The Ayn Rand Candidate
There are a lot of Republicans candidates running for office in this election cycle who talk about their affinity for the constitution and for limited government. Stephen Bailey, the Republican nominee for Colorado’s 2nd congressional district does too. What makes him slightly different is that he is also a fan of Ayn Rand’s Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology, her text explaining the philosophy of Objectivism. Bailey isn’t just a small-government conservative, he’s also an Objectivist running for political office.
“I don’t classify myself as an Objectivist candidate. I do consider myself an Objectivist, but to me that’s not relevant. What’s relevant is the constitution and do you respect and honor it, and that’s what I want the law of the land to return to being”, he says. He makes it clear that he doesn’t want to push the Objectivist “ethical lifestyle” onto the nation. He believes in a free society so he doesn’t want to dictate how people should live their lives.
He also explained that he cited that book above all of Rand’s other titles because it had “the most positive” result in his life. He credits Rand’s epistemology with giving him a firm grounding and understanding of the world that has led him to success in business and in life.
Affinity for Rand already percolates on the right, but having an actual Objectivist run for Congress is a new development. Objectivists are famous for being despondent about the modern political process: Rand’s intellectual heir, Leonard Peikoff, summed up the objectivist perspective on politics pretty effectively during the 2008 election: "I think McCain comes across as a tired moron, Obama as a lying phony, Biden as an enjoyably hilarious windbag, and Sarah Palin as an opportunist struggling to learn how to become a moron, a phony and a windbag."
That was before the Tea Party movement and before conservatives decided to embrace a first principles critique of the Obama administration. Bailey’s story of why he decided to run for Congress is similar to other stories from Tea Party candidates across the country; he got involved with his local Tea Party during the April 15th Tax Day rallies, attended the first 9/12 March in Washington D.C., and became so concerned about the direction of the country that he decided to run for office.
Stephen Bailey won his Republican primary with 68% of the vote. While he didn’t run on an “Objectivist” platform, true to form, Bailey did not compromise on his views when it came to issues that usually excite the Republican base. He is not a pro-life candidate, and is against the “personhood” amendment being proposed in Colorado that would grant constitutional rights to fetuses from the point of conception. He views the issue of gay rights as an issue with the tax code which could be solved with either a flat or fair tax so government doesn’t give preferential treatment to married couples.
For Bailey, it is the economy that is the centerpiece of his campaign, and Republicans who support his campaign are willing to overlook how he may not necessarily be a textbook conservative on social issues. Bailey notes that he has a lot of pro-life supporters who may disagree with him, and that he is not a single issue voter and so is willing to back Ken Buck for Senate even though he is pro-life. (Objectivists used to view voting for religious conservatives as “unwittingly helping to push the U.S. toward disaster, i.e., theocracy, not in 50 years, but, frighteningly, much sooner.”)
In his interview with FrumForum, Bailey said he agreed with Ayn Rand’s position on the gold standard as well as the critiques of Immanuel Kant, but it was clear that these sorts of topics are not what Bailey views as central to his campaign. The important themes of his campaign are the size of government, it’s spending, and whether or not America’s economy can stay strong into the future. While I could tell he was an Objectivist based on word choices and style of arguments, to the majority of voters, he will just be another Republican.
This might become a real legacy of the Tea Party movement. Philosophies and movements that agree that the country needs to fundamentally return to lost first principles, whether it is from objectivists, paleoconservatives, or libertarians, have been given a opening that may not have existed before.
Bailey faces one of the most deeply entrenched Democratic incumbents in the country, and the district has a very strong Democratic rating on the partisan voting index. It will be interesting to see how deeply Bailey can make inroads when his message is about the economy, he is not aligned with the religious right on social issues, and when he stays on message and doesn’t discuss the “Is-Ought Problem” or why “A is A”. (He does note that his philosophical training gives him an advantage over his opponent, because he can point out the “six logical fallacies that Jared Polis gave to the League of Women Voters.”)
Follow Noah on Twitter: @noahkgreen