We know nothing is sacred anymore. How else could a book, a movie about ethics, reason, written by a woman who epitomized the American dream, a woman who fled a totalitarian state, who championed individual rights, fall prey to Tea Party propaganda, liberal denigration and other distortions that go on and on depending on one's political beliefs or disbeliefs.
Atlas Shrugged Part 1, the recently released movie based on Ayn Rand's magnum opus, Atlas Shrugged, -- hijacked. Director Paul Johansson, actors: Taylor Schilling, Grant Bowler and Jsu Garcia, among others, bring Rand's characters to glorious life across this magnificent country of ours from East to West, coast to coast, evoking just what Americana is. This story hits us today, resonates just as it did when published over 50 years ago, its relevancy seemingly eternal. Why? Celebrating individual freedom, the power of one's vision, the power to create, to risk for what one believes, to work hard and make a good life, doesn't this represent classic American values?
Atlas Shrugged, still in print, reported to have sold over 25 million copies to date, proves Ayn Rand had and still has her finger on the proverbial pulse of not only America, but also the aspirations of world. When Atlas Shrugged was first published the majority of critical reviews were less than favorable. Obviously the people spoke and overrode the critics. It's time to speak again.
To quote Ayn Rand: "You don't have to see through the eyes of others." Why then are we seeing through the eyes of critics, naysayers, political propagandists, and falling victim to others' agendas. This is missing the point of Ayn Rand: individual freedom. Ayn Rand saw firsthand, experienced firsthand what happens when that freedom is denied. Lionized, demonized, she stood for individual freedom above all else because she personally experienced living under a repressive regime, under a philosophy of control that extended from dominating the world, the economy, religious thought, all aspects of life, our individual expression -- and yes control of our thoughts. Atlas Shrugged was created in response to these early formative years growing up in the Soviet Union and the fear that this system might prevail.
What was she espousing? The glory of man, the glory of the individual, the infinite possibilities we possess, can manifest, the power we have within us to be creators, doers, thinkers. In my opinion she wanted to open minds, hearts, show us how to think, to transcend dogma, politics, mores, cultures, to see all points of view not to stifle them, not to say this is what you should think. We all know to put the oxygen mask on ourselves first, then others. How can we help others if we ourselves are a burden? So we take care of ourselves first so we can take care of others if necessary. We rely on ourselves first before we seek a handout. Isn't this what America is all about? Why our ancestors came to this great land? Why Ayn Rand left her native country for our great shores.
Individual freedom means we are all entitled to our opinions. We all have varying tastes, likes and dislikes. Some may see the movie and hate it. Others come out raving. Personally when I was present for two screenings, the audience was ecstatic. I would say 98 percent of those who attended loved the movie. They were fans of the book thrilled to finally have Dagny Taggart, Hank Reardon and Francisco D'Anconia up on the big screen and excited to see the next installments.
In the spirit of Ayn Rand, let us not go quietly into the night. If we can agree with Ayn Rand and advocate the morality of rational self-interest, then don't sell yourself short. Judge for yourself. Go see the film. Don't let the hijackers get away with it.
Michael Shermer: Why Liberals Should See (and Like) