14

Excerpt: John Galt's speech

Posted by richrobinson 9 years, 2 months ago to The Gulch: General
60 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

I have been listening to AS and I am up to John Galts speech. I found this part to be particularly prescient.

“This country-the product of reason-could not survive on the morality of sacrifice. It was not built by men who sought self-immolation or by men who sought handouts. It could not stand on the mystic split that divorced man’s soul from his body. It could not live by the mystic doctrine that damned this earth as evil and those who succeeded on earth as depraved. From its start, this country was a threat to the ancient rule of mystics. In the brilliant rocket-explosion of its youth, this country displayed to an incredulous world what greatness was possible to man, what happiness was possible on earth. It was one or the other: America or mystics. The mystics knew it; you didn’t. You let them infect you with the worship of need-and this country became a giant in body with a mooching midget in place of its soul, while its living soul was driven underground to labor and feed you in silence, unnamed, unhonored, negated, its soul and hero: the industrialist.


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by khalling 9 years, 2 months ago
    "while its living soul was driven underground to labor and feed you in silence, unnamed, unhonored, negated..."
    give back, anyone?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • 10
      Posted by Mamaemma 9 years, 2 months ago
      I feel that way more every day. I work hard so I can be hated. Even if that is human nature, and I don't agree it is, that hate should not be sanctioned by society. It should be recognized as the destructive evil that it is.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by $ puzzlelady 9 years, 2 months ago
        Mamaemma, human nature retains much of its evolutionary origins of animal behavior: unthinking pursuit of what survival needs and taking what one wants as one finds it. The notion of respecting others' property or even recognizing such a thing as ownership was a much later evolutionary stage. It made possible a system of communal living, with division of labor and productive achievement, voluntary cooperation, the trading of values for equal and mutual benefit, the recognition of individual rights. To get there we went through every variation of slavery, domination, exploitation, pillage and genocide through all the millennia of human expansion. (It is usually overlooked that America was able to have a "brilliant rocket-explosion" in its youth because it had a virtually virgin continent as a resource to appropriate.)

        What we are seeing today is a long-coming relapse to wanting to have without the commensurate effort to earn it, a primitive motivation of envy. And because humans have developed the brain capacity for abstract reasoning coupled with unreasoning emotions, they have managed to construct thought systems that rationalize demanding that the productive serve the needy. And rather than gratitude, the productive are paid with the insolence of ever-growing demands, envy and accusations of greed. People can easily be led to believing that thus enslaving the more able is justified "for the greater good".

        The evil resides in those who know how envy works and build it into a political philosophy that then enshrines itself into the culture as altruism enforced through socialism. You can see it nakedly exposed in a Bernie Sanders speech to congress that I came across recently: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsDYA...

        There is growing talk of "war", first metaphorically as the war on drugs, the war against women, or against the middle class, or against the rich, or against the poor. But wars become real, and after making illegal wars against any number of foreign nations, we seem to be building towards civil war, what with militarized police and drones and ever-encroaching limits on citizens' rights. And will this civil war be people against people, or people against governmental tyranny? And how can we reverse this snowballing process to restore the enlightened system that built America, without a war, without bloodshed and destruction?

        It always galls me when people speak of "the American experiment", as though it were just some transient thing to be tossed away instead of the breakthrough to the best great hope for a lasting civilization, a foundation upon which this strange product of evolution, the human species, could advance to greatness not yet dreamed of.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 1 month ago
      Just this morning, as I was walking to the office in the dark I was thinking about how I'm planning to phase myself out of engineering. - How it is a field that has died a gradual, steady death. That it really is a profession for somebody who is living in a society that wants to build things, as opposed to a society that willingly strangles itself with taxes and regulations. No...five or six more years at the most. They can keep it. My degree and license will remain on the wall, as will some photos of some of the things I helped create. Like a mini-museum...
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 1 month ago
        What kind of engineering?

