'Atlas Shrugged': From Fiction to Fact in 52 Years • Hacker News Board

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

#101

Post by jfornear » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 6:51 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #92

electromagnetic wrote: post #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 beca…

"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." Exactly backwards . And I mean exactly backwards. There are, in fact, laws that forced banks to give out loans to those people…

> Not "no" regulation. Bad regulation. It exists! ... so why does that common-sense declaration feel so subversive to say?

I wonder this same thing to myself every time I turn on the news or get into an ideological argument with a friend!

I wish I could just give all my karma to your comment. I agree with everything you said. You put it well.

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

#102

Post by unalone » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 6:53 PM UTC

walterk wrote: post #50

ananthrk wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Not trying to be rhetoric, but a honest question ever since I encountered Rand's works) If, as a society, everyone is a "Value Creator", will we still require a government? What would be the job of the government then? "gives a false sense of moral certainty derived from an elitist denial of social complexity" - what kind of complexity are we talking about here? Is it the reality that not everyone is a "Value Creato…

> If, as a society, everyone is a "Value Creator", will we still require a government? If everyone created value by Rand's standards, were highly rational and reasonable, did not destroy value, and were otherwise law-abiding (or simply moral) citizens, then you might not need government, or at least a very minimal one. We're incredibly far off from such a world, however (assuming it's even possible), so we at least n…

Funny, because (as an older article said) Gladwell is Rand's idea of a villain and vice-versa. They've both got flaws, but Gladwell in particular likes to coin phrases and say things that are easy for others to parrot, and this cap rates thing is among them.

This is the country that has spawned the richest people on the planet, many of them from very lowly backgrounds. The most influential web sites on the planet came from the United States. The greatest TV shows I've seen were all but one American, and the one - The Office - managed to at least win Ricky Gervais an Emmy once he brought it over here. Ditto greatest movies. In almost every field, America has got at least a distinctive presence. So obviously some people are escaping the stupid, impoverished culture.

I think that in Atlas Rand does abandon villains, but I feel that's because she's relying on her readers to have read The Fountainhead so we can already understand their justifications. In that earlier book, she spends a lot of time treating her villains with sympathy. She tries to explain why they are what they are. And while I agree that she does simplify in Atlas, I've absolutely met people who have similar mindsets to the villains from The Fountainhead - she's not just making up that type of person, and they often are as vile and as insignificant as she paints them to be.

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

#103

Post by manny » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:05 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #92

electromagnetic wrote: post #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 beca…

"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." Exactly backwards . And I mean exactly backwards. There are, in fact, laws that forced banks to give out loans to those people…

I wish I could upmod you twice.

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

#104

Post by msg » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:13 PM UTC

unalone wrote: post #62

fuzzmeister wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's pretty disturbing, considering one of the book's main arguments is against altruism.

It's not altruism if you benefit from the results. It was in Rand's best interests to influence as many people as possible, since she promotes a system of logic and selfishness to better people. If people subscribe to her theory of belief, she gains as much as they do.

Selfishness isn't selfishness if you lose something.

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

#105

Post by mmmurf » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:15 PM UTC

davidw wrote: post #71

ellyagg wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well, you have to realize that up until Ayn Rand, the only popular absolutism was Marxism. People were pretty excited to have an absolutism that promoted striving for excellence rather than striving for grey sameness.

Good point. If you read Rand in that spirit, it makes for an interesting point of view. The important thing is to avoid getting caught up in it and think that "Objectivism" is a sensible or even possible way of running the world. People are neither 100% collectivist oriented, nor 100% individual oriented, and going in either direction too far is to go against how we function (but please note that I'm not arguing for…

Your comment suggests that you believe the world needs to be "run" by a wise planner of some sort.

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

#106

Post by walterk » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:27 PM UTC

unalone wrote: post #99

_5y6p wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it gives a sense of surety in an uncertain world In particular, a false sense of moral certainty derived from an elitist denial of social complexity.

Is it necessarily false? I mean, yes, of course it's false for the people who use the book like a cult icon, but think about the countless people who read it and got from it the moral of "it's okay to do what you feel is right, even when other people may disagree, because in the end you should trust your own feelings first and foremost." That's a very healthy thought, and it's one that I've never seen illustrated as…

I agree that you can come away from the book with that message (much more so with The Fountainhead). But the much more explicit one, I think, is Objectivism. :)

Though I now disagree with her philosophy, I do think she wrote inspiringly about some of her heroes. Roark and Rearden were always my favorite of the bunch.

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

#107

Post by olefoo » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:36 PM UTC

jerf wrote: post #92

electromagnetic wrote: post #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 beca…

"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." Exactly backwards . And I mean exactly backwards. There are, in fact, laws that forced banks to give out loans to those people…

Please name the regulation that said that any bank had to give a loan to someone with No Income, No Job, No Assets?

Please name the laws that are (you claim) still forcing banks to make loans to unqualified borrowers.

Now I would agree that there were many failures of regulation in the mortgage industry; but if you are trying to claim that things like http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/title8.php forced banks into making bad loans you are full of shit. Racist shit, that doesn't even make sense.

But since you can't even name the "laws that forced banks to give out loans to those people." I'm guessing that you or your fellows will try to nail me on the use of profanity rather than addressing the facts.

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

#108

Post by walterk » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:38 PM UTC

mmmurf wrote: post #97

walterk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If, as a society, everyone is a "Value Creator", will we still require a government? If everyone created value by Rand's standards, were highly rational and reasonable, did not destroy value, and were otherwise law-abiding (or simply moral) citizens, then you might not need government, or at least a very minimal one. We're incredibly far off from such a world, however (assuming it's even possible), so we at least n…

Note: Rand doesn't care how productive someone is, only that he/she attempts to actually be productive. Obviously there is great variation in how productive (in an absolute and economic sense) that individual humans can be. The point is that some people strive to produce while some strive to take power over others.

Right, but there are also many who are simply discouraged from striving at all, possibly jaded. Rand never considers the forces behind this fact: she simply casts them as villains.

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

#109

Post by opticksversi » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:55 PM UTC

olefoo wrote: post #107

jerf wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"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." Exactly backwards . And I mean exactly backwards. There are, in fact, laws that forced banks to give out loans to those people…

Please name the regulation that said that any bank had to give a loan to someone with No Income, No Job, No Assets? Please name the laws that are (you claim) still forcing banks to make loans to unqualified borrowers. Now I would agree that there were many failures of regulation in the mortgage industry; but if you are trying to claim that things like http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/housing/title8.php forced banks into maki…

Racist shit

To what, specifically, in his comment are you referring?

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

#110

Post by walterk » Sat, Jan 10, 2009, 7:58 PM UTC

unalone wrote: post #102

walterk wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If, as a society, everyone is a "Value Creator", will we still require a government? If everyone created value by Rand's standards, were highly rational and reasonable, did not destroy value, and were otherwise law-abiding (or simply moral) citizens, then you might not need government, or at least a very minimal one. We're incredibly far off from such a world, however (assuming it's even possible), so we at least n…

Funny, because (as an older article said) Gladwell is Rand's idea of a villain and vice-versa. They've both got flaws, but Gladwell in particular likes to coin phrases and say things that are easy for others to parrot, and this cap rates thing is among them. This is the country that has spawned the richest people on the planet, many of them from very lowly backgrounds. The most influential web sites on the planet cam…

> They've both got flaws, but Gladwell in particular likes to coin phrases and say things that are easy for others to parrot, and this cap rates thing is among them.

He does make it easy for people to parrot things. But the human capitalization rate is a genuinely valuable concept. I read an article recently (possibly here?) about someone working on glasses that the users could adjust themselves, eliminating the need for an optometrist. He's trying to get these distributed on a really wide scale in countries which are too poor to afford optometry, because failing eyesight stops a great many from being able to work.

> So obviously some people are escaping the stupid, impoverished culture.

Individuals definitely do rise up from poverty, but that's a sociological rarity. Most people who grow up poor among other poor folks are indoctrinated into the idea that this is just how it is. It's extremely rare to find a poor person who's able to step back from all that and defiantly work his way up.

> I think that in Atlas Rand does abandon villains, but I feel that's because she's relying on her readers to have read The Fountainhead so we can already understand their justifications.

It's been a while since I read Fountainhead, but the only prominent villains I remember are Keating and Toohey. They seemed to be remarkably capable men, but Keating sabotaged his potential by constantly seeking others' approval. Toohey, I guess, was supposed to be the apotheosis of that mindset.

I'm thinking more about, say, the jaded bum from Atlas Shrugged, or the workers who don't have a love of what they do and aren't highly competent at it. Rand seems pretty happy to just treat them all with contempt, rather than understand where they're coming from and why.