Ayn Rand claims that a capitalist society should be build upon one legitimate function of the state: the protection of individual rights. This protection is made possible by institutions like the police, law system and the military army (Ayn Rand: Capitalism the Unknown Ideal, 1966).

For a capitalist society to exist it has to accept the principle on human rights. This capitalism can only be proclaimed and used when it is an integrated part of a rational philosophical view of life, containing ideas and values as: individualism, reason and rational egoism. Ayn Rand find these ideas as a road to capitalism (along with Adam Smith as mentioned earlier).

Capitalism is the social system where everyone has a right to produce and create values – and keep them, and having the opportunity and choice to trade freely among other mutual interested partners.

Adam Smith convincingly and brilliant showed us in the “Wealth of Nations” how a restrictive, regulated, ‘mercantilist’ system (anno 1776) destroys economic development. The principles of free trade, competition and choice would spur economic development, reduce poverty and precipitate the social and moral improvement of human kind.

Again, as a sociologist: why do academic people overlook Smiths argument : People are born with a moral sense, just as they have inborn ideas of beauty or harmony (Adam Smith: The Theory of Moral Sentiments 1759)? (My note: empathy with nature - human beings and objects).

Our conscience tells us what is right and wrong: and that is something innate, not something given too us by lawmakers or rational analysis (or: state restrictions…believe it or not, we are not wolfs) because we have a natural fellow feeling: “SYMPATHY”. Between them, these natural senses of conscience and sympathy ensure that human beings can and do live together in orderly and beneficial organizations –(My note: long term social order , and not short-term like many intellectuals claim the utilitarian tradition(cost/benefit) is based upon, but long term: in other words: the possibility for a civil society).

Sociologically; the moral sentiment establishes a new liberalism, in which social organization is seen as the outcome of human action but not necessarily of human design. Our unplanned social order is far more complex and functional than anything we could reason out for ourselves (a point which Marxist politicians still forget to their cost).

In our context, the kitsch producer in the capitalist social system should have no political restrictions on her (his) production and trade. This kind of public restriction is force, and harassment against the individual integrity and right in keeping her (his) talent, and their greatest value: the mastering of a “timeless” craft.

Unfortunately no artist is free in the Art-world today because of discriminating institutional norms and laws.

Ayn Rand favors the romantic period which is influenced by Aristotelian capitalism. During the rebellious 1700- century it developed capitalism after the industrial revolution. It was an extremely Aristotelian “sense of life” among the people in the West, but it was also a very strong influence from Plato and Kant.

The dominating philosophical ideas from Plato and Kant is the reason why capitalism slowly disappeared, since it was no rational philosophical defense for its existence. Immanuel Kant’s aesthetical scientific work “The Critique of Judgment” (1790) influenced the romantic period by claiming that beauty is to serve moral and taste. The moral as we all know by now – was altruism and collectivism, and had its great birth in the 1700- century, and beginning of the 1800 century. This view of life is still dominating the world today.

Ayn Rand claimed that the individual was a free individual, and where “the artist” created masterpieces from its axiom: existence exists, with a declaration to life in the acknowledgement and volition for existence. They did not create out or in favor of one God, mystique or political ideology.

Laissez-faire capitalism was (and still is in my view) the social system that made this possible. Unfortunately most of intellectuals and aesthetics’ turned away from capitalism to the more spiritual romanticism, since their pore understanding of capitalism was in terms of materialism (as it also is today).They also missed the point on capitalism as a system of freedom, and not alienation.

The economic system and Art world today is penetrated by public restrictions, and it is also here where the Artist can create her (his) Art.

Laissez- faire capitalism is the social system where the kitsch producer has the complete freedom to produce her (his) Kitsch. Here you find no public system which only disintegrated task, is to acknowledge what Art or Kitsch is.

Art is of course depended on these public affairs and restrictions, but Kitsch defense itself.

The value system of Kitsch doesn’t contain any platonic/ kantian ideology or infrastructure, since this (infrastructure) is build up on wrong moral and myths about the collective identity.

The Kitsch producer - produce out accordance to her (his) volition to beauty which lies in the human existence. Her (his) metaphysical values, her (his) view of life and her (his) abilities and talent is Kitsch as the result.

No structure of any kind shall influence or penetrate the sphere of the Kitsch producers, since the aesthetical judgments concerning them is not to be of any national, race, political or religious kind, but rather on objective - timeless values.

The objective values is qualities regarding human existence covered in drama, tragedy and fantasy which reflects itself in the technique and craft in the motives represented.

Odd Nerdrum has been a private master for many talented students during the years. They have preformed and developed their craft on a private basis where the technique from the old masters is the model, and system of profit is: “trade for pay”. The French sociologist Pierre Bourdieu calls this “the commercial field of production”.

The public sector and its field of cultural production have other criteria. The State; represented by small elite groups claims certain and specific defined “qualities” (accordance to the Critique of Judgment; Immanuel Kant 1790) from the Art –object, and system of profit is: freedom for play.

If we compare the private and public sector, you can see a great difference between the two. It can be explained with the simple capitalist principle: The individual Kitsch producer is free to produce in harmony with her (his) talent and abilities, and at the same time trade freely with people who want to sense and enjoy an Aristotelian “sense of life”- in sympathy we mutually respect the individuals rights.

In the Kitsch context you pay for good quality. This is something that the artist as a dilettante in the Art-world never acknowledges about her/himself and their works. They are simply not allowed to.

In other words: trade for freedom and pay…Play no game.

Some of these theses has been published in articles in the Norwegian Philosophical Rewiew, AerA nr.1 and nr 4 . 2002 by Hanna Cecilie Skurdal.

(Currently working on a scientific masterpiece with Odd Nerdrum 2005)