We have a socialist in the White House now.

We have, and have had a socialist of some variety in the white house for 100 years, with perhaps two exceptions. In both of those cases the socialist camp in congress was strong enough to greatly slow or stop what those two presidents wanted to do.

"The difference between a welfare state and a totalitarian state is a matter of time" - Rand

Perhaps one of the most truthful statements ever uttered. We have a cultural battle to fight to help others around each of us understand it so that the 52% becomes a 0%.

The more reason to start looking for a place to "go Galt" to.

we have been living in a socialist world for many, many years and it has just become more and more obvious to many of you.

I was thinking the other day WHY socialism is so attractive emotionally to people that they gravitate to it, in spite of it obviously NOT working anywhere its been tried. We humans are animals, not unlike the lions and tigers and wildebeasts that roam in Africa. They just hunt, chase, and kill whatever they internally feel they need to in order to survive. Its dog eat dog, survival of the fittest, and all that. Humans have the ABILITY to think and basically make deals with each other, team up, and survive BETTER than if they acted like the beasts in the African plains. I think the desire to avoid the harsh realities of independent survival leads people to socialism and a feeling that if "we all take care of each other" it will be better. But in practical terms, its an attempt to escape the reality of human nature.

Its not obvious, and requires some thought, to come to the conclusion that the only practical way to make life better in groups is to acknowledge and respect some basic rights of each individual. Our founding fathers had it mostly right, but I dont think it was grounded very well. Too much religion and escaping from the specifics of life in England.

Anyway, I am coming to the conclusion that fighting socialism needs to be brought down to the level most people are at- and to show continually how the details of it isnt working anywhere right NOW. We should be making a TV series about Venezuela and how socialism hurt people instead of helping them.

Cool!!

Hu-rah!!!!!!

The guy that sells the Palm Beach Report from Florida that touts the "Invisible Account" that thousands of prominent people have used to "disappear " from view of the government including dozens of presidents, etc, is using the "going Galt" theme. The "Invisible Account" used to be called the 777 Account until it got exposed as a scam.

But he is pulling in people by portraying it as thousands of prominent people "going Galt".

HBO is not a socialist.
He's a fascist.
He lets you think you own something, but the rules he makes controls what you can do with what you "own." Far more insidious than mere socialism.

Silly Marxists. Marx and Engels believed that the transition from feudalism to capitalism to socialism and ultimately communism depended upon the wealth and capital first created by capitalism. The serious fallacy overlooked by them was that the capital would ultimately be used up and everything would collapse. Margaret Thatcher — 'The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.' This is the blind spot of many of today's Democrats. If only enough of us could go Galt and let them suffer the consequences without harming our own well being...

Wow

I love this trend. The only thing I worry about is the progressives asserting that the all Ayn Rand supporters just want to take their superior economic position, leverage the value offered by the US (of course in their minds and words, offered by the sacrifice of the proletariat) and hide out in luxury.

Many of us, including me, would say this is just fine if it is the only way to demonstrate the futility of socialism. However, I am not there yet.

Hopefully, "Going Gulch" can not be used to paint us as simply opportunistic and lazy. If this becomes a real term, we need to make sure it describes hard work, capability, perseverance and Objectivism.

I wonder if anyone has ever considered charting a specific course of correcting social and economic problems through relief from legislation. I mean micro-economics, not macro economics. Such a course would be interesting to consider.

I doubt that a substantial percentage of that 52% even know what socialism (as a political agenda) means. Fumbling around with the word to define it, it might well be first contrasted against individualism. In that light, socialism may well just mean something like friendly, generous, helpful, or part-of-the-team to these people. That kind of mass ignorance is even more frightening to ponder than the idea that they know what it means and actually want it. It's not as though the public schools and the media do a good job of informing them.

Just think of how long it takes the average person to embrace "selfishness" as a virtue when they were not exposed to the idea in childhood. When all context is missing, how can anyone adequately judge the meaning of a word?

I think 52% of registered Democrats is about 15% or so of those eligible to vote. That may not be sufficient reason to Go Galt, but then occupancy of the oval office is probably not the criteria for making that call.

bsmith may provide an analysis of Obama's ration-
alization of his actions, but I think kevinw's is the
one that hits it on the head.