Thanks for the mention of the Lynne Cheney biography of James Madison. I will find it and read it. Lynne Cheney impressed me when I heard her on the radio some years ago. (See here: http://necessaryfacts.blogspot.com/2011/...) As for The Gulch and Rand's intentions, you can find her journals and diaries and margin notes in the books she read via the Ayn Rand Institute. The error to avoid is "Ayn Rand denounced socialism. I denounce socialism. Therefore Ayn Rand advocated something else that I believe in." For one thing, she had no love for the rural country or the people who live there. ("Cracker barrel conservatives" was one of her epithets, invoking the image of men playing checkers at the country store.) She was a big city girl all her life. In her novel, Atlas Shrugged, The Gulch was a consequence of dire emergency, not a permanent community.

As for the persona of John Galt, while it is true that he is drawn as an epic hero, remember that in the Valley at a dinner party, Hugh Akston says that Galt, Ragnar, and Frisco were "normal men." They were not super-heroes, but only everyday people who were not encumbered with bad thinking, wrong assumptions, internal. contradictions. John Galt was a normal man, an example of what anyone could be with good thinking.

The proper spelling is "leech" not "leach". They are two different words. Your spell checker did not catch it.

"The strategy was to let the system collapse quickly so there would still be producers that could rebuild it." You need to read the book carefully. Galt says that he did not know if it would take generations. They were all surprised at how quickly the economy fell apart. You have to face the reality of mixed-premise producers such as Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, and George Soros. And you have to face the absolute fact that those three in particular and the Fortune 1000 in general probably did read _Atlas Shrugged_ and rejected it in toto, even if they accepted some specific details.

One of the first decisions to make is whether to use inclusionary or exclusionary criterion. Is the Gulch a place where 'producers and people of like mind' are included or a place where 'moochers are excluded'. I am in favor of the latter: I like the Gulch as a place where there is a simple list of exclusionary criteria, but other than that all philosophies are welcome. (I do not see eye-to-eye with many of the people in this gulch, but I suspect that you would make good - and interesting - neighbors.)

Jan

The Gulch is a place where persons understand that if there is to be product, (which is what people live on), there must be a free mind.
Most people confuse the product of the mind with the mind behind the product.
The Gulch is a place of safe haven for folks who understand this concept and desire to remove themselves from those who would view the fruit of their labors as "fruit to be plucked from the collective tree" for "the overall good" of society.

In order to be taken seriously as a warning, the leaches would have to have something to fear. At this time, they have nothing. No men of the mind have left. They're corrupt influence and power continues to grow. Republicans spend a lot...Democrats spend even more. Neither is worried about any threat. You have to be able to execute a threat for it to be taken seriously.

The Gulch in AS was a sanctuary, concealed from the rest of the world, password-protected and self-sufficient, with resources at hand, food production, and John Galt's motor supplying all the energy needed. It worked fine for a limited number of population. The valley was spacious enough that Dagny even considered running a train through it. It would tide the most valuable people through long enough, if the outside world went completely to hell. These people were handpicked by Galt as the movers and shakers of the world, without whose talents civilization would break down, and whose values and virtues were congruent with his own. Is it really the case that out of 7 billion people, a mere 70, or even 700, could run everything? Was Atlantis a modern-day Noah's Ark for those whose psycho-epistemology most matched Rand's own? Do we, today, in the real world, have a critical mass?

I believe this would be the gvt's way of combating the brain drain. Thoughts? http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Corporatio...

Unfortunately I think you have misinterpreted the logistics of Ayn's strike concept but you did get its purpose right. Although the plotline centers on the removal of the contributions of the "men of the mind" to society, her strike required the participation of a critical mass of ALL of society's "producers." This included anyone of competence who was enabling the "engine" to continue running. Think Eddie Willers and all of the other train crews abandoning their posts. The underlying concept is not about the 1 per centers throwing a hissy fit, but about the freedom of men (and women) to produce and exchange what they produce without outside influence from the government or anyone else. The socialism that she hated is a system where the government tells you both what and how much you are to produce as well as what and how much you consume. Galt's Gulch was intended as the opposite to this approach.

Galt's Gulch was (or will be) a self-sustaining community. The "machine" provided power and they had an adequate water supply. They grew their own food and traded among themselves.
A Galt's Gulch like community will endure when the dollar collapses or the Grid goes down.
It's a shame that Galt's machine was not thermodynamically possible. My solar collector design, the Bradford collector, will provide all power and water requirements for Off-Grid Communities more economical than electricity and water from public utilities. www.offgridtexan.net

"What if Galt’s Gultch is not a “solution” but a “warning”?"
Yes.

It's mental, not physical. I'm old enough to have followed the Minerva Reef project and the boat that sank in the Hudson. Rand was dismissive of such efforts, sort of as if she were saying, "That's not what I said." She found herself consistently having to answer the question, "Is Atlas shrugging?" and her answer was always no.

politics could be honorable, and once was -- just look at the folks whom you mentioned!!! -- j