A Great Article on Ayn Rand

[Neser Boha]

It must be difficult for you trying to navigate though a would you don't understand.

Well, I sure am thrilled that you have no difficulty doing so whatsoever. Some people are just born superior to others, huh?

My sympathy.

Ayn wouldn't approve of that.

Here, let me try to help you out: which way did you come in?

No, really. The point of pasting and documenting is to lend support to my point which you claimed...well, I won't use the language that you chose, but you implied was untrue.

It's totally fine to support one's claims by external and reliable sources, of course. However, if that is all one's doing, while the rest of his/her posts are inane personal attacks, and it becomes obvious he/she's missing the point of certain posters' reactions - it becomes a bit of a problem. And yes, you did succeed at offending me. Bravo! You must be proud.

In America, all have an opportunity to succeed. Often, poor life style choices stand in the way of our success.

That is all swell. The problem is that it's not ONLY and ALWAYS 'poor life style choices' that lead to failure. One could name such detrimental issues as a long-term/chronic illness, unfavorable position in society (a kid from a ghetto has much more of a chance and opportunity to fail than a middle-class brat, I'm sure we can agree on that), family, connections (or lack thereof), etc.

What galls me is when folks cheer on bad choices and lack of effort, and then blame society. And, in short, I am defending the values of our society.

Strange, we must live in two separate worlds as I've never seen anyone 'cheer bad choices or lack of effort'. Ever. I have never seen in it in CZ, USA, nor Sweden. I have seen political decisions that let the above attitudes to continue unabated, but I have never seen them 'cheered'.

I have nothing against American values, only that they are really not that special around the world ... the value of freedom is rather wide-spread, the value of hard-work as well, there are some differences, of course; it just 'galls me' how some Americans tend to be so full of themselves and their messiah nation. One nation under God? Nah. USA is one country/nation among many, period. I'm sick of propaganda as there was a lot of it during communism in my own country, thank you very much.

And, at the risk of antagonizing you again, I see in Ayn Rand a fictional view of a world such as ours, where those in charge feel that confiscation, or 'redistribution' is other than killing the goose that lays the golden eggs.

I will argue that she did not actually present any new philosophy nor a novel approach to the subject matter. She REACTED to what she saw in USSR without - what seems to me - much of a deep thought. Also, it is too obvious that and how her sad childhood affected her way of relating to other people (viz her cold mother).

Her novels were some of the lousiest pieces of literature I ever had the misfortune to spend hours reading. They were so cold, so empty... so obvious and shallow. My first thought after reading Fountainhead was: 'hmm, it vaguely reminds me of a crappy Harlequinn novel'.

And thanks to all the anti-communist/collectivist sentiment - especially during the time her novels came out, certain Americans ate it all up. Hook, line, and sinker.

IMHO.

We need the achievers, the successful to let the rest of us have the lives we wish to lead. Who do you think pays the bulk of taxes, creats most of the real jobs, is reponsible for progress?

Yes. As we need everyone else as well. Society is made of a variety of people and they are all important to the society itself for different reasons.

Did you actully think that your previous post wasn't an attack? And you must know by now that I don't shy away from a fight. And why are you commenting on my being 'little'?(The rest may be true)

It was not a personal attack, no. I simply thought (and still think) that it was a turd of a quote. Pure naive propaganda. Something only the simplest of minds would actually believe.

 

[Neser Boha]

That was a powerful & important sharing of your already known & way vapid opinion.

Bravo.

Why don't you go trolling someplace else. Assclown.

And leave the field all to asswipes like you, douchey?

I think not. And stick that whip up your ass, take a picture of the occasion and you too can be a famous liberal "artist," ya moron.

Besides, pointing out the import of that absurd post is perfectly proper response, not "trolling," you arrogant, pompous shithead.

Thank me.

She expressed an opinion that related directly to the topic of this thread. Your post did no such thing. Now, if you explained to us why you think her opinion is vapid, etc... and laid out an argument that has at least an iota to do with the topic, that'd be something different.

Buttmunch.

 

[foggedinn]

Never read Atlas Shrugged though I did read The Fountainhead way back in high school. Thought it was a good read.

Being an impressionable teenager and considering myself to be the superior man described in the book, I was much in agreement with the philosophy described in the book. It was vanity then and hubris now.

Having several decades of actual work experience, I've realized that no matter how much I can accomplish on my own, it doesn't even approach what can be accomplished as part of a well organized and balanced team. The whole becomes much more that the sum of the parts.

Art usually being an exception.

As for Rand's atheistic philosophy; it's been my experience that only through the power of the Most High was I able to overcome impossible obstacles.

 

[The_Halfmoon]

what? that is a terrible terrible way of relating her ideas. She was anti-Kantian, and her objectivism was principally an objection to Kantian altruism and moral rigidity.

I'm religious myself, so I disagreed with her ideas on many levels, but I respect her as a genuine intellectual with genuine ideas that demand respect.

Anyone who does not simply shows an inability to read and understand her material, whether they agree with it or not.

 

[geauxtohell]

Being an impressionable teenager and considering myself to be the superior man described in the book, I was much in agreement with the philosophy described in the book. It was vanity then and hubris now.

I think that hits the nail on the head.

 

[PoliticalChic]

It must be difficult for you trying to navigate though a would you don't understand.

Well, I sure am thrilled that you have no difficulty doing so whatsoever. Some people are just born superior to others, huh?

My sympathy.

Ayn wouldn't approve of that.



It's totally fine to support one's claims by external and reliable sources, of course. However, if that is all one's doing, while the rest of his/her posts are inane personal attacks, and it becomes obvious he/she's missing the point of certain posters' reactions - it becomes a bit of a problem. And yes, you did succeed at offending me. Bravo! You must be proud.



That is all swell. The problem is that it's not ONLY and ALWAYS 'poor life style choices' that lead to failure. One could name such detrimental issues as a long-term/chronic illness, unfavorable position in society (a kid from a ghetto has much more of a chance and opportunity to fail than a middle-class brat, I'm sure we can agree on that), family, connections (or lack thereof), etc.



Strange, we must live in two separate worlds as I've never seen anyone 'cheer bad choices or lack of effort'. Ever. I have never seen in it in CZ, USA, nor Sweden. I have seen political decisions that let the above attitudes to continue unabated, but I have never seen them 'cheered'.

I have nothing against American values, only that they are really not that special around the world ... the value of freedom is rather wide-spread, the value of hard-work as well, there are some differences, of course; it just 'galls me' how some Americans tend to be so full of themselves and their messiah nation. One nation under God? Nah. USA is one country/nation among many, period. I'm sick of propaganda as there was a lot of it during communism in my own country, thank you very much.



I will argue that she did not actually present any new philosophy nor a novel approach to the subject matter. She REACTED to what she saw in USSR without - what seems to me - much of a deep thought. Also, it is too obvious that and how her sad childhood affected her way of relating to other people (viz her cold mother).

Her novels were some of the lousiest pieces of literature I ever had the misfortune to spend hours reading. They were so cold, so empty... so obvious and shallow. My first thought after reading Fountainhead was: 'hmm, it vaguely reminds me of a crappy Harlequinn novel'.

And thanks to all the anti-communist/collectivist sentiment - especially during the time her novels came out, certain Americans ate it all up. Hook, line, and sinker.

IMHO.

We need the achievers, the successful to let the rest of us have the lives we wish to lead. Who do you think pays the bulk of taxes, creats most of the real jobs, is reponsible for progress?

Yes. As we need everyone else as well. Society is made of a variety of people and they are all important to the society itself for different reasons.

Did you actully think that your previous post wasn't an attack? And you must know by now that I don't shy away from a fight. And why are you commenting on my being 'little'?(The rest may be true)

It was not a personal attack, no. I simply thought (and still think) that it was a turd of a quote. Pure naive propaganda. Something only the simplest of minds would actually believe.

You made some good, some valid points.

I appreciate the change in tone.

 

[CMike]

I loved Ayn Rand books. It seems what she warned could happen, is in fact, happening under the Obama regime.

 

[Polk]

Rand's appeal is to an acceptance and tolerance for what is and an excuse for what is. If you assume or believe that your place in life was all of your making, then you must figure the other person's place is of their making. Curiously the people who believe this often have less than the people who find it to be hooey. Luck matters, as well birth class etc. Can one imagine a poor person reading Ayn, watching their parents work each day, and then saying if only they worked harder or some such BS. Rand serves as the bible of the selfish and self centered, she is excellent in that role. PS Her writing sucks too, but that is my literary opinion. lol

'Ayn Rand and the Invincible Cult of Selfishness on the American Right'

'Wealthcare' By Jonathan Chait

"The current era of Democratic governance has provoked a florid response on the right, ranging from the prosaic (routine denunciations of big spending and debt) to the overheated (fears of socialism) to the lunatic (the belief that Democrats plan to put the elderly to death). Amid this cacophony of rage and dread, there has emerged one anxiety that is an actual idea, and not a mere slogan or factual misapprehension. The idea is that the United States is divided into two classes--the hard-working productive elite, and the indolent masses leeching off their labor by means of confiscatory taxes and transfer programs."

Wealthcare | The New Republic


"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

So many of you folks on the left carry on about social class and luck, but the evidence is simply that it is easier to whine and ask for the government to take from someone else to give you some more, then to honor those entrepeneurs who risk time and treasure.

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

 

[Polk]

I was going to post this, but Neser beat me to the punch. Obviously, the article is from Slate so it surely is biased to a degree. However, that doesn't mean it's total bunk.

I realize that many people subscribe to Rand's philosophy. I personally find it to be ridiculous for the reason that was outlined in the article:



America didn't spring forth de novo and our society, from which Rand's protagonists like Roark, believe they should be allowed to operate in a completely unfettered manner was created and secured by men and women who acted in a selfless, collectivist manner. People are enabled to make their fortunes in this country, because somebody carries a rifle, or walks the beat, or puts out fire, to give them that opportunity. These people are not mere chattle for the Rand's Ubermensch to trod on as they move up Maslow's hierarchy.

On a literary note, I personally find Rand hard to read and don't think she is a good writer. Her characters are static and the themes come across with the tone and tenor of bible versus as opposed to challenging the reader to consider her point of view.

Very well put!

On a literary note ... reading Atlas Shrugged made me think of Russian propaganda paintings/drawings in the style of Socialist Realism. I think she's yet another ugly product of Soviet Totalitarianism and its poor attempt at communism. All of her philosophy came out of hatred. Actually, calling that a philosophy is being too nice - rather, it was one huge reaction.

The article hit on that. Rand basically had a Bolshevik mentality about capitalism. She was the opposite side of the same coin.

On an completely unrelated note: my unit in the Army, the 27th Infantry Regiment, was created to go into Russia and fight the Bolsheviks and saw action in Siberia. A little known fact of American History that we committed troops to try and help the Czar (whether right or wrong).

We were fighting commies before it was cool.

27th Infantry Regiment (United States) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh yeah, we were also the unit portrayed in the book/movie "From Here To Eternity"

/threadjack

Khrushchev referred that in that famous UN address with the shoe when he talked about Arkhangelsk.

 

[CMike]

Rand's appeal is to an acceptance and tolerance for what is and an excuse for what is. If you assume or believe that your place in life was all of your making, then you must figure the other person's place is of their making. Curiously the people who believe this often have less than the people who find it to be hooey. Luck matters, as well birth class etc. Can one imagine a poor person reading Ayn, watching their parents work each day, and then saying if only they worked harder or some such BS. Rand serves as the bible of the selfish and self centered, she is excellent in that role. PS Her writing sucks too, but that is my literary opinion. lol

'Ayn Rand and the Invincible Cult of Selfishness on the American Right'

'Wealthcare' By Jonathan Chait

"The current era of Democratic governance has provoked a florid response on the right, ranging from the prosaic (routine denunciations of big spending and debt) to the overheated (fears of socialism) to the lunatic (the belief that Democrats plan to put the elderly to death). Amid this cacophony of rage and dread, there has emerged one anxiety that is an actual idea, and not a mere slogan or factual misapprehension. The idea is that the United States is divided into two classes--the hard-working productive elite, and the indolent masses leeching off their labor by means of confiscatory taxes and transfer programs."

Wealthcare | The New Republic


"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

So many of you folks on the left carry on about social class and luck, but the evidence is simply that it is easier to whine and ask for the government to take from someone else to give you some more, then to honor those entrepeneurs who risk time and treasure.

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

How do you figure?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Rand's appeal is to an acceptance and tolerance for what is and an excuse for what is. If you assume or believe that your place in life was all of your making, then you must figure the other person's place is of their making. Curiously the people who believe this often have less than the people who find it to be hooey. Luck matters, as well birth class etc. Can one imagine a poor person reading Ayn, watching their parents work each day, and then saying if only they worked harder or some such BS. Rand serves as the bible of the selfish and self centered, she is excellent in that role. PS Her writing sucks too, but that is my literary opinion. lol

'Ayn Rand and the Invincible Cult of Selfishness on the American Right'

'Wealthcare' By Jonathan Chait

"The current era of Democratic governance has provoked a florid response on the right, ranging from the prosaic (routine denunciations of big spending and debt) to the overheated (fears of socialism) to the lunatic (the belief that Democrats plan to put the elderly to death). Amid this cacophony of rage and dread, there has emerged one anxiety that is an actual idea, and not a mere slogan or factual misapprehension. The idea is that the United States is divided into two classes--the hard-working productive elite, and the indolent masses leeching off their labor by means of confiscatory taxes and transfer programs."

Wealthcare | The New Republic


"The modern conservative is engaged in one of man's oldest exercises in moral philosophy; that is, the search for a superior moral justification for selfishness." John Kenneth Galbraith

So many of you folks on the left carry on about social class and luck, but the evidence is simply that it is easier to whine and ask for the government to take from someone else to give you some more, then to honor those entrepeneurs who risk time and treasure.

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html

 

[Polk]

So many of you folks on the left carry on about social class and luck, but the evidence is simply that it is easier to whine and ask for the government to take from someone else to give you some more, then to honor those entrepeneurs who risk time and treasure.

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

How do you figure?

Social mobility is higher. There is more of an opportunity for someone to make their own path in life. Class structures are much more rigid here.

 

[Neser Boha]

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

How do you figure?

Social mobility is higher. There is more of an opportunity for someone to make their own path in life. Class structures are much more rigid here.

I have heard this before ... actually read an article on the topic about two to three years ago (in a sociology class no less). But I can't remember the name of the author or the article ... Could you please supply us with a link to a reliable source that states/proves so?

Thanks.

 

[Neser Boha]

So many of you folks on the left carry on about social class and luck, but the evidence is simply that it is easier to whine and ask for the government to take from someone else to give you some more, then to honor those entrepeneurs who risk time and treasure.

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

For all the talk of America being a land of opportunity, opportunity is much more widespread in Western Europe.

I lived for about a decade, on and off, in France and later moved to the United States. Nobody in their right mind would give up the manifold sensual, aesthetic and gastronomic pleasures offered by French savoir-vivre for the unrelenting battlefield of American ambition were it not for one thing: possibility.
You know possibility when you breathe it. For an immigrant, it lies in the ease of American identity and the boundlessness of American horizons after the narrower confines of European nationhood and the stifling attentions of the European nanny state, which has often made it more attractive not to work than to work. High French unemployment was never much of a mystery.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/04/opinion/04iht-edcohen.2.20587034.html

I will actually have to somewhat agree with you! The scandal!

I agree that America does have a much more libertarian feel to it. Just to cite a lame example, one doesn't have to pay a phone bill if one doesn't feel he/she got a good service and besides that getting on their credit report (unless they make the effort to dispute it) there are no real negative consequences to that. Here in Sweden, one unpaid phone bill means the end of the service - and the impossibility of getting another phone service with any other phone company (they're all connected by some sort of an agreement) and eventually of course ... a repossession of something you own. I'm talking one phone bill.

Living in the US, one can even decide not to pay their medical bills and besides that reflecting on their credit score (which clears every what - 7 years?), there are no other real consequences - in regards to smaller sums of money, at least. I also think when it comes to consumer contracts with their companies, in the US, companies tend to be more flexible to suit their customers while in Europe it's this way or the highway (with many other implications). Things that I could solve in the US by just calling somebody and complaining (or asking nicely) can't be solved in the same manner here in Sweden where as long as you signed a piece of paper, nothing else really matters (contracts are strictly enforced - I feel that much more so than in the US). Customer service sucks ass in Sweden (everywhere) compared to the US. That is 100% true.

However, what is totally different between the US and let's say Sweden, is that there are many very rich people here in Sweden that are (pretty much) all fine with paying the extremely high taxes simply because they feel that is the right thing to do and because they love the society they live in and wouldn't want their kids to grow up in a society that's different from the one in Sweden. (actually, my fiance's both dad and mom are both very rich individuals - I heard this from his dad who owns one of the fastest growing companies in Sweden) Crime is very low here, no guns in the street, no homeless beggars lining the streets, school all paid for from child till doctoral studies ... they - the rich - basically feel that they are the safe keepers of their dream-society. And I can totally understand that sentiment. Very ... umm ... Christian

I'll tell you one thing ... nothing beats 'free' or rather 'tax-sponsored' education!!! Well, maybe not in the US (the horrors of a US public high school flash before my eyes), but here in Sweden it rocks my socks. In a year, I will be eligible for governmental aid (CSN) and I'll be able to continue in my studies and get a master's degree! With the CSN money, I'll be able to sustain myself while focusing 100% on my studies - that is the definition of heaven - at least to a low income class immigrant who had to work full-time while studying about 99.9% of her university studies (in the US), the 0.1% of the time I was working part-time while studying full-time. Not to mention for a while I had to pay out-of-state tuition. I could never really focus on my studies as I always had to worry about all that existential shit ... like surviving (such a drag ). Ah, thinking back to those times, I can say - I love Sweden. It always pissed me off to witness classmates that came from rich families talking about partying here and partying there and always being able to score a good grade because they had much more time to study than I, while I was struggling to pay the rent and get an A (or sometimes even a B) in the class. Not because of their own doing, but simply because they were born to rich parents and I happened to be an immigrant whose parents didn't even live in the same country not to mention helping me out financially (I actually sent money to my mom, not the other way around). In Sweden, people ACTUALLY do get an equal start in life, in the US - it's just a myth - and a dream of many.

About immigrants - one thing is definitely true about USA. Since USA is such a multi-cultural/racial, etc. nation, it must be much easier for minorities to live and enjoy themselves there than in Europe where nationality is sometimes even based on certain physical features (wtf). And of course - it's a nation of immigrants - so you better treat them 'better' than making them name their children certain names (in France I heard if you were to be considered a Frenchman, you better have a traditional French name - such as Pierre, etc.)

So ... wow, I went way out on a tangent there. My apologies. Morning tea - brain jump-start. Not yet that successful

 

[editec]

Rand's philosophy of selfishness is the philosophy of a sociopath.

Can't help but notice that the person most resposible for allowing this fianancial melt down, Greenspan, recanted his committment to the Randian school of deregulation.

It was Randian style contempt for government and regulation of market rules which made the meltdown we're curretnly dealing with possible.

Nobody is in a better position to understand that that is true, than the man who allowed the markets to become the disaster they are now, on his watch.



Oct 2009 Greenspan testified before the House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform:

As I wrote last March: those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief. Such counterparty surveillance is a central pillar of our financial markets’ state of balance. If it fails, as occurred this year, market stability is undermined.

[ame]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAH-o7oEiyY[/ame]

Do you get it yet, Randians?

The truth shall set you free.

Here's the truth...the markets are comprised of PEOPLE with the power to pervert the "invisible hand of the market"

People with such power have the propensity to advance their own personal interests (virtue of selfishess, anyone?) at the expense of everybody else.

Deregulation gives us no better outcomes than overregulating does.

Idealogues (of any persuasion) are setting themselves up for a great fall because nature itself does not tolerate excesses regardless of how noble the motivation for them.

That's why over regulated communism won't work and that is ALSO why unregulated capitalism never works, either.

 

[The_Halfmoon]

Rand's philosophy of selfishness is the philosophy of a sociopath.

Can't help but notice that the person most resposible for allowing this fianancial melt down, Greenspan, recanted his committment to the Randian school of deregulation.

It was Randian style contempt for government and regulation of market rules which made the meltdown we're curretnly dealing with possible.

Nobody is in a better position to understand that that is true, than the man who allowed the markets to become the disaster they are now, on his watch.



Oct 2009 Greenspan testified before the House Committee of Government Oversight and Reform:

As I wrote last March: those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked disbelief. Such counterparty surveillance is a central pillar of our financial markets’ state of balance. If it fails, as occurred this year, market stability is undermined.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bAH-o7oEiyY]YouTube - Greenspan Destroys Deregulation in 16 Seconds[/ame]

Do you get it yet, Randians?

The truth shall set you free.

Here's the truth...the markets are comprised of PEOPLE with the power to pervert the "invisible hand of the market"

People with such power have the propensity to advance their own personal interests (virtue of selfishess, anyone?) at the expense of everybody else.

Deregulation gives us no better outcomes than overregulating does.

Idealogues (of any persuasion) are setting themselves up for a great fall because nature itself does not tolerate excesses regardless of how noble the motivation for them.

That's why over regulated communism won't work and that is ALSO why unregulated capitalism never works, either.

that's a very superficial interpretation of Rand's economic ideas. The federal reserve is a massive force that destroys much of the market's ability to function. Setting interest rates is essentially price-fixing the value of money, which in turn affects every transaction thereafter.

Greenspan was NOT a good disciple of Rand however much he loved her ideas (and I'm guessing you got the notion that he was Randian from Frontline's episode "The Warning," which was actually a very good program).

Neither Rand or her followers would've supported Greenspan's lowering of interest rates.

 

[Toro]

The harder I work, the luckier I get.
Samuel Goldwyn

"If you are born smart and work hard, you can own a BMW. If you are born smart, work hard and are lucky, you can own a jet."

- Nassim Taleb.

 

[Oddball]

Reason has a cover story on Rand this month. Have to wait 'til next month before it can be linked to.

In the meantime:

Reason.tv: Rand-O-Rama—The Long Shelf Life of Ayn Rand's Legacy - Hit & Run : Reason Magazine

 

[code1211]

Two biographies of Ayn Rand. - By Johann Hari - Slate Magazine

Ayn Rand is one of America's great mysteries. She was an amphetamine-addicted author of sub-Dan Brown potboilers, who in her spare time wrote lavish torrents of praise for serial killers and the Bernie Madoff-style embezzlers of her day. She opposed democracy on the grounds that "the masses"—her readers—were "lice" and "parasites" who scarcely deserved to live. Yet she remains one of the most popular writers in the United States, still selling 800,000 books a year from beyond the grave. She regularly tops any list of books that Americans say have most influenced them. Since the great crash of 2008, her writing has had another Benzedrine rush, as Rush Limbaugh hails her as a prophetess. With her assertions that government is "evil" and selfishness is "the only virtue," she is the patron saint of the tea-partiers and the death panel doomsters. So how did this little Russian bomb of pure immorality in a black wig become an American icon?

Poor Ayn .. or Alisa ... her entire life-story reduced to an article in a Slate magazine. Reduced it was very well though ... it affords us a very good glimpse into Rand's life and "philosophy" that gathered so many and such high-profile followers.

Many of us who know Rand's work have noticed that with each passing week, and with each successive bailout plan and economic-stimulus scheme out of Washington, our current politicians are committing the very acts of economic lunacy that "Atlas Shrugged" parodied in 1957, when this 1,000-page novel was first published and became an instant hit.

Rand, who had come to America from Soviet Russia with striking insights into totalitarianism and the destructiveness of socialism, was already a celebrity. The left, naturally, hated her. But as recently as 1991, a survey by the Library of Congress and the Book of the Month Club found that readers rated "Atlas" as the second-most influential book in their lives, behind only the Bible.

For the uninitiated, the moral of the story is simply this: Politicians invariably respond to crises -- that in most cases they themselves created -- by spawning new government programs, laws and regulations. These, in turn, generate more havoc and poverty, which inspires the politicians to create more programs . . . and the downward spiral repeats itself until the productive sectors of the economy collapse under the collective weight of taxes and other burdens imposed in the name of fairness, equality and do-goodism.

'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years - WSJ.com

The lesson that I took from Atlas shrugged was that there are people of varying ambitions and talents. A very few of these are the ones that make the whole society go. These folks, in Atlas Shrugged became aware that they were not only not getting credit for doing good, but actually getting blamed for not sharing their gifts with the masses for even less reward.

They, one by one, left the society which soon collapsed upon itself as the governing elite, incapable of creating wealth, tried to both redistribute and confiscate the wealth that existed at the time.

The enlightened or inspired or gifted, call them what you will, gravitated to each other and formed a commune in which they could each exercise their passions for excellence and creativity and existed outside of the society which had formerly both used and tormented them.

The society, without the gifted, entered into a downward spiral. The ruling elite was a group of power brokers and their followers were weak yes men. The basis of their power was the abandoned hope of the masses and the future was one of ever decreasing expectations.

It was a historical perspective of the years following 2008.

Who is John Galt?

 

[Polk]

How do you figure?

Social mobility is higher. There is more of an opportunity for someone to make their own path in life. Class structures are much more rigid here.

I have heard this before ... actually read an article on the topic about two to three years ago (in a sociology class no less). But I can't remember the name of the author or the article ... Could you please supply us with a link to a reliable source that states/proves so?

Thanks.

Here's one I found.
http://www.suttontrust.com/reports/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf