Log in

View Full Version : Where in the World is John Galt?



griffjam
12th March 2009, 01:22
The neo-conservative 'movement' in the last few decades has essentially been a monstrous circle jerk between Christianist theocrats, crypto-Fascists, and political-economic Libertopains; three distinct, and one might think in a lot of ways incompatible, varieties of counter factual lunacy somehow merged into a monstrous ass-beast of scum-sucking political vileness. It really is entertaining and more than a little validating to watch this creature sink into the toxic morass of its own creation, desperately throwing out line after line in an attempt to heave itself back onto the shores of relevance. The latest notion cooked up by the leading lights in their eternal quest to regain some sort of moral high ground is the notion that of 'Going Galt (http://www.facebook.com/note_redirect.php?note_id=56457938958&h=d0627ddf2093e7a08b21cfd2a18aa0c6&url=http%3A%2F%2Fredtory.wordpress.com%2F2009%2F03 %2F09%2F%25E2%2580%259Cgoing-galt%25E2%2580%259D%2F).'

For those of you who managed to avoid a brief, unfulfilling college fling with Ayn Rand, let me introduce you to John Galt, main character of her capitalist slash fanfic Atlas Shrugged (http://www.facebook.com/note_redirect.php?note_id=56457938958&h=f5d05dbd71c06ec2b7fc8840dfe8dab1&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.amazon.ca%2FAtlas-Shrugged-Ayn-Rand%2Fdp%2F0451191145). (Spoiler alert!) He's such an amazing super-genius that he was able to invent an engine that makes electricity out of air. But when the gosh darn gubmint took it into their sleazy communist hearts to force him to use his invention for the good of others, he just took it and up and left. He went out to found a city where everyone could live free from the evil of socioeconomic redistribution, and convinced all the great capitalists, artists, scientists, and other worthwhile people to join him as the world fell into decay under the hands of petty bureaucratic tyrants.

I have to admit, I thoroughly enjoyed Atlas Shrugged. I liked it in the same way I like slasher flicks and super-hero comics; it's a philosophical cartoon, intellectual pabulum for people who aren't ready to deal with the complexities and compromises of serious political and moral thought. But I never imagined it was a plausible representation of reality. To this day, when I meet someone who never managed to get over their juvenile Rand infatuation and thinks of themselves as a genuine dyed-in-the-wool Objectivist, I think about the same thing as I do when I meet serious bible-believing Christians: "You seriously believe that crap?" And the idea of people trying to 'go Galt' in real life strikes me about the same as people putting on a cape and thinking they can take down the mafia, or running around in a hockey mask taking a machete to stupid teenagers.

There are three classes of people in Atlas Shrugged. There are the super-smart and super-heroic super-capitalists whose brilliant entrepreneurship shills keep the economy turning over; there are villainous parasites whose only means of not starving to death in the street is to leech off the productivity of the super-capitalists, be it by robbing them at knife point, by getting their shrewish mothers to guilt their hard-working brothers into giving them a cushy job, or by infiltrating the government and passing laws that raise taxes and commandeer hard won capital. Then there are, implicit but almost never even mentioned, all the 'little people' who actually do all the work. You know, the farmers, the factory workers, the shop keepers, and suchlike. Rand's world is a vast fictional explication of the concept of 'social darwinism'; through absolute selfish competition, those who are fittest rise to the top and collect the bulk of the wealth, and everyone else gets whatever level of power and wealth they are competent to handle. This is not only a social reality but a moral imperative; anyone who tries to interfere with the function of the free market is a sinful parasite, and anyone preaching the virtues of altruism and the 'duty' of people to help the less fortunate is just trying to get theirs by subterfuge instead of honest hard work.

Or, you know, by skimming the cream off the hard work of others, because that's what capitalism is in reality. No mention is made of how Galt's Gulch feeds itself, of how a bunch of investor/inventors engaged in a kind of extreme tax evasion managed to convince people to come work in their factories (or even build them). Presumably Galt and his cronies did it all themselves. The idea is more or less the same as an anarcho-syndicalist commune, except that everyone's working for wages and gets to buy each others products, and magically nobody falls to the bottom of the economic heap because they're all magic super-capitalists (or if they do, they're happy about it because they're fulfilling their maximum potential in life while getting the moral satisfaction of sticking it to those parasites outside); and if there's a fire or they get sick they'll most certainly have insurance, and if the commies come along to rob them of their capital they'll all just pick up their guns and fight back. In fact, the concept of 'going Galt' is lifted from Anarchism hook line and sinker; but where Anarchism is about people working together to free themselves from tyranny, going Galt is about declaring yourself to be intrinsically better than the masses of poor and the working class by virtue of your ability to stack up worthless pieces of paper via usury.

These people think they're going to make the economy grind to a halt by not 'working'? I'd love to see them try! Where exactly do they think their wealth is going to come from without thousands upon thousands of 'little people' providing the muscle behind their profits? Imagining a bunch of effete bankers, lawyers, bloggers, and corporate CEOs deliberately putting themselves into such dire poverty that they're reduced to the level of the people they exploit amuses me even more than watching some maniac cut people to pieces. Let them go out into the wilderness and try to build their little Libertopian society. I'll lay odds they're back within 6 months, begging for their old jobs back.

IcarusAngel
12th March 2009, 02:11
I was starting to get sick of reading all the Ayn Rand threads but that was a good post.

Indeed, that collusion of interests who represent various elites in American society is pretty interesting. They've turned James Madison's fear of religious factions on its head, but allowing a tyrannical economic philosophy to be cloacked in religious hyperbole. The modern right in America is essentially economic, political, and religious dogmatists, hellbent on maintaining power at any cost.

Whether they become Randians or not remains to be seen, but the economic royalism they display is indeed about the same as Rand's lunacy.

GPDP
12th March 2009, 02:30
Some rich, right-wing bastards are actually considering withdrawing from society to "stick it" to the rest of us?

LOL

Best thing they could possibly do. They might as well give us the means of production on a silver platter.

Unclebananahead
12th March 2009, 03:54
Some rich, right-wing bastards are actually considering withdrawing from society to "stick it" to the rest of us?

LOL

Best thing they could possibly do. They might as well give us the means of production on a silver platter.

The problem is that they would try to take their wealth with them, and scrap whatever it is they don't want us proles getting--you know, scorched earth policy and all that.

GracchusBabeuf
12th March 2009, 04:19
The neo-cons (including the three types you have mentioned) are the worst thing to hit humanity since the Nazis.

Its remarkable from the range of angles the right wing uses to justify their specific little tyrannies.

The right-wing libertarians nearly unanimously declare the US "the only true capitalist" country while totally ignoring the tyrannical nature of the US system and just blindly join in the ranks of the jingoistic nationalist crowd.

SocialismOrBarbarism
12th March 2009, 04:21
I was reading the summary of this on wikipedia, and found some interesting stuff:


The Sanction of the victim is defined as "the willingness of the good to suffer at the hands of the evil, to accept the role of sacrificial victim for the 'sin' of creating values."
The entire story of Atlas Shrugged can be seen as an answer to the question, what would happen if this sanction were revoked? When Atlas shrugs, relieving himself of the burden of carrying the world, he is revoking his sanction.

John Galt is a man disgusted that non-productive members of society use laws and guilt to leech from the value created by productive members of society, and furthermore even exalt the qualities of the leeches over the workers and inventors.If I didn't know better I'd think it was anti-capitalist.


The right-wing libertarians nearly unanimously declare the US "the only true capitalist" country while totally ignoring the tyrannical nature of the US system and just blindly join in the ranks of the jingoistic nationalist crowd.

That's not true. They only tend to claim it's capitalist when they want to claim capitalism is responsible for the high standards of living in the US or the technological innovations developed here. Most of the time they call it fascist or socialist.

GracchusBabeuf
12th March 2009, 04:33
If I didn't know better I'd think it was anti-capitalist.I think Rand just exchanged socialism and capitalism while plagiarizing the socialist authors of the nineteenth century. For example, she calls the capitalists "producers" and the proletariat "parasites" while the earlier socialist authors had meant the proletariat as the producers and the capitalists as parasites.



That's not true. They only tend to claim it's capitalist when they want to claim capitalism is responsible for the high standards of living in the US or the technological innovations developed here. Most of the time they call it fascist or socialist.Yes, from what I have seen, they maintain that capitalism is responsible for all good in the world, while ignoring the real problems with capitalism, like wage slavery etc.

Die Neue Zeit
12th March 2009, 05:37
I think Rand just exchanged socialism and capitalism while plagiarizing the socialist authors of the nineteenth century. For example, she calls the capitalists "producers" and the proletariat "parasites" while the earlier socialist authors had meant the proletariat as the producers and the capitalists as parasites.

She ignores the proles, but I think what she has in mind for "parasites" are the lumpen.

GracchusBabeuf
13th March 2009, 01:53
The Rand Illusion by Stephen Colbert (http://www.colbertnation.com/the-colbert-report-videos/221335/march-11-2009/the-word---rand-illusion)
:laugh:

Verix
13th March 2009, 11:53
Capitalism is a pyramid if you remove the bottom (workers) then the whole thing falls apart but if you remove the top it just makes less weight for the bottom to hold :D

trivas7
13th March 2009, 16:19
Some rich, right-wing bastards are actually considering withdrawing from society to "stick it" to the rest of us?

Best thing they could possibly do. They might as well give us the means of production on a silver platter.
Sounds like an endorsement of the premise of Ms. Rand's novel.


Capitalism is a pyramid [...] if you remove the top it just makes less weight for the bottom to hold :D
That remains to be seen.

jacobian
13th March 2009, 16:29
Do you have this essay up on a web page somewhere? I'd love to be able to point people to it. :)

MikeSC
13th March 2009, 16:53
Wasn't some company having big floating cities built for Rand cultists to go and dodge taxes in? The article likened them to that BionicShock game, but I haven't heard anything about it since- anyone know whether those damn lazy moochers ever got off their arses and made these big floating cities for their Lords and Masters?

Klepto
13th March 2009, 18:33
I have to admit, I thoroughly enjoyed Atlas Shrugged.Even if you ignore the (evil) message, the book wasn't good IMO. Rand never used three words when twelve pages would do, she repeats herself ad nausium, the characters are grotesque caricatures and she takes herself far too seriously.


I think Rand just exchanged socialism and capitalism while plagiarizing the socialist authors of the nineteenth century. For example, she calls the capitalists "producers" and the proletariat "parasites" while the earlier socialist authors had meant the proletariat as the producers and the capitalists as parasites.Well said!

MikeSC
13th March 2009, 22:00
I think Rand just exchanged socialism and capitalism while plagiarizing the socialist authors of the nineteenth century. For example, she calls the capitalists "producers" and the proletariat "parasites" while the earlier socialist authors had meant the proletariat as the producers and the capitalists as parasites.That's certainly possible- I remember reading somewhere about how her "philosophy" is a rip off of other writers (I hesitate to say "other" philosophers), except she so badly understood what she was reading that it ended up quite different.

HERE (http://maverickphilosopher.blogspot.com/2004/06/rands-misunderstanding-of-kant.html)'s a link to a blog post about her philosophy that people here might like.


So I persist in my view that Rand is a hack, and that this is part of the explanation of why many professional philosophers accord her little respect.I have to say his conclusion is sound.

EDIT; i messed the URL up :) Give us a sec...

EDIT2: Okay, done! Didn't know how to undo links when editing. I do now, though :)

trivas7
13th March 2009, 22:23
I think Rand just exchanged socialism and capitalism while plagiarizing the socialist authors of the nineteenth century. For example, she calls the capitalists "producers" and the proletariat "parasites" while the earlier socialist authors had meant the proletariat as the producers and the capitalists as parasites.

She learned the dialectical method from a college prof. w/ which her writing undoubtedly became imbued. So I would argue; so argues Chris Matthew Sciabarra's Ayn Rand: The Radical Russian. (http://www.amazon.com/Ayn-Rand-Chris-Matthew-Sciabarra/dp/0271014415/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1236979195&sr=8-1)

Trystan
13th March 2009, 22:37
Dude, I am so going to use your post for trolling purposes (if you don't mind, that is).

ComradeOm
14th March 2009, 13:42
I have to admit, I thoroughly enjoyed Atlas ShruggedEven Galt's speech? That thing ran to 17 pages of uninterrupted drivel in the edition I read :ohmy:

PRC-UTE
14th March 2009, 23:42
Even Galt's speech? That thing ran to 17 pages of uninterrupted drivel in the edition I read :ohmy:

wtf :lol:

ComradeOm
15th March 2009, 00:15
Actually its much worse than I remembered. I just checked my copy (granted it is a paperback but the print is very small) and the contents of John Galt's speech actually runs to 54 consecutive pages. That is 54 pages of an uninterrupted monologue. Paragraph after paragraph of this one man droning on without pause. Almost literally without pause - I half remember one line of non-dialogue (something like, "He paused before continuing") in those 54 pages :lol:

Schrödinger's Cat
15th March 2009, 01:58
Atlas Shrugged had some potential with its basic idea. What if the most intelligent aspects of society "striked?" Unfortunately, she came across an unfortunate reality: scientists and inventors are overwhelmingly working class. Alas, Rand trudged forward with the utilization of "robots." What a cop out.

I welcome those Objectivists who want to quit their job to go John Galt! Best Buy won't miss them.

trivas7
15th March 2009, 03:06
Dude, I am so going to use your post for trolling purposes (if you don't mind, that is).
Here's something better from libertarian Chris Sciabarra:



Dialectics is the art of context-keeping. It is a thinking style that emphasizes the centrality of context in the analysis of systems across time. As applied to libertarian social theory, it counsels us not to disconnect politics from economics, culture, social psychology, ethics, epistemology, and other factors. It views these seemingly disparate aspects as interrelated within a wider totality. Hence, any attempt to understand--or change--society must entail an analysis of its interrelations from the vantage point of any single aspect. This brings forth an enriched portrait of society, and underscores the indivisible connection between theory and practice. In furthering this research program, Sciabarra projected a trilogy of works--part intellectual history, part social theory, part social critique--that would define and defend a dialectical approach to libertarianism, a "dialectical libertarianism." In the process, Sciabarra rediscovered the dialectical elements at work in the thought of several key thinkers in the libertarian tradition.

-- Chris Sciabarra, from 'Total Freedom' (http://www.nyu.edu/projects/sciabarra/totalfrdm/tf1.htm)

FreeMan
17th March 2009, 03:19
I am a big fan of Rand's work myself. We should remember that Atlas Shrugged is just a story though and that even Rand's work ain't perfect.

I sometimes wonder why the communist don't go of and make their own society like Galt did. Does their system actually depend on them taking away from the capitlist by force in order to function?

FreeMan
17th March 2009, 03:19
And BTW according to yahoo news Capital is starting to go on strike:

From Yahoo News (forum won't let me post link)

Capital On Strike


Economy: Barack won the presidency by vowing to bring "hope and change" to America. We've seen the change as the economy's deterioration accelerated. Now where's the hope?

In the three months since the election, the broadest measure of the stock market's value, the Wilshire 5000 Index, has plunged more than 30%, slicing over $3 trillion from Americans' wealth. Investors have walked away from investing, while businesses shut down factories and offices and slash jobs.

This is both highly significant and dangerous. Capital, bluntly put, has gone on strike. Those who own wealth are pushing it to the sidelines, as a young and inexperienced president tries to jam through the most sweeping economic changes in over 70 years.

The prospect of these changes becoming law has already radically altered our nation's economy. Entrepreneurs and CEOs who once created new products, new services, jobs and trillions in wealth for America's workers and retirees now find themselves vilified and punished for their success.

ABC News reported this week that many upper-income taxpayers already are planning to cut back on work and investments to stay under $250,000 in income -- the point where Obama's punitive taxes kick in. No one wins from this, yet Obama seems oblivious.

This isn't the only warning sign. A new study asserts that some 100,000 highly educated, well-trained Indians now living in the U.S. will return home in the next few years. Ditto China.

Jack
17th March 2009, 04:07
I am a big fan of Rand's work myself. We should remember that Atlas Shrugged is just a story though and that even Rand's work ain't perfect.

I sometimes wonder why the communist don't go of and make their own society like Galt did. Does their system actually depend on them taking away from the capitlist by force in order to function?

Your system is built on exploitation.

All property is stolen property, we just want to give it back to whom it belongs to, everyone.

There's a funny comic called Atlas Shrugged Part II that has all the capitalists working their asses off plowing fields and in factories going "damn, this sucks!". Capitalism is easy to love if you have money.

FreeMan
17th March 2009, 05:05
Your system is built on exploitation.

All property is stolen property, we just want to give it back to whom it belongs to, everyone.

There's a funny comic called Atlas Shrugged Part II that has all the capitalists working their asses off plowing fields and in factories going "damn, this sucks!". Capitalism is easy to love if you have money.

Can you explain what you mean by how Capitalism exploits people?

There is nothing wrong with plowing fields or doing whatever you can to make a living.

GracchusBabeuf
17th March 2009, 05:29
Can you explain what you mean by how Capitalism exploits people? Please see this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/communist-theory-faq-t23569/index.html) and/or this (http://www.revleft.com/vb/making-sense-anarchism-t6416/index.html).