Atlas Shrugged Reaches 50th Anniversary

The New York Times notes that next month will mark the 50th anniversary of the publication of Atlas Shrugged and it is fitting that this comes in the business section. Ayn Rand has many critics on both the right and the left, but she also has many admirers:

But the book attracted a coterie of fans, some of them top corporate executives, who dared not speak of its impact except in private. When they read the book, often as college students, they now say, it gave form and substance to their inchoate thoughts, showing there is no conflict between private ambition and public benefit.

“I know from talking to a lot of Fortune 500 C.E.O.’s that ‘Atlas Shrugged’ has had a significant effect on their business decisions, even if they don’t agree with all of Ayn Rand’s ideas,” said John A. Allison, the chief executive of BB&T, one of the largest banks in the United States.

“It offers something other books don’t: the principles that apply to business and to life in general. I would call it complete,” he said.

Rand certainly has many faults, but that does not mean that those who wish to write her off completely are correct, as I discussed last month. Putting aside those who go overboard in making Objectivism a religion, Rand did say things worth considering. Rand fled the Soviet Union and her ideas were shaped by “when the Bolsheviks broke into her father’s pharmacy and declared his livelihood the property of the state.” During a period when Marxism was often seen as the dominant philosophy reshaping the world, Rand helped provide a much-needed moral argument for capitalism. While the viewpoint can be taken too far, Rand also displays a bold message on the power of the individual and value of excellence.

More on Ayn Rand at Q&O, Wake Up America, and The van der Galiën Gazette.

Why Ayn Rand is Compelling, Despite Her Human Faults

Liberals and libertarians have areas of agreement and disagreement. As there is a considerable variation in the views of liberals, some liberals are more sympathetic to libertarianism than others. It also may be a matter of whether particular liberals care to stress their areas of agreement or disagreement, but there is a variety of views with regards to libertarians seen in the liberal blogosphere. While Ayn Rand did not consider herself to be a part of the libertarian movement, the same can also be said about liberal attitudes about her. Some of us respect her for her work to promote liberty, while others object to her for a variety of reasons.

Ezra Klein has recently written of “how utterly astonishing I find it that anyone takes her seriously.” Jake Young has an excellent response. One reason I found his response to be of value is that he recognizes both the strength in Rand’s work as well as her failings, which are often amplified by some of her more extreme followers:

First, we all knew some yo-yo in college freshmen who proclaimed themself an Objectivist on the first day. They were in some cases outrageously selfish, socially inept, and prone to getting other people into long-winded philosophical discussions against their will.

Now, I assure you that I found these individuals as distasteful as you did. It has also been my experience that in most cases they took everything that Rand said to be the Gospel truth without serious analysis. However, I do not consider it wise to judge a philosophy by the inadequacies of college freshmen, and I don’t think it fair to judge an individual by what they were like before they grew into themselves… It has not been my experience that all people who like Ayn Rand are like this.

Second, Objectivism as a movement — particularly in its later years — can be reasonably defined as a cult, by which I mean a body of individuals that enforces extreme ideological conformity by means of excommunication.

I do not deny this. Rand was a human being with many more faults than average. She created a philosophy that has some things with which I agree and other with which I don’t.

Jake notes that “Rand was one of the most vehement deniers of the right of the government to conscript individuals to participate in unjust wars” and suggests that her detractors might just find something to like in her work. He presented three main reasons for finding Rand compelling. Of the three, this is the one I found to be the strongest:

She validates the individual and the power of the individual human mind. In Atlas Shrugged, she describes a world where the intelligent and the capable have made clear that they are not willing to be exploited by the violent, the ignorant, and the incompetent. They argue that this is a world that can be grasped and improved by an individual intelligence and all that is required is the application of effort and logic. As a scientist, a physician, an intellectual, and a human being, I find that appealing.

I am neither the strongest, nor the most attractive, nor the richest, nor the most socially gifted kid in the room, but I am sure as hell capable of using my mind. Rand argues that this is all that is required for happiness.

An Actor Might be the Republican’s Best Bet

Fred Thompson is looking more and more like a candidate. Yesterday he had an op-ed in The Wall Street Journal which will make conservative Republicans very happy as he repeated their mantra that tax cuts always result in more growth and increased tax revenues. Sometimes this is true, but you’ll never get a Republican to admit this is not always the case. By their logic a tax rate of zero would bring in the most money of all.

There must be a limit where the benefits of lowering taxes does not mean more tax revenue as the rate is too low to bring in sufficient funds to support necessary funding. Republicans see themselves as being a John Galt (from Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged) and think they can create wealth in the business sector as a result of their own will and hard work, with no need for the infrastructure which makes our economy possible. Lack of adequate money for government is not a problem which these Republicans can conceive of.

While Thompson cites the tax cuts under Calvin Coolidge as evidence for his position, The Mahablog presents arguments to the contrary, blaming his cuts for subsequent economic stagnation and ultimately the depression. Ezra Klein presents some tough questions for those tho see cutting taxes as the ultimate panacea, wondering where expenses will actually be cut. Presumably this will lead to greater deficits, as we’ve already seen from previous Republicans.

Steve Benen asks, “Does the GOP really need another standard bearer who doesn’t like to work hard, doesn’t care for details, and has zero foreign policy experience? (In other words, given Bush’s humiliating presidency, shouldn’t the party be looking for someone who has an entirely different set of qualities?)”

Thompson actually does have the qualities that Republicans want, and the economic arguments don’t matter. He’s played a President on television, perhaps making him even more qualified than Ronald Reagan. That means he can deliver the message the Republicans want with a straight face and perhaps even convince others that he is right. It does no good to present economic arguments that Republican policies don’t work, and ultimately risk even making the wealthy become less rich as the economy sours.

The Republican mind set is simple. They want to pay less taxes. Period. That’s all they have, and all they really believe in. They work backwards from that point to present economic theories to justify cutting taxes, and no amount of evidence will make a difference. If the religious right can help deliver votes, they will throw them some bones, and don’t worry about the consequences as long as they will pay less in taxes. If neoconservatives will back them they don’t care which country they invade (on credit, of course) as long as they can pay less in taxes. If the Constitution and Bill of Rights get shredded under Republicans from Nixon to Bush they don’t care as long as they can pay less in taxes.

The appeal of paying less taxes is strong for everyone, not only the wealthy. Sometimes we get a wake up call that this does not always work, and that sometimes government spending is necessary. While many factors led to the repudiation of George Bush, the impact of Katrina can not be under-estimated in showing voters what could happen when taxes are cut too much and there isn’t money to spend for emergencies. The health care crisis presents another area where an increasing number of people see the needs for government action. Voodo Economics is getting harder and harder to sell, which is why an actor who can convincingly present Republican views be what the Republicans need if they are not willing to reconsider their policies.

SciFri Friday: Star Trek and Battlestar Galactica Previews

J.J. Abrams has confirmed that the script for his upcoming Star Trek movie has been completed and is now undergoing editing. He promises to please everybody:

”On the one hand, for people who love Star Trek, the fix that they will get will be really satisfying,” he says. ”For people who’ve never seen it or know it vaguely, I think they will enjoy it equally, because the movie does not require you to know anything about Star Trek. I would actually prefer [that] people don’t know the series, because I feel like they will come to it with an open mind.”

Abrams has tried to deflect questions about the rumors that the story will deal with a young Kirk and Spock but William Shatner has leaked more information:

William Shatner revealed to SCI FI Wire that the upcoming 11th Star Trek movie will indeed, as rumored, deal with the early years of Capt. James T. Kirk and Spock—and that he will definitely appear in the movie if director J.J. Abrams can find a place to use him. Shatner, who originated the role of Kirk in the original Trek series and several subsequent films, said in an interview that he was invited to meet with Abrams (Mission: Impossible III), who is also co-writing the movie.

“I met with J.J., and they told me they would like me to be part of their film, but they have to write the role,” Shatner said in an interview.

As for the many rumors concerning the sequel’s story, Shatner said that Abrams will explore Kirk and Spock during their Starfleet Academy years. “Yes, we know the story is based on young Kirk,” Shatner said. Up until now, everyone connected with the film has maintained strict silence about the storyline, though rumors have run rampant that they concern Kirk and Spock’s first missions.

As for Shatner’s place in that storyline? “They need to figure out how to put the dead captain in with the young captain,” he said. “It’s a very complex, technical problem of how to write the character in, and I’m not sure how they will solve it.” It sounds as if Shatner may play an older version of Kirk.

There are additional leaks reporting that other characters include Scotty and Christopher Pike, who was Captain of the Enterprise before James Kirk. Reportedly the storyline is not linear, allowing appearances by Kirk as both a young man and by the older Shatner.

Another Star Trek related leak is that there are Klingons in the White House. These are Klingons of the worst type–faux Klingons. See this being revealed on the floor of Congress here. In other Star Trek news, The History Channel will have a show entitled Star Trek: Beyond the Final Frontier next month, narrated by Leonard Nimoy. As I reported earlier in the week, Stephen Hawking, who once appeared in space on Star Trek: The Next Generation, is now planning to take an actual trip into space.

The Chicago Tribune has another interview with Ron Moore which has some information on Battlestar Galactica after it returns. It’s already been revealed that a major character will die, and much of the information suggests it may be Kara Thrace. An episode to air March 4 will include profound changes in Starbuck, and reportedly Katee Sackhoff is leaving the show. Moore is ambiguous in answering the questions and leaves open the possibility that Starbuck might survive in some form:

As you know, there’s a ton of speculation that a character dies in the second half of the season. [Moore also alluded to an upcoming character death in a December interview.] And right now a lot of the speculation centers on Kara Thrace. Can you address that?

Ron Moore: “Kara is one of the characters some fairly profound events happen to in the second half of the season. There are also other characters that are pretty fundamentally… have fairly earthshaking events happen toward the end [of the season]. But certainly [what happens to] Kara will be one of the most surprising things that’s happened in the history of the show so far. Kara’s one of the key players and I think it’ll really take people by surprise.”

People are speculating that her character dies. Do you not want to characterize it that way?

RM: “I don’t know that I want to say that directly. I think people will have to watch that episode and judge for themselves what happens. I can say that Galactica will suffer a shocking loss in that episode and Kara is a key member of the crew. Certainly if she were not there suddenly, that would shift the parameters of what the show is and what the show is about and who the key players are.”

Tricia Helfer Playboy CoverThe direct to DVD Battlestar Galactica movie planned for this summer is also discussed. It reportedly will bridge seasons three and four but, contrary to other rumors, will only deal with BSG and not the upcoming Caprica prequel. While the Chicago Tribune has this interview with Ron Moore, Playboy has Tricia Helfer as its cover girl this month.

I noted the death of author Robert Anton Wilson yesterday. 10 Zen Monkeys has reposted a selection of rarely seen columns by Wilson.

The International Herald Tribune has an article on new plans to attempt to make a movie version of Atlas Shrugged. It will certainly be a challenge to trim this down to a two hour movie and still be true to the book. An Ayn Rand character is capable of giving a lecture for almost two hours on her philosophical views, often after making love. Obviously none of these can be included without turning this into a mini-series (a long mini-series).Those involved with the present project might have an easier time than those who tried in the past due to no longer having to deal with Ayn Rand. Hopefully they will do a better job than was done with The Fountainhead.

Jack is back this Sunday and finally gets out of that Chinese prison, only to be asked to sacrifice his life to fight another terrorist plot. Of course we know he will survive, as Kieifer Sutherland’s contract extends beyond this season. USA Today has an interesting article on the writing of 24. It comes as little surprise that they make up a lot of the story as they go along. Unfortunately sometimes it shows, but it always remains fun even if it is often necessary to ignore huge holes in the plots.