Going Galt


jtucek

Recommended Posts

Hello, I have written a short story (~30,000 words) - Platonic dialog style - with the main protagonist gone on a limited form of a Randian strike. You can read it in full here

Someone is probably going to tell me that this is a wrong subforum, but I do not wish to discuss the literary merits of the text, only the nature of the protagonist's strike. If someone cares to read the manuscript, we can discuss these two statements in this thread.

  1. The rebellion is badly inadequate, as the protagonists still contribute something of much value, albeit of intangible value, to the looting society.
  2. The rebellion is unjust, as there are services the protagonists cannot opt out of, eg. national defense, and they blankly refuse to pay for them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 254
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I enjoyed reading your short story, although I have only read the first half of it so far, and fully intend to finish it tomorrow after I get home from work.

I think that we all know that the premises underlying our society today are slowly bringing it down as they are mistaken premises. Whether one pays one's taxes or not has little effect on the outcome, which is virtually inevitable. One has to earn one's living so it is foolish to withdraw one's efforts entirely. In order to change society into the one we advocate requires enlightenment of enough of our fellow human beings. What is necessary, since the antidote is already known, is recruitment of others to the cause. One may argue about the best way to accomplish that.

Rebellion can take many forms and some are probably of no value at all if the ultimate objective is the creation of a truly free society, built on the proper premises.

Those of us who value such an objective should consider ourselves engaged in the process of creation not merely rebellion. I think it is important to plant the right seeds not to simply withholding support from the establishment of a misguided society.

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not wish to discuss the literary merits of the text, only the nature of the protagonist's strike. If someone cares to read the manuscript, we can discuss these two statements in this thread.

  1. The rebellion is badly inadequate, as the protagonists still contribute something of much value, albeit of intangible value, to the looting society.
  2. The rebellion is unjust, as there are services the protagonists cannot opt out of, eg. national defense, and they blankly refuse to pay for them.

You accurately assessed the conundrum of rebelling, but not completely. 1 and 2 are only two reasons why I don't waste my energy on destructive rebellion, but rather channel it to constructive building so as to enjoy a good life in this world just as it is right now.

What people don't realize is that both capitulation and rebellion are slavery to the world, because they are both reactions to it. While building your own world is independent of it.

You can starve the world simply by depriving it of the energy of your emotional reactions to it. :smile:

Do not let yourself be overcome by evil, but master evil with good.

Romans 12:21

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to OL Jaroslav.

You will have to excuse Greg, sometimes he forgets his OL manners.

Interesting inverse handle you used.

Where do you hail from?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do not wish to discuss the literary merits of the text, only the nature of the protagonist's strike. If someone cares to read the manuscript, we can discuss these two statements in this thread.

  1. The rebellion is badly inadequate, as the protagonists still contribute something of much value, albeit of intangible value, to the looting society.
  2. The rebellion is unjust, as there are services the protagonists cannot opt out of, eg. national defense, and they blankly refuse to pay for them.

You accurately assessed the conundrum of rebelling, but not completely. 1 and 2 are only two reasons why I don't waste my energy on destructive rebellion, but rather channel it to constructive building so as to enjoy a good life in this world just as it is right now.

What people don't realize is that both capitulation and rebellion are slavery to the world, because they are both reactions to it. While building your own world is independent of it.

You can starve the world simply by depriving it of the energy of your emotional reactions to it. :smile:

Do not let yourself be overcome by evil, but master evil with good.

Romans 12:21

Greg

That's the basic problem with Atlas Shrugged. The bad guys were much more interesting and had much more game than the good guys--even Dagny didn't have much wit as to what they were really about, but they sure did. The men of the mind going on strike, however, was such a supremely great idea for a novel you can't complain that Rand wrote it. She has freed millions from the psychological matrix of sacrifice. She was The One!

The novel and her philosophy can be considered Objectivism 101 and many who have yet to be exposed to it will and benefit as have others for the same reasons. But others have gone on to Objectivism 202 and even graduate school. This simply means the life--including personal life--and works of Ayn Rand are serious food for thought, not any end all or be all. For instance, the rubric of absolutism belongs to reality itself, but we have to be modest about what we know and could or might know but not immodest about what we damn well should know by now. I'm especially referring to right and wrong conduct and the universalism of such.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The men of the mind going on strike, however, was such a supremely great idea for a novel you can't complain that Rand wrote it. She has freed millions from the psychological matrix of sacrifice. She was The One!

I'd never complain about that, Brant. But I do differentiate between rebellion and striking. I'm definitely on strike, but I have no involvement in rebelling against the world. That's a waste of valuable time and energy which is better utilized in the task of building my world.

And as far as studying Objectivism 101 and 202 etc, That's not my personal style. Instead of learning by studying, I learn by doing. The Army aptly called it OJT (on the job training). That's my method. Can't say it will work for everyone. I only know it works for me.

I'm especially referring to right and wrong conduct and the universalism of such.

There are certainly universal principles pertaining to right and wrong. Understand how they operate within yourself... and the world is yours.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether one pays one's taxes or not has little effect on the outcome, which is virtually inevitable. One has to earn one's living so it is foolish to withdraw one's efforts entirely. In order to change society into the one we advocate requires enlightenment of enough of our fellow human beings. What is necessary, since the antidote is already known, is recruitment of others to the cause.

Do you think you can recruit, by enlightening, a law-making majority of the electorate for the kind of change you suggest? Not going to happen ... as long as you have something left on you worth looting.

Taxes on the other hand ... if 20 people refuse to pay, they have a problem called jail. If 20 million refuse, the government has a problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

People generally can be civilized else there would not have been progress in this direction for the last thousand years. You need the right person with the right message. It would also be nice to amend the constitution so lying while working in government was not profitable... And the rules for politicians should be the same as the rest of us. Insider trading anyone? Immunity from prosecution for lying anyone?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, Greg, if there were no Ayn Rand how do you think your life would be different today, especially in what you know and value?

--Brant

Without Ayn Rand I would not have been inspired to build my own Galt's Gulch, so it would have taken longer to see what's what and to see what to do about it. While I'm religious and give heed to the ancient wisdom written down in the Bible, my values basically come from identifying moral principles and testing them to see what works best in my life. And Ayn Rand added a valuable confirmation of them from her secular point of view.

Independent validation from two disparate points are how a third point can be confirmed by triangulation...

...and once that confirmation is a concrete reality, I'm on it with both feet and off and running. :smile:

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whether one pays one's taxes or not has little effect on the outcome, which is virtually inevitable. One has to earn one's living so it is foolish to withdraw one's efforts entirely. In order to change society into the one we advocate requires enlightenment of enough of our fellow human beings. What is necessary, since the antidote is already known, is recruitment of others to the cause.

Do you think you can recruit, by enlightening, a law-making majority of the electorate for the kind of change you suggest? Not going to happen ... as long as you have something left on you worth looting.

Taxes on the other hand ... if 20 people refuse to pay, they have a problem called jail. If 20 million refuse, the government has a problem.

Nope. With central banking the government never has a problem. All its problems get reduced to the dollar and the government is master of the dollar. Take away central banking, the government has a problem. Take away the income tax, the government has a problem. Those problems were taken care of a century ago. "If 20 million refuse," 20 million have a problem. It's like Jews in Nazi Germany. All the many millions of them had a problem. Not the Nazis. The Jews were a resource exploited unto their deaths.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. With central banking the government never has a problem. All its problems get reduced to the dollar and the government is master of the dollar. Take away central banking, the government has a problem. Take away the income tax, the government has a problem. Those problems were taken care of a century ago. "If 20 million refuse," 20 million have a problem. It's like Jews in Nazi Germany. All the many millions of them had a problem. Not the Nazis. The Jews were a resource exploited unto their deaths.

Maybe you're right in that. If the government and the society at large is willing to take the step down to the Nazi level.

But if not? What are they going to do? Build a jail for 20 million people? Openly ignore law breakers of that sort? Still looks to me like a government's problem. And if they do ignore them, then you have the Gulch without the need to hide. You can even dump the dollar, made worthless now by the printing presses, and use something private instead. Think bitcoin for example.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nope. With central banking the government never has a problem. All its problems get reduced to the dollar and the government is master of the dollar. Take away central banking, the government has a problem. Take away the income tax, the government has a problem. Those problems were taken care of a century ago. "If 20 million refuse," 20 million have a problem. It's like Jews in Nazi Germany. All the many millions of them had a problem. Not the Nazis. The Jews were a resource exploited unto their deaths.

Maybe you're right in that. If the government and the society at large is willing to take the step down to the Nazi level.

But if not? What are they going to do? Build a jail for 20 million people? Openly ignore law breakers of that sort? Still looks to me like a government's problem. And if they do ignore them, then you have the Gulch without the need to hide. You can even dump the dollar, made worthless now by the printing presses, and use something private instead. Think bitcoin for example.

The dollar is worthless? Please send me yours. For each 5000 of yours I'll send you a 1 ounce gold bullion coin. I'll then take that money and buy 4 more gold coins for myself--unless you want to continue the trade. If you do, I will.

The government can do what it wants with those 20 million--when it wants to. In fact, it is hard to find an innocent American anymore for all the laws and regulations they constantly violate. The arbitrariness of possible prosecution is the essence of totalitarian terror. It's there but hardly used so far. It takes decades to ramp this crap up, but ramping up it is. If I had children we'd all go international with different citizenships and passports. America is no longer for Americans except for those who want to fight for it. Childless, I'll do that. The basic principle is whenever government knocks on your door, kick it in the balls. Especially if it's there to help you. Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

--Brant

kick, kick, kick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not worthless now. I meant to say once it would have been made worthless by the government trying to make up for the loss of income from 20 million strikers, the way you seemend to have implied by the reference to central banking.

