Marx or Tocqueville?

Posted by lacedemon 12 years, 3 months ago to Government
4 comments | Share | Best of... | Flag

In Atlas Shrugged, a character flaw of Dagny's, and Hank Rearden, seemed to be their focus on exclusively their business, allowing politicians and legislators to run their course. Dagny often deferred to Jim on such matters, and Rearden's choice of a lobbyist was ill-advised.

Should they be required to govern more than just their companies? Should they be forced to choose: submit to a higher authority, or leave to a secluded gulch?

To me, Tocqueville's Democratic Revolution, which spread the equality of conditions throughout the whole of society, is but a precursor of a totalitarian Marxist regime. The state becomes an enforcing, compulsory community which dictates what it wishes. It becomes a vehicle for collecting popular will, whether through knowing collaborators or unsuspecting masses.

Is the gulch, then, the only means of escape for the enlightened individual? Or must he take a part in the affairs of the state?


Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by Ibuiltmybusiness 12 years, 3 months ago
    For the past 16 years I stayed out of government and was quiet on matters of religion and faith. I felt that my business would suffer if I let my positions be known. I was wrong. I am speaking out, and getting active again. We all must, it is the price of freedom. "If the godly don't vote, it leaves the power in the hands of the ungodly." me
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
  • Posted by jfw06013 12 years, 3 months ago
    Never heard of Tocqueville but I have listen to R. A. Hayek The Road To Serfdom and watched (bought) the PBS mini series Milton Freedman Free To Choose.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo