
With 'Atlas Shrugged,' Hollywood may have its first anti-bailout movie - gibsonf1
http://www.riskybusinessblog.com/2009/03/with-atlas-shrugged-hollywood-may-have-its-first-antibailout-movie.html
======
gfodor
Everyone who I know that's read Atlas Shrugged (including myself) turned into
a selfish jerk for at least a month after reading it. God help us if the "Ayn
Rand temporary jerk phenomenon" is unleashed through movie theaters all at
once.

It's a good book but like anything else people extrapolate the points beyond
recognition and additionally interpret it to re-enforce their own views,
regardless of how unreasonable those views might be.

~~~
jacoblyles
I said something similar on the last Ayn Rand thread, and indeed these threads
do start to sound repetitive.

I read literally hundreds of books in school with socialist, feminist,
existentialist, collectivist, or fatalist themes. I read exactly one author in
all of American literature with the theme that an individual could shape his
own destiny and that capitalism (you know, that evil economic system that has
sort of created unprecedented global prosperity) is okay. That author is Ayn
Rand.

I was an obnoxious Randroid for awhile. But Ayn gave me the ability to stand
up for myself intellectually, to question establishment ethics and politics,
and to eventually question and reject her. I think that's a valuable
experience for a young person to have.

I suppose my parents thought I was a "selfish jerk" when, after reading The
Fountainhead, I ginned up the strength to leave the religion that made me
depressed and a little suicidal in my youth. I'm not sure that's a bad thing.

In my mind, the inventors of the computer revolution did more good for
humanity than all the starry-eyed kids going into the Peace Corps or working
soup kitchens. How often is a teenager going to hear that? It's certainly
against establishment ethics. It's not something that you can safely assert in
mixed company. People will label you a sociopath if you state it. But I think
it's true.

Is the worldview of myself and Ayn so dangerous that people should be
completely shielded from it? If so, watch out for this movie. If it's done
right, it's going to fill lots of heads with dangerous ideas.

Personally, I like dangerous ideas. I think we could use more of them. When
people's minds are filled with safe ones, the intellectual climate stagnates.

Lastly, to those who say her characters are not believable, I reply that
neither were the characters in the movie "300". This isn't Hemmingway. She has
her own style. You hate her politics so you're saying she's a bad author.
Admit it and we can discuss the real issues.

I've yet to find one person that says "I think Ayn makes some great points,
but I really think she writes like crap". Rather, it is usually "Ayn is a
hateful and evil person. And besides, her books are total crap. Nobody should
ever read her works for any reason."

~~~
luckystrike

      I think Ayn makes some great points, but I really think she writes like crap
    

Actually, i say something on these lines very often, if a discussion related
to Ayn Rand is happening around me. I would say Ayn makes some good (and
obvious) points, but at least for me, Fountainhead was not a "reading
pleasure". It was too long and overstretched at places, when it could have
been far more succinct.

Someday, i might actually get the dust off 'Atlas Shrugged' in my bookshelf,
and read it.

------
frisco
I don't know how I feel about this. It's my favorite book, and I've read it
many times, but I feel like it's something that either means a lot to you or
means nothing. It doesn't translate very well beyond how you personally take
it, and I'm afraid of flamewars breaking out over the content, which can have
no winner. Or the studios missing the point to make it more mainstream. I also
just have a very good internal idea of what it looks like, and I'm somewhat
afraid of it being ruined by a movie which misses the mark, but that's
remedied easily enough by me not seeing it.

Atlas Shrugged is a powerful book, but the arguments it makes highlight
fundamental disagreements between sections of society. We'll do as we will,
and others will do likewise. Bringing it to a national stage I don't think
would cause many to go "Oh! I get it now!". At worst, it could cause sentiment
to turn against entrepreneurs given the current political climate, casting
them as arrogant and malicious towards the rest of society. Not that popular
opinion should influence the entrepreneurs, though.

~~~
electromagnetic
Don't worry about it, Atlas Shrugged is never going to get made. 35 years and
counting kind of testifies to that effect.

Angelina Jolie was cast, but she got pregnant and left the project with all
the prospect of it ever being made.

~~~
arakyd
Of course, that's what everybody said about Watchmen.

I've never read the book, but I've heard a lot about Ayn Rand's philosophy,
none of it good.

~~~
unalone
Well, obviously. People who hate Rand _loathe_ her, and people who love Rand
are annoying and misphrase her stuff and say stupid things.

At the core of her philosophy is the belief that you should live for yourself,
that you should do things not because other people want you to but because
_you_ want to, that you should never feel guilty for the things that you can
do that other people can't, and that the worst kind of person is the person
who leeches off of other people. Is that none good?

~~~
vitaminj
I've got nothing against her philosophy in the abstract, it's how people
interpret it that I have a problem with. The "selfishness" in living for
yourself is supposed to be open ended, but often people interpret this as
taking as much as they can for themselves, without thought of the consequences
to others.

Rand positioned the major protaganists in Atlas Shrugged (eg. Dagny, Rearden,
Galt, etc) as real producers, who through their selfishness, were actually
acting in the public interest (railroads, steel, etc). The same can't be said
for a selfish sub-prime mortgage lender. Rand's ideas are more or less amoral,
and probably need to be coupled with some other moral framework for it to be
described as "good".

~~~
grandalf
Dude the sub prime lender is nothing at all like Rand's ideas...

First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the
"virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-
actualization". The idea is that the idea that we should all somehow do what
we don't want (being selfless) is what she attacks, and her argument makes
perfect sense.

Second, someone who is part of the home/mortgage industry is not really a
capitalist. The industry is full of subsidies, tax breaks, transfers, etc.,
and is home to Fannie and Freddie, which are government created, Enron-style
entities that allow the government to do things "off the books". You're
absolutely right that there is nothing the slightest bit similar between the
mortgage industry (or most big, entrenched business in the US) and Rand's
heroes...

~~~
miked
>> First, the idea of the virtue of selfishness is that we should question the
"virtue of self-sacrifice". Really what she means is "the virtue of self-
actualization".

Good point. Rand called one of her books _The Virtue of Selfishness_,
apparently either as a marketing idea or just to get a rise out of people (she
seemed to enjoy controversy). "Self-actualization" is more new-agey, and she
would probably have disliked it, but it's clear from her writing that that's
exactly what she meant.

------
rglovejoy
It would probably work better as a television mini-series than as a theatrical
release.

~~~
chops
Or, at the very least, a trilogy. The book is already divided into three
parts, so you have natural breaking points.

------
paulgb
Apologies for being slightly off topic, but since there are a number of Atlas
Shrugged readers here, I have a question:

Is it worth reading? Most discussion about the book seems to be about
Objectivism in general, understandably. But aside from the philosophy of the
book, is it an entertaining or interesting read? (or is that like the
quotation asking "Otherwise, Mrs. Lincoln, how was the show?") I generally
like to read books that are getting talked about, but I've heard so many mixed
reviews of this it's a tough decision.

~~~
Hast
I think it's a better idea to read one of the shorter books first (IIRC the
Fountainhead is pretty short). Atlas Shrugged could be cut down to about half
the size and make the point it's trying to make better (by virtue of being
more concise).

Personally I find it fascinating that the characters in the book (and Ayn
Rand) constantly reiterate that "decisions should be made on logic and
rationality instead of emotions" but the entire book is driven by pathos
instead of any logical argument.

All the "good guys and gals" and smart, beautiful and horny. All the bad guys
are ugly and stupid. They constantly use tautologies ("A is A") as if it was a
way to debate with logic (it's not). And it never provides any attempt to
_prove_ that the entire premise is true or even feasible. Say what you want
about Karl Marx but he did at least attempt to make a rational argument.

All that said you may still enjoy the book. Personally I've read a lot other
books which make the same, or similar, point but better. Animal Farm springs
to mind (no, it's not about objectivism, but it is about how power corrupts
people, or animals).

~~~
dantheman
The whole A is A thing is about reality and confronting it, very much like
Nietzsche.

------
xenophanes
FYI The Fountainhead has a movie:

<http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4619025/The_Fountainhead>

~~~
chops
Maybe you could link a legitimate copy, rather than the pirated copy?

Amazon: [http://www.amazon.com/Fountainhead-Gary-
Cooper/dp/B000HWZ4A2...](http://www.amazon.com/Fountainhead-Gary-
Cooper/dp/B000HWZ4A2/ref=pd_bbs_sr_3?ie=UTF8&s=dvd&qid=1238713949&sr=8-3)

Netflix:
[http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The_Fountainhead/70055755?trkid...](http://www.netflix.com/Movie/The_Fountainhead/70055755?trkid=222336&lnkctr=srchrd-
sr&strkid=521871131_0_0)

~~~
xenophanes
Why? Then less people will watch it.

~~~
endtime
Without moralizing...if you're linking to TPB rather than Amazon, I don't
really think you absorbed Rand's message.

(Yes, I know Danneskjold was a pirate, but he was (effectively) stealing tax
money and returning it to those who were taxed.)

~~~
xenophanes
Can you link to an article by the Ayn Rand Institute, or similar, saying why
piracy is wrong and a fan of Rand must oppose it?

I didn't find anything either way in a few seconds on Google.

~~~
chops
Piracy is a concept that relies on the concept Intellectual Property.

From: <http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/patentsandcopyrights.html>

_Patents and copyrights are the legal implementation of the base of all
property rights: a man’s right to the product of his mind.

...

But what the patent or copyright protects is not the physical object as such,
but the idea which it embodies. By forbidding an unauthorized reproduction of
the object, the law declares, in effect, that the physical labor of copying is
not the source of the object’s value, that that value is created by the
originator of the idea and may not be used without his consent; thus the law
establishes the property right of a mind to that which it has brought into
existence.

...

The government does not _grant_ a patent or copyright, in the sense of a gift,
privilege, or favor; the government merely _secures it_ i.e., the government
certifies the origination of an idea and protects its owner’s exclusive right
of use and disposal._

Piracy constitutes "unauthorized reproduction" and such falls under the above
passage. Thus, it is with great irony that one would advocate pirating the
works of Ayn Rand.

~~~
xenophanes
Suppose a person agrees about property rights in general, but believes certain
circumstances are extenuating.

None of the quotes you provide argue that he is wrong. Rand could have agreed
with him. It simply doesn't say, either way.

One such extenuating circumstance might be this: no harm is done to the
property owner. Then if there is a crime, it is a victimless crime. A
libertarian like Rand or myself might think in that case it's really none of
the property owner's business, since it has no negative effect on him.

Not all downloads are harmless, but some are. Property rights advocates can
disagree about how many. The passages you quote don't say where Rand stands on
this.

~~~
AlisdairO
The concept of a victimless crime is difficult: let's say we have a kid with
no money. Currently, pretty much the default route for that kid to get music
is to simply pirate it. In the past, a music-loving kid might have done extra
chores, got a paper route, or whatever to earn some extra cash and buy the
item. The fact that someone has no money _now_ is no indication that they
wouldn't buy something if they had no other route to accessing it.

Now of course, some crimes really _are_ victimless. People pirate stuff that
they really wouldn't buy. I certainly don't quarrel with you that in this case
no significant harm is done to the property owner. The key problem here is the
issue of enforceability. Maybe you and I can be trusted to pay for the things
we really think are worth it, but if you think everyone can, you're probably
mistaken. How do you enforce copyrights if all an illegitimate copyer has to
do is lie and say that they wouldn't have bought the item?

The law needs to be enforceable, and it can't possibly effectively cover every
corner case. It is of necessity coarsely grained, and some activities that are
victimless are nonetheless criminalised for the greater overall good: so that
victimising actions can be punished. Now, you may not agree that intellectual
property rights are the greater good, but that's another discussion altogether
;).

~~~
xenophanes
I don't see how "the law needs to be enforceable" can be an anti-torrent
position. Shutting down torrent sites isn't working out so well. They just
provide information, like Google. The actual people doing file transfers are
the ones who ought to be in trouble, but that's even less enforceable.

~~~
AlisdairO
It is enforceable. I agree that it's hard or impossible for rights holders to
effectively defend their IP in the current environment, but it wouldn't be all
that hard for governments to make torrenting too much like hard work for the
average individual. Of course, this rightly entails questions about whether
defending the IP is worth it, but that's a different issue.

------
hermitcrab
I tried to read 'Atlas Shrugged' recently. I only got a few chapters in before
I lost interest. But I am not really much of a novel reader.

Is it worth reading the Galt speech on its own? If so, where in the books is
it (I'm not reading 1,100 pages to find it)?

~~~
modoc
I've read the book a few times. I've always ended up skipping over the last
half of the Galt speech, so the idea of skipping the rest of the book just to
read that never ending speech seems funny to me.

------
msluyter
I wonder if we'll get the complete Galt speech? ;)

~~~
unalone
That's Atlas Shrugged 2, due out a month after the main movie.

(Is it too off-topic/nerdy to make comparisons between that speech and the
Spirit Bomb week from Dragonball Z? Something about way-too-long things is
extremely hilarious.)

------
mattchew
I was scanning and did a double take on this part:

"A high net-worth individual with whom the Baldwins have partnered"

For a moment I thought they were talking about Alec Baldwin and his brothers
as producers. My Imp of the Perverse is sadly disappointed that it isn't so.

------
catone
What's with the picture of Barney Frank?

I thought this was an April fool's joke, but IMDB has a page for it and a
quick Google search does turn up articles from 2006 mentioned Jolie being
attached at one point.

~~~
electromagnetic
It's been going for over 35 years, Jolie was cast but in 2008 got pregnant and
the project is dead again. I personally hope it stays dead, the last thing we
need is something else promoting government inaction, which gave us this
problem in the first place.

The main reason the financial crisis happened was pure greed and the reason
people got away with being so greedy was because they were allowed to. Umm...
what's that thing called where companies are allowed to do absolutely whatever
they want even in complete disregard of even their own long-term survival...
oh yeah aggressive-free-market capitalism, just what Ayn Rand wanted.

I hope Ayn Rand's work is dead and gone so that at least my generation isn't
going to suffer the complete stupidity. I'm 21 and I've already been through
two large recessions thanks to the US, coming from the UK I hope to sweet god
that America stops following moronic policies and starts towing the line with
the rest of the world.

Quite honestly, if there's a 3rd economic recession because of the US, I'm
going to start voting for the people trying to ban international trade with
the US, at least then the US can kill itself without ruining everyone else's
country too.

~~~
Femur
>I hope Ayn Rand's work is dead and gone so that at least my generation isn't
going to suffer the complete stupidity.

I think a work of literature that has had such an impact should never be lost
or forgotten no matter how much you disagree with the content. Mein Kampf is a
great example of this.

~~~
unalone
Seconded. _Atlas Shrugged_ has a hell of a lot to teach people, young
individuals in particular. Frankly, I liked the _Atlas Shrugged_ dicks more
than I liked the emo dicks at 16. The guys that read _Atlas Shrugged_ avoided
a lot of the existentialist angst, and some of them went on to do some cool
things with their time. That's worth the many people who get obnoxious after
reading it.

------
electromagnetic
Coming from Europe and suffering two recessions caused by US economics, all
which Ayn Rand promoted I hope this crap never gets turned into a film.

The economy grows at a fair rate on average, yet Rand's aggressive-free-market
capitalism basically promotes trying to grow the economy at 5000% until _pop_
and everyone who doesn't have $500 million in the bank gets screwed over. I'm
sorry, but when someone gets fired and then handed a $150 million check for
losing their job, I think capitalism flat out sucks.

All the CEO's who've been fired have lost their jobs for a reason: bad
business. Yet they're rewarded with more money than an average person would
make in a millennium. Yet if I lost my job, I'd be given nothing.

~~~
viggity
I think you're sorely mistaken if you think that the economics of the US are
anywhere near what Rand would consider to be Capitalism.

Have you even read her books?

~~~
Automatt-2
Enlightened self interest doesn't work on a scale necessary for a civilization
to function.

Every nation that has next to no government and every man is free to do with
his life as he wishes is a giant shithole that teeters in and out of
revolution. Want to see objectivism at work? Go visit Somalia or the
Democratic Republic of the Congo. In those countries every man is free to
pursue "... his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with
productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only
absolute." Countries full of people who are "all noble heros free to pursue
their dreams". Too bad their dreams all involve mass murder and slavery to
pursue personal wealth and power.

Hobbes was smarter than Rand. We have a Government to protect us from each
other.

~~~
viggity
I don't think you'll find Rand objecting to a government that protects its
people from physical aggression or coercion. The problem I have with most
world governments (including my own), is that they try to (and fail at)
protecting people from matters that the people are capable of handling
themselves. In doing so, they rob people of their motivation and self
satisfaction.

I understand why people would think that Rand says "you should only care about
your own life and happiness". But that is bullshit. It isn't considered bad to
care about and care for other people (look at Dagny and Hank/John/Francisco).
What Rand is railing against is being forced to care about another person
(which is what the government does to the producers by threat of coercion).

I'm a firm believer in Rand's theories, but that certainly doesn't stop me
from donating my time and money to worthy causes. The important part is that
my donations are made of my own FREE WILL and not forced at the barrel of a
gun.