Anyway, that part is not important to me. What is important, you seem not to care about statement number 2 one bit. That's interesting. It bothers me quite a bit. So, not sure whether you have read the text ... would you buy a jewish villa from the government in the 1930 for a great price ... with no mercy and a kick?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government can do what it wants with those 20 million

Also, Brant, this is a cheap escape. Name one practical thing the government can do to 20 million strikers. Just one.

I am pretty much sure that they are not going to jail them. And they are not going to evict them from their homes, confiscate their property and shoot them. Not these days. So what can they do? Maybe they can threaten to withhold the loot distribution for them, but the strikers are the ones being robbed, so they'd just laugh at the threat. What's left?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The government can do what it wants with those 20 million

Also, Brant, this is a cheap escape. Name one practical thing the government can do to 20 million strikers. Just one.

I am pretty much sure that they are not going to jail them. And they are not going to evict them from their homes, confiscate their property and shoot them. Not these days. So what can they do? Maybe they can threaten to withhold the loot distribution for them, but the strikers are the ones being robbed, so they'd just laugh at the threat. What's left?

Nothing except scare them individually. There are many more than 20 million right now, btw. Many are on welfare. It's easier and better (material) living to take the dole than try to work your way into the middle class. One barrier is the tax barrier. You work like hell and aren't better off. Many never start businesses for all the hoops and red tape and taxes. This is just one or two facets. Now, 20 million refuse to pay their income taxes on earned income. Do you know how fast a state or the federal government can empty your bank account? A click of the mouse. Lien on your house. Force sale of your house. You're running a business and need cash for operations--oops! It's gone. You're an employee, your taxes are collected by your employer. What to do? Quit working. Problem feeding your family--food stamps! WASHINGTON DOES NOT CARE! Only the IRS part. The IRS does not care about the strike only about the next striker on its plate. Now, please note that 90% of the taxes are not paid by 90% of the taxpayers. The rich boys aren't striking. They have a lot of money left over and lawyers and accountants to minimize each of their burdens.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

You're right if you're not at war with the government, wrong if you are. It's all strategy and tactics. Picket's charge is not advised.

--Brant

war costs a lot, usually too much

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

Since in your cosmology the victims of the crime deserve what they get, crime is an irrelevant moral consideration here for you respecting anyone making a victim. You blame the victim. I don't. You take care of the victim first by kicking the victimizer in the ass. Then you explain how to avoid it in the future. You don't, it seems, unless it's you and yours. I know you're better than that or I wouldn't be noting the irony of you trapped in your formally stated position by the reality you claim so ardently to embrace.

You gave up your right to speak up for others as victims, but now you choose to only as an ad hoc rebuttal. I suggest a somewhat bigger tribe for you since you seem to be trying for that already. If we both call it "grace" we'll be talking about the same thing.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You're right if you're not at war with the government, wrong if you are.

Correct. I'm certainly not at war with the government, because the government is not the enemy. For it treats me exactly as decent as i am. This means that I'm the only one who can be my own worst enemy.

Understanding that the government answers to the same higher moral law I do is what sets me free to work, to make money, to build my world, and to enjoy living a good productive meaningful life.

By virtue of the moral law it was founded upon, the US government can only afflict you to the degree of your own failure to live like an American.

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

Since in your cosmology the victims of the crime deserve what they get...

I was specifically referring to the immorality of taking what the government offers... simply because it takes from someone else in order to give to you. This is zero sum Marxism because no wealth is being created through useful production.

It's essentially self-imposed slavery. Now who else could you honestly blame for that, when you could work to create your own wealth through your own useful production...

...and be free of the need of government because you govern yourself?

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

Since in your cosmology the victims of the crime deserve what they get...

I was specifically referring to the immorality of taking what the government offers...

Greg

For this discussion, but you have a more general view often expressed.

--Brant

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Take what it offers and still kick it in the balls. No mercy.

I consider it to be a bad choice to take what the government offers, for that's how it enslaves people... through their own dependence on feeling entitled to get something for nothing. Taking what the government gives to you is just as unethical as the government taking from someone else to give to you. In that way, you become an accomplice to the crime.

Greg

Since in your cosmology the victims of the crime deserve what they get...

I was specifically referring to the immorality of taking what the government offers...

Greg

For this discussion, but you have a more general view often expressed.

--Brant

I'd rather not see the baby thrown out with the bathwater... although you're free to disagree about taking from the government being slavery. After all, it's just my purely subjective opinion drawn from my own personal experience.

I can accurately measure my freedom by what I don't need the government to do for me or give to me...

...because the degree I don't need it determines the degree to which the government leaves me alone to enjoy my life. :smile:

Greg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now