10

What is your favorite part of Atlas Shrugged?

Posted by  $  jbrenner 2 months, 4 weeks ago to Economics
104 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

Mine is from Galt's speech: A farmer will not invest the effort of one summer if he’s unable to calculate his chances of a harvest. But you expect industrial giants - who plan in terms of decades, invest in terms of generations and undertake ninety-nine-year contracts -to continue to function and produce, not knowing what random caprice in the skull of what random official will descend upon them at what moment to demolish the whole of their effort. Drifters and physical laborers live and plan by the range of a day. The better the mind, the longer the range. A man whose vision extends to a shanty, might continue to build on your quicksands, to grab a fast profit and run. A man who envisions skyscrapers, will not. Nor will he give ten years of unswerving devotion to the task of inventing a new product, when he knows the gangs of entrenched mediocrity are juggling the laws against him, to tie him, restrict him and force him to fail, but should he fight them and struggle and succeed, they will seize his rewards and his invention.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    This is the part of Gult's speech that got to me the most.

    "Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all."

    "Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it is possible, it's yours."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      The problem with galt's speech is that it is written for the real intellectual, not the average person. It is something critical for the writer of a constitution, or a supreme court judge, but doesnt address where people actually live on a day to day basis.

      I think thats why AS didnt have the impact that AR expected. Trump has more impact with a MUCH less intellectually consistent message at his rallies. Imagine if we had that part of Trump allied with the ideas of AR- maybe things would really change.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  exceller 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        If you understand Rand's message that it is only a small percentage of the population who represent the engine of society (such as Galt, Dagny, Rearden, D'Anconia, Wyatt et al) then you understand Galt's speech and whom is it aimed at?

        Politicians voice this simply enough that most often sounds like slogans. The fact is that the "engine" is on what the large population depends, on what they build (even though Obama thinks they did not build it) their lives on.

        At the time of Rand it was necessary to formulate what capitalism is? Have you heard one of the lectures by Branden when he talks about how Rand defined to him what capitalism was? She asked him: "Do you believe that a human being has the right to exist?" Branden: "Yes". "Do you believe that he has the right to exist for his own sake?" Branden: "Of course. Otherwise it would be by permission." Rand: "The political implementation of that idea is capitalism."

        That is why it was necessary for Rand to spell out all aspects of that principle in Galt's speech.

        Having said that, Francisco speech on how money works comes in second to Galt's.

        As for the novel's adaptation to films, none of the three sequels give credit to the contents. They were poorly made and superficial (although I don't blame the authors, they had very limited budgets. But the actors practically ruined the contents. Same is true for "Fountainhead". Cooper was too old to play the role of Roark.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          I would agree with you that Galt's speech was geared for the producer group. I get that part.

          What confused me at the time, and even now, is that our do called democracy is based on mob rule, so the producers have little clout- like we see now. Even though Apple makes great stuff that I use all the time, The government puts tariffs on their imports and just tells Apple to make the stuff here (translation- they dont have "pull" to get the tariffs waived for them).

          So if AR was thinking that to convince the producers would keep this country from falling into collectivism, she was off base and you can see what effect AS had since. A few people, like us, understand but at least half the people are dyed in the wool collectivists who are hell bent on getting rid of any parts of the constitution that protect our rights.

          As to the films, I agree. I thought the actress who portrayed Dagny in the first one was pretty good, and it played out like a normal movie. It was interesting to watch, and I at least felt like I was there. The following two were very bad, probably because of low budgets and a mediocre director. I saw an internview with Spielberg one time where he said "I am a storyteller". They needed someone like that in AS2 and AS3.
          My list of the really good movies doesnt include any of the AS releases actually, but then again they didnt spend 200 million like they did on Titanic. Some movies like "the hundred foot journey" had a really good story and director, and I suspect not a big budget.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by  $  exceller 2 months, 3 weeks ago
            Well, tastes are different.

            I thought only the 3rd sequel was passable, the 1st and 2nd was awful. Those Dagnys simply did not cut it, specifically the 2nd one.

            In the 3rd Francisco was played by a 60 yo actor who probably got the role for his younger fame. It was awful.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  exceller 2 months, 3 weeks ago
              Also, "What confused me at the time, and even now, is that our do called democracy is based on mob rule, so the producers have little clout."

              Democracy based on mob rule? That is the reality now but it should not be. The mob will always be mob. The gladiator games in the Coliseum of Rome were designed to silence them: Give us bread and circus!

              I do not know what is the right way to have them understand what human dignity and integrity are for. I think that is one reason the elite's contempt for them, except that they lump everyone in the group who does not agree with them politically, the purpose of which to enhance their own power. So if we want to generalize neither group is better than the other.

              We are very far from the idealistic way the Founding Fathers were trying to set the path for this nation.
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
              I think a series based on reality in Venezuela with rand Ian characters would be very interesting. People need to see in real time where collectivism leads, and it’s happening right now
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
            I thought none of the parts came near doing justice to the book. The Wet Nurse didn't even get killed.I knew from a preview on the computer that Eddie Willers was going to be black, and I thought that was a mistake, because, given Eddie's complete subordination to Dagny, it would make him into an "Uncle Tom" stereotype; and also no need to offend black people without any reason.
            I had thought, off an on, for years about what a movie of it would look like; I concluded that a mini-series would be better; that Winston Tunnel incident would have made a very good episode all by itself. For $300 plus an automatic typewriter, I could have written a much better script. Not bragging on myself as a writer, that main thing would have been in knowing what to keep and what to cut; since Ayn Rand had already done most of the work, most of it could have been written by doing straight copy from the book.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
              I agree that none of the movie parts did justice to the book. Its such a great book that I felt like I was "there" already while reading it. A movie needs to distill a lot of the details so as to fit within the 2 hour typical window. I spent three days reading the book. Spielberg and other great directors know how to do this distilling, which is why they are great.

              I will say that I read Jurassic Park after I saw the movie, and I could see that a LOT of the details were left out in the movie, including all the work that the Ingen people did to guarantee safety and efficiency in the process they used. It was essentially sabotage that was responsible for the problems, NOT some loosely worded thing about "life finds a way". It was their programmer who found a way, not the dinosaurs
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Suzanne43 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    I have two favorite parts. First would be when Dagny invites a "tramp" that she found on her train to have dinner with her. During the dinner this so called tramp gives the best, and I do mean the best rebuttal to Communism that I have read or heard. Then my second favorite section was the Thanksgiving dinner at the Rearden home. Hank finally let his family.have it.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by diessos 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    The part when Francisco visits Rearden at the mills before the trial. He comes close to getting Readen to abandon all, until the siren goes off. Anyone who has ever been ridiculed for ideas or inventions that went against the tide. Anyone how has faced condemnation for being different. Anyone who had ever had their beliefs critized can relate to that conversation.

    “All your life, you have heard yourself denounced, not for your faults, but for your greatest virtues. You have been hated, not for your mistakes, but for your achievements. You have been scorned for all those qualities of character which are your highest pride. You have been called selfish for the courage of acting on your own judgment and bearing sole responsibility for your own life. You have been called arrogant for your independent mind. You have been called cruel for your unyielding integrity. You have been called anti-social for the vision that made you venture upon undiscovered roads. You have been called ruthless for the strength and self-discipline of your drive to your purpose. You have been called greedy for the magnificence of your power to create wealth. You, who’ve expended an inconceivable flow of energy, have been called a parasite. You, who’ve created abundance where there had been nothing but wastelands and helpless, starving men before you, have been called a robber. You, who’ve kept them all alive, have been called an exploiter. You, the purest and most moral man among them, have been sneered at as a ‘vulgar materialist.’ Have you stopped to ask them: by what right? — by what code? — by what standard? No, you have borne it all and kept silent. You bowed to their code and you never upheld your own. You knew what exacting morality was needed to produce a single metal nail, but you let them brand you as immoral. You knew that man needs the strictest code of values to deal with nature, but you thought that you needed no such code to deal with men. You left the deadliest weapon in the hands of your enemies, a weapon you never suspected or understood. Their moral code is their weapon.”
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Dobrien 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      Define 'Psychological Projection'.
      A theory in psychology in which the human ego defends itself against unconscious impulses or qualities (both positive and negative) by denying their existence in themselves while attributing them to others?
      Bonus round.
      'Narcissists' are renowned for using 'psychological projection' to blame other people, even when it is entirely apparent that they are the
      Guilty.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Psychological projection is observed by almost all looting politicians, particularly demagogues the Clintons and Obama. Do they even realize they are doing it?
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gharkness 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    Francisco's money speech. There are no words to describe it - or how disappointed I was when it was decimated in the movie. It was barely even represented.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  rockymountainpirate 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    There are just too many parts I love to chose from. Hanks speech at his trial, Galt's speech, Francisco's money speech, Hank finally kicking Lillian the succubus and his family to the curb, the tunnel, the opening of the John Galt Line. There are so many others I just can't pick just one. Edited to fix a typo.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      Most of the book really spoke to the application of her philosophy to everyday life. When it came to Gals's speedh, I thought it was boring and I skipped most of it. Its an accurate description of Objectivism to be sure, just anti climactic given the rest of the book. By the time one got through the book, one pretty much knew how to run ones life in practical terms.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  rockymountainpirate 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        True. There is a reason I have this part of his speech on my fridge. It really speaks to me.
        "Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark in the hopeless swamps of the not-quite, the not-yet, and the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish in the lonely frustration for the life you deserve and have never been able to reach. the world you desire can be won. It exists..it is real..it is possible..it's yours."
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Abaco 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    When I was first reading Atlas Shrugged I was in the middle of some very serious research. At that time I observed the scientific method being scrapped in favor of special interests. I saw government-backed research being used as a very expensive, complex tool to weave dangerous lies. It's still going on. I was really perplexed as to how men could behave in such a way, because people were, and still are being harmed by what I saw. Then, late one night I was reading AS by my fireplace and I came upon this quote: "At times like these, when their fat little comforts are threatened, you may be sure that science is the first thing men will sacrifice."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      Yeah, that's said by Dr. Floyd Ferris, one of the worst villains in the book; he wants to grab taxpayers' money to support his version of "science".
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Abaco 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        ...and that is science in America today, in a nutshell. I'm an engineer. And, as Dagney said, "When I see something, I see it." I have seen things covered up that you wouldn't believe. Not only that, and no offense, you wouldn't want to believe. Huge wakeup call for me several years ago. I, and at least one MIT mathematician, knows where it will lead. It's not good. I'll be in my own Gulch when the chickens come home to roost...
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by bsmith51 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    The concept of "check your premises" was my greatest take-away. It's also the one thing I wish modern day "thinkers" would consider as they argue around symptoms of problems while largely ignoring their roots.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  mshupe 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    The narrative about the passengers on the train in the tunnel was memorable and instructive. It was like a corollary to the sanction of the victim idea.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      We are all involved in the sanction of the victim when we pay taxes to a collectivist government. This bothers me more and more, but the alternative seems worse in the short term.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Zero 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    The speech for me, too. I read it like a dog lapping water. Got chills the first time.
    That and the tunnel. How the various passengers "earned" their place on the train. Really made me think.

