Why John Galt would not support conservatives 'going Galt'

[Ruth]

Is there any segment of society actually preparing to "go Galt" in real life, or is this all just a lot of wind?

The idea that in a capitalist system, the exodus of a large chunk of the executive class would do anything but open up a huge market for new entrepreneurs to seize the opportunity and take their place is pretty laughable. And most of the REAL capitalists know this, and would never do such a thing, which leaves a little group with pundit jobs who aren't about to influence anything.

Anyway, Doug Mataconis at Below the Beltway says:

Over at The Liberty Papers, Stephen Littau presents the definitive refutation of the conservative appropriation of Ayn Rand’s archetype:

John Galt is not someone who merely caps the limits on his productivity to avoid being pushed into a higher tax bracket. What Galt does in Atlas Shrugged is much more radical: going on strike by refusing to produce anything for the benefit of society. Galt seeks out other high achievers and convinces them to do the same and help him build a society of their own.

(…)

To be invited to Galt’s Gulch one has to demonstrate that s/he has rejected the false virtues of altruism, collectivism, and mysticism (religion) and embrace his virtues of selfishness, reason, objective reality, and capitalism. While Malkin and Co. pay lip service to capitalism (especially when their people are not in control of the levers of power), their remaining values run counter to that of Galt’s. Is it not these very people who wish to erect religious monuments on government property, demand that Intelligent Design (Creationism) be taught alongside evolution in government schools, encourage individual sacrifice for the “greater good,” and wish to ratchet up the War on (Some) Drugs despite the evidence that the policy is completely counterproductive?

As Stephen notes, the one good thing about the attention being paid to Atlas Shrugged at this point is that it might cause some people to read the book for themselves and discover what it’s really all about. Of course, when they do, they’ll find out that the Malkin’s and Limbaugh’s of the world never would’ve even been considered for residence in Galt’s Gulch.

I totally agree with this, which is why SOLO's (and particularly Perigo's) drooling admiration for Limbaugh, Malkin, Palin and other anti-freedom wingnut conservatives is so destructive to Objectivism.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Ruth,

Give me an Objectivist (or one friendly to Objectivism) like Jimbo Wales any day over arm-chair achievers. I guarantee that he will not "Go Galt."

btw - I supported Palin, but that was in contrast to the other ticket in a specific election—and after looking at her track record. For example, she worked against a law to close bars earlier even as she belonged to a temperance-promoting church because she valued freedom of choice as an individual right. I find that kind of fact indicative of what she would do in power, with the caveat that power does corrupt. Track-record-wise, her acts are a lot better than a lot of her rhetoric. I hope this continues.

I do agree with you that she is not a very good Objectivist.

Michael

[SherryTX]

I think what a lot of people forget when they talk about "going Galt" is that we live in a very different world than is described in Atlas Shrugged - and different than the world Ayn Rand was living in when she wrote and published it.

Ruth - I agree - if people went all Galt, there would be several more people in line to take their place. Especially since we have the internet now, and it is easier to find people for even high niche positions than it would have ever been in the book, or back in Rand's day. (I like to read Malkin's blog from time to time - however, when I was watching Colbert's video "The Rand Illusion" the other night, I noticed she and a few other people that were show kept calling her Ann. Interesting - if you know so much about her philosophy - why the hell cannot you get her name right? That bugged me big time.)

Anyway - I do know of people locally that I associate with that wish a group of us could find some island, or country to move to and start up a little Objectivist city/village, whatever. Kinda like the Free State project on steroids. (I commented that if people were serious about it, find a big tract of land, several acres, buy it as a group and sub divide it and sell the lots to all your Objectivist friends and build. But even in that community, it wouldn't be perfect.)

I don't fault anyone for "shrugging" if it means taking a bow out of an industry or to stop working for a company if they feel like it is going against their values. However, I also think that is quite absurd to think that it is going to make a huge impact - no where near like in the book.

People forget that even though the message of Atlas is so important, the world it takes place in is fiction.

What I would like to see is more people doing something about the way things are. I am also confused by someone I meet that say they are an Objectivist, or a fan of Rand and then state that they think voting is useless - or when it is suggested if they want to change things, they should see if it is possible for them to get involved - say at the local level, what have you - but they think again it is useless. Or that it would be a "self sacrifice." Really? It is a sacrifice to see if there is something you can do to improve things for your self? That makes no sense to me. Those people bug me because they bitch the most about things, in my experience.

So yes - I bothers me that a lot of the people I see talking about Atlas Shrugged on TV and radio do not fully understand her philosophy and are wrong on so many things. However, the more Ayn Rand's name and the title of her books get out there, well maybe more people will look into it.

Edited to add: by the way Ruth, thanks for the link. I haven't been to that site before. I posted the link on my FaceBook profile as well so my local Oist peeps can read it.

Edited March 30, 2009 by SherryTX

[Chris Grieb]

Sherry; On the pronunciation of Ayn Rand's name one prominent free market who spoke at the TAS 50th Atlas celebration insisting on pronouncing Miss Rand's first name wrong and telling the audience is was a matter of debate. I am sadly not surprised that Conservatives get it wrong.

[Alfonso Jones]

Sherry; On the pronunciation of Ayn Rand's name one prominent free market who spoke at the TAS 50th Atlas celebration insisting on pronouncing Miss Rand's first name wrong and telling the audience is was a matter of debate. I am sadly not surprised that Conservatives get it wrong.

How to pronounce Ayn Rand's first name being A MATTER OF DEBATE?

I guess that if one's only exposure to Rand were through the printed page, that might be an understandable error. (Though one can find written documentation of Rand's pronunciation, also.) But for a speaker at an Atlas Shrugged 50th anniversary celebration? Ignorance...

Bill P

[syrakusos]

Give me an Objectivist ... like Jimbo Wales ... I guarantee that he will not "Go Galt."

MSK, how can you guarantee what anyone else will do?

[syrakusos]

The idea that in a capitalist system, the exodus of a large chunk of the executive class would do anything but open up a huge market for new entrepreneurs to seize the opportunity and take their place is pretty laughable.

The theorem rests on an axiom that not all men are equal. They may be born that way, but they don't stay that way. Who runs a company matters... the bigger the firm, the more it matters. Why do you think that the American automobile makers are in their present situation? The companies are run by professional managers -- the best that money can buy... but not by entrepreneurs. So, after 50 or 75 years... sooner or later... The last gasp was actually the current generation. I am 60. Atlas Shrugged taught a generation to seek personal freedom.

The computer revolution came because computering was (and remains) unregulated. Anyone can be a programmer by claiming to be one. There are no government standards for code. No regulators read your documentation to make sure that it conforms to the law. If we had licensing, registration, and government examinations, we would still be punching cards on mainframes. That's where the automobile manufacturers and the bankers are: punching cards on mainframes.

It matters who runs the company.

[SherryTX]

Sherry; On the pronunciation of Ayn Rand's name one prominent free market who spoke at the TAS 50th Atlas celebration insisting on pronouncing Miss Rand's first name wrong and telling the audience is was a matter of debate. I am sadly not surprised that Conservatives get it wrong.

How to pronounce Ayn Rand's first name being A MATTER OF DEBATE?

I guess that if one's only exposure to Rand were through the printed page, that might be an understandable error. (Though one can find written documentation of Rand's pronunciation, also.) But for a speaker at an Atlas Shrugged 50th anniversary celebration? Ignorance...

Bill P

I can excuse people that have only been exposed to it through the written word. Myself, and others I have known wasn't sure - until we were correct by those that knew better. But then again, none of these people acted like they were knowledgeable enough about Ayn Rand's works to go on tv and mispronounce her name hahah. I guess that is why it bothers me. Some research people! Doesn't Michelle Malkin have an intern???

[SherryTX]

The idea that in a capitalist system, the exodus of a large chunk of the executive class would do anything but open up a huge market for new entrepreneurs to seize the opportunity and take their place is pretty laughable.

The theorem rests on an axiom that not all men are equal. They may be born that way, but they don't stay that way. Who runs a company matters... the bigger the firm, the more it matters. Why do you think that the American automobile makers are in their present situation? The companies are run by professional managers -- the best that money can buy... but not by entrepreneurs. So, after 50 or 75 years... sooner or later... The last gasp was actually the current generation. I am 60. Atlas Shrugged taught a generation to seek personal freedom.

The computer revolution came because computering was (and remains) unregulated. Anyone can be a programmer by claiming to be one. There are no government standards for code. No regulators read your documentation to make sure that it conforms to the law. If we had licensing, registration, and government examinations, we would still be punching cards on mainframes. That's where the automobile manufacturers and the bankers are: punching cards on mainframes.

It matters who runs the company.

I do agree with the fact it does matter who runs the company. After all - Steve Jobs, in my opinion saved Apple when he came back. The stock goes up and down every time their is a report of his health failing further, but then he makes an appearance to calm the fears.

However - I guess I don't know of enough key business men that if they shrugged would make the same impact it did in Atlas Shrugged.

But I guess the point of the piece was that "shrugging" to stay under a tax bracket is not the same as what John Galt was doing. However - I can tell you something: for a lot of people, I can understand that. I was burned in 2007 - we made $10K more than the year before and paid $4K more in taxes. What the heck? We are no where near the $250K limit they are talking about, of course, but it is amazing that even with 5 kids, a mortgage and careful planning, how seriously we are considering me just taking the rest of the year off because we are so sick of paying so much in taxes. (Of course, we are still doing the math - don't want to cut off the nose to spite the face of course!)