Leonard Peikoff

Peikoff views Objectivism as a "closed system" that consists solely of the philosophical principles Rand herself had articulated, and he considers disagreement with any of these principles a departure from Objectivism. The Ayn Rand Institute promotes Peikoff's view of Objectivism.

The closed vs. open issue came to the fore when David Kelley, a philosopher then affiliated with Peikoff and ARI, published his essay "A Question of Sanction", arguing for greater open-mindedness in working with other groups. Kelley sees Objectivism as an "open system" that can evolve beyond Rand's own writings and beliefs. Peikoff presented his objections to Kelley in an article called "Fact and Value," arguing that Kelley's case itself contradicted Rand's understanding of the relationship between cognition and evaluation, facts, and moral values. Peikoff concluded that Kelley was not a genuine Objectivist and urged anyone agreeing with Kelley to leave the Objectivist movement.[21] Ultimately, Kelley responded by founding the Institute for Objectivist Studies in 1990, which later changed its name to The Objectivist Center and finally The Atlas Society.

Peikoff inherited many of Rand's manuscripts. During her lifetime, Rand had made a statement that she would bequeath her manuscripts to the Library of Congress. She later had reservations, and the bequest was not part of Rand's will. However, after her death, the Library of Congress requested the manuscripts. In July 1991, Peikoff had an assistant deliver the manuscripts of Rand's novels, except for the first and last pages of The Fountainhead, which he had framed. In their stead, he had the pages photocopied so that the manuscripts would be "complete". On August 16, 1998, the Los Angeles Times published an article about Peikoff, including a joke he made about "stealing" the pages from the Library of Congress. The library demanded that he deliver the pages to them, deeming them to be U. S. government property. A complaint from the United States Department of Justice followed in October 2000, claiming over a million dollars in damages unless Peikoff turned over the pages. After consulting his lawyer, Peikoff released the pages to a representative of the Library of Congress.[22][23]

In his book The Logical Leap: Induction in Physics (which he co-wrote with physicist David Harriman), Peikoff argues that there is no problem of induction, because philosophy is itself an inductive science and, therefore, that any attempt to deny the validity of induction contradicts itself by implicitly accepting the validity of induction. Peikoff and Harriman also argue that scientific claims verified by induction should be considered true until new evidence warrants modifying or amending them because scientific knowledge derived from induction is contextual. In other words, those who on the basis of conclusive evidence make inductive scientific claims regarding science cannot argue that their claims are subject to no possible modification but can argue that they are the only rational claims that can be believed based on the available evidence. They conclude that the same process of induction is essential to every rational field (except mathematics) and that, as a result, truth in any such field possesses the same objectivity as that of physics.[24]

Peikoff supports laissez-faire capitalism, arguing that the role of government in society should be limited to night-watchman state conceptions of protecting individuals from the initiation of force and fraud. He opposes taxation, public education, welfare, and business regulations. He also opposes laws regulating pornography, euthanasia, or stem cell research. He is a supporter of abortion rights but criticizes defenders of abortion who label themselves "pro-choice", arguing that the term ignores the deeper philosophical issues involved.[25] He believes that circumcision of a child too young to consent should be a crime and is evil.[26]

He also continues Rand's opposition to libertarianism, remaining sharply opposed to any description of Objectivist political philosophy as "libertarian" and to any collaboration with most libertarian groups. He has been critical of American foreign policy, considering both neoconservative and libertarian views self-sacrificial. He objects to the terms "isolationist" or "interventionist" to describe his foreign policy views, stating that the only "intervention" the United States should enact is war and "only and when it is in self-defense."[27]

Peikoff campaigned for Elián González' right to remain in Florida, rather than returning to his father in Cuba, stating, "To send a child to rot in the prison of Cuba for the alleged sake of his own well-being is criminal hypocrisy. To send him there in order to preserve his father's rights is absurdity, since there are no parental or other rights in Cuba. To send him there because 'He needs a father, no matter what' is a mindless bromide. Does he need a father who has no choice but to watch his son being broken in mind and starved in body?"[28]

Peikoff claims that Palestinian people prior to the establishment of the State of Israel consisted solely of "nomadic tribes meandering across the terrain," and that "the Arabs" today have no concept of property rights; indeed, that their "primitivist" antagonism to such rights is the root cause of Arab terrorism. He argues that Israel is a moral beacon which should not return any territory to Arabs or even negotiate with them.[29]

Peikoff considers the nationalization of Middle Eastern oil properties developed by Western corporations—beginning with Iran in 1951—to be in violation of international law and refers to such efforts as "confiscation" and supports covert actions to reverse such efforts. He advocates bringing an end to what he claims are "terrorist states" and has routinely lobbied for regime change in Iran "as quickly as possible and with the fewest U.S. casualties, regardless of the countless innocents caught in the line of fire," not ruling out the use of nuclear weapons, arguing that moral responsibility for innocent deaths would lie with their governments rather than the United States.[30]

In April 1992, Peikoff endorsed "any Democrat nominated by his party for the Presidency", citing President George H. W. Bush's "truly disgraceful" record, specifically tax hikes, support for new employee protections, his foreign trade policy, foreign aid to Russia, alleged hostility to Israel, the Gulf War, anti-abortion and anti-obscenity views, and alleged failure to defend Salman Rushdie's freedom of speech during The Satanic Verses controversy.[31]

In 2004, Peikoff endorsed John Kerry (despite thinking of Kerry as a "disgustingly bad" candidate) against George W. Bush (whom he called "apocalyptically bad"), on the basis of Bush's religiosity and his refusal to crush Islamic regimes, especially Iran, along with his "doomed" economic policies. In advance of the 2006 elections, Peikoff recommended voting only for Democrats, to forestall what he sees is a rise in influence of the religious right, adding:

Given the choice between a rotten, enfeebled, despairing killer [Democrats], and a rotten, ever stronger, and ambitious killer [Republicans], it is immoral to vote for the latter, and equally immoral to refrain from voting at all because "both are bad."[32]

Of the 2008 United States presidential election, Peikoff said, "I wouldn't dream of voting", saying that the Republicans should be "wiped out" or "severely punished" for their association with the religious right. Furthermore, he characterized Barack Obama as "anti-American" and a "lying phoney" with troubling connections to both Islam and Reverend Jeremiah Wright. He labelled Obama's running mate Joe Biden an "enjoyably hilarious windbag", and their Republican opponents John McCain and Sarah Palin as a "tired moron" and an "opportunist", respectively.[33]

In a 2010 podcast,[34] Peikoff explained why he supports immigration restrictions in the current context of the welfare state, and why he does not see this as a contradiction to Objectivism's general rejection of immigration restrictions.[35] In another 2010 podcast, Peikoff explained that he does not support the building of a mosque near Ground Zero in New York City, arguing that property rights are always contextual and that preventing the construction is a wartime necessity.[36] Similarly, he supported the French ban on the burqa.[37]

In September 2012, Peikoff endorsed Mitt Romney for the Presidency, citing President Obama's alleged nihilism, taxation, economic and energy policies, Obamacare, and his use of executive orders. However, Peikoff was not enthusiastic in his endorsement of Romney, calling him an "appeasing, directionless" candidate with "no political convictions" who would be useful for buying time. For the same reason, he endorsed the Republican Congressional nominees.[38] Afterwards, he called Obama's re-election a "catastrophe", "the worst political event ever to occur in the history of this continent" and "worse than the Civil War".[39]

• Heller, Anne C. (2009). Ayn Rand and the World She Made. New York: Doubleday. ISBN 978-0-385-51399-9. OCLC 229027437.
• Gladstein, Mimi Reisel (2009). Ayn Rand. Major Conservative and Libertarian Thinkers series. New York: Continuum. ISBN 978-0-8264-4513-1. OCLC 319595162.
• McConnell, Scott (2010). 100 Voices: An Oral History of Ayn Rand. New York: New American Library. ISBN 978-0-451-23130-7. OCLC 555642813.