent there. The IRC let the Nazis know that there were coming, and the Nazis selected a date that gave them time to clean up the camp and stage a performance. The chiildren played soccer before an enthusiastic audience. A well-known Czech conductor led an orchestra of imprisoned musicians. The Red Cross issued a report praising conditions at the camp.
A few days after the Red Cross inspection, the orchestra conductor was deported to Auschwitz, along with many of the musicians.
The Terezin museum was fascinating, and I regretted that we had only an hour there. One room was filled with names of children who passed through Terezin. There were 15,000, but only 8,000 names. Names are added whenever anyone is identified. There was a wall of children’s drawings. And there were beautiful poems written by children who knew they were doomed.
The museum also contained a graphic chronology of anti-Semitism in Hitler’s time—such as the Wannsee Conference, where Nazi leaders agreed on the necessity of a “Final Solution” to the Jewish problem: to kill every one of the 11 million Jews then living in Europe.
The architect of the Final Solution was Rudolph Heydrich, who was the deputy head of the Nazi “Protectorate” that included Czechoslovakia. He was assassinated by partisans in 1942.
In retaliation, the Nazis made an example of the towns of Lidice and Lezaky, believing the assassins came from there. The Nazis murdered every man in Lidice and sent the women to the Ravensbruck concentration camp, where most died. Lezaky was totally destroyed, and its inhabitants killed.
In the midst of great beauty and art that we see today in Central Europe, it’s hard to imagine these horrific events. So much death and destruction. Unthinkable. Unimaginable. But true.
As I left the Terezin museum, I saw a copy of a diary written by one of the children who survived both Terezin and Auschwitz: Helga’s Diary. But the shop was closed. I was the last person to exit. I got on the bus and ordered a copy online.
While I am enjoying my vacation, I received the following text message from the Trump campaign. I’m amused that the message refers to me as the Number One Republican in my city. Fake news. I assume it was sent to millions of people, and I imagine many of them were flattered to be addressed as “the Number One Republican in your city.” I thought I’d share it with you as an example of clever marketing, before I write STOP at the bottom and delete it.
My team has informed me you’re the Number One Republican in your city. That means there’s no one who I would rather reach out to for this critical task: The 2023 NRSC NATIONWIDE CENSUS.
The radical Left is determined to destroy our country, but I’m determined to stop them, and I know you are too. That’s why I’m calling on you to join me by completing the 2023 Nationwide Census today.
Your participation is CRUCIAL towards the Republican Party’s success moving forward. We need YOUR SUPPORT.
Complete the census before MIDNIGHT TONIGHT to provide America First Conservatives with the information we need to WIN in 2024. >> https://trmpusa.com/q92n
Thank you,
Donald J. Trump
Thom Hartmann wonders why Republican leaders embrace cruelty, why they seem happy to inflict misery on others. This is part 2 of his analysis of libertarianism, and it is compelling.
So, once again, why are Republicans so cruel and why do they seem so fond of libertarianism? Why does Greg Abbott put razor wire in the Rio Grande river? Why does Donald Trump target people for assassination by his followers? Why does Ron DeSantis revel in keeping tens of thousands of low-income Florida children from getting Medicaid?
Yesterday, I laid out the terrible impact Libertarian policies, which have infected the GOP for five decades, have had on the United States. But where did the whole idea of libertarianism come from, and who started the Libertarian Party?
Get ready for a wild ride as we do a deep dive into America’s most bizarre (and phony) political party.
How is it that Republicans so often embrace casual cruelty like tearing mothers from their children or throwing pregnant women in poverty off public assistance? Why have 12 GOP-controlled states refused to this day to expand Medicaid for their 30 million minimum-wage working people when the federal government covers 90 percent of the cost?
Why are Republicans so committed to destroying Medicare and Social Security? Why do they go so far as to use the disrespectful slur “Democrat Party” when there’s no such a thing in America and never has been?
Why are Democratic members of Congress having to armor their own homes, having received over 9000 death threats so far this year, virtually all of them from domestic terrorists who Republicans refuse to repudiate? The FBI still is looking for a Matt Gaetz supporter who threatened to murder Gaetz’s Democratic opponent: why are these people attracted to the GOP?
It turns out this is not just politics; the roots of this brutal movement in today’s GOP run from a 1927 child murderer, through a greedy real-estate lobbying group, to Ronald Reagan putting both of their philosophies into actual practice and bringing morbidly rich rightwing billionaires into the GOP fold.
As a result, Republican policies over the past 42 years not only gutted America’s middle class and transferred $50 trillion from working people to the top 1 percent, but also led straight to the Trump presidency and the attack on the Capitol on January 6th that he led.
The Libertarians
Reporter Mark Ames documents how, back in the 1940s, a real estate lobbying group came up with the idea of creating a new political party to justify deregulating the real estate and finance industries so they could make more money.
This new “Libertarian Party” would give an ideological and political cover to their goal of becoming government-free, and they developed an elaborate pretense of governing philosophy around it.
Their principal argument was that if everybody acted separately and independently, in all cases with maximum selfishness, such behavior would actually benefit society. There would be no government needed beyond an army and a police force, and a court system to defend the rights of property owners. It was a bizarre twisting of Adam Smith’s reference to the “invisible hand” that regulated trade among nations.
In 1980, billionaire David Koch ran for vice president on the newly formed Libertarian Party ticket.
His platform included calls to privatize the Post Office, end all public schools, give Medicare and Medicaid to big insurance companies, end all taxation of the morbidly rich, terminate food and housing support and all other forms of “welfare,” deregulate all corporate oversight while shutting down the EPA and FDA, and selling off much of the federal government’s land and other assets to billionaires and big corporations.
Reagan, who won that 1980 election, embraced this view in his inaugural address, saying, “[G]overnment is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem.” He then doubled down on the idea by beginning the systematic process of gutting and crippling governmental institutions that historically had supported working people and the middle class.
The child-killer who inspired a movement
Reagan wasn’t just echoing the Libertarian vision; he was also endorsing Ayn Rand’s “objectivist” view of the world, which traces its roots to a murderous psychopath in 1927.
Back in 2015, Donald Trump told USA Today’s Kirsten Powers that his favorite book was Ayn Rand’s raped-girl-decides-she-likes-it novel, “The Fountainhead.”
“It relates to business, beauty, life and inner emotions,” he told Powers. “That book relates to … everything.”
Ayn Rand’s novels have informed libertarian Republicans like former Speaker of the House of Representatives and current Fox News board member Paul Ryan, who required interns to read her books when they joined his staff.
Powers added, “He [Trump],” told her that he “identified with Howard Roark, the protagonist who designs skyscrapers and rages against the establishment.”
Rand’s hero Roark, in fact, “raged” so much in her novel that he blew up a public housing project with dynamite.
Rand, in her Journals, explained where she got her inspiration for Howard Roark and the leading male characters in so many of her other novels. She writes that the theme of The Fountainhead, for example, is:
“One puts oneself above all and crushes everything in one’s way to get the best for oneself.”
On Trump’s hero Howard Roark, she wrote that he:
“…has learned long ago, with his first consciousness, two things which dominate his entire attitude toward life: his own superiority and the utter worthlessness of the world. He knows what he wants and what he thinks. He needs no other reasons, standards or considerations. His complete selfishness is as natural to him as breathing.”
It turns out that Roark and many of her other characters were based on a real person. The man who so inspired Ayn Rand’s fictional heroes was named William Edward Hickman, and he lived in Los Angeles during the Roaring Twenties.
Ten days before Christmas in 1927, Hickman, a teenager with slicked dark hair and tiny, muted eyes, drove up to Mount Vernon Junior High School in Los Angeles and kidnapped Marion Parker — the daughter of a wealthy banker in town.
Hickman held the girl ransom, demanding $1,500 from her father — back then about a year’s salary. Supremely confident that he would elude capture, Hickman signed his name on the ransom notes, “The Fox.”
After two days, Marion’s father agreed to hand over the ransom in exchange for the safety of his daughter. What Perry Parker didn’t know is that Hickman never intended to live up to his end of the bargain.
The Pittsburgh Press detailed what Hickman, in his own words, did next.
“It was while I was fixing the blindfold that the urge to murder came upon me,” he said. “I just couldn’t help myself. I got a towel and stepped up behind Marion. Then, before she could move, I put it around her neck and twisted it tightly.”
Hickman didn’t hold back on any of these details: he was proud of his cold-bloodedness.
“I held on and she made no outcry except to gurgle. I held on for about two minutes, I guess, and then I let go. When I cut loose the fastenings, she fell to the floor. I knew she was dead.”
“After she was dead I carried her body into the bathroom and undressed her, all but the underwear, and cut a hole in her throat with a pocket knife to let the blood out.”
Hickman then dismembered the child piece-by-piece, putting her limbs in a cabinet in his apartment, and then wrapped up the carved-up torso, powdered the lifeless face of Marion Parker, set what was left of her stump torso with the head sitting atop it in the passenger seat of his car, and drove to meet her father to collect the ransom money.
He even sewed open her eyelids to make it look like she was alive.
On the way, Hickman dumped body parts out of his car window, before rendezvousing with Marion Parker’s father.
Armed with a shotgun so her father wouldn’t come close enough to Hickman’s car to see that Marion was dead, Hickman collected his $1,500, then kicked open the door and tossed the rest of Marion Parker onto the road. As he sped off, her father fell to his knees, screaming.
Days later, the police caught up with a defiant and unrepentant Hickman in Oregon. His lawyers pleaded insanity, but the jury gave him the gallows.
To nearly everyone, Hickman was a monster. The year of the murder, the Los Angeles Times called it “the most horrible crime of the 1920s.” Hickman was America’s most despicable villain at the time.
Ayn Rand falls in love with a “superman”
But to Alissa Zinovievna Rosenbaum, a 21-year-old Russian political science student who’d arrived in America just two years earlier, Hickman was a hero.
Alissa was a squat five-foot-two with a flapper hairdo and wide, sunken dark eyes that gave her a haunting stare. Etched into those brooding eyes was burned the memory of a childhood backlit by the Russian Revolution.
She had just departed Leninist Russia where, almost a decade earlier, there was a harsh backlash against the Russian property owners by the Bolsheviks. Alissa’s own family was targeted, and at the age of 12 she watched as Bolshevik soldiers burst into her father’s pharmacy, looted the store, and plastered on her Dad’s doors the red emblem of the state, indicating that his private business now belonged to “the people.”
That incident left such a deep and burning wound in young Alissa’s mind that she went to college to study political science and vowed one day she’d become a famous writer to warn the world of the dangers of Bolshevism.
Starting afresh in Hollywood, she anglicized her name to Ayn Rand, and moved from prop-girl to screenwriter/novelist, basing the heroes of several of her stories on a man she was reading about in the newspapers at the time. A man she wrote effusively about in her diaries. A man she hero-worshipped.
William Edward Hickman was the most notorious man in American in 1928, having achieved the level of national fame that she craved.
Young Ayn Rand saw in Hickman the “ideal man” she based The Fountainhead on, and used to ground her philosophy and her life’s work. His greatest quality, she believed, was his unfeeling, pitiless selfishness.
Hickman’s words were carefully recounted by Rand in her Journals. His statement that, “I am like the state: what is good for me is right,” resonated deeply with her. It was the perfect articulation of her belief that if people pursued their own interests above all else — even above friends, family, or nation — the result would be utopian.
She wrote in her diary that those words of Hickman’s were, “the best and strongest expression of a real man’s psychology I ever heard.”
Hickman — the monster who boasted about how he had hacked up a 12-year-old girl — had Rand’s ear, as well as her heart. She saw a strongman archetype in him, the way that people wearing red MAGA hats see a strongman savior in Donald Trump.
As Hickman’s murder trial unfolded, Rand grew increasingly enraged at how the “mediocre” American masses had rushed to condemn her Superman.
“The first thing that impresses me about the case,” Rand wrote in reference to the Hickman trial in early notes for a book she was working on titled The Little Street, “is the ferocious rage of the whole society against one man.”
