Brat beats Cantor: interest in Ayn Rand but more in religion

[ewv 0]

David Brat, the tea party Congressional candidate who just made national headlines as the dog who caught the car by unexpectedly defeating House Majority Leader Eric Cantor in a primary election landslide, also has an interest in Ayn Rand that is being exaggerated in reports, and a more serious commitment to religion. His primary election victory made history despite his being outspent by at least 10 to 1 with the entire establishment against him in the media and endorsements: "This is a miracle from God," Brat told AP.

Brat is a pro-free market economics professor with an interest in ethics in economics. He is a faculty member at Randolph-Macon College in Ashland, VA, where he is Chair of the Department of Economics and Business, past Director of the Ethics Minor Program, and head of the campus BB&T Moral Foundations of Capitalism Program funded and sponsored through John Allison and the Clemson Institute for the Study of Capitalism headed by C. Bradley Thompson. The reports on Brat so far do not indicate what kinds of ethics are being emphasized in his BB&T-funded program or to what degree John Allison's intent to emphasize Ayn Rand's philosophy as a serious alternative is part of it.

A National Review article based on an interview with Brat said that "while he isn't a Randian, he has been influenced by Atlas Shrugged and appreciates Rand's case for human freedom and free markets".

Brat is being characterized with exageration by some as an "Ayn Rand scholar", as "Ayn Rand Loving", and as "Runing A $500,000 Program To Push Ayn Rand's Ideas At College" in a "bank-branded program intended to give 'free-market principles' -- and Ayn Rand's philosophy of Objectivism in particular -- a leg up in the classroom". The reports have not provided details in support of these claims, only citing the BB&T program and the title of one article Brat wrote on Ayn Rand's philosophy without saying what position he took.

Brat's higher education consists of a degree in business administration from Hope College in 1986, a small religious liberal arts university in Michigan, followed -- after working in accounting -- by a Master of Divinity from Princeton Theological Seminary where according to the New York Times he had thought he "wanted to be a professor of systematic theology and cites John Calvin, Karl Barth, and Reinhold Niebuhr as influences." But after receiving his M. Div. in 1990 he switched to The American University where received a PhD in economics in 1995.

The National Review article reports that "he says his religious background informs his views on economics. 'I've always found it amazing how we have the grand swath of the Judeo-Christian tradition, and we lost moral arguments on the major issue of our day,' he says, referring to fiscal-policy issues." "Religion, particularly the importance of Christianity", the New York Times reports, "is a theme in his work, including his thesis, 'Human Capital, Religion and Economic Growth' and a presentation to the Virginia Association of Community Banks titled: 'The Moral Foundations of Capitalism, From the Great Generation to Financial Crisis ... What Went Wrong?'"

Brat's campaign website emphasizes religion: "A man of deep faith, Dave attends St. Marys Catholic Church"; "... faith in God, as recognized by our Founding Fathers is essential to the moral fiber of the Nation" (attributed to Reagan); and "Dave respects and values every person he meets because he truly sees them as Children of God. Our Rights come from God and not from Government." Ayn Rand is not mentioned.

His extensive writing includes one article on Ayn Rand's philosophy entitled "An Analysis of the Moral Foundations in Ayn Rand", co-authored with Katy Holland and presented and published in the proceedings of Southeast Informs, Myrtle Beach, SC, October 6, 2010. Most of his articles concern economics, sometimes incorporating religious themes, and include one entitled "Kantian Ethics and the Financial Crisis", presented at the Association of Private Enterprise Education international conference, Guatemala City, Guatemala, April 5, 2009.

None of his professional writing seems to have become easily available on the internet, and there is so far no statement of what his position is on Ayn Rand's philosophy and its moral foundations (or Kant's), but the very title of his one article on Ayn Rand and his connection with the BB&T program, exaggerated to be all or primarily about "pushing" Ayn Rand, have sent leftist writers into a snarling frenzy whatever Brat's actual beliefs dominated by religion may be.

[Arnold 0]

I don't think the USA would elect an atheist (like our recent ex Prime Minister for example), so the best you can hope for is a religious person who sees some value in Rand, as above. One is then faced with trying to keep Rand's philosophy from being contaminated by misunderstanding (unprincipled ideas which place faith on a par with reason).

[ewv 0]

Arnold, I haven't been discussing whether or not people in Dave Brat's district should be voting for him given his religious views. That he is a candidate in the tea party movement who just unseated the powerful establishment House Majority Leader Eric Cantor is very good in itself, but not much is yet known about him other than a vaguely free market emphasis. He is in a strongly conservative, religious region, so what we think won't make any difference to the votes for him, though it is still worth discussing.

I wrote about a different topic especially suited to the Forum, documenting his known views on Ayn Rand versus his connections with religion in the context of a lot of media hype claiming or insinuating that he is an ardent fan and scholar of Ayn Rand. He is neither a supporter of her philosophy nor a scholar of her work.

The Ryan fiasco a few years ago -- in which excitement over recordings of the Congressman (and then VP candidate) making definitive statements indicating a strong support of Ayn Rand at a deeper level than "libertarian" politics was followed by his running in denial as he firmly sought refuge in orthodox Catholicism and establishment politics at the first hint of public controversy -- illustrates the necessity of examining Brat's actual stated views in the context and contrast of the recent reports.


As for your comment on electability:

I don't think the USA would elect an atheist (like our recent ex Prime Minister for example), so the best you can hope for is a religious person who sees some value in Rand, as above. One is then faced with trying to keep Rand's philosophy from being contaminated by misunderstanding (unprincipled ideas which place faith on a par with reason).

"Atheism" is a negative statement only, rejecting belief in the supernatural, not a statement of anyone's positive position, which is left unstated. Supporting an "atheist" -- who could be an individualist, anarchist, or statist with any kind of ethics, is therefore not the goal, especially in politics.

It is, however, important to assess religiosity in a political candidate because there are degrees of intensity and commitment to religion. A large majority of those professing religion today do so primarily in god cliches with no practical effect for most of their lives. But not all of them, and Dave Brat's theological background and continued emphasis on religion raise warning flags. We can't jump to conclusions in assessing Dave Brat either way without further investigation.

We seek candidates who not only support economic freedom, but more fundamentally individual rights, and who can think and act in a competent, rational, and effective way rather than flailing in political ineptness, going off on theocratic tangents, or embarrassing themselves as flakes while serving to discredit the tea party movement, let alone capitalism and individualism. Rep. Michelle Bachman, for example, is religious, but is much more competent and effective in her activism in Washington than merely passively voting the right way much of the time.

Whatever value Dave Brat sees in Ayn Rand, he is unlikely to campaign on it in today's context, but he has already been tied to her and you are right that "One is then faced with trying to keep Rand's philosophy from being contaminated by misunderstanding" including "unprincipled ideas which place faith on a par with reason". But that always has to be done anyway as Dave Brat and others promote religion in the classroom, in the tea party movement, and among the fans of Atlas Shrugged.

[ewv 0]

Here is an update. Dave Brat's sole paper on Ayn Rand cited in his faculty research, "An Analysis of the Moral Foundations in Ayn Rand", turns out to be not an analysis and evaluation of a philosophy, but a dubious utilitarianism econometrics attempt to statistically "test" it using "freedom indices" compiled by the World Bank for different countries today.

A summary of the presentation is published under the very different original title, "Testing Ayn Rand's Moral Foundations of Capitalism: 20 Testable Hypotheses on the Nature of Capitalism". Contrary to his statement on the university website that the paper was "presented and published in the proceedings of Southeast Informs, Myrtle Beach, SC, October 6, 2010", the actual paper appears to not have been published, and is not available in printed form unless he chooses to release it himself. (I and others have asked him for it but there has so far been no response; I have also inquired at BB&T at Clemson.)

The 2005 book The Philosophy Of Economics: A History Of Science, Method And Ethics which he lists with his research also appears not to be available or listed as having been published -- not being listed at amazon, bookfinder.com or the Library of Congress catalog.

The forum for his verbal presentation on Ayn Rand, "Southeast Informs", turns out to have been an annual multi-disciplinary meeting of a chapter of InfORMS, the Institute for Operations Research and Management Sciences, an unlikely forum for philosophical discussion.

In 2005 he published at the same forum a paper, "Is Growth Exogenous? Taking Bernanke Seriously: But How Can a Fed Guy Forget the Institutions?" (Proceedings of the Southeast Information Sciences, presented in Myrtle Beach, NC, October 2005) claiming to have proved by statistical correlation that a "Protestant institutional variable" in "countries with a Protestant religious establishment have 'on average' higher income levels".

The summary of his statistical presentation on Ayn Rand, which appears to have been written to introduce the pending verbal presentation at the meeting, begins:

We plan to explore the moral foundations of Randian capitalism as Ayn Rand defined them and compare these ideas to several prominent western philosophical thinkers. We then plan to line these ideas up with real world economic variables and to test what it is possible to test. Is economic freedom good? Is it correlated with many of the goods we desire?...

It ends with:

Thanks to a recent major study by the World Bank, a host of new freedom indexes are available which makes it possible to correlate economic freedom to a host of other dependent variables such as: life span, health, education, gender roles, race issues, standard of living. The final section of our paper will present over 20 falsifiable/restable claims relating capitalism to these other dependent variables. We should note that Capitalism is not always a positive force. We anticipate that Capitalism has had a negative effect on the family structure in the West, but we will see.

5. Conclusion

There are obviously arguments for and against capitalism and there are both societal advantages and disadvantages to such a system. I plan to examine these advantages and disadvantages; examining whether in fact the advantages of competition and the free market system that Rand so strongly advocates in both her pieces of fiction and nonfiction outweigh disadvantages of capitalism. For Rand, this is almost easy by definition, but social science must [d]o better. The debate must be put forward in falsifiable and testable terms.

If an actual written version of his presentation ever turns up, it may indicate more about his degree and level of understanding or his intellectual evaluation of the philosophical principles formulated by Ayn Rand, but this summary of his methodology is not promising (it does, however, provide a straightforward but very brief summary of her political philosophy regarded seriously, though not the "moral foundations".)

[Arnold 0]

If an actual written version of his presentation ever turns up, it may indicate more about his degree and level of understanding or his intellectual evaluation of the philosophical principles formulated by Ayn Rand, but this summary of his methodology is not promising (it does, however, provide a straightforward but very brief summary of her political philosophy regarded seriously, though not the "moral foundations".)

It seems to me that he is overlooking the foundations of freedom, namely individual rights. How else could he entertain a conflict between freedom and family life? (" We anticipate that Capitalism has had a negative effect on the family structure in the West, but we will see.") The implication that family structure suffers more from Capitalism than the welfare state is troubling.

[ewv 0]

He is overlooking a lot. I have been giving him the benefit of the doubt since there isn't much written on the details and I have been focusing on what there is. But if he were a proponent of Ayn Rand one would think that he would have said more about it, especially as head of a BB&T program, There is very little on or related to Ayn Rand, and what there is isn't very promising.

An example of this is the conflict he sees between "freedom" and "family life", which is more than a matter of rights. It's a personal moral issue of what you do regarding your family. It depends on what you are trying to accomplish, what means you have, and what your family is like. But conservatives regard "family structure" as a duty and somehow a foundation in their politics, often claiming "family" as an alternative to welfare in various ways. So right off the bat when you see him appealing to conservative "family" platitudes in conflict with "Ayn Rand capitalism" it isn't promising.

[ewv 0]

Here is an excellent interview with Yaron Brook on Dave Brat and the trend of which he is a part regarding Ayn Rand.

Yaron Brook speaks from knowledge he has of Brat which has not been made publicly available, although he does not go into the details, but there is much more to this presentation because he discusses at length the context of Ayn Rand's influence.

[Betsy Speicher 0]

Here is an excellent interview with Yaron Brook on Dave Brat and the trend of which he is a part regarding Ayn Rand.

Yaron Brook speaks from knowledge he has of Brat which has not been made publicly available, although he does not go into the details, but there is much more to this presentation because he discusses at length the context of Ayn Rand's influence.

Here's the link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jG5SmQf2hm8

[ewv 0]

Thanks. I hadn't realized the link had disappeared. There is something strange about the Forum software that sometimes deletes links specified in the URL format, apparently when switching between display modes in the WYSIWYDG editor and who knows what else. It also sometimes on its own changes a url specified in the text to URL format,with or without further mangling, and changes the display of a utube link between the link text and an a display of the image of the first frame. Any of this can happen in the final submission. The old Forum software didn't do this (before they made you drop your custom improvements to conform with an "update").

Here is (I hope) the ARI link which embeds the utube video you linked to directly.

http://ari.aynrand.org/blog/2014/06/16/aris-yaron-brook-discusses-dave-brat

[Arnold 0]

An inspiring interview. I think Yaron Brook is an excellent advocate for Objectivism. He comes across in a very natural and non academic way, which opens these views to the everyday person and not just the intellectuals.