        In my first non-fiction book I point out a number of changes in the laws from the late 90s that undercut technology startups. These same laws of course undercut the engineering profession. What is amazing is that so many engineers do not understand that their value is tied to the strength of the patent system for instance. Without strong property rights, engineers cannot work independently or start their own businesses. Manufacturers (including google and similar companies) are the new Luddites.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ Abaco 9 years, 1 month ago
          "new Luddites"...I need to learn of that. Have heard the term but not familiar with its meaning.

          I started in the aircraft industry, mostly manufacturing engineering and (my favorite) aircraft structures analysis. I eventually made the switch to A&E - hvac, plumbing, fire suppression and a little seismic. Salaries for engineers, during my career, have really stagnated and even dropped some. I know some very good engineers who get paid $65K/year. They need to have their heads examined. And, I've had plenty of offers to get to work for nothing. When I left the aerospace business I was seeing designs from major companies you've all heard of where it was clear the company didn't value good engineering. They were hiring people with zero experience to do things like design satellite structures and the designs were terrible sometimes. But, that's ok because those engineers are cheap. I've had some good laughs looking at piping drawings that were outsourced to India. Sharp people, with little experience, working for almost nothing. Knock yourselves out...

          Look at the story of our new Bay Bridge here in the Bay. I love to look at it and at the Golden Gate nearby. The Golden Gate was done with pencils, paper, slide rules and real grit. The new Bay Bridge, recently done, is a mess - crappy welds, etc. We just can't get it done. I'm thinking the engineers on the Golden Gate probably had a house on the hill or a little coastal real estate...

          Sorry for the rant...
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
          • Posted by dbhalling 9 years, 1 month ago
            Luddites went around breaking the new weaving machines that they feared were taking their jobs.

            Large companies today are worried about inventors that they cannot control and their answer has been to weaken patent laws, so all inventors (engineers) have to work for them and not compete with them.
            Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 2 months ago
    When I ran a retail business, not a week went by that someone while trying to get me to lower my prices, told me how rich I was getting. Many of them were under the impression that the mark-up on products were huge and had no concept of overhead such as taxes, rent, maintenance, salaries, plus legal and accounting fees. I often think that most Washington practitioners of politics think the same way as those customers who look only at the gross and never the bottom line.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by ewv 9 years, 2 months ago
      Their lack of understanding of your costs and efforts was only part of it. What difference would it have made if you had higher profits from providing them with value? They resented you for success and expected to you to provide for them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Herb7734 9 years, 2 months ago
        We sold cameras and accessories plus .We couldn't compete with big retailers in price, but we made so little on cameras that we only made profit on accessories. Our mantra was that if you didn't sell an accessory with a camera, you didn't really make a sale.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 2 months ago
    Rand made a number errors, among them was in her various writings she dealt with the United States as if it were one nation from the beginning — as distinct from the thirteen independent nations which formed a compact of states. Even England, when it recognized the independence of the states in the early 1800s did so by recognizing each of the thirteen as independent countries. The concept of independence was chipped away, even by Jefferson after he became president. Prior to 1865 the phrase was “these” United States, indicting the voluntary association.

    DiLorenzo put it: “The use of the words United States in the singular did not become acceptable until after 1865, when the voluntary union of the states was overthrown by a bloody and violent revolution.”
    DiLorenzo, Thomas (2009-01-16). Lincoln Unmasked: What You're Not Supposed to Know About Dishonest Abe (Kindle Locations 903-904). The Crown Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 2 months ago
      If the States were more independent, then they might be able to serve as varied crucibles where different forms of government were experimented with. But I am not sure that would happen - even within the scope of current variability, most states deviate little.

      I am more concerned with the stronger establishment of individual rights than I am in making the US a conglomeration of independent nations.

      Jan
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Posted by Esceptico 9 years, 2 months ago
        The smaller the state, the freer the people. Small nations cannot make big wars.
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
        • Posted by $ jlc 9 years, 2 months ago
          But they can make more deadly wars more frequently. Tribal and city-state societies had more frequent conflicts with higher death rates than current nations do (by orders of magnitude).