Astounded that Americans didn’t recognize the heroism Hickman showed when he proudly rose above simply conforming to society’s rules, Rand wrote:
“It is not the crime alone that has raised the fury of public hatred. It is the case of a daring challenge to society. … It is the amazing picture of a man with no regard whatever for all that society holds sacred, with a consciousness all his own.”
Rand explained that when the masses are confronted with such a bold actor, they neither understood nor empathized with him.
Thus, “a brilliant, unusual, exceptional boy [was] turned [by the media] into a purposeless monster.”
The protagonist of the book that Rand was writing around that time was a boy named Danny Renahan. In her notes for the book, she wrote, “The model for the boy [Renahan] is Hickman.” He would be her ideal man, and the archetype for a philosophical movement that would transform a nation.
“He is born with the spirit of Argon and the nature of a medieval feudal lord,” Rand wrote in her notes describing Renahan. “Imperious. Impatient. Uncompromising. Untamable. Intolerant. Unadaptable. Passionate. Intensely proud. Superior to the mob… an extreme ‘extremist.’ … No respect for anything or anyone.”
Rand wanted capitalism in its most raw form, uncheck by any government that could control the rules of the market or promote the benefits of society. Such good intentions had, after all, caused the hell she’d experienced in the Bolshevik Revolution.
Ayn Rand, like Hickman, found peace and justification in the extremes of her economic, political, and moral philosophy. Forget about democratic institutions, forget about regulating markets, and forget about pursuing any policies that benefit the majority at the expense of the very rich — the petty political rule-makers and rule-enforcers could never, ever do anything well or good.
Libertarianism and Ayn Rand set the stage for Trumpism
Only billionaires should rule the world, Trump has suggested.
And he tried to put it into place, installing a billionaire advocate of destroying public schools in charge of public schools, a coal lobbyist representing billionaires in charge of the EPA, an billionaire-funded oil lobbyist in charge of our public lands, and a billionaire described by Forbes as a “grifter” in charge of the Commerce Department.
Trump’s chief of staff said that putting children in cages and billionaire-owned privatized concentration camps (where seven died) would actually be a public good.
As Ayn Rand might say, “Don’t just ignore the rules; destroy them.”
Welfare and other social safety net programs were, as Rand saw it, “the glorification of mediocrity” in society. Providing a social safety net for the poor, disabled, or unemployed, she believed, were part of a way of thinking that promoted, “satisfaction instead of joy, contentment instead of happiness… a glow-worm instead of a fire.”
Sociopaths of the world, unite!
Rand, like Trump, lived a largely joyless life. She mercilessly manipulated people, particularly her husband and Alan Greenspan (who brought a dollar-sign-shaped floral arrangement to her funeral), and, like Trump, surrounded herself with cult-like followers who were only on the inside so long as they gave her total, unhesitating loyalty.
Like Trump, McConnell, McCarthy and their billionaire backers, Rand believed that a government working to help out working-class “looters,” instead of solely looking out for rich capitalist “producers,” was throwing its “best people” under the bus.
In Rand’s universe, the producers had no obligations to the looters. Providing welfare or sacrificing one nickel of your own money to help a “looter” on welfare, unemployment, or Social Security — particularly if it was “taken at the barrel of a gun” (taxes) — was morally reprehensible.
Like Trump saying, “My whole life I’ve been greedy,” for Rand looking out for numero uno was the singular name of the game — selfishness was next to godliness.
Later in Rand’s life, in 1959, as she gained more notoriety for the moral philosophy of selfishness that she named “Objectivism” and that is today at the core of libertarianism and the GOP, she sat down for an interview with CBS reporter Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes.
Suggesting that selfishness undermines most truly American values, Wallace bluntly challenged Rand.
“You are out to destroy almost every edifice in the contemporary American way of life,” Wallace said to Rand. “Our Judeo-Christian religion, our modified government-regulated capitalism, our rule by the majority will… you scorn churches, and the concept of God… are these accurate criticisms?”
As Wallace was reciting the public criticisms of Rand, the CBS television cameras zoomed in closely on her face, as her eyes darted back and forth between the ground and Wallace’s fingers. But the question, with its implied condemnation, didn’t faze her at all. Rand said with confidence in a matter-of-fact tone, “Yes.”
“We’re taught to feel concern for our fellow man,” Wallace challenged, “to feel responsible for his welfare, to feel that we are, as religious people might put it, children under God and responsible one for the other — now why do you rebel?”
“That is what in fact makes man a sacrificial animal,” Rand answered. She added, “[Man’s] highest moral purpose is the achievement of his own happiness.”
Rand’s philosophy, though popular in high school and on college campuses, never did — in her lifetime — achieve the sort of mass appeal she had hoped. But today Ayn Rand’s philosophy is a central tenet of the Republican Party and grounds the moral code proudly cited and followed by high-profile billionaires and three former presidents of the United States.
Ironically, when she was finally beginning to be taken seriously, Ayn Rand became ill with lung cancer and went on Social Security and Medicare to make it through her last days. She died a “looter” in 1982, unaware that her promotion of William Edward Hickman’s sociopathic worldview would one day validate an entire political party’s embrace of a similarly sociopathic president.
The result so far is over a million dead Americans from Covid, an epidemic of homelessness, and the collapse of this nation’s working class.
While the ideas and policies promoted by the libertarian wing of the Republican Party have made CEOs and billionaire investors very, very rich in recent decades, it’s killing the rest of us.
A return to sanity
In the 1930s, 1940s, and 1950’s Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Dwight Eisenhower put America back together after the Republican Great Depression and built the largest and wealthiest middle class in the history of the world at the time.
Today, 42 years of Ayn Rand’s ideas being put into practice by libertarian Republicans from Reagan to Bush to Trump have gutted the middle class, made a handful of oligarchs wealthier than any king or pharaoh in the history of the world, and brought a whole new generation of criminals, hustlers and grifters into the GOP.
Three men in America today own more wealth than the entire bottom 50 percent of the country, a level of inequality never before seen in the modern developed world.
When America was still coasting on FDR’s success in rebuilding our government and institutions, nobody took very seriously Rand’s or Koch’s misguided idealist efforts to tear it all down.
Now that Libertarians and objectivists in the GOP have had 42 years to make their project work, we’re hitting peak libertarianism and it’s tearing our country apart, pitting Americans against each other, and literally killing people every day.
If America is to survive as a functioning democratic republic, we must repudiate the “greed is good” ideology of Ayn Rand and libertarianism, get billionaires and their money out of politics, and rebuild our civic institutions.
That starts with waking Americans up to the incredible damage that 40 years of Rand’s writings and libertarian “Reagan Republicans” have done to this country.
It will succeed if President Biden can overcome the cynicism and greed celebrated by McConnell, Trump, Gaetz, Greene, Cruz, and Hawley; reclaim the mantle of FDR; and put America back on the upward trajectory the middle class enjoyed before the Reagan Revolution.
Thom Hartmann argues that the Republican Party has become infected with libertarianism, a philosophy based on selfishness. This explains it’s eagerness to cut social supports and hurt the weak and vulnerable. Feeding hungry children or providing medical care is “woke.” The party of mean.
Anti-vaxxer hero and Democratic primary nominee Robert Kennedy Jr. says, according to news reports:
“I’ve always been aligned with libertarians on most issues.”
Bobby, of course, isn’t the only one. It’s high fashion across the GOP to claim your Libertarian credentials; Ron (and now Rand) Paul turned it into a moneymaking scam, and most all of the Putin Caucus in the GOP love to talk up libertarianism, as do multiple rightwing billionaires. Senator Mike Lee proclaims himself a Libertarian, and has for years.
We see it writ large in the rhetoric of Republican members of Congress and conservative pundits who argue that shutting the government down is a good thing, because most government functions are “unnecessary” or “woke.”
So let’s take a look at how libertarianism would work out in America, and where it came from in the first place.
Generally speaking, Libertarians don’t believe in democracy, which, they say, should be replaced by “the magic of the marketplace” — or at least the “magic” of people made rich by the marketplace — running the country’s essential services.
Here’s the one question that always stops libertarians dead in their tracks when they come on or call into my radio/TV program to proclaim the wonders of their political ideology:
“Please name one country, anywhere in the world, any time in the last 7000 years, where libertarianism has succeeded and produced general peace and prosperity?”
There literally is none. Nowhere. Not a single one. It has never happened. Ever.
If it had, that country would be on the tip of every Libertarian’s tongue, the way Democratic Socialists talk about Norway or Denmark where the full-on Social Democracy and regulated capitalism experiment has succeeded for generations.
Doing my show from Copenhagen a few years ago, I had one of that nation’s top conservative politicians on.
“So, you’re one of the nation’s leading conservatives,” I said. “I guess that means you want to privatize Denmark’s national healthcare system?”
He blinked a few times, incredulous, and then said, bluntly, “Are you crazy?”
There are, of course, examples of governments that intentionally or unintentionally operate broadly along libertarian lines. Back in the 1980s when I was setting up international relief projects with the Salem organization based out of West Germany, I worked in several such countries.
They were places where the government’s only real function is to run the army, police, and the courts, just like libertarians say America should be run. No social safety net, no Social Security, no national healthcare, no or few state-funded public schools, no publicly funded infrastructure of any consequence.
In 2008, my friend and colleague talkshow host Joe Madison (“The Black Eagle” on SiriusXM daily) and I saw how this worked in South Sudan on the border of Darfur as the northern Sudanese government was burning people out of their homes and the group we were with was flooded by tens of thousands of refugees.
It was similar to what I saw in 1980 in Uganda when I was working there at the end of the Tanzanian war to expel Idi Amin.
In parts of Colombia later that decade, after a bomb went off just a block from where we were working, I heard stories of middle-class men in the next neighborhood over who’d an organized an urban “hunt club,” complete with logos and patches, using high-powered rifles to pursue what they described as “feral children.”
Kidnapping was also a major industry in Colombia then: a friend in Bogota was kidnapped and repeatedly raped while her husband, forced to listen to her screams on the phone, frantically tried to raise enough money to pay her ransom. I later met with them both and heard the story firsthand.
In those countries that, because of corruption, civil war, or oligarchic ideology are run along Ayn Rand/Rand Paul libertarian lines, the roads, utilities and housing are fine in wealthy neighborhoods that can provide for themselves, but the rest of the country is potholed and dark, while everyday people often have to walk miles to get firewood, food, and fresh water every day.
There are few or no taxes for the very rich in such countries, and no resources at all for the very poor except those provided by international relief agencies like the one I worked with.
We generally referred to those countries as “failed states.” Rand Paul would probably describe them as “Libertarian paradises,” as his father advocated when, during a presidential primary debate, he said people shouldn’t be let into hospital emergency rooms unless they can pay.
“That’s what freedom is all about, taking your own risks,” Ron Paul said.
No country has ever succeeded when its government has suffered the fate that multimillionaire K Street Lobbyist Grover Norquist wished on America when he famously told NPR:
“I don’t want to abolish government. I simply want to reduce it to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub.”
That’s what Texas did when they split their grid away from the rest of America to avoid regulation of their power industry. The lie of libertarian policies was on vivid display when Texans died from hypothermia while Ted Cruz fled to Cancun.
And then Texas families who survived the bitter cold got $3,000 to $17,000 power bills after the freeze left, because of magical deregulated “free markets” for power in that state.
The libertarian streak in GOP politics was on vivid display when the power went down and the now-resigned Republican Mayor of Colorado City, Texas, Tim Boyd, posted to Facebook:
“No one owes you are (sic) your family anything; nor is it the local government’s responsibility to support you during trying times like this! Sink or swim it’s your choice! The City and County, along with power providers or any other service owes you NOTHING! I’m sick and tired of people looking for a damn handout!
“If you don’t have electricity you step up and come up with a game plan to keep your family warm and safe. If you have no water you deal with out and think outside of the box to survive and supply water to your family.
“If you are sitting at home in the cold because you have no power and are sitting there waiting for someone to come rescue you because your (sic) lazy is direct result of your raising! Only the strong will survive and the weak will parish (sic).”
This libertarian world-view has been foundational to and at the core of the Republican mantras of austerity and “self reliance” ever since the Reagan Revolution of the 1980s.
It’s what Trump tried to do to our public health agencies when he first came into office and shut down Obama’s pandemic response operations in both the National Security Council and the Department of Homeland Security. As a result, almost a million Americans have died of Covid and millions more are disabled for life.
When George W. Bush put a Republican-donor horse show judge in charge of FEMA’s disaster response, his libertarian attitude pretty much guaranteed thousands of people would die in Hurricane Katrina: “Heckuva job, Brownie.”
The Bush administration also defunded food safety enforcement and the predictable result was an increase in food-borne sickness and death.
At the behest of fossil-fuel billionaire libertarians, Republicans have fought any regulation of the fossil fuel industry for 40 years; the result is climate wilding that’s devastating our country from California to Texas to the Midwest to Miami Beach.
Mitch McConnell and Republicans in the US House and Senate argue that giving a $2 trillion tax cut to billionaires was an appropriate thing for government to do (even though it jacked up the national debt), but Build Back Better to help out average Americans is, they say, a crime against our republic.
Americans, increasingly, are figuring out the damage this failed 40-year-long libertarian experiment has done to our nation, which is why people are leaving the Republican Party in droves.
There is, however, one group that is still quite enamored of libertarianism: rightwing billionaires and the corporations that made them rich. And quite a few of them have spent the past decades shoveling cash into the Republican Party, with no sign of a letup to this day.
They set up think tanks and fund hundreds of college professors nationwide to preach their libertarian ideology, and often dominate internet searches because of their thousands of organizations and “news” sites.
They create phony grassroots organizations and get deluded middle-class white people to show up with signs like, “Keep Your Damn Government Hands Off My Medicare!”
They set up organizations nationwide and in every state to bring Republican legislators together with lobbyists to craft libertarian “corporate friendly“ legislation that consistently enriches the top 1% and screws average Americans.
They proclaim the wonders of “small government” and “fiscal responsibility,” code words for gutting the protective functions traditionally performed by government and replacing them with “charity” and corporate sponsorships.
And Republican politicians live in fear today of doing anything that might cause government to actually help the American people, because those same libertarian billionaires and corporations who fund their campaigns are more than happy to destroy them politically when they stray.
Despite all the obvious disasters and widespread public opposition, they’re still intent on America being their grand experiment to prove that at least one country can operate along libertarian lines.
Back in the 1950s and 1960s when Milton Friedman and Ayn Rand were first pitching this ideology (then called neoliberalism and objectivism) as a way to bring “freedom” to America, they were broadly ridiculed and ignored.
But the libertarian foundations and billionaires got into the act in the 1970s, along with the rightwing media organizations they were then building, putting Ronald Reagan into office and shaping his policies, sending America into a libertarian slide.
Forty years of the Reagan Revolution’s libertarian experiment have brought us the predictable result:
— historically low tax rates on corporations and billionaires
— an impoverished middle-class
— devastated labor unions
— the highest rate of child poverty and maternal death in the developed world
— millions without access to healthcare
— one in seven American children going to bed hungry
— our schools, roads, bridges and rail systems in shambles
Libertarianism is a poison that’s crept into our society on the backs of rightwing billionaires like Libertarian David Koch, who ran for Vice President in 1980 on a platform of shutting down every government agency except the military, courts, and police.
But where did all this “greed is good” as a political philosophy start?
Believe it or not, it began in the 1950s with a corrupt real estate lobby, a brutal child murderer, and the young, idealistic Russian immigrant who fell in love with him.
Read the rest of the story in the next post.
The latest blow to Trump’s reputation came in a court in New York, when the judge ruled that Trump fraudulently overvalued his properties in order to get bank loans. Of course, his base won’t care.
I have a personal story that supports the judgement. Last fall, I drove with my partner to Saratoga Springs, New York, to visit a kayak maker. As we were driving up the Taconic State Parkway, we passed a sign that said “Donald J. Trump State Park.” I had never heard of such a park, so I googled and found a Wikipedia entry that explained.
Trump purchased the property in 1998 with plans to build a $10 million private golf course. Totalling $2.5 million, it was purchased in two sections: Indian Hill for $1.75 million and French Hill for $750,000.[1]The land contained significant wetlands and development faced strict environmental restrictions and permitting requirements.[2]He donated it in 2006[3][4] after he was unable to gain town approvals to develop the property.[2] At that time Trump claimed the parcel was worth $100 million.[1] He used the donation as a tax write-off.[5] The donation was praised by governor George Pataki. Trump said, “I hope that these 436 acres of property will turn into one of the most beautiful parks anywhere in the world.”[1]
The park is now abandoned. Trump paid $2.5 million for the land, which was not suitable for development. He claimed the land was worth $100 million and used that amount to reduce his taxes. Nice increase in value on land that that could not be developed.
Recently the Network for Public Education and the Education Law Center sponsored a zoom conversation with Nick Surgey. Nick is an experienced investigative journalist who works with an organization called Documented, which digs into the Dark Money groups undermining Public schools and other democratic institutions. Nick has done the legwork that identified the money and people behind the home schooling movement, as well as the rightwing Alliance for Defending Freedom. He has worked with the Center for Media and Democracy and other pro-democracy organizations.
This is a discussion you should definitely tune into.
Mike Miles, the state-appointed superintendent of the Houston Independent School District, was given control of the district despite his poor track record in Dallas. Nonetheless, he intends to remake the district. He imposed a set of mandates that he called the “New Education System.” At first, he was supposed to reform 28 schools. Then another 85 schools joined his program voluntarily. 190 schools are supposed to be left alone.
Miles has ruled with a heavy hand. A few days ago, he removed a principal from a B-rated school and installed an “apprentice,” an inexperienced one as a temporary replacement.
Anna Bauman of the Houston Chronicle reported:
District officials have removed another principal from a Houston ISD campus, this time pulling the top leader from Jane Long Academy and Las Americas Middle School in southwest Houston.
Myra Castle-Bell, an educator of more than two decades, will no longer serve as principal of the schools located on the same campus in Sharpstown, according to an HISD spokesperson. Castle-Bell chose to align both schools with the New Education System, a reform model created by state-appointed Superintendent Mike Miles, when given the option over the summer.
The district shared the news last week in a message sent to families and staff at the schools, informing them that Courtney Riley, a principal apprentice, will lead the campus while HISD searches for a permanent replacement.
“We know these changes can feel disruptive, but we are committed to ensuring every student at both schools gets access to excellent instruction every day,” the district said in the message. “We’ll update you as soon as we have selected a new Principal and thank you for your continued partnership.”
Riley is a member of the HISD Principal Academy, a program introduced this year by Miles geared toward preparing future principals through a year-long, paid residency model.
Long Academy is a B-rated school serving more than 800 students in middle and high school, according to the most recent state data. Las Americas is a newcomer campus that caters to recent immigrant and refugee children who typically have little or no English language proficiency or formal education.
Other schools whose principals have been reassigned in recent months include Francis Scott Key Middle School, Stevens Elementary, Garcia Elementary, Cage Elementary/Project Chrysalis Middle School, and Sharpstown, Worthing and Yates high schools. Additionally, the district appointed new principals at 11 schools in June through the re-hiring process required at NES schools.
HISD provided no explanation for the removal of Castle-Bell or any other principal, saying it cannot comment on personnel matters. Castle-Bell has been reassigned to a new position as Division Support Administrator for the West Division, according to HISD.
Miles is following the Broad Academy “reform” playbook. Disrupt as much as possible. Keep everyone on edge. Create an “academy” to train new principals, bypassing the traditional route of rising through the ranks and serving a genuine apprenticeship for 3-5 years as an assistant principal. NYC had a “Leadership Academy” doing exactly what Miles is doing now; it failed and was eventually closed down.
Diane Ravitch's blog 