Who is John Galt?
Submitted by huskesforever on Sat, 12/15/2007 - 16:08
I strongly recommend to anyone that has not read Atlas Shrugged to do so as soon as possible.
Would make a great Christmas gift for any Ron Paul supporter or potential Ron Paul Supporter
Who is Ron Paul?
»





















Actually, it's from the Fountainhead BUT...
This just says it all about the old media--and it's why I'm not buying in.
What do you want Ellsworth ?"
"Power, Petey. I want to rule. Like my spiritual predecessors. But I'm luckier than they were. I inherited the fruit of their efforts and I shall be the one who'll see the great dream made real. I see it all around me today. I recognise it. I don't like it. I didn't expect to like it. Enjoyment is not my destiny. I shall find such satisfaction as my capacity permits. I shall rule."
"Whom...?"
"You. The world. It's only a matter of discovering the lever. If you learn how to rule one single man's soul, you can get the rest of mankind. It's the soul, Peter, the soul. Not whips or swords or fire or guns. That's why the Caesars, the attilas, the Napoleons were fools and did not last. We will. The soul, Peter, is that which can't be ruled. It must be broken. Drive a wedge in, get your fingers on it ? and the man is yours. You won't need a whip--he'll bring it to you and ask to be whipped. Set him in reverse and his own mechanism will do your work for you. Use him against himself. Want to know how it's done? See if I ever lied to you. See if you haven't heard all this for years, but didn't want to hear, and the fault is yours, not mine.
There are many ways. Here's one. Make man feel small. Make him feel guilty. Kill his aspiration and his integrity. That's difficult. The worst among you gropes for an idol in his own twisted way. Kill integrity by internal corruption. Use it against himself. Direct it towards a goal destructive of all integrity. Preach selflessness. Tell man that altruism is the ideal. Not a single one has ever reached it and not a single one ever will. His every living instinct screams against it. But don't you see what you accomplish ? Man realises that he's incapable of what he's accepted as the noblest virtue - and it gives him a sense of guilt, of sin, of his own basic unworthiness. Since the supreme ideal is beyond his grasp, he gives up eventually all ideals, all aspiration, all sense of his personal value. He feels himself obliged to preach what he can't practice. But one can't be good halfway or honest approximately. To preserve one's integrity is a hard battle. Why preserve that which one knows to be corrupt already? His soul gives up its self respect. You've got him. He'll obey. He'll be glad to obey, because he can't trust himself, he feels uncertain, he feels unclean. That's one way.
Here's another. Kill man's sense of values. Kill his capacity to recognise greatness or to achieve it. Great men can't be ruled. We don't want any great men. Don't deny conception of greatness. Destroy it from within. The great is the rare, the difficult, the exceptional. Set up standards of achievement open to all, to the least, to the most inept? and you stop the impetus to effort in men, great or small. You stop all incentive to improvement, to excellence, to perfection. Laugh at Roark and hold Peter Keating as a great architect. You've destroyed architecture. Build Lois Cook and you've destroyed literature. Hail Ike and you've destroyed the theatre. Glorify Lancelot Clankey and you've destroyed the press. Don't set out to raze all shrines, you'll frighten men, Enshrine mediocrity - and the shrines are razed.
Then there's another way. Kill by laughter. Laughter is an instrument of human joy. Learn to use it as a weapon of destruction. Turn it into a sneer. It's simple. Tell them to laugh at everything. Tell them that a sense of humour is an unlimited virtue. Don't let anything remain sacred in a man?s soul ? and his soul won't be sacred to him. Kill reverence and you've killed the hero in man. One doesn't reverence with a giggle. He'll obey and he'll set no limits to obedience? anything goes? nothing is too serious.
Here's another way. This is most important. Don't allow men to be happy. Happiness is self-contained and self-sufficient. Happy men have no time and no use for you. Happy men are free men. So kill their joy in living. Take away from them what they want. Make them think that the mere thought of a personal desire is evil. Bring them to a state where saying 'I want' is no longer a natural right, but a shameful admission. Altruism is of great help in this. Unhappy men will come to you. They'll need you. They'll come for consolation, for support, for escape. Nature allows no vacuum. Empty man's soul and the space is yours to fill.
I don't see why you should look so shocked, Peter. This is the oldest one of all. Look back at history. Look at any great system of ethics, from the Orient up. Didn't they all preach the sacrifice of personal joy? Under all the complications of verbiage, haven?t they all had a single leitmotif: sacrifice, renunciation, self-denial? Haven't you been able to catch their theme song? "Give up, give up, give up, give up?" Look at the moral atmosphere of today. Everything enjoyable, from cigarettes to sex to ambition to the profit motive, is considered depraved or sinful. Just prove that a thing makes men happy and you've damned it. That's how far we've come. We've tied happiness to guilt. And we've got mankind by the throat.
Throw your first born into a sacrificial furnace? Lie on a bed of nails? go into the desert to mortify the flesh? don't dance? don't go to the movies on Sunday ? don't try to get rich? don't smoke ? don't drink. It?s all the same line. The great line. Fools don't think that taboos of this nature are just nonsense. Something left over, old-fashioned. But there's always a purpose in nonsense. Don't bother to examine a folly? ask yourself only what it accomplishes. Every system of ethics that preached sacrifice grew into a world power and ruled millions of men.
Of course, you must dress them up. You must tell people they'll achieve a superior kind of happiness by giving up everything that makes them happy. You don't have to be too clear about it. Use big vague words. "Universal Harmony?" "Eternal Spirit?" "Divine Purpose?" "Nirvana?"- "Paradise?" "Racial Supremacy?" "the Dictatorship of the Proletariat?" Internal corruption, Peter. That's the oldest one of all. The farce has been going on for centuries and men still fall for it.
Yet the test should be so simple: just listen to any prophet and if you hear him speak of sacrifice? Run. Run faster than from a plague. It stands to reason that where there's sacrifice, there's someone collecting sacrificial offerings. Where there's service, there's someone being served. The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master. But if you ever hear a man telling you that you must be happy, that it's your natural right, that your first duty is to yourself ? that will be the man who has nothing to gain from you. But let him come and you'll scream your empty heads off, howling that he's a selfish monster. So the racket is safe for many, many centuries.
But here you might have noticed something. I said, "It stands to reason." Do you see? Men have a weapon against you. Reason. So you must be very sure to take it away from them. Cut the props from under it. But be careful. Don't deny outright. Never deny anything outright, you give your hand away. Don't say reason is evil, though some have gone that far and with astonishing success. Just say that reason is limited. That there's something above it. What? You don't have to be too clear about it either. The field's inexhaustible. "Instinct?" "Feeling?" "Revelation?" "Divine Intuition?" "Dialectic Materialism?" If you get caught at some crucial point and somebody tells you that your doctrine doesn't make sense? you're ready for him. You tell him there's something above sense. That here he must not try to think, he must feel. He must believe. Suspend reason and you play it deuces wild. Anything goes in any manner you wish whenever you need it. You've got him. Can you rule a thinking man? We don't want any thinking men."
Keating had sat down on the floor, by the side of the dresser. He did not want to abandon the dresser; he felt safer, leaning against it.
Peter, you've heard all this. You've seen me practising it for ten years. You see it being practised all over the world. Why are you disgusted? You have no right to sit there and stare at me with the virtuous superiority of being shocked. You're in on it. You've taken your share and you've got to go along. You're afraid to see where it's leading. I'm not. I'll tell you.
The world of the future. The world I want. A world of obedience and of unity. A world where the thought of each man will not be his own, but an attempt to guess the thought of the next neighbour who'll have no thought, and so on, Peter, around the globe. Since all must agree with all. A world where no man will hold a desire for himself, but will direct all his efforts to satisfy the desires of his neighbour who'll have no desires except to satisfy the desires of the next neighbour, who?ll have no desires ? around the globe, Peter. Since all must serve all. A world in which man will not work for so innocent an incentive as money, but for that headless monster? prestige. The approval of his fellows? their good opinion? the opinion of men who'll be allowed to hold no opinion. An octopus, all tentacles and no brain.
Judgement, Peter! Not judgement, but public polls. An average drawn upon zeroes? since no individuality will be permitted. A world with its motor cut off and a single heart, pumped by hand. My hand? and the hands of a few, a very few other men like me. Those who know what makes you tick you great, wonderful average, you who have not risen in fury when we called you the average, the little, the common, you who've liked and accepted these names. You'll sit enthroned and enshrined, you, the little people, the absolute ruler to make all past rulers squirm with envy, the absolute, the unlimited, God and Prophet and King combined. Vox populi. The average, the common, the general.
Do you know the proper antonym for Ego? Bromide, Peter. The rule of the bromide. But even the trite has to be organised by someone at some time. We'll do the organising. Vox dei. We'll enjoy unlimited submission from men who've learned nothing except to submit. We'll call it "to serve." We'll give out medals for service. You'll fall over one another in a scramble to see who can submit better and more. There will be no other distinction to seek. No other form of personal achievement.
Can you see Howard Roark in this picture? No? Then don't waste time on foolish questions. Everything that can't be ruled, must go. And if freaks persist in being born occasionally, they will not survive beyond their twelfth year. When their brain begins to function, it will feel the pressure and it will explode. The pressure gauged to a vacuum. Do you know the fate of deep-sea creatures brought out to sunlight? So much for future Roarks. The rest of you will smile and obey. Have you noticed that the imbecile always smiles? Man's first frown is the first touch of God on his forehead. The touch of thought. But we'll have neither God nor thought. Only voting by smiles. Automatic levers, all saying yes...
Now if you were a little more intelligent, you'd ask: What of us, the rulers? What of me, Ellsworth Monkton Toohey? And I'd say, Yes, you're right. I'll achieve no more than you will. I'll have no purpose save to keep you contended. To lie, to flatter you, to praise you, to inflate your vanity. To make speeches about the people and the common good. Peter, my poor old friend, I'm the most selfless man you've ever known. I have less independence than you, whom I just forced to sell your soul. You've used people at least for the sake of what you could get from them for yourself. I want nothing for myself. I use people for the sake of what I can do to them. It's my only function and satisfaction. I have no private purpose. I want power. I want my world of the future. Let all live for all. Let all sacrifice and none profit. Let all suffer and none enjoy. Let progress stop. Let all stagnate. There's equality in stagnation. All subjugated to the will of all. Universal slavery without even the dignity of a master. Slavery to slavery. A great circle, and a total equality. The world of the future.
"Ellsworth... you?re..."
"Insane? Afraid to say it? There you sit and the world's written all over you, your last hope. Insane? Look around you. Pick up any newspaper and read the headlines. Isn't it coming? Isn't it here? Every single thing I told you? Isn't Europe swallowed already and we're stumbling on to follow? Everything I said is contained in a single word--collectivism. And isn't that the god of our century. To act together. To think together. To feel? together. To unite, to agree, to obey. To obey, to serve, to sacrifice. Divide and conquer first. But then, unite and rule. We've discovered that one last. Remember the Roman Emperor who said he wished humanity had a single neck so he could cut it? People have laughed at him for centuries. But we'll have the last laugh. We've accomplished what he couldn't accomplish. We've taught men to unite. This makes one neck ready for one leash. We found the magic word. Collectivism.
Look at Europe, you fool. Can't you see past the guff and recognise the essence? One country is dedicated to the proposition that man has no rights, that the collective is all. The individual held as evil, the mass--as God. No motive and no virtue permitted--except that of service to the proletariat.
That's one version. Here's another. A country dedicated to the proposition that man has no rights, that the State is all. The individual held as evil, the race--as God. No motive and no virtue permitted, except that of service to the race. Am I raving or is this the harsh reality of two continents already? If you're sick of one version, we push you in the other. We've fixed the coin. Heads? collectivism. Tails? collectivism. Give up your soul to a council or give it up to a leader. But give it up, give it up, give it up. Offer poison as food and poison as antidote. Go fancy on the trimmings, but hang on to the main objective. Give the fools a chance, let them have their fun--but don't forget the only purpose you have to accomplish. Kill the individual. Kill man's soul. The rest will follow automatically.
"Free government is founded in jealousy, and not in confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited constitutions." Thomas Jefferson, Kentucky Resolutions of 1798
Angelina Jolie movie on Atlas shrugged will
generate buzz around libertarian ideals.
Please check out this page and offer feedback here as well
http://www.dailypaul.com/node/14009
-----------------DO YOU REALLY WANT RON TO WIN------------------
Ron needs more than just money. Send this strategy to mail@ronpaul2008.com and also to press@ronpaul2008.com if these ideas make sense to you
www.dailypaul.com/node/14009
Atlas Shrugged is one of the
Atlas Shrugged is one of the most thought provoking books I've ever read. There aren't many works of art that fundamentally change the way you view the world, but it's one of them.
It's Been Years Since
I read Rand's books (like 20 years). Can someone refresh me on what "Who is John Galt?" meant?
A teacher had us read Anthym for class and I later read Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged on my own. A local talk show host in Michigan, Mark Scott, was a big fan of Rand back then.
I hate Ayn Rand's writing style
At great personal risk to life and limb from everyone else on this forum.....
I can't stand Ayn Rand's writings. Found her work to be extremely boring and unengaging. She just droned on and on and on.....
I don't discount the effect she has had on the liberty community, though. She's probably one of the main voices for liberty in the 20th century. I just personally can't get into her writing style.
Sorry.
That's fine!
Liberty means reading what you want, or not, for whatever reason you want to, or don't. :-) Rand was very much a Russian, and she wrote in that long, speechy Russian style. Not everyone's cup of tea. Read the cliff notes at least and you'll get the gist. ;-)
Run, Ron, Run!
Run, Ron, Run!
Crime and Punishment is my 2nd favorite book of all time
I must like that "long, speechy Russian style." ;-)
Freedom Bomb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qiURceBX0
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
The revolution will not be televised.
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
"The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me." - Ayn Rand
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
We are!!!!!
We are!!!!!
more Atlas intrigue
This is one of my favorite lines from the book, "to fear to face an issue is to the believe that the worst is true," from this day forward we are an army of one and we will fear no more!
fun side note
Which one of the other GOP candidates should play Wesley Mouch?
If you would like a pdf of the book (free) email me
email me if you would like a pdf of the book
huskersforever@msn.com
By the way...
Atlas Shrugged is currently "in production" with Angelina Jolie as Dagny Taggart and Brad Pitt rumored to be cast as John Galt. Apparently, both are fans of Rand. Unfortunately, the movie probably won't be released until after the election, but... might be good if it came out in September 2008. ;-)
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0480239/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlas_Shrugged#Film_adaptation
Freedom Bomb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qiURceBX0
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
The revolution will not be televised.
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
"The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me." - Ayn Rand
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
Don't hold your breath...
There have been rumors about movies and mini-series ever since the book was published.
Pretty sure that Peikoff still holds some "veto" over the project and/or script. It probably won't become real until he gets desperate for cash, which is unlikely to happen. Otherwise it'll wait until probably 5 years before whenever the "extended" and "re-extended" copyrights run out.
After that (once it's public domain) then expect someone to put out a REAL HACK job of it.
BTW, if you haven't seen "The Fountainhead" done in the 1940's by King Vidor -- get a copy and watch it; that will pretty much end ANY desire you previously had for seeing Atlas on the big (or small) screen.
I've seen The Fountainhead
Good flick. But, Peikoff holds no "veto power" over the making of the Atlas Shrugged movie. The main problem is a viable screenplay.
Freedom Bomb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qiURceBX0
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
The revolution will not be televised.
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
"The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me." - Ayn Rand
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
I believe her greatest work
was the prescient description of what will happen if collectivism wins out that is presented in "Anthem".
Who is John Galt?
This is perhaps the greatest metaphor of the 20 Century and now here in the early stages of the 21st Century 50 years after that question was asked we have the absolute answer ... it is Ron Paul ... it is We the People ... do you see?
Except that "Who is John Galt?" was a message of despair...
It was really always an "unanswerable" question -- saying several different things at different points in the "historical timeline" of the book...
In it's earliest iterations, it was expressing indignation:
"Who does John Galt think he is?"
Later on it was expressing doubt:
"How is John Galt doing this to us?"
And finally it was an expression of full "despair" and despondancy:
"Who can stop John Galt?"
By contrast "Who Is Ron Paul?" is a question we WANT to answer, and it is a message of HOPE and EXPECTATION.
Although I *do* appreciate the reference (as unfortunately *most* RP supporters probably do not)... it was one of the most truly SELFISHLY [grin!] enjoyable parts of making my first WiRP? banner early this summer! (Of a total of nearly 50 such banners BTW... now for the golden $ cigs as an encore!)
I would like to recomend
"The Letters of Ayn Rand" Leonard Peikoff is one of my favorite books. It is a collection of her letters and response to many famous people such as, Alan Greenspan, who she tells, "You don't know what capitalism is."; Barry Goldwater on his book "Conscious of the Conservative", to which she says, ""Conservative is not a philosophy so conscious can not apply"; and how she explains that there are four types of people represented in Atlas Shrugged: The loser who knows he's a loser; the loser who thinks he's a winner; the winner who thinks he's a loser, and the winner who knows he's the winner. John Galt is in her words, the winner who knows he is a winner." So who is Ron Paul?
WE ARE GOING TO WIN!
___.---.___
.' ( ) '.
) /)' '( )
',_( ';-;'\_,'
|-|
(")
Dagny, that minx...
She had to write Hank a "Dear John Galt" letter.
I named my son Galt...
He's only 2 years old. Looks like Ron beat me to the punch by naming his son Rand.
Freedom Bomb
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A0qiURceBX0
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
The revolution will not be televised.
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
"Cheers for liberty, my man."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2qpVWPlqSAw&feature=related
"The question isn't who is going to let me, it's who is going to stop me." - Ayn Rand
http://www.myspace.com/goldenstategalt
What would have been REALLY funny...
would be if he had named ANOTHER son "Remington."
(And don't worry if you don't get that... it is an inside joke and a VERY obscure Randian reference... I wonder if even Ron Paul would get that one?)
Who Is Henry M. Galt
For all you Randians out there, if you'd like a peek into what may have been Ayn Rand's inspiration for Atlas Shrugged, read The Driver by Garet Garrett and find out who Henry M. Galt is.
Available free as an online PDF from those fine folks at mises.org.
http://www.mises.org/books/driver.pdf
Haven't read _Atlas Shrugged_ but
I have read Murray Rothbard's description of what can only be described as Ayn Rand's cult: http://www.lewrockwell.com/rothbard/rothbard23.html
Also, what is REALLY ironic...
Is that Rothbard's own "von Mises institute" and that of his most-devoted "disciple" (acolyte?) -- one Lew Rockwell -- seem to have constructed their own little "mini-cult" of insiders many of whom while promoting "independent thought" via writings, are actually pretty much "loyally obedient" to the now-dead "Lenins & Stalin" and their current "Krushchev" (who is known as a person with some personality characteristics similar to AR and a temper to match) -- justifying their slavishness under the mantle of his "property rights" as the owner of the website and leader of the institute.
I even got a response from one of them recently that he "is just a mere soldier" obeying the orders of one Lew Rockwell.
And the writer completely didn't understand the irony of it all. (I thought he had been saying it sarcastically... but he actually MEANT it. Really sad.)
Guess C. Northcote Parkinson's Law is true of so-called "Libertarian" organizations as well -- both the root (CATO) and the branches (vMI, LRC).
Needless to say, my opinion of the reliability of (sometimes weird) content of LR.com has dropped dramatically as a result. (I now think of it more in line of a Saruman-like copy of Rupert Murdoch's Mordor, but with a libertarian colored coating.)
Guess it really requires the RARE humility of someone like Ron Paul's to avoid such ego traps (at least for himself... not sure the same can be said as a general thing for his staff or devotees).
Au contraire
Where do you get this nonsense?
The Mises Institute is a fabulous educational organization, not a cult. Lew Rockwell is a former staff member of Ron Paul's and they remain great friends. I have been to several Mises seminars and met Lew Rockwell. He's one of the finest gentlemen you'd ever care to meet; on a par with Ron Paul. His commentaries and speeches are brilliant. Lew Rockwell gets credit for laying much of the educational groundwork for the last 25 years that helped make the Ron Paul Revolution possible.
IMHO, the best cure for "Ayn Rand worship" is to read...
Barbara Brandon's book The Passion of Ayn Rand
It REALLY humanizes her, and helps explain how the whole "cult" thing happened (she DIDN'T seek it, it was really more Nathan Blumenthal's doing -- her main fault was in falling for the sycophancy of a second-rater like him, and not realizing it for what it was.)
BTW, Nathan Blumenthal (aka "Nathanial Brandon") is really one of the primary causes of the whole "self-esteem" BS that has infiltrated our society. In truth, nearly ALL of AR's "worshipers" turned out to be REAL disappointments -- little more than social climbers and second-raters building careers on either the government dole (Greenspan), the selling of populist BS to the public (Nathanial Brandon) or living off the royalties of her legacy (Leonard Peikoff)... IMHO, the only one who seems to have done well in REAL WORK would be Barbara Brandon, a truly gracious and well-balanced person who has also maintained her "objectivity" and integrity; in short, a really classy lady!
Wow, grinding Barbara's axe for her, aren't we?
Nathaniel Branden's approach to self esteem is actually right in line with Rand's thinking, and expansive of it; its the wider "self esteem" movement that discredits itself, and actually bears little resemblance to Branden and Rand's thought. As for Rand heirs, David Kelly (whom Barb Branden likes quite a bit, since that seems to matter to you) has lead some nice efforts to keep Objectivism in the postlight, and free of Peikoff's nonsense.
Run, Ron, Run!
Run, Ron, Run!
Funny isn't it how someone
Funny isn't it how someone could take histories greatest philosopher and discovery, Objectivism, and only think about some second rate rejects envy ridden sob story about why he was ejected as an unclear thinker by Rand? How negative you must feel to bring up Rothbards screed?
Axes to grind aside....
Rand herself was not a pleasant person, and her circle of immediate followers was not a fun environment to be sure. But it's all irrelevant, because the ideas are what matters.
Run, Ron, Run!
Run, Ron, Run!
Rand Trivia
Ayn Rand is buried in Kensico Cemetary in Valhalla, NY, not far from Weschester and the Bronx. Coincidentally, that's also the same cemetary where the Dorsey Brothers, Rachmaninoff, and Lou Gehrig are all buried (and my family plot is there also, which is why I know this stuff!).
But I have never read Rand and I never will.
"Fight wars for a just cause, not just because!"