'THE FOUNTAINHEAD' IS A GREATER PHILOSOPHICAL STAND-ALONE MASTERPIECE, THAN 'ATLAS SHRUGGED'
Posted by HARD_ROAR 6 years, 4 months ago to Philosophy
THIS IS ABOUT 100% INTEGRITY. FOR 'THE FOUNTAINHEAD' IS ABOUT ONE MAN ALWAYS STANDING ALONE AGAINST ALL MEN, VERSUS 'ATLAS SHRUGGED' BEING ABOUT A COLLECTIVE OF ALIKE-THINKING, HIGHLY CAPABLE MEN, BANDING TOGETHER TO SURVIVE, CONSTANT SIEGE OF MOOCHER MEN.
but... AS is further flawed than TF, in many ways.
for example... where are the CHILDREN of AS individuals?
because when you are dealing with only one individual, like in TF, that is one thing,
but when you deal with MANY individuals,like in AS, and NONE of them have children...
how REALISTIC is that? or is AS just an allegory, like ANTHEM, except 10 times longer?
this is what most of her critics cling to, her characters were all one dimensional, with little if no basis in reality. well, children are real, right? and that is just one argument, re logical flaws in atlas.
but what else more do i need as evidence, than the 3 sequential films made of atlas,each one a much worse mickey mouse stinker, than the prior? and it's not just about the cheap rotten actors or the rotten directing. IT'S JUST NOT BASED ON REALITY.
so yes, what she wrote was GREAT philosophically, but NOT real, like she wanted. hence, her heroes fly about in space, meanwhile, the moochers keep gaining ground on Earth, as each decade passes.
you want to talk about great novels, based on reality? so let's talk about '1984,' probably the greatest novel ever written, about true existence on Earth.
First Ayn Rand was 12 when this thing called the Russian Revolution happened. She experienced the whole communist wave until some 8 years later when she came to the US.
The Fountainhead was absolutely her finest work. This was a labor of love based on her life experiences. Her hero may have been a man but it was really all about her. Her individual struggle, the obstacles in her way but staying true to a driving desire, to be free. Here is a biography that I think shows the parallels: http://aynrandlexicon.com/about-ayn-r....
But Atlas Shrugged took 12 years to write until release in 1957 which means she started in 1945, the end of WWII. And oh boy where things going on. She had already experienced the "New Deal". In my opinion she wrote that book out of fear. She saw the hand writing on the wall and wanted all to see. She had already been through that experience and knew the ending.She had already vented about the Rockefeller's, the Vanderbilt's, the Morgan's in The Fountainhead.
But she saw an even worse dilemma with the marriage of the government and the corporation coupled with the rise of the bureaucrats. That was what all those long winded value speeches were all about.
Hank Reardon was the atypical businessman of the period especially when saddled with a family like that, no love there. So his only love was "his" business. Blind to all but his surrogate child, that is why he was the last to leave. Hank was a man conflicted, he did not understand what was going on around him even when someone kept pointing to the path.
But Ayn Rand already knew the ending before she knew she would write the book, she had been there.
That in no way compares to "1984". In 1948 when the book was written, television was in it's infancy and was only on the air a few hours a day but not on weekends. High tech communications consisted of a rotary dial phone most likely on a party line.
This book could almost be used as a history book of our times. How could Wells have conjured up some of those details so accurately?
While The Fountainhead would be my favorite from Rand, 1985 is in it's own world. I'm not saying it's the best just there is nothing else like it.
A cannot equal B at the same time in the same context. History ignored is history repeated. Time periods are very important as an action in a vacuum has no definition. It is the atmosphere that defines the action giving it meaning.
It really is immaterial if she wrote the novel forwards, backwards or sideways. I'm talking about context, her motivation for writing the novel. If one studies her actual life and has any knowledge of what was occurring in her world at that time, her motivation becomes very clear.
How can there be doubt that The Fountainhead represented her life in Russia. If you examine the characters in Atlas Shrugged, this was influenced very heavily by her American experience.
Your argument also tends to ignore what effect the 1930s had on her psyche, socialism and communism all over the place also instills she was writing from fear, that's why all her heroes need to disappear where it's safe.
She had a philosophy degree from Russia and novels was one of the ways she spread her philosophy. In the world of philosophy she was very strong in the metaphysical and the epistemological branches but had conflicts in the ethics branch that so much stands out in her novels, both of them. Seems to be a standard trait of philosophers. If in doubt, read John Locke.
Yes long winded. She could have made those same arguments in half the time and actually increased the clarity. 12 years, 100 pages a year and one needs to wonder, how many times did she keep writing each one of those, just couldn't stop writing. Your argument treats her like a robot but this woman was real. She like everybody else had her little idiosyncrasies but that is what made her real.
I'm not sure at whether I should thank you or freak out but I will choose to thank you.
Now on the debate side of things, your opinion states I have flaws but none that you have been able to address. Repeating things over and over again does not make the untruth truth. You need to provide sources that show how your opinion was formed which you have not done.
In my argument I have shown you sources and offered an analysis of how it applies to my opinion. To just throw a source out there is a logical fallacy deemed "Appeal to Authority". Sort of like trying to use Einstein in an argument on politics which was not his field of expertise. Einstein's authority was based on Physics not politics.
I would also suggest you use introspection in respect to your quote from Ayn Rand. Some of your epistemological premises are in error. There can be no conflicts.
since you want to keep seeing atlas shrugged as divinity, not to be doubted.
however, i will tell you this, i understand atlas shrugged much better than you,
and it is not perfect. yes, a great attempt at perfection, but not even close.
nothing else to be said, that i have not already said before, on this thread.
i've read atlas shrugged twice, when i was much much younger, and loved it both times. so do not mistake me there. yet in the 2nd reading, i began to see the flaws in it. it is still great, but flawed. for starters, beside the absurd oversight of no major hero in the story having any children, there is the huge flaw of it being way too long, for this 1,100 page, tiny print novel could have 2 or 3 hundred pages trimmed out of it, and benefit mightily from a quality editing.
and i won't discuss '1984', since you obviously do not understand it. for it deals with true reality, while atlas deals with the romanticized vision of rand, of twisting reality so her heroes can win by doing something fantastical, like 'disappearing' into an unseen gulch.
so tell me, which of you has 'disappeared' lately? because pretty soon, if things get bad enough, even the national exit doors may get locked up, so you achievers and providers, can serve the socialist nanny state, forever.
look. take atlas shrugged for what it solely is. a complex, romanticized, intellectual concept, from a sage, a wise writer, having a great time for 13 years, writing it.. but realistic? you answer that for yourself.
for first and foremost, that da vinci you cite, was a lifetime pedophile, so who cares what he made. wonder why a supposed super dude like da vinci, not one movie has ever been made of his life? well, simple. you'd have to start his story with all the little boy 'assistants' that lived with him throughout his entire life, and he lived to an old age.
and i only bring this up, since you cited him, it sort of shows you don't look under the surface of things, because that citation indicates your level of naivete, in believing in the 'great men" you were taught about in school, and still cite.
also, in wholeheartedly believing that the world is changing today, into a randian atlas way; when what is truly occurring, is the direct opposite of that. and dude, you have zero idea, on just how directly opposite that is. but just wait until they close your bank, atm, etc. then you'll see just how asleep you have been, to true modern-day reality,1984-style.
atlas shrugged is a happy, dreamy cartoon (compared to 1984), made for naive, highly idealistic people like yourself. but... could i be wrong? could a galt gulch really exist conceptually inside the u.s. (as you suggest), and save selected people like you? imo, no chance. for as long as you make statements like the one below, you have no idea of what's really going on:
tuner38: ""disappearing" that isn't necessary at present. There is still a degree of freedom..."
huh? degree of freedom?? damn. are you surely naive, friend.
because your freedom is tightly being further strangulated every year. slowly, yet surely.
listen, i am just trying to wake you up from your way overly-optimistic pipedream that you cite above, so when the direct opposite of what you believe occurs, you don't die of shock..
i have never tried to intimidate you.
i tried to warn you, since you appeared naive to me.
i think you are a very good man, and possibly better than me.
and maybe i was you, twenty years ago. maybe i was that innocent.
so maybe when i tried to warn you, i was warning the naive person i used to be.
so again, my strong apologies. hence do whatever you like, since you are a free man.
(btw, an ad hominem attack is a PERSONAL, DIRECT attack upon a person, and not upon his ideas. so it is not a 'logical fallacy', but it is a PURPOSEFUL ATTACK upon a man, so that NOTHING he thinks/feels henceforth, is of any value or worth)..
and i assure you, i did NOT do that to you.
I also have a copy of The Fountainhead in the early 80s which has stood up to time much better because it is not so large.
I cannot say one is better or worse than the other, They both have their unique approach to the saga of Objectivism.
I have just recently obtained the trilogy of Atlas Shrugged but was sorely disappointed with the part III, "Who is John Galt?" What should have been the climax was poorly done and anticlimactic.
I read "1984" for the first time a couple of years ago borrowed from a friend and as a result had to own a copy.
As to reality, Rand's stories are based on reality as she lived through the Russian Revolution of 1917 when she was 12. At that young age she got to face the horrors of the Bolsheviks. Imagine her horror when she escapes Russia and arrives in the US to discover to her horror this nation was headed in the same direction. Her novels and other works are a rendition of that experience.
"1984" that book was scary, In 1948 TV was just beginning. I remember our first TV which was a little round screen in black and white. The book should have been fiction, but it wasn't, was it?
However, I treasure all three as a window on history that has now manifested. If I had to choose which one was a more realistic about today's world, I would have to choose "1984".
You throw an argument out there based solely on an opinion where you are trying to compare a contrast. Atlas Shrugged is based on what was trending with a fairy tail ending. 1984 was a fairy tail then is manifesting into reality.
I had respect for Hank Reardon when he stood before his oppressors and dishonored their authority. I lost that respect when he didn't turn and leave after that pronouncement. He denied them jurisdiction and then stood for their seizure of same.
Ludwig was prone to unreasonable logic. All economists are. Economist try and instill their art as science while generally ignoring that little detail their science is based in forensics not projection. Anything conclusions not based on what is has as much validity as using the dartboard method. Both contain about as much validity on what has yet to manifest.
Now I am an avid follower of Mises Institute and look forward to lectures by the likes of Napolitano and DiLorenzo and to a lesser degree Woods. Now while many there worship at the feet of Rothbard, I think he is about as fruity as Socrates, Plato, Locke, Kant and Molyneux. My favorite is DiLorenzo even though he is an economics professor in one of the top tyrannical states in the union.
i already explained elsewhere on this thread, in great detail, what i mean by that. it is the way the ending is handled with galt. it is totally unbelievable. now you adress that, specifically, or there is nothing else to discuss, since you appear to me to be totally brainwashed by atlas shrugged.
but ok, friend tuner38, you win. so do stick to your child-like, atlas idealism.
but when reality smacks you in the face, real soon, don't say you weren't warned.
p.s. who cares about mysticism or altruism, when you are tortured, solely for power's sake.
power. that is all. nothing else.
and all else, is just show, for the weak.
finally. an honest man.
so now i will give you a scarier lesson.
'1984' is more realistic about ANY human world, not just today's.
'1984' is about how the world has ALWAYS been run---past, present, future.
and that is the horror if it.
for all else is 'velvet glove' illusion.
and that is why i consider it the greatest novel ever written.
I am under the impression that I still have not read the greatest novel ever written but it's out there somewhere waiting to be discovered but I doubt I will ever get to it. My proclivity at this point in life leans more toward non-fiction especially the common law.
I'm at a point where it takes more and more work to maintain short term memory. That is why I love the art of the argument as it keeps the mind in shape. The mind needs exercise just as much as the physical body.
I look forward to engagement as I love your style.
a fairy tale you love and read repeatedly.
but that is all it is. for room 101 is still there.
Well got to run for now, got to go secure the chickens form all those things that go bump in the night.
for true christians, the bible is it. the end all be all book for their belief, faith, trust and love.
and their greatest hero is jesus, whom they'll follow to the end, even to be eaten in the lions' den.
but for serious, diehard randians---like one seldom finds anywhere else, except on specific websites like this one we are on---for some of us, like myself:
the randian bible is the fountainhead.
period.
and atlas shrugged,
a great (but flawed) attempt at expanding the fountainead's pure individualistic concept, into a group of alike independent creative men, that abandon the collective world, to live out their lives in a private, idealistic, laissez-faire world. and all this made possible, solely from the brilliance of one young man, john galt (imo, rand's inspiration for galt was tesla, who came close to creating truly amazing inventions in the energy field).
without galt, there is no strike of the men of the mind and also no hidden gulch. he is it. the jesus figure of this fantastical, brilliant story, which is filled with more crystally-clear, rock-solid philosophy than you can shake a stick at.
the jesus-figure mentality of galt is further strengthened by his last scene, when he is strapped down waiting to be electrocuted. yet his clumsy -wannabe-torturers, are so incompetent, they can't get the machinery to work. and instead of just looking at them and smiling at their lack of ability, galt proceeds to tell them how to solve the electrical problem, so then they can fry him!! i mean, hahaha, who the hell finds this realistic?? and even more unrealistic, is that then they don't fry the fool before leaving, they just simply run away!
bottomline, i found the ending of atlas quite muddled and unbelievable. it felt to me like rand was tired of writing, and just wanted to finish the damn thing. maybe she had a publishing deadline, who knows.
for roark would never have been dumb enough to do what galt did at the end, of helping his torturers kill him. so i reiterate, this makes galt fall more in the category of jesus, and not of roark. and this was another flaw i found, that rand's core self-loving philosophy is abandoned at the end, due to a sacrificial jesus-like attitude being embraced by galt.
and this is one more of many other reasons why, that once again, i consider the fountaihhead rand's most pure individualistic masterpiece---over the highly ambitious, yet quite flawed, the great atlas shrugged, a masterful companion-piece to the fountainhead.
https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/faq#...
and which part of addressing my specific comments, you didn't understand?
you want to kick me out, then kick me out.
but first why don't you read some of my other posts, except with this guy with blinders on, tuner38. for i have even apologized to him, yet he still keeps giving me the same sig heil tripe, yet with no detailed backup, refuting what i specifically wrote re atlas shrugged.
and it pisses me off you erased 25 points right now, from my profile, just for not being an atlas shrugged hitler youth.
so go ahead and kick me out, for i will write whatever i see fit to write, as long as i am stating my truth.
and for your information, the greatest influence in my life, bar none, is alissa rosenbaum. and neither you nor anyone, will ever change that.
so go ahead and run this place like a kraut camp, if you want.
If you'll review the Code of Conduct, you'll see that it does not say "everyone in Galt's Gulch must agree with Gulcher turner38 because that guy is awesome."
What it does say is: "Please do not cast obscenities or be rude." and "Please do not wage personal attacks or chastise other Gulch members. Ad hominem and/or "flaming" is not permitted."
Code of Conduct: https://www.galtsgulchonline.com/faq#...
I used it when I came to this site but got big time lazy and stepped over the bounds. I rightly got my wrist slapped and agreed to correct the error of my ways, albiet:
"It is always bad form to use the fallacy of argumentum ad hominem. But there are some cases when it is not really a fallacy, such as when one needs to evaluate the truth of factual statements (as opposed to lines of argument or statements of value) made by interested parties. If someone has an incentive to lie about something, then it would be naive to accept his statements about that subject without question. It is also possible to restate many ad hominem arguments so as to redirect them toward ideas rather than people, such as by replacing "My opponents are fascists" with "My opponents' arguments are fascist."
And I have enjoyed my debates with Turner38. His arguments may have flaws but he debates them in earnest.
which contain a moral philosophy and the new which supposedly about a man declared to be the son of god. What I like about the new is that it declares invalid many parts of the old, perhaps why the Jewish religion doesn't honor the new testament but ironically the Muslims do.
I like the bible for it philosophy but do not believe it was ever meant to be practiced as a religion. Jesus said to spread the word not enslave the people.
Now if one where to look at the philosophy of Rand for the metaphysical and epistemological, then the bible completes the trilogy for the ethical so long as you can separate out the parts about aggression.
Now on a side note, I much prefer George Carlin's rendition of the ten commandments over Deuteronomy.
In my opinion The Fountainhead is where Rand set the stage for her philosophy and Atlas Shrugged was the alarm bells for what was going on in the world at the time. With 12 years in the writing and a 1957 publish date then we would be talking the late 40s, right after WWII when no one was paying attention, all was well with the world.
As to Galt, I would do what he did. Long ago in a war far away I heard the sonic pop of a round just off my left ear. There is were I realized that if fate had deemed it so, I die, if not, I don't. It was then that I accepted that death was inevitable and not something I control. I lost my fear of dying.
and don't forget the poignant, tragic: 'we the living'
Atlas Shrugged, on the other had was interesting and DID relate in so many ways to what is going on in the real world, and presented a solution to i- basically withdrawing support for the statistism, and letting it fall of its own weight.
Constantly fighting what the statists do just is tiring and its time to admit that it has to fail before it can be replaced.
well, it is possible if i was not an architect, as i am, maybe i would not find it as interesting as i do.
but it goes beyond architecture. because i consider the psychological passages on the make up of the INDIVIDUAL human soul, to be much deeper internal analysis, than what occurs in atlas, which concerns itself more with the actions and feelings of GROUPS of humans, rather than individuals.
fountainhead is a brilliant study of 4 individual psychological types. atlas is much more comprehensive and complex, however, it's main focus in not on individuals, it is on GROUPS.
and i am always much more interested in individuals than on any group.
hence, my preference of T.F. over A.S.
I probably used the wrong word when I said “boring”. I like to lose myself into a good book or movie I lost three days of my life when I was in college, being immersed in the story AR created in atlas shrugged. Fountainhead was interesting but wasn’t the same experience
dagny is fascinating, to observe her 24/7 'no quit' tenacity. yet, she learned this from her father, (already dead in this story), who is probably a much more interesting person than her. i mean, i recall story of him she related, that when they denied him loans and tried to shut down his new railroad, he then, not to lose his mind before the next-day payment deadline, he went out all night and drove spikes into his rail tracks, thinking all along. then at sun-up, he showered, suited up, and armed with new ideas, he hit more banks, until he got his loans. and that 'no quit' vision of his, has always motivated me, at worst moments.
the character i identify most in atlas shrugged is francisco d'anconia. and my favorite speech in the entire novel is, his speech about the nature of money, and what it reveals about you, on how you think about it. speech occurs at reardon's party, where many very important story-telling things occur (so kudos, ms. rand).
yet, as interesting as francisco's character is, his original south american ancestor was even more interesting than him; just like with dagny's father, as they both already had mythical stature within their powerful families, even before dagny's and francisco's stories start.
I used to be into inventing and bringing things to market The collectivist culture has made me less interested in the bringing to market part. I still love inventing but only for the joy of creating. I have little interest in helping support the statist system we live under
Maybe trump can slow down the march of socialism, although it is a war out there even for that. I do feel the drums beating for a civil war in the USA.
The drums of war are a beating. It is time for the blood of tyrants and patriots to stain the land in the infamous words of Thomas Jefferson.
Throughout time the lifespan of a republic is between 240 and 250 years, so the inevitable is upon us. I am just hoping I can live to experience what the signers of the Declaration of Independence experienced even though I will be among the founders that did not make it to see the freedom they so desired but I will exit this experience with a smile on my face.
To say that something to do with nations happens in a day is absurd.
The fall of a republic takes on a destiny of 240 to 250 years through gradual decay.
Ancient Greece's failure was well documented in his work "Republic"
"Just as the tragedies of Aeschylus, Sophocles, and Euripides often dramatized the fall of a great house (that of Atreus or Oedipus or Theseus), so Plato’s non-dramatic prose tragedy illustrates the natural cycle of political decay from aristocracy to timocracy to oligarchy to democracy to tyranny in terms of a five-generation royal family. In Plato’s telling, an aristocratic father is followed by a timocratic son, who is himself succeeded in turn by an oligarch, a democrat, and a tyrant." - http://www.theimaginativeconservative...
The USA will not cease to exist, it will just be returned to the rightful owners like in 1776.
However, this country is inexorably tied to the rest of the world. This means the trigger for collapse could be triggered by both internal as well as external actions.
Just on the internal side we have many impetuses to failure; housing bubble, the automotive bubble, the stock bubble, the financial bubble, and of course the currency bubble not to forget the civil unrest. And that is just to mention a few.
Now add that to all the other nations that are in the same boat and it just a matter of what goes first as all else will be tumbling down behind it. Externally Germany seems to be leading the pack as the trigger.
The implications are staggering. It's all one big group of dominoes in a circle, trigger one and all the rest fall with it.
I am surprised they have been able to delay everything this long. It has all been smoke and mirrors and the fire has gone out.
1) any action is on the table with proper legislative and executive authorities
2) there is a lot of wealth to be expropriated in the USA to pay for the mistakes of the past
3) most of the liquid wealth in easily controlled by banking, which is under the control of the collectivists- limitations on trades, account withdrawals. ( check out cypress)
4) prices and wages have been controlled before, as well as goods rationed to prevent hoarding
5) ability if foreign countries to get value for the dollars they hold has been controlled before ( 1971 abandonment of the gold standard with Nixon
6) we have had annual inflation up to about 17% about 40 yrs ago, meaning they can print a lot more money to solve issues
7) our problems today are national debt and money printing problems which we have had during ww2 and Vietnam war. Inflation has paid off those debts already thru depreciation of the $$ by 90+%
8) China traded a lot of worthless paper for a bunch of goods that brought their country out of the third world. They want to overtake USA as the economic power and they will with their billions of people
9) the day they are willing to devalue all that paper money by upvaluinh their Juan, we will know they are strong enough to float free of us. Chinese prices will rise, our imports will drop, and our prices will skyrocket.
10). The Chinese might try and spend that money in the USA, but will be met with investment restrictions. They could try diversifying their holdings of US dollars thru other currencies if others are stupid enough to. It the dollars from them
11) USA has hidden its problems by trading our independence for the lure of unrealistically cheap Chinese stuff. THAT chicken will come home to roost
To say there is a collectivist mentality would be to ignore the fact that at best collectivism is a form but in my opinion is but a part of a single form that is circular in nature.
Collectivism however does have two different and opposing subforms. These subforms are defined by whom will be the controllers and beneficiaries, the fascist or the communist.
Be it as it may as to the subforms, they are not looking for delay, they are looking for completion. The delay is because factors are stacking up against them. Another Odumbo failure as he was supposed to bring alignment but instead brought a vast awakening.
The delay is their trying to keep this thing from falling off the cliff before realignment cna be reestablished. King Donald is also playing a big part in this but I not going to go there in this post.
In my opinion man has two ears and two eyes but only one mouth for a reason. He was to meant to spend time observing and listening before engaging. To this point I have spent considerable time doing just that to arrive at engagement, but there is not enough time to know all so I am always open to debate. So let me address your points:
1) What of the judicial? They have over time usurped the whole process by legislating from the bench, refusing to hear arguments detrimental to their position, and consistently side with the government against the people. One side of congress is replaced (including reconfirmed) every two years, the president every four years (but no more than twice), the other side of congress every six years. But the judicial are appointed, for life. While this is not the absolute depravity of their usurpation, it is definitely representative of it: Nat. Fedn. of Indep. Business v. Sebelius better know as the Obamacare decision.
2) such a huge category in such a small statement is hard to address. What wealth was expropriated to pay for mistakes?
3) The banks are the collectivist. What they have has nothing to do with wealth, it's all about control, power. Real wealth is based on property, hard assets. Currency is not hard assets. In both common and statute law there is a cause of action called conversion wherein somebody has converted your property to their use without your permission. Currency can not be converted. But what you are describing is a misunderstanding of banking. Deposits are loans to the banks. Safe deposit boxes are deposits. When someone makes a deposit, a bank must carry that as a liability, not an asset.
4) Many things have been done before but the question is why? Definitely has nothing to do with freedom but it's all about control.
5) Ah, Bretton Woods were the bankers found a way to get their hands on all that gold sitting in Kentucky for only $35 an ounce. In 1944 the price of gold was $36.25 and in 1971 was $44.60. When Johnson realized there was not enough gold to continue and closed that window, gold rose to $63.84 in 1972 and 106.48 in 1973, never to see those prices again. As a side note, it was stolen from the people in 1933 at $20.67 per troy ounce. In 1934 after the theft gold was set at $35 and ounce.
6) Inflation is a hidden tax demonstrating that currency really has no value. The purchasing power of a 1913 dollar would be $0.04 today. That is why savings are never a good idea over the long term.
7) National debt, the likes of which without it there would be no currency other than coins and modern coins have no real value, that was stripped out since 1965. Our economy is based on reserve banking where money only comes into existence when borrowed at interest.
8) China is but the current end of a long line used to destroy nations and make the bankers rich, Before them it was India and there was Mexico, Taiwan, Japan and a host of others. China has used their bounty to trade for hard assets, real estate. In addition to other places, they own a huge chunk of New York city.
9) Yuan. China has nothing at all to do with that. China is now buying oil for yuan that is convertible to gold on demand. This is a direct attack on the US as the dollars value is oil. A country buys dollars then they can buy oil. The Saudis (original contract for petro dollars) then invested those dollars in the US and the US would bomb anybody that upset the camel jockies. Or they could just buy weapons of mass destruction and terrorize all their neighbors except Israel as Israel was out of bounds.
10) Are you serious? China has not been sitting idly by. They have been spreading that wealth all around and have almost purchased all the resources in Africa using those worthless dollars. They own a substantial part of the real estate on the west coast and elsewhere. They now own quite a number of the building in New York and other major cities. They have converted 100s of billions of not trillions of worthless pieces of paper into hard assets. They almost own all of Hollywood.
11) China only provides the labor. It is our along with our "partners" that have built the factories in China. The US factories are trash with old technology because these American business have bought modern capital equipment for use in China. The Chinese being the thugs they are own 51% of all these factories. The worse part is they now are co-owners of all this technology without spending a dime.
To use your analogy, the chicken may come home but there is no roost, all that has been moved elsewhere.
I agree the collectivists want complete control NOW, not later. Nobsma gave them control over medical care, but it crashed on takeoff
I agree Obama caused the first battle of the American civil war #2- peacefully thru election. The left was blindsided and are in a rage still , trying to U.N. elect trump. They will pull out all the stops to unseat him or at least distract him from doing anything
2). In this economy much wealth is stored in us follar denominated financial instruments which are essentially worthless. We work and get paid in paper and save that in banks. Real estate and other things are hard assets, but most people are a payment away from losing them to the lender banks
People who have put their wages into 401k will discover that wealth is gone when they try to use it.
Best thing to do is buy physical gold and silver coins and be quiet about it
I read that China has trillions of US dollars in treasuries. I wasn’t aware they bought up so much real estate
They are smart cookies and should trade $$ for something tangible before we shut the door on trading in treasuries.
China is not our friend, and their teeth are bared - we should not hide in the sand any more. Tariffs would have to be over 100% to have a measurable effect. I can tell u that our small company is switching from China to Taiwan to escape the coming tariffs- as fast as we can. Chins may already be big enough to live off its domestic market
It’s going to be increasingly more difficult to keep our financial system afloat- that’s for sure. I think they can print more money yet before that won’t work anymore
In Venezuela they have reached the end with Maduro. No more stretching the rubber band. Madura will be killed snd capitalism will be allowed to give a boost to the economy while the socialists prepare the next downfall
Just to address a few small points as I'm not going to spend the vast amount of time it would take to fully respond as I have already done so previously.
You are wrong about Odumbocare, it had nothing to do with socialism, it's all about fascism. The insurance companies now own the lives of those presupposed to medical treatment and that has absolutely nothing to do with health. It's all about being able to extract as much from you as possible before medicine kills you. The average cancer patient is worth $50,000 a year and their goal is to string that out for five years for a nice sum of $250,000. There are now more providers involved in cancer treatment than there are patients.
The dichotomy of this is cancer is nothing more than an immune system deficiency. All that is required to cure cancer is a drastic change in diet to all organic live raw vegetables especially leafy green ones. Check out Charlotte Gerson which has a clinic in Tijuana Mexico because you're not allowed to cure people in the US.
According to a growing consenus, 80% of the worlds population are but sheeple waiting for the next set of instructions. They don't really buy houses, they have no understanding of property. Real estate is not property. The meat of the argument is in the details. Property and real estate are at odds.
The Chinese are our friends. They may speak a different language, have different cultures and values but they other than that they are no different than us. They have the same desires and dreams we do. You are confusing government with people, could be a fatal error. I have also found the Iranian people to be remarkable people and their food is absolutely delicious and much healthier than the American crap we eat.
And in closing Manduro is not the problem, he is but the symptom. Should he be assassinated, a new talking head will rise in his stead like he did with ole Hugo before him. As to the 80-20 rule, it does not apply to Venezuela as the 20 part has either died or escaped.
deutsche bank right now has so many financial problems, there are already worldwide 'rescues' being applied to keep it afloat. why? because deutsche bank is HUGE. it is the 15TH LARGEST bank in the world. and if it fails... look out below, world. for the depressionary pit down is endless.
(did you know that deutsche bank was already rescued once before by the fed, in 2008? to the tune of 1.5 trillion dollars, i think. money created out of thin air, of course... and on the future back of your children, and your children's children..)
so i don't think it will fail. at least not alone. for the multiple 'rescues' must fail first, one by one.
personally, i've always felt a greek exit from the euro will be the trigger point. and if they smell that germans could fail first... they'll want to beat them to the punch, cancel all euro debt immediately, and return to the drachma. of course, this tiny action by a tiny country would collapse the euro overnight. and all it's nations with it, since not even switzerland will be immune to this, as all nations are loaded with debt due to decades of socialistic policiies.
While China will be severely hampered because of their ignorant actions Russia because we keep applying sanctions has learned to be somewhat self sufficient.
Are you aware that the Chinese now own a huge portion of the US. Bought it all with those worthless pieces of fiat currency that have been collecting. They are no fools, turned all that worthless trash into real assets, property.
Greece can't do anything. If they left the EU they would be another Venezuela within 6 months.
The Euro is destined to fail anyway. Most of Europe is now in the process of reinstigating their currencies with of course Britain leading the way pretending to Brexit.
The world is bankrupt so just who is going to rescue whom?
and are you aware that the chinese have spread their banking empire all over the world, making many nations and powerful citizens their own personal debtors?
and are you aware that the chinese have built the greatest underground atomic bomb-shelter ever, a circular ring of many hundreds of miles?
Russia has always had the resources and much more. There problem has been communism since 1917. Now they are a nation with more freedoms than us by a long short that is unless you are a sexual deviate in any manner.
China not so much so, still that communist problem. So long as everyone toes the line and brings money into China all is good. But they are not so rich in resources because most of the country is a desert, a cold desert. I climbed the wall one November so I can testify just how cold (there on a business trip manning a booth at a computer trade show in the early 90s. Anyhow, that is immaterial as they have secured supplies all over Asia and Africa. While our business has been war, their business has been business and they have been busier than we have. We bombed everything, they bought everything,
I was in Vietnam and heard of the tunnels. I saw a documentary on those tunnels after the war so I have no doubts whatsoever..
China and Russia will stand while the rest of the world crumbles around them. That is why the militia and guns are so important. The world has always said not to invade this country because there is a gun behind every rock. Afghanistan and Vietnam proved many times over the effectiveness of guerilla warfare over conventional armies.
I can't buy the part about the Chinese and banks. They have always been funny about their currency. But I do know they have used their huge store of the trash currency from us to buy America, not junk but land and buildings. Why do you think housing in California is so expensive? The Chinese ran it up.
.
wow. finally something you don't know, since you appear to know everything.
china has been travelling to many countries, mainly latin americal countries, and giving out easy-terms large loans, and / or setting up chinese bank branches, under-cutting all locals in every respect, sometimes even giving out free money, to draw middle class money into their banks.
hey, they learned from the americans, what can i say.
so there is more kindle for your world bonfire scenario.
like it needed any more, right?
While in the US business is war, China's business is business. But to further break your bubble, did you know that China has a Rothschild central bank. There are only three countries that don't, North Korea, Cuba and Iran and that is quickly heading to one.
But to throw you a bone I don't do quantum physics nor do I desire to.
But to perhaps take it back, did you know that the US financed Mao for the communist takeover of China?
You can't compare overall "philosophical stand-alone masterpiece" against the traits of a single character. In addition, think of AS as representing many individualists, not a collective, and where at least 1 is a more complete Obj. character than Roark.
"YOU CAN'T COMPARE," YOU FURTHER SUPPRESS?
I CAN DO WHATEVER THE FUH I WANT.
that said, H.R. is at least 10 times more self-centered, self-sufficient and self-motivated than J.G., a young man who spends nearly an entire 1000 page, tiny print novel, running around all over, looking for more and more daddy figures to admire him.
the greatest representational line (what the book is all about) in T.F. occurs when toohey approaches roark at night, alone, on the sidewalk of a large construction site, and toohey tells roark (i'm paraphrasing here) that was a project he should have had, but he took it away from him. then he adds that he has also done this before, many times, taken many projects away from him, turning him into a pariah architect. then toohey asks roark: and i am going to keep doing it to you. so now that you know all this, tell me, what do you think about me? there is nobody around, no one will hear you except me. so, what do you think of me? and roark flatly tells him, in a calm voice:
"BUT I DON'T THINK YOU."
then he walks away.
now that, is true individualism.
and i'll go further:
compared to HOWARD ROARK's independent integrity, JOHN GALT comes across as the collective social worker for the creatively rich and powerful.
i love atlas shrugged.
love it.
it is a great masterpiece.
however, for me, personally,
me,
the human i care most in this world,
the fountainhead
is the greater masterpiece of the two,
simply because
i prefer totally individualist stories
of one man
against the entire world,
rather than,
a group of alike-thinking men,
against the whole world.
my preference.
i prefer the excellent individualistic psychological analysis
of the fountainhead,
than i do about the mentality of how groups of men
(whether individuals, moochers, or in-between),
act, feel, think, or interact with each other,
or their enemies.
now you tell me, how i don't understand rand, from my direct comments above.
so check your premises, boy, before you address me.
have seen the 1949 film many times. i own it.
ayn rand wanted gary cooper and she got him, even though cooper was really too old for the part, and had trouble understanding some of the philosophical concepts.
gary cooper was oscar-nominated for best actor FIVE times.
and he won best actor TWO times.
he was also the LEADING actor in over EIGHTY movies.
and ayn rand wanted no one else, to play roark, than gary cooper.
so old herb, go back to deeper tokes of your medicinal marijuana.
It seems like he was pushed as a star and everyone bought it. He is as interesting and charismatic as a grain of sand on the beach.
the fact that cooper was given so many hero roles, was simply because he made them so effortlessly and honestly believable, that everyone bought them. however, if you look at two roles that cooper was turned into a coward (they came to cordura, 1959), and another into a villain, his only villain role i know of (bright leaf, 1950), you will see that he was again fully believable, as villain and/or coward.
and how about 'high noon', considered one of the greatest american films of all time? and same goes for hemingways's profound 'for whom the bells toll.' and how about his comedic ability, in the great capra film, 'mr. deeds goes to town?'
so guys, when you try to knock down great achievers with idiotic words, it only makes you look like losers.
and a final word about cruise: though i detest him as an actor, have to wholeheartedly admit, that he was great, in 'born on the 4th of july.' have seen that movie many times. cruise was nominated for an oscar, and possibly deserved it.
but then again, i am a great fan of nearly all of oliver stone's work. first rate work, almost always. loved 'jfk,' for example.
+1
yours is the best challenge i have read so far.
however... i keep looking at everything on an individual basis. stand-alone individual basis.
yet... you are saying galt was wiser than roark,
that he saw the bigger picture better than him,
and that galt wanted to change the whole world,
while roark only cared to do his work, his way.
ok. i'll buy that. nevertheless... you are playing
this argument with hindsight, of 1957 vs. 1943,
time of first publishing, creating both characters.
have to stop now, have other business to attend.
will come back to this, for you are on right track.
it is about brain-washing, the next generations.
so they won't argue. so those like us, don't exist.
but what is ASTONISHING about T. F. is that it got PUBLISHED in 1943, at a time when F. D. R.'s ever-growing depression-socialism and world war efforts eschewed and ostracized any american that solely wanted to stand alone for ANY cause, least of all for a "petty" one, like the "integrity" of architecture.
as far as i've read, rand had several dozen rejection letters, until she finally found a young editor that loved it, and staked his career on it. and then the word of mouth on it, caught on like wildfire, and i believe T. F. soon became one of the bestsellers of 1943.
something else you said struck me, "to make the world a better place." i disagree with you there, for roark NEVER did ANYTHING with the purpose of "making the world a better place." he did all he did SOLELY to stand up for ALL he believed in, WHATEVER it was. and the fact that in the story, he COLLATERALLY ends up expanding the legal rights for ALL individuals, that is NOT the reason WHY he did it (though he might be glad it occurred, of course).
thanks for the post, stating that you prefer masterpiece T. F. over masterpiece ATLAS.
Just a note. I didn't say anything about FLW.
there you go. you answer it all. nothing else to be said.
for who gives a shtt, whether he improved the world or not.
and those are the feelings, of a pure individual.
I agree the Chinese people are very friendly. Their govt sucks
There once was an excellent documentary about the whole process including the back room dealings. Then everyone started puking on Odumbocare and it disappeared from Netflix but is still available.
https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/fi...
Chinese people are really reserved. It is hard for a westerner to be accepted. They will be polite but you are still an outsider until you prove yourself.
I really think Obama knew it wouldnt work, and would lead to medicaid for evryone, which is why in the bill was such an expansion as it was for medicaid..
The end goal is free medicaid for everyone. Once people see how great it is to have zero cost healthcare (for them), they will never give that up
Every thing about Odumbo has been deeply buried which is not in and of itself an easy task. There is some really big money involved, bigger even than Soros himself even thought he is the public emblem of what is happening.
It was through research on the Federal Reserve system that I started coming across strange connections. The Napoleon war with England was one of the main keys that started unlocking doors. From Woodrow Wilson:
"I am a most unhappy man. I have unwittingly ruined my country. A great industrial nation is controlled by its system of credit. Our system of credit is concentrated. The growth of the nation, therefore, and all our activities are in the hands of a few men. We have come to be one of the worst ruled, one of the most completely controlled and dominated Governments in the civilized world -- no longer a Government by free opinion, no longer a Government by conviction and the vote of the majority, but a Government by the opinion and duress of a small group of dominant men."
Eisenhour stated the problem as such:
"This conjunction of an immense military establishment and a large arms industry is new in the American experience. The total influence – economic, political, even spiritual – is felt in every city, every Statehouse, every office of the Federal government. We recognize the imperative need for this development. Yet we must not fail to comprehend its grave implications. Our toil, resources and livelihood are all involved; so is the very structure of our society.
In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist."
But he was wrong, dangerously wrong for the military industrial complex is but wishful thinking without capital.
You mention Medicaid and have hit a bull's eye. Medicaid during the Odumbocare argument before those mystical beings in black robes' opinion was sacrosanct.
It's whole purpose within the Odumbocare law was to get the states to increase the size of their populations on Medicaid and then to dump the full financial burden on them.
Medicine is not health. To those that believe medicine cures is hoping on what never was and will never be. It is ignorance that supports this belief and to those choosing to remain ignorant get what they ask for.
As so eloquently stated by Alexis de Tocqueville:
"In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from the necessity of forming opinions of their own."
So being a member of a society where free trade ups the efficiency and gets you much more than you could do yourself if alone.
But, I think that there comes a point in a society where its just too large and stops being efficient because people change from wanting power over nature, to wanting power over other people.
At that point, I think I it starts to take more time to deal with the results of that thinking, than it would take to just handle my own affairs.
I think we have gotten to that point in the USA
First let me start out that in nature man is a social animal. Man requires at minimum food and shelter from the elements to survive. But the social being is not based on efficiency, it's based on protection. The efficiency of man is based on experience. The more experience, the more efficient the action.
Now by adding society, efficiency is now diminished as two does not mean twice the result because now time is spent determining who does what. Even then one will invariably do more than the other and will be the loser in the transaction.
However as the group grows, someone is going to project a role superior to the others and a ruler is born. That is when things go down hill because a ruler is going to need enforcers to make sure all are doing their fair share.
But the question is why does one need a ruler? Rules yes, rulers no. Without the ruler, there is a free society where men cooperate for mutual benefit.
This is where I may have an excess of tomatoes where one of my neighbors has an excess of cucumber and another an excess of lettuce and we all get to dine on a wonderful salad instead of a singular product. That is known as capitalism, trade by agreement instead of trade by force.
But what is happening not only in the US but in the world is an issue of morality. For a free society to operate that society must be a moral society because the state of society is proportional to the morality of that society.
"No people will tamely surrender their liberties, nor can any be easily subdued, when knowledge is diffused and virtue is preserved. On the contrary, when people are universally ignorant, and debauched in their manners, they will sink under their own weight without the aid of foreign invaders." - Samuel Adams.
Man can live their lives without the formal education of philosophy but it is impossible for man to live with a philosophy. But that life would be full of contradictions and have voids of what could have been. Quality of life would suffer.
Man in search of a proper education should have philosophy at the top of the list. Study of the metaphysical, epistemological and ethical branches would put into proper perspective the world around them, the proper method of obtaining knowledge and the moral fiber of knowledge.
To me the two main subjects for a good life in a modern world would be philosophy and finance.
I would say that expecting masses of people to even spell epistemology is a bit over the top. There needs to be something easier to understand if its going to catch on. Maybe thats why it hasnt caught on so far. Even the USA is not intellectually consistent
for 'anthem' is a great allegorical short story.
Personally I liked Atlas Shrugged. The variety of characters and their interactions were tremendous.
I often Recomended both!
this is the mark of a true masterpiece.
no matter how many times you read it, see it, hear it,
you still learn more, each and every time.
do not agree with your final statement.
why? because a young mind should be exposed to ALL ways of thought, especially philosophy.
so then, that young mind, can make him/her own choices, of what works for him/her.
but the problem is, that in the u.s.a., ayn rand is not even treated,
or even talked about in high schools, as a valid philosopher!
liberal and leftist h.s. teachers roll their eyes, at any mention of ayn rand.
'that evil crackpot novelist that creates only one-dimensional characters!
and rants for capitalism over socialism! who doesn't want socialism? evil, evil!
for today, in the u.s.a., and also most of the world, socialism has been so accepted,
that it is no longer hardly questioned as the proper way of life, in large groups.
however, reality, financial reality, has ALL these countries with socialistic philosophies,
have HUGE NATIONAL DEBT LOADS they carry, solely due to their beliefs.
and one day, maybe soon, all this world-banks pyramid scheme,
will shatter---starting from ANY OF MANY, weak bank/nation links.
on how to stay focused on what matters most.
To the OP's assertion, I would have to say No. Atlas was a page turner by comparison, even though it's contents was far more dated with regards to the technology and settings.
Even though Fountainhead contains mostly timeless references, from the very beginning about stone columns being carved to resemble ancient hewn wood, and those factoids remain true to this day. While the protagonist certainly had skills, he was for the most part rather boring.
Sorry, just my $0.02
i understand what you are saying, but obviously do not agree.
but at least you made me chuckle with this one:
howard roark boring??
i am still laughing.
but don't get me wrong, i still consider atlas shrugged a great novel. could have used a bit of editing, in my opinion, to make it even better.
but for me, the fountainhead is the greater novel of the two, and for the same reason:
that i prefer stories of loners going against the entire world.
so i am not surprised about mao being financed by the u.s., same as they financed and gave away secrets to the ruskies regarding space travel in the 50's, so they'd appear to get ahead in the space race, and so create u.s. panic?
i mean, the u.s. had already royally screwed the entire world in 1944, with the bretton woods agreement. but i figure i do not need to give you the details on that worldwide royal screwing.
dude, you know your sh+t, bigtime. so who are you, al?
you remind me of the donald sutherland character in 'jfk.'
For China, it wasn't just money. Arms and intelligence was a part of the package.
In 1944 the US was the hero. The military industrial complex was selling arms to both the British and the Russians while senior Bush's father Preston was busy providing huge loans to Hitler so the banks were getting rich and after Russia lost 20 million souls to the war, here comes the shiny heroes to take all the credit while at the same time mopping up the Pacific Rim/Asia theater. As the only industrial nation left, this country prospered like no other ever as our banks, of course backed by City of London, House of Rothschild needs their cut as they brokered this whole deal, cleaned up.
Who am I? The luckiest hillbilly ever born in West Virginia. I've had a life that just can't be comprehended beforehand. It has been an exciting ride. I'm the guy that bought a lot of bear for these two state troopers that as their tongues got lose let us know they were unhappy with their current assignment which was to procure hookers for the governor, slick willie. I'm the guy that could consume two books flying coast to coast and five to Bangkok, my favorite city in the world, but not any more. A guy that has read tens of thousands of books. I used to design communications networks for voice and data where my largest customers where banks, airlines and wall street. A guy that had the pleasure of seeing $50 million in freshly signed bearer bonds sitting on a table in front of me at a Boston Bank. But more importantly a guy capable of intense research to be able to find the missing links to complete the puzzle.
but let me ask you something, al, how come a bigtime knowledgeable achiever like yourself, never got recruited to join the big brother team?
or they did, and you are now on this rand site only to take down names, of potential troublemakers against big bro?
i mean, the more you write, alfred, the more my image of you is changing, from that of the big-eared, shtt-eatin' grin of neuman, into the grim, dead-eyed look of richard burton.
I have never granted authority but to the just. The president of this large company I used to be with referred to me as his little a-hole as I had no fear and told him things exactly as they appeared with no sugar coating. When he brought me into a senior staff meeting, everyone there used to sweat wondering just whose career I would end this time. I really didn't care as I was under the influence of Ayn Rand and served at my grace, not theirs. I was considered much too dangerous to let go to a competitor.
But Newman better connotates my spirit than Neuman. What we have in common is we both agree that it's a mad, mad world out there.
I never really had much respect for Burton. My mom took me as a young teenager to see "Who's afraid of Virginia Wolf?' I was convinced that neither him nor Taylor were actually acting which later proved out. Yeah my mom was a little saucy as that was a very controversial film back then deemed unfit for young viewers.
But you are just scratching the surface of where I've been and what I've done. As I have stated, I am the luckiest hillbilly ever to come out of the state of West Virginia which is a pretty tall claim being West Virginia was a Rockefeller stronghold.
With that said, let me ask. Do you understand my avatar?
got to say, that i am surprised a lifetime brainy speed reader like you, had never read 1984, until a couple of years ago. but you have read animal farm by now, right? that is 1984's companion piece.
something that pops into my head re your recent voluminous reading comments, is one novel, that i highly recommend, if you have not read it yet: "LUCIFER'S HAMMER." for in some ways, it is a better 'end of world' scenario novel, than atlas shrugged---MUCH more realistic.
and if tuner38 reads this comment, haha, he may go apeshtt ballistic yet again. tuner38 reminds of that old saying: 'beware of the man of one book.'
and as a side note, i disagree with your acting critique of richard burton, for he had many fine film performances. with 'the spy who came in from the cold', being one of my favorites. and add tennessee's 'night of the iguana' as another burton favorite movie. and he was the best 'alexander' ever portrayed in films.
I have two objectives on what I read, first and foremost is the advancement of knowledge in current research and second is for entertainment with good plot and writing style. "1984" would never have risen up high enough for me to read but by chance. One friend was returning the book to another friend and I had the time so I borrowed it. "Animal Farm", I saw the movie and while I am of the comprehension that books are always much better than the transition to script, the book just does not warrant being read when there is so many others better. Time is not unlimited.
I'm not into science fiction, never have been, never will be so Lucifer's Hammer will never make it to my read list. My current book is "Tragedy and Hope" by Carroll Quigley. This is another book that has been long on my list and only now is the time appropriate to tackle this work. I have studied history many decades and in the dictates of law, I have done all my discovery and it has come time to dispose the main witness, Quigley. I am hoping to either verify or reform what I have come to understand from this master of history.
Actually I find Turner38 to be a little delusional but not unreasonable. From the arguments he/she has posted I would say he/she is young but so long as the mind remains open, will grow.
I did not critique Burton's acting, I critiqued Burton himself. I believe that Burton and Taylor where the 60s rendition of today's overpaid idiots in Hollywood.
but seriously, which do you prefer, oban or j.w. blue?
haha.