Courtesy Cornell Capa, International Center of Photography / Magnum
Ayn Rand, the Russian-born author, referred to Native Americans as 'savages' and defended the genocide committed against them.

Conservative Icon Ayn Rand Said 'Savages' Had No Right to Land

Simon Moya-Smith
10/16/15

Native Americans did not have a right to their ancestral homeland, and white people were justified in committing genocide against them, Ayn Rand, the Russian-born conservative heroine and writer, said during a Q&A in 1974, Salon reported.

"Americans didn’t conquer ... You are a racist if you object to that ... [And since] the Indians did not have any property rights — they didn’t have the concept of property ... they didn’t have any rights to the land," Rand said, reported Ben Norton of Salon on Wednesday.

RELATED: Native Genocide issue at Sac State: ‘No University Policies Violated’ says President

Rand, who is lauded by conservative politicians such as Republican House Representative Paul Ryan for her positions on a free market, referred to Native Americans as "savages" and implied they would have rather lived "like an animal."

"Let's suppose they were all beautifully innocent savages, which they certainly were not. ... What was it that they were fighting for, if they opposed white men on this continent? For their wish to continue a primitive existence, their right to keep part of the earth untouched, unused, and not even as property, but just keep everybody out so that you will live practically like an animal?" Rand said.

Rand is the author of "Atlas Shrugged," a novel about a society falling into chaos after the wealthy, strained by stringent regulations, divest from an economy.

Read more of Rand's comments and Norton's full report: Libertarian superstar Ayn Rand defended Native American genocide: “Racism didn’t exist in this country until the liberals brought it up

You need to be logged in in order to post comments
Please use the log in option at the bottom of this page

POST A COMMENT

Comments

archangel's picture
archangel
Submitted by archangel on
Never was a big fan of Aynn. Fell asleep reading Atlas Shrugged and thought the so called "hero" in the Fountain Head was a selfish and self absorbed moron. However the fact is that her "philosophy" if one can call it such is known as objectivism not libertarianism. Lest we forget that the late great Russell Means was a Libertarian candidate for the presidency which he describes in his book Where White Men Fear to Tread: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312147619?*Version*=1&*entries*=0 Anyway Aynn as far as I can see from reading many of her "pearls" which are occasionally thrown out as "wisdom". She is not only a racist but a warmonger as well: http://www.theamericanconservative.com/2013/03/22/ayn-rand-and-vietnam/ In my opinion calling her a "libertarian" would be like calling a Nazi a Democrat or Republican.

tmsyr11's picture
tmsyr11
Submitted by tmsyr11 on
Ayn Rand is…..dead and isn't coming back. Just as much as Saul D. Alinsky is dead. He too isn't coming - the Father of Radicals.

dry hills's picture
dry hills
Submitted by dry hills on
As a person whose family held property in Russia and lost it in the rise of Soviet communism(dictatorship)...it is the highest irony that she would abuse Native Americans of their rightful heritage. Typical narcissistic behavior! She also benefited from government programs when she came here. Selfish,greedy,power-mad...no wonder politicians are drawn to her FANTASY WRITINGS!

jwrock's picture
jwrock
Submitted by jwrock on
The point Rand was making was that property rights did not exist prior to a legal system that recognized and protected them. The existing system was to take what the tribe had the power to take and keep what the tribe had the power to keep. The white 'tribes' behaved no differently. But they did more than take what they had the power to take and keep what they had the power to keep. They instituted a private property system to bring ownership under the protection of law. This codified and civilized the ownership of property.

Ron Toahami Jackson
Ron Toahami Jackson
Submitted by Ron Toahami Jackson on
Before our white brothers arrived to make us civilized men, we didn't have any kind of prison. Because of this, we had no delinquents. Without a prison, there can be no delinquents. We had no locks nor keys and therefore among us there were no thieves. When someone was so poor that he couldn't afford a horse, a tent or a blanket, he would, in that case, receive it all as a gift. We were too uncivilized to give great importance to private property. We didn't know any kind of money and consequently, the value of a human being was not determined by his wealth. We had no written laws laid down, no lawyers, no politicians, therefore we were not able to cheat and swindle one another. We were really in bad shape before the white men arrived and I don't know how to explain how we were able to manage without these fundamental things that (so they tell us) are so necessary for a civilized society.
5