Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Donald J. Trump: Randian Hero!
So many pixels have been rendered lately for the sake of hyperbolic takes on Donald Trump that I just have to get in on it. Why should I deny myself the fun? And far from a jeremiad on incipient fascism, my hyperbolic take is one of acknowledgement of the heroic: Donald J. Trump is that hero, a hero right out of the pages of an Ayn Rand novel… and I’m going to make you see it.
I can hear the scoffing protests now. “Donald Trump is base, abrasive, rough, and uncouth,” and so was Ellis Wyatt. “Donald Trump inherited his money;” so did Francisco d’Anconia. “Donald Trump attacks people;” so did Ragnar Danneskjöld. “Donald Trump only wants to make money and put his name on everything;” so did Hank Rearden. “Donald Trump just wants to blow things up;” so did Howard Roark. “Donald Trump is horrible to women;” actually, “horrible” was how Howard Roark treated Dominique Francon, and Trump doesn’t come close.
In Rand’s novels, polite society, in fact just about everyone, hates the hero. Like Donald Trump, each hero is rich, successful, driven, ornery, and unapologetic. In one case, one of Rand’s heroes is hated by his own mother. The media in Rand’s novels print nothing but lies and dark innuendos about her heroes, and most of the people in the story believe those lies and innuendos. And sadly, even though at this point we should really know better, most of us in the real world believe similar wildly biased narratives.
“But Trump used the corrupt system that he now claims to hate.” And by necessity, so do all businessmen, even Rand’s heroes:
“Rearden disliked the subject. He knew that it was necessary to have a man to protect him from the legislature; all industrialists had to employ such men.” (Rand, pg. 40)
“But Trump said that he wasn’t going to accept the results of the election!” Is that what you heard? I heard that same Hank Rearden refusing to grant “sanction of the victim” to an outrageously corrupt kangaroo court:
“If you fine me, you will have to seize my property to collect the fine – I will not volunteer to pay it. If you believe that you have the right to force me – use your guns openly. I will not help you disguise the nature of your actions.” (Rand, pg. 479)
“But Trump is only in it for the power,” and so was Gail Wynand. Unique in the pantheon of Rand’s heroes, Wynand is a tragic hero. His fatal flaw is a quest for power. When Wynand realizes that he wants to be a better person, to use all of the power he’s amassed for a cause that is actually good, that desire comes at the cost of everything he has. Overwhelmed, his world collapsing, powerless despite his power, he caves. In the end, ashamed and broken, he makes good in what small way he can. However, throughout his arc, you desperately want Wynand to succeed.
And will Donald Trump succeed where Gail Wynand failed? Who knows. In the real world, Donald Trump is just a man, as gifted and flawed as any of us. And while it’s possible to fit him (or any of us) into a contrived rubric of hero or villain, in this same real world, any of these rubrics prove to be just a bit hyperbolic.
Rand, Ayn. “Atlas Shrugged,” Plume, August 1999.
Published in Politics
It’s not clear to me that your essay would not be equally accurate if you replaced Donald Trump with Hillary Clinton throughout the essay, though you need to replace inherit money with inherit power.
I’ve always said Trump is the slapstick Howard Roark.
That movie may have done better at the box office.
None of that stuff bothered me but his basic economic and political foreign and domestic policy ignorance is deeply disturbing, but Hillary’s wrong understanding of these matters and the pervasive strength of the interests who support Democrats constitute a different and deeper threat. Trump may be educable and guided by adults because otherwise he will accomplish nothing which is itself, better than what Hillary will succeed at. Only impeachment will remove her but then we get a pure Marxist in contrast to an Alinskyite (It’s no longer acceptable to call the approach fascist which is where Alinsky got all of his tactics.)
Great Idea. Is Mel Brooks still alive?
Counterargument: Trump is a James Taggart who thinks he’s Hank Reardon.
Bingo. You win.
This reminds me why I never cared for Rand.
[light-hearted jesting mode on]
I thought that discussing Ayn Rand or Atlas Shrugged was a Code of Conduct violation?
[light-hearted jesting mode off]
Well, this is certainly an interesting post. Thanks, Rick.
And Trump is working in his father’s line of business, just like Jesus.
He has a chance to be a hero, a chance for redemption.
I’m not sure. While it’s possible to, tongue-in-cheek, shoehorn Trump into an analogy of a Randian hero in order to make a wider point of over-the-top comparisons of Trump on Ricochet, one doesn’t have to try so hard or unseriously to notice that Hillary is kind of a real life Randian villain.
Thanks for reading, A-squared.
Well, the whole piece is intended to be a bit slapstick. But, if you’re looking for the closest analogy, it would have to be Wynand.
Thanks for reading, JLocked.
It was actually a recent hyperbolic piece on impeachment that finally convinced me to offer this tongue-in-cheek hyperbolic response.
Thanks for reading, I Walton.
I think the only Rand villain I dislike more than James Taggart is Gus Webb.
Thanks for reading, Tom.
Thanks for reading, Mark.
I certainly hope so! Bring it!
Thanks for reading, Peter.
Thanks, Arahant. And thanks for reading.
Someone should really remake this movie.
Thanks for reading, Doc Jay.
Exactly. You should do your own hyperbolic post – Donald J. Trump: Disciple of Jesus!
Thanks for reading, Randy.
Cast Emma Stone as Harry Roark (short for Harriet) and throw in some plot boiling “because she’s a young woman” shading and turn the dynamiting into a protest and we’ve got a movie.
Somebody get me @roblong!
I think that’s kind of the point I’m trying to get across, we all have the potential to be a hero or a villain. At some point, the insistence that that potential in someone is realized, either to the point of Randian Heroics or Hitlerian villainy, becomes a bit much.
You can double-feature it with the new Ghostbusters!
Oh man. Funny cause its true. And I only read the book.
The main premise of this post is that we would want Roark, Rearden or Galt as President. We don’t.
No, the main premise of this post is that there’s been a lot of over-the-top comparisons on Ricochet as to what Trump will be like as President. So I decided, in Limbaugh-like fashion, to illustrate absurdity by being absurd, and to counter those over-the-top comparisons with an over-the-top comparison of my own.
Thanks for reading though.
Interesting take. I am not a big Rand fan, but like the concept of hero hatred. It is a true phenom.
Thanks for reading, Bryan.