Live data from Hacker News

'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

online.wsj.com

81–90 of 147 posts

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#81
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

He did? In what way? (Genuinely curious.) My understanding is that, despite some of his views being at odds with her own, Rand was happy to have him in her inner circle anyway.

Before: http://www.lewrockwell.com/north/north204.html After: Central banker That's the gist of the argument. I'm not going to pretend to know where the line between Objectivism's general ideals and economic ideals lies.

He's always defended his involvement as being a necessary compromise. An unusual stance for an Objectivist, but an Objectivist nonetheless.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#82
post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agree that she respected manual labor: after all, the heroic Howard Roark character worked in a granite quarry for a time in "The Fountainhead".

Don't forget the philosopher who made burgers.

Or the part where Dagney cooked and kept house for John Galt as repayment for her staying with him.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#83
post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very! I had the same experience when I read The Fountainhead for the first time, in the middle of an ego clash happening at my school. It's important, I've found, not to mistake Rand's works for wholesale reality. She makes some incredibly good points, and I love her concept of the virtue of selfishness, but things are more complex than she writes about. She was aware of this too: her books are deliberately overstate…

If more of Rand's proponents were apparently aware of this fact that "things are more complex than she writes about" nor, might I add, are things as absolute, I would have less of a problem with Objectivism.

Yeah. The problem, which I still find sad, is that Rand's main message, above the stuff she writes about, is that you should always believe in objective reality, which means picking logic over dogma, and treating the world as a constantly-evolving thing that requires your own thought. Her followers throw out that message more often than not, and follow an incredibly dogmatic belief system that disregards logical statements for catch-phrases.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#84

I came across an interesting analogy about how Atlas Shrugged was the first book in a trilogy. And how Anthem was the 3rd book (the second book, "shrug harder" not having been written or released). > Then [John Galt] went further and, in a fit of offended pique, promised to "stop the motor of the world," to kill 90% or so of Earth's population by intentionally wrecking the economy. Which he then did. How? By finding…

because John Galt had carefully sabotaged the bridges and railroads

John Galt destroyed nothing except a room full of his own inventions. The railroads were destroyed due to the poor management of Dagny's brother (forget his name) and interference from Washington.

Also, from that link:

John Galt, outraged that anybody would even suggest that he or the company he worked for owed anything to the nation that provided his education, protected him from infectious disease outbreaks, protected him from Communist invasion, built the roads that got him to work each day, provided the police that kept him safe, and provided the court system that protected his property rights at all, sabotaged the Galt Engine, so nobody could have it.

As I recall, one of the heroic characters (Ragnar?) specifically states that these are all legitimate functions of the government and that they should be financed by taxes. In fact, one of the strikers actually worked for the government (Judge Narragansett).

It's always helpful to read a book before criticizing it.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#85

So because government programs in a work of fiction caused more harm than good, all government programs in the non-fiction world must be bad. Good logic.

Oh, don't interfere with the beautiful ways of ideology ;-) But seriously, government programs are in great danger of failing because _all_ big projects are in great danger of failing. I think you would easily find evidence of that. Taking a centralised decision on how to spend over a trillion dollars within a year or two, allowing no time for readjustment or seeing what actually works, is a very high risk business,…

There has been great success in large-scale projects in the past. It's just that back in the 1950's and earlier when they were spending vast amounts of money on single projects, people had been talking about them for over a decade.

Perhaps today we don't need 10 years to come up with a plan on how to build a network of highways, perhaps all our computers and better analytical models help greatly in predictions. However, it's hard to tell if software is giving you a good prediction until you begin getting results and I don't think many people would have felt comfortable betting on Deep Blue before it publicly won its first game of chess.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#86
post #77
post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know what you mean - I felt the same way after reading Age of Tolerance (similar to Atlas Shrugged but specific to contemporary American political issues) and then saw people singing the national anthem in Spanish, but with the words politically modified. I've read The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged too, but it was a while ago.

> then saw people singing the national anthem in Spanish, Would this be a good or a bad thing?

with the words politically modified

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#87

Hmm. I tend to think that Rand's philosophy misses some important points, like: 1. Humans hate inequality, esp. those who are on the losing end, but it seems to make everyone unhappier in general. Inequality is useful, but probably needs some managing. 2. Massive wealth generated in modern societies, though it tends to fall into the hands of a few (exponentially so), is generated by having a society/collective. If yo…

I think it's important what kind of inequality we're talking about. Are we talking inequality between two people with similar opportunities and education, one lazy and unimaginative and the other a creative risk taker? Or are we talking inequality between joe the dock worker, son of a dock worker, working the dock reasonably well, but never looking beyond, and jack the corporate lawyer, son of a corporate lawyer, wor…

I think the closer you get to merit based accumulations of wealth the better for society. Let's suppose you could give 15 million inflation adjusted to your children, but after that it's taxed at 75%. Now clearly 4 billion to 1 billion is not going to eliminate wealth quickly, but the history of the ford family and the ford company is going to look vary different.

Now do the same thing but start that at 250k vs 15 million. Your still going to have the corporate lawyer issue but that still has a lot to do with education and a type of drive.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#88
post #75
post #9

I read this book for the first time, last summer. It was actually a little bit spooky -- OK, very spooky -- to read basically the same thing (metaphorically) in the book and the news most days of the week.

I know what you mean - I felt the same way after reading Age of Tolerance (similar to Atlas Shrugged but specific to contemporary American political issues) and then saw people singing the national anthem in Spanish, but with the words politically modified. I've read The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged too, but it was a while ago.

It's much stranger seeing people change the words of a drinking song into a national anthem.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#89
Personally I find this article stupidly hilarious.

> "Rand, who had come to America from Soviet Russia with striking insights into totalitarianism and the destructiveness of socialism..."

I'm sorry, I thought it was capitalism that just fudged the butter causing this economic crisis. I mean there was the whole mortgage deal (that only happened in the largely non-socialist US) that started screwing the economy up because the US doesn't have enough legal protections in place to stop people who physically don't have the money to pay a loan to get a loan in the first place. I mean there used to be the day in the US where if you had no money you'd get a credit check and then be refused like everywhere else in the world.

The subprime mortgage fiasco caused the big swathe of mortgages defaulting. Basically this made the banks need to get their money back or face bankruptcy, then the NYSE went down the crap hole, gas went through the roof and then the mixture of shit vehicles, crappy prices, high gas price/low mileage and big debts caused chaos for the big 3 automakers in the US.

I'm sorry, but correct me if I'm wrong, but that little summarization (essentially thanks to wikipedia) never once mentioned a country other than the largely non-socialist US.

The US's major butter fudging caused all the economic problems in the more socialist countries like the UK. The funny thing is, is that if the US had nationalised health care (like the UK) they would pay approximately half what they currently do for health care and would result in them being twice as healthy. Ironically this would mean more americans would have more money to spend and would have less reasons to not spend it, which is exactly what the economy needs right now.

On the side of Ayn Rand's background, she came from soviet Russia, which completely fucked up the whole socialism thing by preventing anyone losing a job or being unemployed. They avoided buying combine harvesters for farms because it would make some people unemployed not realising that those very people would become reemployed in other jobs... like fixing the combine harvesters.

Now I have a cute little pet bunny balled up in a blanket in between my legs whom, much like me, cares little about Atlas Shrugged and any misconceived links to the current financial crisis and he only cares that the prices of his food and hay and treats have all gone up a couple of dollars thanks to the US.

Re: 'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years

#90
post #79

I think Marx's "The Capital" explains better the current economical situation. But meanwhile, in Fantasyland ...

I think there is a middle ground between Marx and Rand that is much better at explaining the current situation: serious economics.
Post reply on HN