Dear Mr. Reisman– I enjoyed reading your blog just now, but if you go back and read what I wrote, you’ll note that I specifically set a parameter: to qualify a book had to be published in the last two decades. Atlas Shrugged was published, I believe, in 1959. The point I was trying to make is that over the last two decades, as business has become more central to American life–or least a more central topic now that Americans invest their 401Ks etc etc, and as business stories have become a part of the front page as well as the business page, and the subject of many non fiction books, where are the novelists? My point still stands, I believe.
Dear Mr. Nocera:
Thank you for your reply. Unfortunately, I believe it merely serves to dig you deeper into the hole of an indefensible position.
The “parameter” you set of books published in the last two decades was purely arbitrary, and so I chose to ignore it. You could not possibly have chosen it if you had read and appreciated Atlas Shrugged. This is a book of such importance that it automatically dictates a time period long enough to include it.
And your notion that it is such things as 401Ks that are significant in determining the importance of business to people’s lives is incredibly myopic. The importance of business is manifested in the difference between the standard of living in the United States and that of the Third World and the pre-industrial era. Where do you think the advances of the last two centuries or more have come from if not from the continuous innovation and the saving and investment of businessmen? This is an essential part of the message of Atlas Shrugged. It is a lesson that you and your colleagues at The New York Times, and most of the rest of the contemporary intellectual establishment, have not learned and refuse to consider.
George Reisman
{ 15 comments }
There comes a time when you just have to accept that you were exaggerating, George. I loved reading Atlas Shrugged and it has had a profound impact on my opinions, but quite frankly the world does not revolve around it.
Just because you don’t like the time frame he chose doesn’t mean you have tear him apart. It is, after all, his article.
I agree with Peter.
For instance, while Atlas Shrugged was great for its time, what about books that preceeded it? An argument could be made that there are classics for each decade and the author of the NT Times article does just that for more contemporary times. FWIW, Rand played no direct role in my development as a libertarian or economist.
Ayn Rand’s talent for fiction was lacking.
Unfortunately, young people do not tend to read literature from the 1950s. It is fair to assume that they are most influenced by literature in the last 20 years.
I once wrote an article demonstrating from Rand’s own wrtings that she likely had certain concerns about the theory of evolution. In spite of the fact that it was documented, my suggestion was denounced by certain Objectivists as “arbitrary.” If you question how much first hand knowledge Rand had of Kant given that she cites him only once or twice, Objectivists will say that it is “arbitrary.”
Rand is an important writer, but she wasn’t infallible.
Incidentally, I have started a blog devoted to Rand and Objectivism. (See the url.)
Mr. Reisman does well, again, by properly skewering another self-serving servant of disinformation. Nocera’s own words, below, show that his thoughts/articles are, either limited to his “own” discoveries, or thinly veiled advertorials for his product(s).
Nocera: “The point I was trying to make is that over the last two decades, as business has become more central to American life–or least a more central topic now that Americans invest their 401Ks etc etc,…”
Reisman’s reply: “The importance of business is manifested in the difference between the standard of living in the United States and that of the Third World and the pre-industrial era. Where do you think the advances of the last two centuries or more have come from if not from the continuous innovation and the saving and investment of businessmen?”, puts into plain relief that Nocera’s focus is to picture something other than the subject of a useful field of view.
Search up : Nocera + 401(k) ,for background.
I sincerely doubt that Nocera’s piece ran with the type of disclosure(necessary), as below:
Referencing author of Houston Chronicle Op/Ed on Global Warming: Bradley is president of the Institute for Energy Research, a 501(c)(3) organization formed in 1989 in Houston and funded by individuals, foundations and corporations, including major energy companies. He is author of “Climate Alarmism Reconsidered” (London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 2003). His Web site is energyrealism.org.
Reisman shows, again, that his faculties have not left him, in the least, when we see that his original supposition: “perhaps he is aware of these facts but simply chooses to ignore them. If this is the case, it would be a classic illustration of the mentality of those once aptly described as “an effete corps of impudent snobs.” That is, a collection of ignoramuses feigning knowledge while going back and forth between ignoring and ridiculing those, such as Ayn Rand and Ludwig von Mises, who actually possess it.”
Spot on. And, proves why many, proper, faculties welcome his sound insight.
Neil-
Rand’s view on evolution was more reasonable than the creationist view of many modern Rockwellians, but it’s true she didn’t outright embrace it either.
*laugh* I was going to refer you to an intriguing article on the topic I remember seeing over on Rebirth of Reason – and then noticed that its author is none other than one Neil Parille! I’ll have to check out your blog.
I would dispute that young people today don’t read fiction of the 50s. My daughter is 16 and in the last year she has read not only Atlas Shrugged, but many other classics. Interestingly, I had tried to get her to read Rand with little success. It was only when her girlfriend raved about Rand that she decided to pick it up and give it a try. And of course she loved AS so much she has now read most of the other Rand books.
My daughter may not be typical (god I hope not). She attends a very demanding high school that emphasizes the arts and is consistently ranked near the top of her class, but most of her friends are reading classic literature as well. I also note that their reading is in addition to what is required for school. There was no requirement to read AS; they just like it.
I think a lot of times we underestimate the younger generations. Good literature stands the test of time and new generations recognize good writing when they read it.
And libertarians can find a unique audience in teenagers. I’ve found that my daughter and her friends respond quite well when I discuss libertarian ideas with them. Part of the reason, no doubt, is that they want to be different. The vast majority of their peers and teachers are liberal, especially in my daughter’s case since she attends an arts school, so hearing about libertarianism is fresh and allows them to stand out from the crowd.
Don’t worry about the younger generation. As libertarians we should be encouraging young people to read about libertarian ideas, not just “business” as it is depicted in popular fiction. When we do, they respond positively.
Professor Reisman asks, “Where do you think the advances of the last two centuries or more have come from if not from the continuous innovation and the saving and investment of businessmen?”
I’d be interested to hear what Nocera answers (if he ever does).
The guts of Ayn Rand’s book is that the benefits of modern technology, choice of lifestyle, excellent products etc. etc. etc., all those things we benefit from today, come from the thoughts, decisions and actions of businessmen and entrepeneurs.
As has been said many times, “Any damn fool can invent something.” It takes a special kind of person to make an invention useful for people in real applications. That is, get the thing manufactured and distributed so that people can use it.
I think the main points to realise are:
1/. Atlas Shrugged is very relevant when it comes to considering the role of businessmen and entrepeneurs and what it is they provide for the rest of us.
2/. Nocera and the liberal establishment do not know and are willfully ignorant.
3/. The Professor is spot on.
Sione
“Unfortunately, young people do not tend to read literature from the 1950s. It is fair to assume that they are most influenced by literature in the last 20 years.”
Sorry found Rand by accident when I was 18 and came across an article “The Toxicity of Environmentalism”.
I’m 30 now but when I was 20 I wasn’t being influenced by literature from the previous 20 years. As the literature that was presented in high school and uni was pure garbage. I was more influenced by science fiction.
I tell you what was influencial, TV. I grew up in a very small mining town and we only had 2 channels, so I was influenced by a couple of TV shows. Monkey!, a Japanese version of the Chinese classic tale Journey to the West, which introduced me to Buddhism and philosophy, though I’m not Buddhist. But the main influence on my life was a British sci fi show called Doctor Who.
One story in particular sent me along the path of libertarianism was The Sun Makers. Basically it was a satire on the British taxation system.
Starts off with a character going to the tax Gatherer to pay his father’s funeral tax. The tax had recently increased, but he didn’t know because he was too busy working double shifts to pay for the funeral tax and all the penalty taxes for working double shifts. The Gatherer’s suggestion was to take stimulants so he could work instead of sleeping 3 hours a night.
However the medical tax on the stimulants are more than he would make after the penalty tax for working double shifts. On top of that there is a 50% compound interest rate on unpaid taxes.
So he was being charged a death tax to pay for his father’s funeral, then having to work double
shifts to pay for the tax, then being taxed for working double shifts and being taxed on extra stimulants to stay awake so he could work double shifts to pay for all the taxes and in the end would be in more debt.
Also had the classic description of taxes by someone from a primitive culture.
Leela: “These ‘taxes’, they are like sacrifices to tribal gods?”
The Doctor: “Well, roughly speaking, but paying taxes is more painful.”
Unfortunately, young people do not tend to read literature from the 1950s. It is fair to assume that they are most influenced by literature in the last 20 years.
Posted by J Henderson at June 5, 2006 06:16 AM
Amazon.com Sales Rank:
Bonfire of the Vanities #33 482
Man if Full #803 229
Atlas Shrugged #661
The baby boomers must be re-stocking their libraries
.
I seem to be in the minority of libertarians, I didn’t like Atlas Shrugged. I guess it may be because some of the philosophy behind the book I already had a solid understanding of one way or the other.
I didn’t particularly like it, either. There were some good ideas, but the writing was abyssmal, the “engine” was a silly perpetuum mobile, which utterly wrecked the story, and the setting didn’t ring true. A good editor could have reduced it to 1/2 or 1/3 of the length, and made it a much better story.
The engine in AS captured its energy from static electricity present in the environment. Rand was not an engineer but her hero’s engine was supposed to be powered from lightening as I recall the story. Hence it did not violate the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Not that it was material to the story but it was not a perpetual motion machine.
Sione
Comments on this entry are closed.