    Funny, a friend of mine used to read AS again every Christmas but he would skip right past Galt's 60 page speech - he'd never read it even once.
    I couldn't believe it when he told me that. I guess I thought fellow OBJ's would love the same things, but of course....
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      There is a sort of poetic justice in that Winston Tunnel incident; she implies that those passengers got what they deserved, or that at least there was "contributory negligence" on their part. (Of course, that could not apply to the children aboard.). There may be some poetic justice in that Luke Beal, the fireman, is the only one who survives--he is presented as an innocent, one who is not very intelligent, but who honestly doesn't know what the result will be (and is also good at his job, as far as it goes). Also, for the news broadcast about it, there has to be one survivor, I guess to tell what went on in the train; the screaming, and somebody pulling the emergency brake cord, etc.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      I skipped most of the speech too. The essence of it is contained in the rest of the book, and to be honest I found the speech a bit boring. It went on way too long, and certainly wouldnt have convinced the average person to do anything but turn it off.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by preimert1 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    I got goose bumps in the AS1 when Dagny and Reardon powered up Dagny's new train on Reardon's steel rails having bested critics and nay-sayers to accomplish something real (before the looters and weepers conspired to take them down)

    The AS story remindes me of how handicappers add exttra weight to race horses to try and make them all equally likely to win thus keeping the odds down on any one horse. One horse does win however in spite of their machinations.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Riftsrunner 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    My favorite parts, beside Galt's speech are:
    1) The Tramp's story of the Twentieth Century Motor Company. Because it tells the story of Socialism/Communism in microcosm. How producers are punished, while slackers are rewarded. And how producers will go out of their ways to not be seen as better than someone else. How people game the system. And how the poor make claims on the affluent. If you have 1 more dollar, you owe them that dollar; if someone else has 1 more dollar they owe you.
    2) The epitomous speech by Francisco that the book gets its name.
    3) The Wet Nurse's final scenes that shows Reardon the truth about how society mentally cripples its young. Especially when he equates it to a birds mother ripping the feathers from their young's wings.
    4) The Dr. Ferris speech to Hank Reardon where he tell him the scam of government. How governments cannot rule innocent men, and it's only power comes from cracking down on criminals. So it creates laws no one can follow, making everyone a criminal, then cashes in on the guilt.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      I think I've been in situations like that (the one Ferris describes), as a kid in school, and on a certain job (where I had a boss that I thought was like Rearden, but turned out to be more to me like James Taggart). But I had read Atlas Shrugged, and knew how to spot it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    I thought Galt's speech was kind of boring actually. It was accurate, but the book itself really said everything in the speech already.

    The parts I liked best were:
    1) The description of the tree that was rotten from the inside and fell over. I still remember seeing in my mind what that tree would look like, and how Caifornia in particular is just like that tree.

    2) Rearden's party where Francisco pulls him aside and tells him about how its a war out there, and we must take sides. Boy, is that true today.

    3) The passages where the collectivists find out that the mines of Francisco are worthless and they are wiped out. This sort of happened in 2007 with the housing crisis, but our government just bailed out their buddies courtesy of OUR money.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by GaryL 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    My favorite part of AS is this very forum where we all get the outlet to express of views and share our thoughts. The words and views I read here are a real testament that we the people are not nearly as dumb as they think we are. They have completely misread our intelligence and the constant diet of BS news is not going unnoticed.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      True enough. Given that were all born into a very intellectually inconsistent culture, most of us are not 100% rational ALL of the time. It takes a lot of work to change from the emotionally driven child to the brain driven adult. Talking about things helps us all to accept reality more fully, and to understand our emotions and what they are based on.

      If there were a god, I would tell him that the design of humans is not very good if he expected us to be rational beings.. The strength of emotions are probably turned up a bit too high, such that they get in the way of thinking more than needed.

      History is full of examples where emotions are treated as primary, and thinking secondary (like with the liberals of today)
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Emotions should be strong. But of course they should not take precedence over rationality. But man has free will about that.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          I postulate that this choice takes place when very young, after seeing how parents and others deal with their emotions, and also after having experienced perhaps intense and frightening emotions resulting from treatment as a child.

          Once it is decided that emotions are to be feared and cant be controlled or mitigated, one tends to adopt liberal ideas about "stronger together" and "political correctness" in an attempt to control their own emotions.

          I have been looking for awhile now for the enduring and incredible attraction to collectivism, in the face of the fact that collectivism is a dismal failure over thousands of years, and even today in Venezuels. Perhaps it is indeed rooted in one's ability to deal with one's own emotions. Talk about individuality and rationality fall on deaf ears if the primary goal of ones life is to escape bad feelings and bask in good feelings however they can be had (drugs or otherwise)
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 2 weeks ago
            As to making the choice when "very young", I don't think that the choice is made just one time, once and forever; one may decide to be rational, but still one has to constantly keep making that choice, over and over, even on a cold winter day when one has to get out of bed, get dressed and go to work the hot dog cart, when one would prefer to go back to sleep, or rather than delaying it too long while listening to the radio.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by term2 2 months, 2 weeks ago
              I kind of agree with you that its a habit that is formed. But I would say it happens when young and living in an environment where emotions are paramount and rationality is not as important. Once the habit is there, then we rationalize it through adopting collectivism as a moral standard
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by PURB 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    Dagny's speech on Bertram Scudder. I remember throwing my fist in the air in triumph when I first read (at 16 YO): "For two years I had been Hank Rearden's mistress. Let there be no misunderstanding of it: I am saying this, not as a shameful confession, but with the highest sense of pride. I had been his mistress. I had slept with him, in his bed, in his arms. There is nothing anyone might now say to you about me, which I will not tell you first.... Did I feel a physical desire for him? I did. Was I moved by a passion of my body? I was. Have I experienced the most violent form of sensual pleasure? I have. If this now makes me a disgraced woman in your eyes--let your estimate be your own concern. I will stand on mine." Utterly unexpected yet ruthlessly logical!
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    Do you want the view from the mentally ill?
    1) I liked the part where the guy on the train who seems like a nobody tells the story of the horrible shrew at the motor plant. She seems like the worst villain I've seen in any media. It's more poignant because it's some rando on the train, and even though he was never running a company, he was the best at what he did in life. It made him happy. No one can say he was better or worse than Dagny, Jim, or anyone. He was working around stuff he liked. Those young investors bought the plant, introduced socialism, and the nasty shrews rose to the top, taking away his life, the same as gov't tooking away Dagny's company or Rearden's metal.

    2) I liked when Dagny was attempting to take it easy up north. She can't help but think of ways to serve more customers by putting in a store and other services, and she says "Just stop!" because she's supposed to be on vacation. She can't stop thinking of ways to meet the needs of potential customers.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 2 weeks ago
      That b*** (Ivy Starnes) is like more than one person I have met (as I recall, it usually was in school. Don't get me started on that subject). But Jeff Allen admits that he and the others voted for it. [Memory quote ("And what we asked for, we had it coming to us. By the time we saw what it was we had asked for, it was too late....And we weren't so innocent, either, back there..."] But at least he has the honesty to see and admit that it was wrong.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Radio_Randy 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    The entire time that Dagny spent with John in Galt's Gulch. Next to "The Speech", that is my favorite part of the book (I've always enjoyed fiction).
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by gcarl615 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    I just finished re-reading the second half of the book for about the 20th time after hearing what senator warren wants to pass as law. It is very hard to choose a favorite part of the whole book. BUT if I had to it would the scene where Dagny, Galt and Francisco are standing on the hill in the Gulch. Dagny dicscribes how she would build a Railroad from Franciscos mine to the rest of the valley. My second choice would be Francisos money speech.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by danba7 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    best part of the book was p.454 the trial of Reardon when he thinks: "after a journey of years through a landscape of devastation..."
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Ben_C 2 months, 3 weeks ago
    My favorite scene is when John Galt is being tortured and he explains to the torturers how to fix the machine. To me this defines the purity in the man.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      Hmm. Sounds like McCain refusing to be released because his ancestors were famous soldiers. I say, thats pretty stupid.

      Same with John Galt. Why help your captors?
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by LibertyBelle 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Perhaps because he thinks they're such a bunch of incompetents, the torture cannot go on much
        longer , so he can afford to tell them how to repair it.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          It just didnt make sense to me that after all the work he did to "stop the motor of the world", he would help them torture him. Same with McCain, which is why I never considered him any sort of hero, but rather a self sacrificing whining manipulator who lived his life on whining about his "service".
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  Dobrien 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    I loved the part when Francisco helped save the blast furnace during a flame out to Hank Reardon's delight and surprise. It was interesting because He was trying to convince Hank to shrug
    Yet he helped him keep the mill functioning. I think because he knew Hank needed to decide for himself when to call it quits. Actually I just loved the way Francisco was an enigma to Hank when ever they interacted?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      What was particularly interesting to me is that This owner, head of his corporation shows that he know every part, every ounce of his business. He likely started it from scratch and knows it all...unlike today's CEO's whom know nothing but connections and influences but nothing of the business they run, nor the people that make it all work.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  exceller 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Yes, very true. It was true to all business owners in Rand's book. They knew their business inside out.

        Today's business "leaders" are more PC conscious and their main interest is to have a golden parachute.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        Today, business is like Taggart Railroad "run" by James Taggart- where profits are really affected mostly by your political connections. Without Dagny taking care of the real issues of course, Tagart Transcontinental would have folded long ago not matter what
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          Breaching the separation of business and government...should have been in the constitution.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
            Yeah. The constitution was a real set of compromised ideas, just like happens today. Its like herding cats. We got what we got, its better than living under a dictator, but isnt perfect by any means.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
            • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
              We should restrict the federal government and the state governments a whole lot more and impose beheading's! when they breach our trust or at least put them in a stockade on the White House Lawn...

              If all we get is parasitical humanoids to man our governments then we will have to treat them as such...
              Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
              • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
                I am thinkning, though, that we get these government people and programs because the people in our "mob rule democracy" feel they are needed. Propaganda and emotional manipulation (in other words- POLITICS) warp peoples' minds and hide whats really going on
                Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
                • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
                  Yes, that is part of it, but progressivism ginned that up, they were the one's that acted as if we were a demonocracy and now the post modernist have almost taken that ball to the goal post.
                  Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by bsmith51 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        David Halberstam's book, The Reckoning, documents the sea-change of American corporate stewardship from CEOs who rose from the mail room through every division and department of their company, to the egghead bean counters, who had no product or customer knowledge or concern, only for the quarterly numbers, execs who took their golden parachutes from company to company to company.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by  $  Olduglycarl 2 months, 3 weeks ago
          I noticed that trend in college and my professors would argue with me that it wouldn't make a difference...there was no need to know everything about the businesses they run.
          Bullcrap!, I still say.
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by gharkness 2 months, 3 weeks ago
      I just loved Francsico. In every single way....and the blast furnace scene - in the book - was a favorite. In the movie? Not so much.

      I think more than anything this shows how different people envision in their mind what a writer is saying, and how it differs among many....including the writer!

      I have always had difficulty, though, not thinking of Francisco as the hero of AS. Can't help it.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by  $  Dobrien 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        As I read AS out loud to my wife we both commented numerous times how descriptive Rand was in "painting the scene" for us. Then later I spoke to a neighbor who is a literature prof
        He hadn't read the book but knew the critics were not fond of her writing style.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by term2 2 months, 3 weeks ago
        He was the practical hero. He knew and understood the philosophy, but he was a real person. His character was one you could talk to and be not 100% perfect all the time- and he would help you to see and fix those areas of your life were you were inconsistent but didnt realize it.

        Galt knew and understood the philosophy, but was some ethereal figure who didnt relate much to humanity. He was more like AR in her everyday life, in that 100% perfection was required all the time.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by  $  25n56il4 2 months, 4 weeks ago
    YOU ASK ME TO PICK? I'VE READ IT AND SEEN ALL THE MOVIES AND YOU ASK ME TO PICK,,,,I COULDN'T POSSIBLY, BUT I WILL READ IT FOR THE THIRD TIME AND SEE IF I CAN POSSIBLY. LOVE AND KISSES,
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo