Atlas Shrugged: Part I, an adaptation of the first third of Ayn Rand’s 1957 bestseller Atlas Shrugged, is hitting theaters.
The movie has been awaited for decades, but some say it’s more than timely. Political commentator Robert Tracinski suggests that its portrayals of the themes of the state stomping the productive individual and the productive individual “going on strike against the creed of self-sacrifice” are being multifariously echoed in the real world.
Tracinski relates how one moviegoer saw the film at a giant mall built with millions in government subsidies that now stands nearly empty — much like the many empty buildings in the socialism-ravaged cityscapes of Atlas Shrugged. Other parallels Tracinski sees:
- The federal government demanding that companies not locate operations in states relatively free of onerous regulation.
- Environmentalists and regulators seeking to thwart innovative ways of extracting resources from the earth, like hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas from shale.
- Government punishing successful companies in order to provide bailouts for failing companies (General Motors, Chrysler).
And entrepreneur Jerry Della Femina just sold his famous eponymous restaurant and abandoned other business ventures. “I’m just not ready to have my wealth redistributed,” Femina explains. “I’m not ready to pay more tax money than the next guy because I provide jobs and because I work a 60-hour week and I earn more than $250,000 a year.… Read a brilliant book by Ayn Rand called Atlas Shrugged, and you’ll know.”
This is Common Sense. I’m Paul Jacob.
5 replies on “Is Atlas Shrugging?”
What about the new requirements in bidding for federal contracts that require that one disclose whether one has contributed any funds to an opposing political party, not that that would in ANY WAY be a deciding factor in whether one got the job?
What about the government subsidizing fatherless families, resulting in a decline in the success of the impoverished ever since the beginning of the war on poverty? Creating a social class of permanent welfare. Resulting in the stasis of the black population, which had improved in level of education, social status, and economic success nearly every year since the Civil War up UNTIL the war on poverty and it’s been downhill since then.
What about a shift in the population where we had 50 million Americans in manufacturing and 8 million in government 40 years ago, and now have about 11 million in manufacturing and 23 million in government?
I certainly give a “vote of no confidence” to this government. Were bowing out a graceful option, or were there better alternatives, I’d be gone in a heartbeat. I don’t blame any billionaire or millionaire (or even thousandaire) who decides to stop supporting this system and get the heck out. Seems to me, that’d make them more responsible, not less…
All anyone has to do to see that this government is totally corrupt and no longer tied to the constitution in any way is visit a court house, and watch the serfs come before the judge and state prosecutor. It’s a sham. The prosecutor puts all the pressure –in the form of a punishment not fitting the crime– in the world on the defendant, and the defendant crumbles and accepts a guilty plea, or his licensed attorney does so. Even if this doesn’t happen, and he does go to trial, he is gagged from telling the truth, or referencing the constitution, under the threat of a “contempt of court” citation which carries a $1,000 fine and 30 days in jail. Like the plea bargain threat before it, this is cruel and unusual punishment, as defined by black’s law dictionary pre-6th edition, and common sense. Licensed attorneys won’t buck the unlawful gag orders “motions in limine” placed on the defendant, so his only chance for justice is to represent himself, which almost noone does, because the law is a mystery to them.
And even if a pro-se defendant goes to “trial”, he’ll be facing a jury hand-picked by the prosecutor during the unconstitutional process of “voir dire” (that didn’t exist before it was created and used to stack Northern juries to return fugitive slaves, in late 1850). And even then, that jury will be instructed by the judge to ignore their consciences and “apply the law” (something that was anathema to the Founding Fathers, and their Founding Fathers, the levellers).
So, those are just some of the ways we are now denied our birthright, the Bill of Rights.
It’s time to abolish this government. Failing that, I can’t blame anyone for getting the hell away from it, as fast as humanly possible.
Stay strong,
–Jake
“Environmentalists and regulators seeking to thwart innovative ways of extracting resources from the earth, like hydraulic fracturing to extract natural gas from shale.”
As long as companies doing this pay pay full compensation for collateral damage (such as ruining existing water wells), they should be allowed to operated unmolested.
The forth branch of self government:
Several state constitutions, including the Georgia Constitution of 1777 and the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1790 specifically provided that “the jury shall be judges of law, as well as fact.”
fourth