Atlas Shrugged page 1169 what's next?

Posted by j_IR1776wg 10 years ago to Politics
84 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Personally I don't believe that the control freaks and property thieves can be kept out for an indefinite period of time. I doubt that Moses would have written the eighth commandment (thou shall not steal) if there were no thieves in his time. I don't believe that Men are innately either good or evil but that we learn to be so. The U S Constitution basically held together for 100 years. How long will John Galt's gulch last?


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by fivedollargold 10 years ago
    At least until AS3 comes out!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by RonC 10 years ago
      I think Galt's Gulch is a place we create in our own lives. For me it started out as a fleeting thought now and then. Over time I acquired more skills and better self discipline. At this time I have managed to create my own little world that for the most part is oblivious to the moochers. I have to settle up on tax day like everyone else, and I always go to the poling place on election day. Who knows? Someday my vote may be for a winner. Beyond that, Washington and the Federal government doesn't bother me much here in Ohio. Taxes aren't so bad when you can figure out a way for someone to hand you the money to pay them with.

      Is this paradise available to anyone? Yes! But you have to see it in your mind, believe it to be possible, work in that direction, and recognize it when the pieces come together. Can it be destroyed? Yes. By neglect, or by the envy and ill will of others. What is there that mankind and mooches cannot destroy?

      A dear friend of mine taught me how to build this place. He had done so himself and in the 2008-09 financial collapse he told me he felt like he was on an island, completely oblivious to all of the financial disaster around him. He has passed away now. Instead of leaving me his fortune and property, he left me something far more valuable, his knowledge! With that a person can build their own Galt's gulch.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 10 years ago
        For me, Galt's Gulch began in 1792. We must work collectively to regain our individual rights ratified in the constitution. It is important we all adhere to the principles expressed in Atlas Shrugged or else we are lost.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by jneilschulman 10 years ago
    Atlas Shrugged was not the last word of fiction written on this subject. Robert A. Heinlein's The Moon is a Harsh Mistress (1966) recapitulates the American Revolution in a lunar prison colony. L. Neil Smith's The Probability Broach (1980) reexamines the American Revolution in a parallel universe.

    If there's any forum where being self-serving is not a problem this should be it.

    My own novel, Alongside Night, portrays a near future where one doesn't need to retreat to a hidden valley in Colorado; the clandestine free markets are embedded all over, waiting for the government to collapse under the weight of overspending and totalitarian controls. That novel was published in 1979 and now it's a feature motion picture just being released into movie theaters.

    Official Alongside Night Movie Website: http://www.AlongsideNightMovie.com

    Official Alongside Night Movie Facebook Page:
    http://Facebook.com/AlongsideNightMovie

    J. Neil Schulman
    author of the novel
    writer/producer/director of the movie
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years ago
      Just finished Alongside Night. Excellent and I eagerly await the movie. As a novelist myself,, I had criticisms, but nothing notable.

      I did like the One-Eyed-Jack character (as a good guy) as I have a glass eye and, until recently, owned a one-eyed horse named One-Eyed-Jack.

      Gulchers, I highly recommend Neil's story.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by jneilschulman 10 years ago
        The character of One-Eyed Jack got me investigated by the CIA. Little did I know when I wrote the novel that this was the name of a CIA station chief in Central America.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years ago
          Considering current developments, I would trust my horse more than the CIA station chief.

          I might note, as with AS, your story is very prescient, considering its age.

          Are you familiar with "Unintended Consequences" by John Ross.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
          • Posted by jneilschulman 10 years ago
            Thank you.

            As for Unintended Consequences, it's in a box with most of my unread books from my last house move in 2008, waiting for bookshelf space to open up.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by jimjamesjames 10 years ago
              Similar to Alongside Night in plausibility. And I understand that John Ross spent a lot of time with ATF people while writing to make sure he didn't have a "One-Eyed-Jack" moment with authorities as you did. ;-)
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by exindigo 10 years ago
    I constantly wonder why people have trouble understanding what the constitution is. Let me tell a story that may open some eyes.

    I had a Danish friend named Thorkild Poulson. He worked for the Danish Parliament on the Citizens Tax Council or some such name. He, as part of his job published a monthly magazine on all matters pending in parliament regarding tax issues that affected the populace and other fiscal and political matters. One of the things he did was p;publish the Muslim-oriented cartoons that caused so much fervor.

    He read the constitution and constantly berated his American friends on their lack of understanding. In this matter, he undertook to read overy constitution, pact, agreement, edict and any other pertinent document regarding the formation of government and citizen's rights.

    Here is what he found. I am paraphrasing his words: The American constitution is the only document that comes from the people to the government. It describes the powers the PEOPLE allow the government to have and specifically denotes powers the government does not have. Every other document of the same or similar name basically describes rights people have that are bestowed by the government. The US Constitution is the ONLY document where the opposite occurs and thus it is the most important political document ever created.

    Remember this when you hear people talk about the constitution. It is a document drafted by the people defining limits for government. It is not from government giving rights to people. In fact, it states that government may not limit or do anything to those freedoms reserved for people. It's there in black and tan.

    Have we forgotten anything?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
      Dear ExIndigo, that was an excellent post! We may not have forgotten anything, but we are overwhelmed by people who willingly choose to ignore reality (ex. James Taggart).

      This next analogy is not original, but it bears repeating. Imagine a democracy where a pack of wolves and a single sheep discuss what is for dinner. While we may not be meek like sheep, those outside Atlantis are like the wolves. No,, they are worse. Wolves at least only kill what they plan on eating.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
      Unfortunately, the progressives have spent the better part of the last century trying to hide that fact and get the populace to believe that it is the government that grants all rights to the citizens.

      I have this discussion every few months with somebody that wants a new law to ban something or make something illegal. They often say that it is the government that grants the ability for people to do things so that the government should have the right to restrict things as well. I have to inform them that it is only the people (and the states, in some cases) that have rights, not the federal government. And we actually created the constitution to ensure that we retain our rights and only give very specific authority to the government to very limited things, but that this has been warped over the decades. This often comes as a surprise and shock to them, and most don't really believe me, until I pull out my pocket Constitution and read to them from it. Then they start to awaken.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ MikeMarotta 10 years ago
    The message of Atlas Shrugged is that the evils of taxation and regulation are result of producers accepting an unearned guilt. If any previous generation had spoken the words of Rearden at his trial, d'Anconia at the reception, or Galt on the radio, the game of the looters and moochers would have been over. Only William Henry Vanderbilt is on record - and he was also proud of his philanthropy.

    "In 1883, reporter John Dickinson Sherman questioned him about why he ran the limited express train: "Do your limited express trains pay or do you run them for the accommodation of the public?" Vanderbilt responded with: "Accommodation of the public? The public be damned! We run them because we have to. They do not pay. We have tried again and again to get the different roads to give them up; but they will run them and, of course, as long as they run them we must do the same." The interview was then published in the Chicago Daily News, but Vanderbilt's words were modified. Several accounts of the incident were then disseminated; The accounts vary in terms of who conducted the interview, under what circumstance and what was actually said. William received bad publicity and clarified his response with a subsequent interview by the Chicago Times. In that interview he was quoted saying: "Railroads are not run for the public benefit, but to pay. Incidentally, we may benefit humanity, but the aim is to earn a dividend." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Hen...) But an isolated instance is not enough to reverse a cultural trend.

    Following Rand, many Objecitivists claim to admire Ancient Greece, especially the Athenian Golden Age 480-400. But in fact, Athens itself was no friend of philosophy until after the death of Socrates, though it nurtured philosophy and art by attracting "metics", Greeks from other towns.Unable to speak in the Assembly, they wrote books and lectured in gardens. However, that launched a 500-year culture of open inquiry, learning, and exploration, both physical and intellectual. It was at Alexandria in Egypt that the word "cosmopolitan" was coined. No one was persecuted for questioning the existence of the gods, or asserting their own self-interest. Read about Aristippos of Cyrene.

    But it was not perfectly explicit or consistent. Merchants were still looked down upon. Slavery was accepted as an institution. Not the Cyreniacs, Hedonists, Epicureans, Peripatetics, Platonists, Stoics, or anyone else developed a consistent and complete philosophy of reason. But it lasted 500 years anyway.

    Rand's thesis was that once clearly articulated and demonstrated, the truths of Objectiivsm will endure like any other science.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 9 years, 12 months ago
      "But in fact, Athens itself was no friend of pilosophy until after the death of Socrates..."

      Most of what you post here I agree with. However it should be noted that Aristotle felt it necessary to leave "lest Athens sin twice against philosophy."
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 10 years ago
    Once upon a time there was an example of freedom and how it works, utilizing capitalism and a work ethic based on self reliance. It was called The United States. It took around 230 years, but it is now in a shambles with only a little hope that it will ever become what it once was. Even if a Galt's Gulch were to spring up somewhere, there is no guarantee that over time, the same thing will happen again. Who said "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance?" Will the new Gulch be eternally vigilant? Only a people who are mature enough to rely on reason have a chance for it to succeed and so far, I don't see a very sizeable number of them. Even those who espouse the right thing, often do so for the wrong reason, a situation which will eventually lead to veering off course. I fear the human race is just not ready. I hope I'm wrong.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by spark- 10 years ago
      John Philpot Curran - "It is the common fate of the indolent to see their rights become a prey to the active. The condition upon which God hath given liberty to man is eternal vigilance; which condition if he break, servitude is at once the consequence of his crime and the punishment of his guilt."

      I also like this one - "We have had 13. states independant 11. years. There has been one rebellion. That comes to one rebellion in a century and a half for each state. What country ever existed a century and a half without a rebellion? And what country can preserve it's liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it's natural manure." - Thomas Jefferson
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by 10 years ago
        I deep in my soul want to agree with Churchill that "jaw jaw is better than war war" but I'm afraid that the time for talk is rapidly ending.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by spark- 10 years ago
          I really don't think that war or revolution would be necessary if the states retain the right to secede. Now that Congress lacks the will do fulfill their mandate and continues to fund the illegal actions of the executive, the best option is to leave the dysfunctional organization. The problem is in getting the popular support for peaceful secession. With 17 trillion in debt, that’s about $45k per person for a state to pay off is liability to the federal govt. This debt is manageable, but the trend is going the wrong way and time is running out for this to be a good option.

          Even in the revolutionary war, there was only about 40-45% popular support and no more than 3% of the population in active combat. The majority certainly did reap the benefits of the 'illegal' actions of the minority. History shows that this is how real changes come about in governments. The majority of today’s population are too ignorant of their rights, and are too irresponsible to do what is right.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by 10 years ago
            I'm hoping enough States agree to an Article V convention. The States, collectively, are the only entities powerful enough to bring the Feds to heel. BO would no more allow a peaceful secession than Putin is going to allow a non-Russian controlled Crimea.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
            Spark, the $45 K per person assumes everyone pays his/her "fair share", which they don't. It neglects the $100 trillion in unfunded obligations to Social Security, Medicare, Obamacare, etc. It also assumes a 0% return on investment for those who buy bonds. How realistic is that?

            The most important thing you wrote, Spark, is the first part about the right to secede. The only state that retained that right to secede when it came into the US was Texas. When the South did secede in 1861, we had the War Between the States. I refuse to call it the Civil War even though I vehemently disagree with slavery, racism, etc. for all the reasons Ayn Rand would have. I do sometimes call that war the "War of Northern Aggression", however. Any state that wants to secede now will no longer be able to do so. I do agree with Mark Levin and j_IR1776wg about the Liberty Amendments and the Article V convention, but the moochers and looters will not let us walk away from their debt without taking us to war. I better get back to 3D printing some of my defensive countermeasures. I am sure the NSA will be reading this one.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by spark- 10 years ago
              In reading the discourse regarding this question from both before and after ratification of the Constitution, it appears to have been assumed the right of secession. Where the Articles of Confederation declared themselves to be perpetual, this was explicitly dropped from the Constitution. Also, in the actions of Lincoln during the war, he was careful to only declare slavery illegal in the southern states. He could not do so in the northern states since he did not have jurisdiction to do so. By making this declaration he acknowledged that he had no jurisdiction over the south, thereby implying their sovereignty.

              It is unfortunate that of all the countries which abolished slavery in that time period, the US was the only one who used it as a pretext for war. Slavery could have easily been abolished without destroying liberty and property rights along with it (the Confederate Constitution actually made importation of slaves illegal).

              Congress definitely has a spending problem, not an income problem. Promises for unfunded liabilities can be un-promised. The fed certainly has a long history of breaking its promises when in its own best interest. Once spending is properly managed, one approach to debt repayment could be to continue to debase the currency, putting the newly ‘minted’ money into the debt rather than the banks and Wall Street. That way the debt would be borne evenly by all currency holders, citizens and non-citizens alike.

              Washington said that this great experiment would only work if the people are educated. This is still a representative democracy, and unfortunately, the representatives we have are what the people want (or think they want).
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                Everything in this latest post is correct, particularly the assumed right of states to secede during the Constitutional signing and the debasing of the currency. It is a fair question, however, given the amendments shortly after the War Between the States, whether secession could still be assumed. This is a set of premises that probably will always need to be checked and rechecked, as the Constitution looks less like a fortress and more and more like a piece of badly yellowing paper.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
                  Should an article V convention actually occur, one of the items should be a distinct mechanism to dissolve the relationship between an individual state and the federal government. It would likely entail some amount of debt repayment.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                    It would involve debt repayment. The problem is that the citizens of Atlantis never entered into what Democrats call the "social contract". At this point, my "share" of the debt and unfunded government obligations (Medicare, SS, etc.) is about the same price as my fully paid $300 K house.

                    I got properly criticized (although not much) when I recommended Tax Man as a song Ayn Rand might have liked. I heard it on the radio this AM. The last line is "And you're working for no one but me. (i.e. the tax man)." I started that post on the day that I rendered to Caesar what is Caesar's (i.e. paid my taxes). I refuse to accept guilt, debt, etc. that was not MINE. If I do something stupid that I should feel guilty about, then I'm OK with feeling guilty for a brief time. However, I refuse to accept what I like to call false guilt - the kind that Ayn Rand wrote most of AS about.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                    • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
                      Unfortunately, whether you personally agreed to the debt, your representatives have done so on your behalf.

                      Totally agree about "Tax Man." I'm guessing that they must have just paid their taxes when they wrote that.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                        Go down some in this thread to see that I just commented on how you can't do much voting with your feet anymore. It wasn't my representative that voted for this abomination (Obamanation?). It was the representatives and senators in other districts and states that decided that Gulch citizens were on the dinner plate.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                        • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
                        • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
                          Unfortunately, it doesn't matter. They collectively have done so.

                          It probably would be a good thing to have a resident at the age of majority sign a contract, probably as a pre-req to gaining the ability to vote, that would obligate one.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                            You're right. It doesn't matter anymore. The collective debt and unfunded liabilities make it such that it doesn't matter anymore where we go in the US. This is why many of us have shrugged and are exiles in our own country.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                      As a followup on my Tax Man rant, "Should 5% appear too small, be thankful I don't take it all." Also, "Don't ask me what I want it (your tax $) for... if you don't want to pay some more."

                      I will gladly agree that Rand would prefer music other than rock-and-roll, but the lyrics of Tax Man would have suited her well.
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by spark- 10 years ago
                  I would refer to the post below by exindigo - "The American constitution is the only document that comes from the people to the government." The concept of government by consent of the governed cannot exist without the right of the people to shrug off their current form of government. Right of secession is always retained by the people, violent overthrow only when the holders of power are no longer beholden to the people (situations such as voting manipulation or unwarranted martial law).
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                    You and exindigo are, of course, correct. We are well past the point you talked about. Jefferson said that he expected revolutions every 20 years. It's high time for another one.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years ago
                      You say you want a revolution?

                      Setting aside the legal issues, it's hard to imagine a violent overthrow of the gov't resulting in more liberty. If there are enough liberty-minded people to overthrow the gov't, couldn't they bring about change peacefully and legally?
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago

                        Nice Beatles pun, CircuitGuy, given my Tax Man rant. Well.. you know. We all want to change the world. No, I don't want a violent overthrow of the US government. Just like the colonists came to America to flee persecution, it is time to do so again. Going back to Lana's point on a different thread, I think that it is possible to flee such persecution and start over again.
                        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                      • Comment deleted.
                        • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years ago
                          Fleeing to somewhere else is completely different from a revolution here. Jefferson envisioned states and even cities experimenting with completely different rules, but the Federal gov't ended up homogenizing everything.

                          What would the Gulch look like in terms of the six issues I mention in this post: http://www.galtsgulchonline.com/posts/69...

                          What would be different in an ideal society vs. ours? I agree with the oath, but does taking it solve the problems? Or do we just have a bunch of AS fans dealing with the same issues.
                          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                          • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                            Agreed. Fleeing is different. Fifteen years, ago and perhaps even six or seven years ago, the US could be saved. The cancer has metasized too far at this point.

                            By itself, the oath doesn't solve the problems, but it prevents the vast majority of them. The oath is a wide spectrum antiviral, antibacterial vaccine.
                            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      I hope you are wrong as well Herb. It's the reason I put this post up. I cannot understand why the human race always seems to backslide toward collectivism. Many people around the globe sing the praises of freedom and individual rights but few seem to achieve these goals. In America, too many people don't even seem interested anymore.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
        Because it's easy. Why work when I can get a politician, more interested in wielding power than truly doing what is best for the people, to steal from the productive for my benefit?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by mminnick 10 years ago
    I agree with the pirate but would carry it further. Not only vigilant. If you are vigilant, you will see issues and problems coming over the horizon. That doesn't stop them from overwhelming you. You must prepare, for the problems and prepare to defend you ideas, ideals and way of life up to and including using extreme violence to protect them. One must be prepared to fight for what is right., to fight for what is scared and for your right to exist as a free human being. without this commitment, vigilance is nothing.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by Robbie53024 10 years ago
      The problem is that most liberty loving people see no need to seek elected office, as they have no desire to implement their views on others.

      Contrarywise, the progressive/collectivist only seeks to impose their will on others, and thus seeks positions of power, particularly elected office.

      Thus, we have a situation where the enslavers actively seek power, and the freedom lovers actively rejecting power. Eventually, the enslavers will hold enough power that the freedom lovers will lose what they cherish.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
        You can only do so much voting with your feet. Most people who seek liberty have already moved to states with no income tax and communities with low tax burdens. The progressive/collectivists have aggregated in NYC, LA, Chicago, etc., and we can't vote their politicians out. This is the reason why most people like their own US representative but despise Congress in general. We can fund candidates who can bring about the progressive/collectivists' destruction... maybe.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
    The biggest problem with page 1169 of AS is that we have to wait (survive?) long enough until we make it happen. The question is not "
    How long will John Galt's Gulch last?" The question is "How long will the world of the looters and moochers last?" Or how do we accelerate the end of the era of the
    looters and moochers? If the answer to those questions is longer than our lifetimes, then what do Gulch citizens have to look forward to?
    It is no wonder that so many people in AS committed suicide. I am actually surprised that more people in the land of moochers and looters have NOT committed suicide.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by 10 years ago
      "If the answer to those questions is longer than our lifetimes, then what do Gulch citizens have to look forward to?"

      Hey jbrenner it is more about fighting for the truth. Do you think Ayn Rand would have quit fighting for her ideas merely because she had reached the end of her life without Galt's Gulch becoming a reality?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
        I will continue fighting for the truth, but where, when, and how are valid questions. Ayn Rand did not quit fighting, and neither will I. Something to work toward is critical. Having no positive, reachable goals leads to despair.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by 10 years ago
          "Having no positive, reachable goals leads to despair"

          Maybe. But so many of us have planted seeds knowing full well that we wouldn't live long enough to enjoy the fruit and did not despair in doing so.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
            I do not mean to be offensive with this statement, but if one does not believe in an afterlife, of what profit is it to not be able to live long enough to enjoy the fruit of one's labor? Christians plant seeds and water them and have faith that they will be rewarded for the good that they have done. But an objectivist cannot be non-contradictory if he/she cannot live long enough to see such fruit.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
              Hello jbrenner, j_IR1776wg,
              Pardon me for interjecting here, but I would suggest that just because one may not live to see their wishes fulfilled does not mean that they may not acquire satisfaction from putting into motion actions which may benefit posterity. This can be reward in itself.
              Respectfully,
              O.A.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                Point well taken, ObjectiveAnalyst. There could be a reward in itself. I doubt that would be common, but certainly possible.
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
                  Sure. One might plant an orchard late in life knowing his children or grandchildren may prosper from the effort, enjoy the satisfaction of knowing a job well done and watching it grow in remaining years.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                  • Posted by $ jbrenner 10 years ago
                    Andrew Carnegie and John Rockefeller pre-1896 would be two of my heroes. However, during the last part of Andrew Carnegie's or John Rockefeller's lives, they essentially planted orchards in the forms of libraries and scholarship funds. There has been some good to come out of that, and I would expect that they derived some satisfaction from it. However, that was the worst part of their lives, and while I will see to it that my own kids and grandkids' college funds are taken care of, I don't plan on saving enough to allow them to live unproductive lives. They will have to prove themselves worthy of the money they inherit, and I mean this in the context that Francisco d'Anconia said it during the money speech.
                    Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                    • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 10 years ago
                      Indeed. One doesn't necessarily acquire the proper respect for the unearned. I have earned my way and built a company under my own steam and credit. I tell my Mother I hope she lives long enough to spend all of her money. There were a few rough times when she offered to help early on, but I refused. My siblings have had different ideas... I do not approve of their unpaid "Loans"...
                      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
  • Posted by airfredd22 10 years ago
    re: j_IR1776wg,
    You state that Moses wrote the 8th commandment, I beg to differ, it was God that wrote the 10 commandments. We could argue forever whether man is innately good or evil. My experience has convinced me that there are some human beings that are in fact innately evil.

    Fred Speckmann
    commonsenseforamericans@yahoo.com
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by iamA2u 10 years ago
    The answer is hinted at several places in AS. The inhabitants explain to Dagny that eventually, after everything collapses, they will have to emerge. Galts Gulch was never meant to be a permanent place to hide. AS hints in a couple of places that you don't want to be on the wrong side when someone like John Galt decides it's necessary to kill.

    What do you think is going to be happening when they emerge from Galts Gulch? The world will be filled with Mao's and Putin's and Kim Jung Il's. There will be a war like no other in history, because all those dictators will not let go of control easily. Those of us who believe in freedom will have to put up the fight of our lives, and many, many will die on all sides.

    But that's in a future book, a story ("Atlas Returns"?), an allegory. In reality things are much grayer, the enemy is diffuse and hard to identify. it's like fighting a wet bag. but the fight will require as much dedication as a full blown physical war, but it will be a war of ideas, of politics, and still yet may require our lives.

    In some ways Ayn Rand by writing Atlas Shrugged changed the world so to guarantee that her story actually will never happen. Or maybe there are just more of us that are capable of carrying a but if the world on our shoulder, who are now aware of what the fight is, that we're changing the world in our own individual little towns and neighborhoods and workplaces. And yet it's not enough. The support that the current president enjoys for some of his looting ideas is evidence of that.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by DaveM49 10 years ago
    I think an "Atlas Redux" would be redundant--you do get a hint of how self-directed folks are coping when Eddie Willers gets stuck on the frozen train and people with horse-drawn wagons come along to offer help. But wouldn't it be interesting to see Rand's vision of society after the strikers came back?

    I have my own image of it--no doubt most do. Perhaps that was Rand's intention. But I do wonder how she imagined it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo