Atlas Shrugged - Week 4: Ch 7 & 8

[Kruiser]

And add this into the mix, Ayn Rand's beliefs are called Objectivism which is different than libertarianism.

Just to be clear in this discussion. Rand had different views than libertarianism although there are many similarities.

I found this taxonomy of libertarianism on Rational-wiki. I have no idea if the site or list has any value. But at least whoever wrote it thinks Rand and the An Caps belong in the libertarian camp. Some of the names are pretty cool, though.

 

[lludwig]

But at least whoever wrote it thinks Rand and the An Caps belong in the libertarian camp. Some of the names are pretty cool, though.

I'll at least agree with you on that. They are in the same camp.

Just like socialism and communism are as well.

 

[Primeperiwinkle]

Imma need an infographic for next week’s freaking plot line... omg!!!

this might take me the rest of the night.. Oy!

This week, Week 5 is here.

 

[broswoodwork]

What truth did Ayn Rand hit on in this book? What truth did she tell with a slant?” I think she showed futility. (And probably a lot more than that but this is what popped into my head today.)

We'll have to keep reading and find out.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Primeperiwinkle]

I think Reardens strong sexual desire is a result of him holding in his desires and emotions for too long. Earlier he said how he sees it as a weakness in his character that he does it with his wife.

He has an overbearing mother who shames him for his accomplishments. I’ve yet to meet a guy who grew up with a mother who did that who isn’t twisty.

 

[BizyDad]

I think if the founding fathers included a clause that forbid vote buying with other's private property, we'd have as close to a perfect system as possible.

I've never been able to totally make the leap to an-cap, though I respect their ideals. I'm stuck over here in minarchism.

Hang on, let me get my Google out... An-cap. Minarchism. No Google, I don't mean monarchism.

At least I don't think so...

 

[Tubs]

I think you'll like this one @Kak

View: https://youtu.be/vE0lkd_w9sE

 

[BizyDad]

Man. I triggered the bootlickers this evening. I sincerely apologize for my pro freedom, limited government views. I didn't realize how hurtful shaking up a statist's belief system can be.

Hahaha! Calling me a bootlicking statist is about as accurate as my calling you a free wheeling hippie.

Who got triggered though?

Leaderless? What about what I have said leads you to think I am advocating for a leaderless society?

You have no idea what type of government would love to see because I haven't said it.

You know you could just go back and read for yourself. Ok, I'll remind you the thread of the conversation, but only because I respect you and want to hear the Peter Forbes story.

So I said show me a single example of a successful society which lacked a government. You said its never been tried.

I said surely some tribe, aka a tiny society where the government is vested in leaders, must have attempted a leaderless society.

I can't fathom any collection of people of any real size not having implemented a government, so I posited this example as the only feasible example I could think of where a society had no government.

I wasn't putting words in your mouth; I was making my own point.

That said, when a dyed in the wool "Ron Paul Republican" shares a T.J. quote about democracy, well, I don't know about anyone else, but I actually have a pretty good idea of what type of government he'd prefer.

Funny thing, you clearly have no idea what type of government I prefer.

So you are pro limited government, as am I, however our definition of limited likely varies in degree, with my preferring just a bit more government than you'd like. To what degree is something I am currently exploring for myself and until just now, I enjoyed your contributions. You got triggered by a childish shot. I understand. I don't appreciate the friendly fire.

And now for the second time I'll attempt to extricate myself from this can of worms.

I think the answer to the question “what is the greatest gift you can give to others?” is.. your life.

I. Completely. Agree. Of course there is no greater gift.

Thank you for clearing that up for me, I really should've seen it sooner.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[GigMistress]

And my mind is juggling who is right. I still think the "villians" have a point, at least in real life. In this book, they suffer from an addling of the brain.

I've read the whole book more than once, but will be careful not to give anything away. What you say here has always been the sticking point for me. It's very easy to divide people into the heroic captains of industry and the weasely socialistic types who are breaking everything while reading, but that is in large part because Rand has created characters very narrowly. Jim Taggart never has an honorable thought; EVERY producer believes his word is his bond.

In the real world, of course, we have humans. And some of the very successful humans undeniably use what liberty they have (and some they don't) to do serious harm to others for their own profit. Some people (even politicians) who want to protect against those abuses have fair points, though often imperfect solutions.

I think those of us who spent a lot of our early lives tripping over people who knew less than we did (or next to nothing) but were nonetheless very sure about the structures they needed to impose on us find it very seductive--one of the reasons I've read the book more than once was that it helped inspire me to step over and around the human obstacles to progress. But, there's no denying that the picture it paints is too simplistic and too black and white.

I have often wondered whether that was the flaw it is today when the book was written. Certainly, long long ago businesses that didn't act with integrity often failed and a businessman's reputation was his chief bit of marketing--I'm talking about the days when communities were small and individual business owners personally known. That seems to become less and less true as businesses grow to monoliths and the humans involved are remote to us, which makes me question how well these concepts actually translate to a world in which poor ethics, dropping the ball, offering shitty products, etc. no longer seems to do much (if any) harm to a business once it has grown to a certain point.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Kruiser]

I've heard it argued that many of them were prototypical libertarians. The arguments seemed reasonable, particularly with Jefferson.

What should they be classified as?

I don't know. I've always just think of them as "the American founders." They saw themselves as inheriting the classical republican thought of ancient Rome, though they were all obviously influenced greatly by enlightenment thought.

It totally make sense that Jefferson might be one... he has always been my least favorite founder and had the most crazy and unrealistic views. The American economy had already moved past his romantic agrarian views when he was still advocating for them. He was also a huge fan of the French revolution.

The founders were not united in their thoughts. Madison was very different than Hamilton who was very different than Jefferson, etc.. For the most part, they were concerned with designing a republic that would last. Liberty was key, but it was an ordered liberty and the virtue of the citizenry was to be key. It was certainly not "total freedom in everything and the market will figure it out."

 

[Kak]

What's an "an cap"? Serious question.

What you think a libertarian is.

Short for "anarcho capitalist."

 

[broswoodwork]

I found this taxonomy of libertarianism on Rational-wiki. I have no idea if the site or list has any value. But at least whoever wrote it thinks Rand and the An Caps belong in the libertarian camp. Some of the names are pretty cool, though.

View attachment 28835

This looks like old school encyclopedia dramatica tier satire.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[reedracer]

This looks like old school encyclopedia dramatica tier satire.

Brilliant! Or a McSweenys list. I just found this over there, pretty much gets everything wrong in the right way.

Our Grimm Nation: Libertarian Goldilocks

Once upon a time, there was a young woman named Goldilocks. But, even though Goldilocks’s family was in the top 2% of earners in America, Goldilock...

www.mcsweeneys.net

LOL, "Don’t you think that all prostitution should be unregulated? Or do you hate freedom?”
I want to write a book of these kind of questions,

 

[G-Man]

I found this taxonomy of libertarianism on Rational-wiki. I have no idea if the site or list has any value. But at least whoever wrote it thinks Rand and the An Caps belong in the libertarian camp. Some of the names are pretty cool, though.

View attachment 28835

It's actually not as bad as I thought it would be when I saw rationalwiki.

Rationalwiki is the website version of that kid in the freshman dorms that's probably above average intelligence and regurgitates fashionable left wing talking points with an air of educated superiority. He's Rachel Maddow's smarter and imminently more hate-able kid cousin.

 

[BizyDad]

I don’t want to open a giant can of worms on this, but I will say I disagree. Never in history have “ills” not been a problem. Thousands of years of government has never once fixed “ills.” The only thing that is proven systematically to reduce “ills” is prosperity.

You might say the government checks capitalist wrongdoing. To that I ask how? When? And why should they have the authority to determine what a wrongdoing and a check is?

You might say that government solves problems that capitalism won’t. To that I ask, like what?

Show me an instance of perceived government benevolence and I will show you an exercise in control, a power grab, or a money funneling opportunity.

Show me an actual problem solved and I will show you a capitalist with a profit motive.

Capitalism doesn't need a precursor like conscious, or common sense. It is already common sense.

View attachment 28804View attachment 28805

The ONLY reason the USA worked so well is because this has been the closest thing to a voluntary society the world has known for the longest amount of time. Those days are, however, over. We are no longer more economically free than any other first world country.

Two can play this game.

Show me a single example of a successful society which lacked a government.

What kind of idealistic paradise would that be? An island of 1? 2? And how long did this uber society last before a stronger neighboring government/tribe/people forced their way into the land?

Failing that example, then it is a discussion of which government is best... I suspect you'd feel the answer is the one which governs least?

But only anarchists feel it is the one which governs not at all, and I suspect neither of us is an anarchist.

Somehow both of us end up in mob rule... Democracy is simply the more civil of the two methods...

And I just noticed your edit it that last bit. On that, we can agree.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[BizyDad]

Brother, no one has ever, in history, given it a chance.

Why is that, do you think?

And how do we know that is true? Surely some tribe somewhere tried a leader less society.

Certainly no one in recorded history.

And why is that? Because the ideal societies aren't built to last? Is idealistic realistic?

San Diego/Tiajuana. El Paso/Juarez. Kansas City/Kansas City. New York/Hoboken.

Don't these city pairing show the value of one government and it's policies over another? Is there not value in that?

I apologize for having more questions than answers, but as I said this is a topic that has me going back and forth. I've given it a lot of thought and drawn very few conclusions.

I envy the man who says he can draw up an ideal society. I cannot.

Anyways, I look forward to continuing the discussion as we progress in the book. I suspect the book will have a lot to say on this topic by the time were through.

The book sure does raise important questions...

 

[Primeperiwinkle]

I just put the book down and read the comments. Y'all so deep.

I agree with the three students of Patrick Henry theory. Totally John Galt masterminding.

I get the feeling Rand really enjoyed naming the University.

"Give me liberty or give me death".

I disagree that this isn't a book with a right vs wrong theme. To me, it is taking great pains to be exactly that. It just is redefining those terms on a non God centric view. I believe it rejects that world view.

And the issue of true liberty seems to be at the crux of it. All the heroes adopt a "you be you and I'll be me" stance, especially in their hardest times. The rest proclaim the need to consider our fellow man.

Liberty vs the tyranny of the majority seems to be the right vs wrong at play here. At least one of them.

And my mind is juggling who is right. I still think the "villians" have a point, at least in real life. In this book, they suffer from an addling of the brain.

I want to ponder more and write more later, but I'm sure of it.

There were some incredibly thought provoking quotes I want to pull out. Like this, "the sight of an achievement was the greatest gift a human being could offer to others."

Is this true? I can't say it is. But this "ethic", or a wasted down version of it, seems to be everywhere now. In the TV era much of our current society has devolved into spectacle. Who reads books over a century old when there's Netflix and the NFL?

But I can't decide what I think the greatest gift is. Truth? People don't appreciate truth (the physicist had a good point). Individuals might appreciate truth, but people don't. So is it Love? Forgiveness?

And yet, achievements like the moon landing or breaking the four minute mile bring Hope. It shows us what's possible. It inspires. I mean, the girl has a point.

I don't know. And it bothers me that I don't know. I should know this by now. This is an important question.

What is the greatest gift a human can give others? (Emphasis on the plurality)

And that is just one of several quotes like it. This book is a fascinating read (I am back to liking it now), but mostly because it makes me evaluate my answers to important questions often left too long unconsidered.

I think the answer to the question “what is the greatest gift you can give to others?” is.. your life.

At one point Hank despairs and discusses his life’s blood being spent.. all great achievements take that.

 

[broswoodwork]

Nor were the founders.

I've heard it argued that many of them were prototypical libertarians. The arguments seemed reasonable, particularly with Jefferson.

What should they be classified as?

 

[Kruiser]

Great post. My thoughts exactly.

Not every libertarian is "an cap." That's why there are "an caps."

What's an "an cap"? Serious question.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[broswoodwork]

What's an "an cap"? Serious question.

Anarcho Capitalist. I think the term voluntarist may be interchangeable, but there probably is a subtle nuance in the mix.

 

[lludwig]

I've always kind of thought of libertarianism as a spectrum that straddles beliefs as disparate "total economic and social anarchy" to "a flat national sales tax would be nice". I'm probably not operating on a precise enough definition, but I think there's enough latitude to admit that some libertarians are pragmatic enough to be admitted into a reasonable adult discourse.

And add this into the mix, Ayn Rand's beliefs are called Objectivism which is different than libertarianism.

Just to be clear in this discussion. Rand had different views than libertarianism although there are many similarities.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[G-Man]

Meant to respond to this on Friday and forgot.

@Primeperiwinkle - I'm only sticking with you at this point because I love grandstanding epic speeches. The characters are non-characters. They aren't real people. Also, I'm pretty sure Ayn Rand just hates pretty ladies. Doesn't seem to have the same resentment to pretty men though. Francisco D'Anconia is a dusky 1940s dystopian Gosling.

If you're ever up for discussing more speeches, let's discuss the movie Gettysburg. 3 hours of speeches and copious amounts of pasted on facial hair.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Primeperiwinkle]

Meant to respond to this on Friday and forgot.

@Primeperiwinkle - I'm only sticking with you at this point because I love grandstanding epic speeches. The characters are non-characters. They aren't real people. Also, I'm pretty sure Ayn Rand just hates pretty ladies. Doesn't seem to have the same resentment to pretty men though. Francisco D'Anconia is a dusky 1940s dystopian Gosling.

If you're ever up for discussing more speeches, let's discuss the movie Gettysburg. 3 hours of speeches and copious amounts of pasted on facial hair.

I agree so much dude. I can’t possibly share all the reasons that these characters no longer ring true to me at all.. but yea. I would have stopped reading at this point if it weren’t for this discussion. Thank you for committing.

 

[Kruiser]

Brother, no one has ever, in history, given it a chance.

Real socialism has also never been given a chance.

Look, I think it's cool to be a libertarian when you're 19 years old. That's totally understandable and even a bit endearing (private roads! private money! private police force! private armies!).

"I've got one simple principle that explains absolutely everything! Economics! Politics! Religion! Morality! I understand it all and you don't get it! By the way, have you read The Road to Serfdom?"

But libertarianism is sophomoric in the truest sense of the word (which is why it is so appealing to college sophomores).

Eventually, if all goes well, these folks can move beyond libertarianism; take some of the real insights that libertarians have provided and incorporate them into a more complete vision of politics, the economy, and life. [Actually, I'm not sure libertarians themselves have provided anything of value beyond what the Scottish enlightenment thinkers, American founders, and Austrian and Chicago economists have provided. But whatever.]

If not, they become the folks you try to avoid at cocktail parties.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[BizyDad]

Real socialism has also never been given a chance.

Look, I think it's cool to be a libertarian when you're 19 years old. That's totally understandable and even a bit endearing (private roads! private money! private police force! private armies!).

"I've got one simple principle that explains absolutely everything! Economics! Politics! Religion! Morality! I understand it all and you don't get it! By the way, have you read The Road to Serfdom?"

But libertarianism is sophomoric in the truest sense of the word (which is why it is so appealing to college sophomores).

Eventually, if all goes well, these folks can move beyond libertarianism; take some of the real insights that libertarians have provided and incorporate them into a more complete vision of politics, the economy, and life. [Actually, I'm not sure libertarians themselves have provided anything of value beyond what the Scottish enlightenment thinkers, American founders, and Austrian and Chicago economists have provided. But whatever.]

If not, they become the folks you try to avoid at cocktail parties.

Now, now, no need to be insulting...

Socialists in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

 

[Kruiser]

Man. I triggered the bootlickers this evening. I sincerely apologize for my pro freedom, limited government views. I didn't realize how hurtful shaking up a statist's belief system can be.

It is also possible that one can be very pro-capitalist, very pro-freedom, and still consider libertarianism to be entirely inadequate.

Adam Smith sure wasn't libertarian. Nor were the founders.

 

[Kruiser]

Hol' up. College sophomores libertarian? All the ones I've encountered sound like they have shrines to the Che and Marx in their campus rooms and Feel The Bern stickers on their hoverboards.

This also holds 4x true the more south you go continentally.

I guess it depends on where you went to school...

I see a lot of similarities between communists and libertarians. Both have a simple system that explains everything and is other than the world is now and would fix everything if only it were tried.

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[Primeperiwinkle]

Brilliant! Or a McSweenys list. I just found this over there, pretty much gets everything wrong in the right way.

Our Grimm Nation: Libertarian Goldilocks

Once upon a time, there was a young woman named Goldilocks. But, even though Goldilocks’s family was in the top 2% of earners in America, Goldilock...

www.mcsweeneys.net

LOL, "Don’t you think that all prostitution should be unregulated? Or do you hate freedom?”
I want to write a book of these kind of questions,

At least I know why she successfully gets into the head of frat boys.. Oy.

 

[StrikingViper69]

Meant to respond to this on Friday and forgot.

@Primeperiwinkle - I'm only sticking with you at this point because I love grandstanding epic speeches. The characters are non-characters. They aren't real people. Also, I'm pretty sure Ayn Rand just hates pretty ladies. Doesn't seem to have the same resentment to pretty men though. Francisco D'Anconia is a dusky 1940s dystopian Gosling.

If you're ever up for discussing more speeches, let's discuss the movie Gettysburg. 3 hours of speeches and copious amounts of pasted on facial hair.

interestesing... what makes you think Ayn Rand hates pretty ladies?

 

Dislike ads? Remove them and support the forum: Subscribe to Fastlane Insiders.

[lludwig]

interestesing... what makes you think Ayn Rand hates pretty ladies?

I don't get that assumption at all. Dagny is described as very attractive and a very strong female lead character.