          I have no problem with the US States having more independence and differentiation (though I pointed out that they did not seem to want to) but we have not had a war within the US in over a century. This cannot be said of the smaller nations of Europe. We do not need to change our current model in order to solve 'how to keep the States of the US from going to war with each other'.

          Jan
          Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by philosophercat 9 years, 2 months ago
      Not correct because she identified the unifying principles on which the political structure is constructed. Monroe writing nearly 50 years later made it clear that the principle was that of individual sovereignty and the political experiment was how to achieve it. So political forms changed while we dreamed of keeping the principle alive.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
    • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 2 months ago
      Prior to all documents were written The United States of America are. Afterwards The United States of America is. The Federalists having won the war got to write the history and the rest of it. The only real point is that Lincoln was the first to suspend civil rights and the Constitution followed by if memory serves Wilson, Roosevelt and everyone that followed all left wing all socialist all fascist and all still in charge. The only major change recently is establishing the one party system and admitting to being openly socialist. The rest is machs nichts since nothing is being done about it except talk talk talk.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 2 months ago
    "In the brilliant rocket-explosion of its youth, this country displayed to an incredulous world what greatness was possible to man, what happiness was possible on earth."
    This sounds like nationalism, but in this case it's what actually happened.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • 13
      Posted by khalling 9 years, 2 months ago
      the key phrase here is "what greatness was possible to man"

      not society, not to the country, but for the individual
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
      • Comment hidden by post owner or admin, or due to low comment or member score. View Comment
      • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 9 years, 2 months ago
        the focus then is on unleashing the potential as something positive. To make that sort of positive change will require assuming or re-assuming control. The three alternatives are leave, accept, or use ballots as bullets that leads to the fourth step.

        The biggest best weapon available is the military those who are still loyal and reminding of the fact of their oath of office and mention how they are being treated despicably most recently in their paychecks and future retirement checks.

        It doesn't take tanks in the streets. These bozos are very open to a take down without violating a single law. Not even the Secret Service will object. But they won't move without support from the population. Right now they are none to sure about the general population.

        Sorry I'm not about to give the other side the juicy tidbits..
        Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by helmsman5 9 years, 2 months ago
    Me 2, Jan. On point as usual. Nephews and Nieces so clearly conditioned by MSM. We try to set a productive example, but watch as taxes increase every year.. Regards
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by broskjold22 9 years, 2 months ago
    Morality of sacrifice = environmentalism.
    Handouts = solar companies.
    Mystic split = climate change.
    Worship of need = animal rights...
    Mooching = mooching is over because the moocher bought a gun with the $$ we gave.

    Environmentalism is to treat other men as an animal. Taxing him disproportionately to punish incentive, imposing restrictions, quotas, and rationing to control his growth, removing his ability to represent his own ideas. Are these not cruel acts with analogous actions? Kill all the buffalo and no fur or meat will remain. Destroy the bee hives and there is no honey for the toast. Beat the horse and don't be surprised if it kicks your chest. But men are not animals, and liberals cannot shape policies which will affect civilization in such a way as they would predict. Institute economic policies and stocks plummet. Institute racial quotas and racism spreads. Institute climate change policies and we shall see what happens... The liberals see themselves as the master, but they are soon to find out exactly what Malcolm said in Jurassic Park. Life finds a way. Despite the doomsday scenarios, when it comes to capitalism, the cat is out of the bag. When it comes to capital, the liberals will say, don't let the door hit you on the way out. The capitalist, though, just moves from the rental to the property. Countries will compete for capital, or they will crumble when cut off from its life-force. Rational men will not be slaves.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ Olduglycarl 9 years, 2 months ago
    Shakespeare described it as: "To be or not to be", that was the question of his time; a time of choosing; to live sovereign with a conscious mind and identity or to live and die by the brain and a disconnect to everything created.

    It was born in the halls of governance, the antilectual dyslexia of progressiveism or "not to be"
    Not the being of order but the plaque of disorder.

    Thanks to the consequences of creation, we whom chose to be, still thrive and prosper; otherwise, I fear, existence would have disappeared.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo