Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

18002Re: The remains of human giants.

Expand Messages
  • val2160
    Dec 8, 2008
      --- In anthroposophy@yahoogroups.com, "holderlin66" <holderlin66@...>
      > An Objectivist is a follower of Ayn Rand. She was a writer. Her most
      > famous book is a novel, Atlas Shrugged.

      I assume you've read the book. It's about the decline of Western

      > Bradford comments;
      > Atlas was a giant, and it is odd, you know at Rockefeller Center, big
      > statue of Atlas and we always think Atlas is holding the world, but It
      > always was the Cosmos. Some recall that Hercules stepped in for Atlas
      > once and almost didn't get out from under the weight of the world or
      > stars, except that Atlas was a Giant, like a Troll, somewhat large,
      > slower and stupid and Hercules fooled him. But Atlas Shrugged, the
      > Rand Intellectual Soul sort of pragmatic problematic global economy.

      So you're sayin' Atlas-holder upper of the whole cosmos-is an
      Intellectual Soul kinda fella?

      > Stock Markets, mountains and cities shake apparently if Atlas, or Wall
      > Street in this case, shrugs. Atlas can shrugging can make global
      > rattling like an 8 pointer on the richter scale, on the earthquake
      > meter.
      > But still, just for the enormous tale of the Fall of Giants or the
      > reshaping of global finances into a more streamlined, large scale
      > fascism run by just a few Orwellians monsters, you have to admit, we
      > have this front row seat, until the power goes out don't we?
      > falls and Gold falls and the dollar sinks.....
      > Ah, Alan Greenspan .... The Maestro, the Wizard. Just one year ago
      > CNBC did a TV special about him, it's title was Judging a Giant!
      > An Objectivist is a follower of Ayn Rand. She was a writer. Her most
      > famous book is a novel, Atlas Shrugged. In it, the capitalist
      > entrepreneurs go on strike against the collectivist shlubs -
      > the unions, and the working class in general - all of whom leach off
      > the great men, and the world collapses.
      > The capitalist leaders go off to the wilderness to form their own
      > utopia, where they build railroads that run on time and airlines that
      > never crash, and have hot, gorgeous, young, college educated heiresses
      > desperate to bed them. They are also very fit and hunky - the
      > entrepreneurs, that is, - who are all male.
      > It's sort of a post-Nietzsche vision of supermensches. In it the only
      > route to virtue is "a full, pure, uncontrolled, unregulated
      > laissez-faire capitalism--with a separation of state and economics, in
      > the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and
      > church."
      > She established a group. She was the leader, was surrounded by
      > and devotees. Alan was among them.
      > Anyway, that's where Alan Greenspan came from.
      > His mind was full of Objectivist ideas. A belief that humans were
      > rational. That self-interest would guide unregulated capitalist to do
      > only sane and sensible things. Not every capitalist all the time, but
      > enough of them often enough, that a capitalist system would be
      > inherently beneficent and operate for the good of all.
      > Free market capitalism - as a faith - really is an inverse of Marxism.
      > It is a theology that believes their system will bring paradise on
      > and moral perfection. When their system is in power in the real world,
      > their true believers claim that any problem only happened because
      > ideology has not been applied with sufficient purity.

      It seems to me, that underlying the value that is represented by the
      U.S. dollar in the Rand/Greenspan philosophy there must be an agreed
      upon intrinsic value of human life or the whole economic system is like
      a house of cards.

      > Alan did very well for himself. He ran a consulting company that made
      > tons of money. He was on the board of directors for Alcoa, Capital
      > Cities/ABC, Inc.
      > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Broadcasting_Company> , General
      > Foods <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Foods_Corporation> , Inc.,
      > J.P. Morgan & Co., Inc.
      > <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JPMorgan_Chase_%26_Co.> , and more. He
      > dated Barbara Walters.
      > In 1987, Ronald Reagan appointed him as Chairman of the Federal
      > He stayed on through Bush I and Bill Clinton
      > Then along came George W. Bush.
      > He was one of those gentiles. The kind who would take a Jewish idea,
      > whether it was Christianity or free market economics, and ride it's
      > ideology as far as circumstances would allow, unaware that he'd left
      > it's humanistic heart behind.
      > With nobody to restrain him, Greenspan put his full faith in the
      > markets. He kept interest rates low. Which pumped money into the
      > markets. He resisted regulations. When he was warned that real estate
      > was blowing a big, big bubble, he refused to act.
      > Why?
      > Because he believed in the inherent virtue of markets.

      Look at these baleouts-the lessor of two evils-the alternative would be
      worse. etc. type thinking.

      > So there he was, being quizzed by one of the heroes of the House of
      > Representatives, Henry Waxman.
      > First, Greenspan said, in a prepared statement, "Those of us who have
      > looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect
      > shareholder's equity (myself especially) are in a state of shocked
      > disbelief."

      Ummm, why should they care?

      > Well, yes. One of the fundamentals of conservative, free market,
      > faire, Objectivist economics is that business people will act sanely
      > sensibly, thereby protecting people who trust in them. That's a
      > theological belief. Now, watching the bubble burst, Greenspan was
      > a remarkable thing, and he does deserve some credit for it. He was
      > acknowledging reality!
      > Then he said, "I made a mistake in presuming they were best capable of
      > protecting their own shareholders." Which means they need to be
      > regulated. By someone else. By government.

      Hello? What if they are the best capable? And they chose not to do it?
      This IS what Atlas Shrugged was about.

      > "In other words, you found that your view of the world, your ideology,
      > was not right, it was not working," Waxman said. Meaning this notion
      > that individual greed would, as if "guided by an invisible hand," lead
      > to the greatest social good.
      > "Absolutely, precisely," Greenspan replied.

      Look's like it worked to me, Bob!-Val
    • Show all 57 messages in this topic