atlas shrugged, are we living through it ?

to justintherunner:

My apologies, I was venting, I work with of bunch of idiots who constantly invoke the book as the end-all-be-all. I will read the book someday, and I'm sure it will be a solid read, but the thought of anyone hitting it head on is ludicrous to me. My guess is that there are many more in depth interpretations of what was meant by this book, and those who use it to spout their individualistic diatribe have chosen to see it in a way that fits their narrow-minded views; sort of like the bible, why on earth I need to believe in the savior from 1948, and how that is in the bible, I don't even want to begin this figure out.

Once again I am sorry; I definitely was not accusing anyone on the thread. I just saw the title felt like taking a few cheap shots at my co-workers while they weren't looking. You are right, I am stupid, I thought I stated that up front, but it is interesting that you are willing to point fingers so quickly. Remember, I accused us all of being stupid; surely there is no arrogance there. Please, go ahead, I'm waiting for it...accuse me of intellectual dishonesty, maybe I will go home crying once I finally realize that I am not only stupid but dishonest; put me in my place, I'm definitely lower than you, your own thoughts prove it. Sorry...again this is were all arguments lead at the workplace, just venting....I think.

As for the subject of the post, I doubt it. We're not devolving into some state were no one can help themselves and we have to rely on a few brutal geniuses to show us the way; remember I haven't read the book so it is a mild guess based on my brilliant co-workers' views and constant citation. We have put ourselves in a shit of a crisis, but it will pass; we will see a bit more regulation return to government policy. If they overshoot it, people will get mad, fear the man, fear communism and shift the balance back into the hands of "hopefully" a more conservative conservative party.

Why a certain segment of our population lives in constant fear of us devovling into a brutal full-blown communist state with of no-return I am not sure; their reality is half-realized I guess. Maybe it's a thirty year cycle or something; we had the 50's, then the 80's and now we are rearing close to the 2010's; it is about time for the red scare to return.

Personally I do agree with the Idiocracy point someone threw out. Although exagerated, give it 500 years.....who knows; the geniuses I work are so brilliant that they all decided that they are not having kids; it puts too much of a strain on their own idividual goals.... Hell that racist jack from Pennsylvania (the one who named his kid after the old AH) already has 2 children. Damn, forget Ayn Rand, I think you're right, Mike Judge may have hit it head on.

Thanks, it takes a real man to apologize. I hear ya though, co-workers can really wear on your nerves, and you just have to grin and bear it, otherwise work would be even more hellish. I misunderstood your venting as an attack, sorry, I guess I can be a little too touchy at times.

patrick suskind (a double dot on the u, it's german) wrote perfume.

society will always circulate between "give me order" and "get your order outa my face"... thousands of years old. the current political dialogue is idiotic and self-important.

look to the issues. ayn rand, in her time, got to the crux of the issue. look to the fiction of today to get to the crux of OUR issues. it may seem stupid, but it foretells the future more than anything else can, i promise.

stock market ain't doin' you any better... go with the fiction writers (liars). haha

For god's sake "Come on people", please quit using "were" when you mean "where". My mind has a number of chemicals f*cking with it right now and I must've spent 5 minutes on those two sentences before I figured out what you were trying to say. Have pity on the inebriated and use proper grammar and spelling!

I think you're interpretation of the book has gotten screwed up because your only exposure to it is second hand. Most of the criticisms I've seen in this thread (at least the ones that are comprehensible) are based on the premise that Atlas Shrugged glorifies unbridled corporate greed. That's not what the book is about. The main message is that the world is divided between those who produce wealth (goods and services) and those who attempt to claim that wealth as an entitlement for themselves. It then proceeds to show what would happen if the producers said "screw you" to the leeches and stop producing. The book doesn't say that you shouldn't take care of your fellow man, it says you shouldn't be forced to do it.

1st, sorry about the grammar, it was late and I don't always care for "perfect" sentence structure. As for my second hand version of the book, this is true, although my "idiot" co-workers are actually fairly intelligent (they just try to act as more than they are) and they do give fairly descript dictations of the book's ideology.

So, I am aware of the thought that the "producers" shouldn't be forced to take care of fellow man. In reality this is only true to some extent. The producers are also dependent on the "leeches" (or base of society), they cannot thrive without them, or it. If the "producers" take advantage of society, society has every right to kick them out and say "screw you" just the same. People always act like society is always dragging them down, but life witout it would be a mess. In my opinion, people are always indebted to the society which has raised them and given them the chance to flourish and it is sad when people ignore this and claim they deserve everything they because they did it all on their own. Pay your #%$&ing taxes or get out.

If a "great" producer was kicked out of a society it wouldn't take long for some "scum" to fill the void present in that society. Such producer positions are often filled and forcfefully defended by individuals who are not the best for the job; they cheated, lied, swindled, out-smarted the less-than-smart local, and often priveledged their way to that point. When they die, get booted out by society, or stop producing to screw everyone else, they only hurt their memory, everyone may suffer for a second, but opportunity only sits idle for a moment; it is never long before the void is filled. Wealth does not only exist in what people have but more importantly the opportunity and potential to develop. Overall, the "producers" are no better than the "leeches", they just have their ass parked on a better seat in the theater; if they decide to move the seat won't be vacant for more than a moment.

We have been living with elements of Atlas Shrugged for a while now.

Also, define "greed".

What crimes have been committed at least regarding the housing collapse?

Some banks gave loans to people who lied about income on their forms. That is really a crime committed by the person seeking the loan. Some banks approved risky loans. That is bad management.

Do not let members of Congress off the hook and the folks at Fannie/Fred who were buying up these risky loans and making millions all the while managers were warning them about the loans.

In the time you have spent defending yourself here you could have read the first 545 chapters of the book. You would almost be through Part 1.

I believe that what Rand best wrote about was "independence of mind". To think for yourself and to not be just another follower in the crowd.

While "Atlas Shrugged" is her masterpiece, "Fountainhead" gives the same message in a more individualistic and concise manner.

She sets some pretty high standards for acting as an individual, many of which she herself did not and could not live up to but her art (her writing) best reflects her ideal man.

"The Fountainhead" inspired me to be better at being an individual but because I am human I fall short all the time but I keep striving anyway.

OMG! I have never met anyone over the age of 22 that believed Rand had anything useful or intelligent to say.

JFC, a paranoid leech with a gun to protect his little pile of money.Happy much? Just when I think I can't be more repulsed...

And Blowhard, please explain the strange disconnect between your love of Rand and obsessions with women who have made their lives about public service. Just a little something for the therapist to chew on.

OR wrote:

What part of atlas shrugged? That part where giving people in industry free reign screws us or the one where giving government free reign screws us? I am thinking we are getting both.

postfontaine wrote:

or did we all just get screwed by massive criminal greed

how bout the part where the girl we give free drinks screws us

I think you're confusing producer and leech with rich and poor. The janitor at Chrysler is a producer since he provides a service (cleanliness and maintenance) that adds to the wealth making potential of the company. The chairman of Cerberus Capital Management (believe it or not, it's Dan Quayle) is a leech because he sent Bob Nardelli to Congress to beg for money for Chrysler. Cerberus has more than enough cash to keep Chrysler going but they think they're entitled to the wealth of others while giving nothing in return. According to Rand's philosophy the janitor is a hero and Quayle is a villain.

On the other hand, Bill Gates would also be a Randian hero (regardless of your opinion of Microsoft), as he not only created tremendous wealth for himself, but allowed millions of people around the world to also enrich themselves through the use of Microsoft products. The lawyers who keep trying to tie up Microsoft in antitrust suits destroy efficiency and potential wealth creation, while only enriching themselves.

Personal riches have nothing to do with being a producer or leech. If you create wealth, no matter how small the creation might be, you're a producer. If you try to enrich yourself by taking from others while creating nothing, you're a leech. If you'd read the book you'd discover the biggest villains in the story are all rich.

Come on people wrote:

My apologies, I was venting...

Wow, now there's something you rarely see on Letsrun. It would be even rarer if it turns out you're a guy.

Blowing Rock Master wrote:

Personal riches have nothing to do with being a producer or leech. If you create wealth, no matter how small the creation might be, you\'re a producer. If you try to enrich yourself by taking from others while creating nothing, you\'re a leech.

So traders and brokers are leeches because they enrich themselves by taking from others while creating nothing?

Reread my post. You create wealth by providing goods or services. Traders and brokers provide a service.

I don't need to reread your post. Moving paper around is not a service. It is an artificial maneuver created by leeches to skim wealth from hardworking individuals.

3rd Street wrote:

I don't need to reread your post.

You're right, why run the risk of being less ignorant. Good luck getting through life without using a trader or broker.