Glenn Beck with Yaron Brook tonight

9thdoctor · June 15, 2010

Atlas Shrugged to be featured on Glenn Beck

We are pleased to announce that ARI president Yaron Brook is scheduled to appear on the Glenn Beck program on Fox News Channel on Tuesday, June 15, for the entire hour to discuss “when fiction becomes fact.” It is a special program dedicated to Atlas Shrugged and Vince Flynn’s book Term Limits. The show starts at 5 p.m., Eastern time (2 p.m., Pacific time).

In bocca al lupo!

In culo alla balena!

How do you say good luck/break a leg in Hebrew?

anthony · June 15, 2010

um, will "Mazel tov!" do?

George H. Smith · June 15, 2010

On his radio program earlier today, Beck explained how our political problems would virtually fix themselves if only our faith in God could be restored.

I wonder if Yaron Brook will accuse Beck of being a Witch Doctor? :lol:

name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="

type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Ghs

Backlighting · June 15, 2010

Saw the show. Yaron didn't get to speak much but the publicity AR and Atlas Shrugged received was significant. I expect a spike in the sales of her books. That's a good thing.

Michael Stuart Kelly · June 16, 2010

Here's the show if anyone wants to see it:

Michael

algernonsidney · June 16, 2010

Beck made a couple errors on the show. He mentioned the rejections that Anthem got. Those comments were actually made with regard to We The Living.

Of course, Rand never actually wrote The Voice of Reason as a book. She wrote the essays. The book was just a collection of her essays.

Alfonso Jones · June 16, 2010

Saw the show. Yaron didn't get to speak much but the publicity AR and Atlas Shrugged received was significant. I expect a spike in the sales of her books. That's a good thing.

Just watched the show (in the Air France courtesy lounge at Paris/CGD airport).

Anyone expecting long speeches from Yaron Brook (or Vince Flynn, for that matter) is surely disappointed. What happened - a push for viewers to engage with Term Limits and Atlas Shrugged.

Not that bad of an idea, after all.

Bill P

George H. Smith · June 16, 2010

The interview segment was so-so, but Beck's earlier pitch for Atlas was excellent. So were his remarks about the importance of novels. Very unusual for a television talk show, especially one on Fox.

Ghs

Backlighting · June 16, 2010

A few days ago Atlas Shrugged was ranked in the 70's on their best seller list.

Today it's listed as number 12. http://www.amazon.com/gp/bestsellers/books/ref=sv_b_3

Beck's show on AS could only have helped.

9thdoctor · June 16, 2010

I felt that Beck’s show was better than Stossel’s Atlas show. Still, Beck reminds me too much of a charismatic preacher, among other reservations. And Brook nods too much.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfhlVRsrV_w&feature=related

Brant Gaede · June 16, 2010

I couldn't watch Beck very much. I skipped almost all the first segment. The second I watched a little more of jumping thru. I never got to the third and fourth. I also hardly ever watch Stossel and never listen to Limbaugh.

Question: Why isn't Peikoff going to run Y. Brook out of his job and condemn him for consorting with a religious conservative?

--Brook's name isn't Barbara Branden

--He's too busy with DIM (two ways)

--Brook is a hell of a fund raiser

--Hypocrisy

--No threat to LP

--All of the above

--Brant

Edited June 17, 2010 by Brant Gaede

Dennis Hardin · June 17, 2010

I liked the fact that Beck began the program by talking about how certain works of fiction can do an amazing job of showing the connections between a wide array of seemingly unrelated concrete events. And that he derided media for doing everything possible to make the public myopic, calling people “paranoid” who claim to see connections. He said it was his explicit goal to tie separate issues together in order to make sense of them, and that he liked fiction writers because they do the same thing when they tell a story. Needless to say, that was a big part of Ayn Rand’s purpose in writing Atlas. So at least Beck grasped that much.

Did anyone notice that one of the book reviews which Beck mocked—where the reviewer called Atlas “remarkably silly” and “preposterous”—was the despicable Whittaker Chamber’s review in National Review? I thought conservative quasi-libertarians like Beck considered National Review sacrosanct. Wow! Slamming National Review in front of miilions of viewers. I found that little tidbit encouraging.

Brook presents himself well. Rather than angry and moralistic, he comes across as smiling, cheerful and benevolent, which is exactly how someone representing a philosophy of reason should come across. That factor alone will help to make people want to check out Rand’s books.

It was amusing that Beck described the bureaucrats in Atlas as, in effect, Barney Frank clones. Obviously he did read the book—or at least parts of it. But then he made the comment that, if Ayn Rand were there, he would tell her that the book’s message to him was simply that common sense was missing in today’s society. That struck me as odd, since earlier in the program he had agreed with his daughter when she told him that Atlas made her "rethink everything" in her life.

Brook took issue with Beck’s statement, saying that Rand went much deeper than common sense to address “fundamental foundational ideas.” He then made reference to Beck’s earlier point about the importance of grasping how disparate events and “data points” were related, and said one theme of Atlas was the causal connection between modern education’s assault on thinking and integration and the rise of statism. Beck seemed to ignore Brook’s key insight. Rather than pick up on it, he went to a question from the audience.

I have my doubts as to whether Beck really understands Atlas if he thinks Galt’s Speech was just common sense. But at least he shut up long enough for Brook to make that crucial point. (On the other hand, Beck's earlier remarks suggest that he does appreciate the importance of thinking and making abstract connections.)

Just like the film version of Atlas, Beck's show—despite its obvious flaws--will definitely help more people discover the philosophy of Ayn Rand. And for that we are in his debt.

Brant Gaede · June 17, 2010

I'm all for Beck championing Atlas. Don't get the idea from my previous comments I'm against that. But once I read Atlas in 1963 I had no need for such as he. Do know that all sorts of people have embraced the novel since they grab what the want and ignore or do not comprehend the rest. The most memorable for me was a newspaper story I read about 30 years ago about a crypto-fascist political thug in New Jersey who prominently displayed it on his bookshelf.

--Brant

9thdoctor · June 18, 2010

--He's too busy with DIM (two ways)

I don’t get the “two ways” part, but it brings up the question: where does Beck get classified in DIM-speak? He'd have to be a D2, right?

Did anyone notice that one of the book reviews which Beck mocked—where the reviewer called Atlas “remarkably silly” and “preposterous”—was the despicable Whittaker Chamber’s review in National Review?

I was really surprised by that too. And the scornful way he pronounced the name Whitaker Chambers…Beck definitely earned a lot of points in my scorebook for that.

Dennis Hardin · June 18, 2010

...t brings up the question: where does Beck get classified in DIM-speak? He'd have to be a D2, right?

I don't know DIM jargon, but since Ayn Rand and Sarah Palin both rank way up near the top of Beck's most adored women list, I'm not sure integration is his strongsuit.

Rowan Atkinson? Is that the best image you could find to symbolize your brilliance? Personally, I preferred the screamer. At least he appeared to be passionate about his blurts. And he was intimidating. Now I’m going to imagine each of your wonderful insights as preceding an impending pratfall.

Ever consider using your own countenance to grace your posts? It’s the only way to quash all the Freddy Krueger rumors.

9thdoctor · June 18, 2010

I don't know DIM jargon, but since Ayn Rand and Sarah Palin both rank way up near the top of Beck's most adored women list, I'm not sure integration is his strongsuit.

His fans in O-land sometimes give him a pass on grounds that he’s perceptibly developing intellectually. I’m not going to keep rehashing my criticisms, besides, MSK’s clearly seen a lot more of Beck’s stuff than I have. On the other hand, my grandmother loves him, and that’s usually a bad sign.

Here’s some material from OCON about DIM:

Dr. Peikoff’s book The DIM Hypothesis identifies three different modes of integration, i.e., of interrelating concretes, such as individual percepts, facts, choices, story events, etc. As Dr. Peikoff explains: “My thesis is that the dominant trends in every key area can be defined by their leaders’ policy toward integration. They are against it (Disintegration, D); they are for it, if it conforms to Nature (Integration, I); they are for it, if it conforms to a Super-Nature (Misintegration, M).” The book—focusing on literature, physics, education and politics—demonstrates the power of these three modes in shaping Western culture and history.

In 2007 Dr. Peikoff presented the first and more theoretical half of the book. Now comes the cashing-in: his identification, on the basis of his hypothesis, of the rules that have governed each of the major changes in Western culture (e.g., pagan to Christian or Enlightenment to Modernist); his analysis of the DIM factors defining the condition of the United States today; and then, applying all this, how those rules predict our future; or, as the title of his last chapter puts it: “What’s Next.” (Along with his prediction, Dr. Peikoff specifies a timeframe and a degree of probability.)

I have a pet theory, its admittedly speculative so don’t jump down my throat about it. Peikoff has expressed admiration for Isaac Asimov a few times recently, and has announced that he’s writing science fiction. Could it be that he read the Foundation series one too many times, and thought: I could be Hari Seldon, let’s give this the old college try. Hence DIM, his adaptation of psychohistory.

Rowan Atkinson? Is that the best image you could find to symbolize your brilliance? Personally, I preferred the screamer. At least he appeared to be passionate about his blurts. And he was intimidating. Now I’m going to imagine each of your wonderful insights as preceding an impending pratfall.

I might change it back at some point, I just got tired of looking at it. Atkinson was an unofficial Ninth Doctor so it remains in keeping with the Dr. Who theme. I most associate him with Blackadder, so I don’t think first of pratfalls ala Mr. Bean. As to my brilliance, thanks for noticing.

Ever consider using your own countenance to grace your posts? It’s the only way to quash all the Freddy Krueger rumors.

Nah, I see it often enough, besides I couldn’t really pass for a Time Lord, I’m short a Tardis, Sonic Screwdriver, and a heart (Time Lords have two). Freddy Krueger? Do I haunt people’s dreams?

Michael Stuart Kelly · June 19, 2010

... MSK's clearly seen a lot more of Beck's stuff than I have. On the other hand, my grandmother loves him, and that's usually a bad sign.

Dennis,

Dayaamm!

If your grandmother is anything like mine, that's a serious seed of doubt...

Michael

Rich Engle · June 19, 2010

I caught wind of the broadcast that very morning. This sort of pissed me off righteously for a couple of reasons. One, I can't stand watching Glen Beck, because it makes me feel all gooshy inside when I see a performer lurch and stutter like he does; that, along with his constant references to himself. Ultimately, as much good as he has done, I view the man as a poster child for self-esteem issues, and an awkward showman to behold, at that. But, still, he does try, I guess.

Another, more important reason in my world was that I had travel plans involving going down to Bonita Springs so my wife could go swimming with her granddaughter. I did that, cut it short, and made it back before a storm rolled in off the Gulf.

But that, of course, is just me. At least I made the effort, given the unprecedent and opportunity and such.

I actually made it in 10 minutes early, which allowed me to start slamming Coke Zeros, chips, and salsa. I figured it couldn't be worse than the Peikoff outing I had seen years before on CNN, which was a total clusterfuck. That one was like interviewing a conspiracy-theory corpse talking about other weirdos; the paranoia shook me, almost as much as his hastily-applied makeup. It was horror-ific.

I could've done without the preliminary chalk-talk, but, after all, that is Beck's way of explaining his look at things. Back in my multi-level marketing days, I had endured amateurs do weird, convoluted whiteboard presentations where they played connect-the-dots in strange fashions that were less efficent than maps my own teams had done to explain the same things. Then he got down to a very simple concept that any studied writer knows about. That was sort of along the lines of the time Harlan Ellison inadvertently re-defined "Science Fiction" to what he called "Speculative Fiction." At this point Beck was conducting a monkey-training session. Personally, I would've loaded the audience with ever-so-slightly more cool-looking people, but whatever. Booga-booga! Writers take shit they have seen happen and talk about what might, based on their horrorific experiences. Well, yeah, we do that shit, for sure. His supportive little info-mercial thingies further reinforced the stupidity levels he was assuming, and, god damn it, he's probably right on that one. News flash to retards! Star Trek gave someone the idea for flip-phones. Sigh. And he was so proud of himself watching these prepared things, as if they were true chestnuts. Ack.

Every-2 minute commercials later, the true fear came to me. Cutting through it, I quickly determined that Beck had THAT DAY as a release one for his book. Now, I haven't read the thing, and probably won't, but, he was clearly enjoying the hyper-terrorist-you'll-find-it-in-theirlunchbox-next-to-the-bomb reviews (being that is definitely good press and all, almost as good as when Hoffman titled his book, well, "Steal This Book"). I rarely judge writers by how they talk, but in this case I have developed believe-a-bility issues. Or, his editor should be nominated for Sainthood. What I mean in saying this is that he has clearly read too many things like Tony Robbins, et al; that modeling, while a speedy path to things, does not replace actual sweat or the knowledge that is acquired with it, and it always shows. At some point or another, you actually have to have done the work to speak to a subject with any manner of authority. The word "emulation" came to mind.

That is where my old, innate Objectivist training kicked in. Because, what I saw were hangers-on, dovetailing their own work along with Atlas. In the end, they were simply suckling off of Atlas' amazing backdraft. They were either not acknowledging that, or worse yet (I believe this one) were attempting to become AR contemporaries. Uh, yeah, rightio.

So then, it came down to him, and Vince ("Term Limits") what's his face using the whole thing to pump their books, both of which are nothing close, of course (and I will be so bold to assume this), to the now-ancient "Atlas." At this point, the dick-measuring began. Hockey bumps and elbow-shoving for space. Something like that. YB never had a chance on this (he should've rolled out a book of his own that day to gain advantage, or at least parity) but, I thought, held his own halfway decent-like.

And that was what it was from the rip.

However, I do believe in the power of holding up a book in front of people, even if they do not know it. It has always worked for Evangelicals. So, exposure is exposure. It's just that, in this case, it was occluded by the machinations of the book business.

I wouldn't have expected anything less.

rde

Edited June 19, 2010 by Rich Engle

9thdoctor · June 19, 2010

This may merit it’s own thread, nevertheless note that the OCON description for the next DIM course includes this statement:

Leonard Peikoff's appearance at this conference does not imply that he agrees with the ideas or formulations of any other speakers.

I believe TAS has used comparable disclaimers from the beginning, or at least it’s been implied by the “Open Objectivism” approach and goes without saying that David Kelley (or whomever) hasn’t pre-sanctioned everything that will be presented at a conference. Is this a recent change/addition in Fundy-land? Another thing, I notice that Harry Binswanger isn’t appearing, among others.

Rich Engle · June 19, 2010

Leonard Peikoff's appearance at this conference does not imply that he agrees with the ideas or formulations of any other speakers.

Good. Maybe doing otherwise would somehow interfere with some kind of endorsement deal he's cutting (Depends<tm>, Big-Daddio Drool Buckets<tm>, etc.)

I picture them wheeling him out rigged up like Anthony Hopkins was in that Silence of the Lambs sequel. Or that dude in the Dune movie. Something.

Judith · June 19, 2010

I quickly determined that Beck had THAT DAY as a release one for his book. Now, I haven't read the thing, and probably won't

I've read it. It's quite a lot of fun. Not top-of-the-line Vince Flynn quality thriller material, but I kept reading to the end, which says something...

Judith

Philip Coates · June 19, 2010

> I can't stand watching Glen Beck...I could've done without the preliminary chalk-talk....a monkey-training session....little info-mercial thingies further reinforced the stupidity levels he was assuming...using the whole thing to pump their books, both of which are nothing close..to the now-ancient "Atlas." [Rich Engle]

Until this week, I had only watched snippets of Glenn Beck and he grated on me in part because he didn't present ideas in the style to which I was accustomed from Objectivist lectures and college classrooms. Plus it was often the breaking news, 'politics of the day' type of thing so I quickly tuned him out. The only entire shows of his I've seen are now this week:

1) the 'Hayek" show and 2) the 'fiction writers, including Rand' show Rich refers to.

My preference for how ideas should be presented to me is that of an intellectual, someone comfortable with long chains of reasoning, scholarly discourse, a 'linear' presentation. But it's only about 1% [i'm guessing, so please don't nitpick the numbers to death] of the population who prefers that or appreciates that. Beck has an audience of millions. He reaches the other 99% in cognitive style.

Beck varies his material and knows how to lay a foundation and build on it:

And what he does, the 'multi-media' or alternation of formats thing, makes a great deal of sense. He mixes in photos, video clips, written material on a blackboard, talking with guests, and audience questions. That keeps it lively for most people.

Actually, not just for most people but to some extent for me as well: For a while I used to watch Charlie Rose and the Sunday talk shows and the News Hour. But I got bored with the unvarying 'talking heads' format. And even when they are debating, you get tired of seeing the same people (e.g., Brooks and Shields) over and over. Sitting in the same chairs. Just talking. And eventually, repeating themselves.

In one of the shows this week, he built up to Rand and Atlas by showing photos of rioting and shooting in the streets of St. Petersburg and how she lived with the horror and death all around her. Then Beck mocked the critics who said she exaggerated the evils of communism or didn't know what she was talking about. Very effective! Much more so than an exclusively abstract statement of the kind Oists like too much.

In the Hayek show, he started with historical background, the rise of the Nazi dictatorship, inflation, chaos. And against that he presents the importance of "The Road to Serfdom" abstractly. Again, much more effective for the average audience,the man on the street, than just plunging in. And, no, it's not appealing to stupidity or dumbing down.

In the fiction writers show (himself, Flynn, Rand and Atlas), he laid the groundwork for a show on fiction, which many would otherwise view as non-serious. How did he do this? By explaining how often fiction writers are the ones to predict (as in the case of nine-eleven with Tom Clancy and others, as in the parallels between today's advance of big government and the scenario in Atlas Shrugged), the ones with imagination who can see where things are going, writers bold enough to tell the grim truth.

Just giving a small amount of time to Brook and Atlas actually is not a bad idea, because he will then be able to repeat this. Wave the book, mention it again in multiple shows. Less likely to work repeatedly if he'd already devoted the whole show to this.

Conclusion: Not preferable type of show for me, who knows a lot of these ideas and who wants to cut to the choice immediately. But very effective for those he wants to bring in, newbies and average people.

Oist "eggheads" don't have a million person audience. They could learn how to bring people along, make them slowly more intellectual, willing to rush out and buy books from Glenn Beck. [And I hope people would not lose this point by talking over and over about the fact he's religious.]

Edited June 19, 2010 by Philip Coates

Glenn Beck with Yaron Brook tonight

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

Create an account

Sign in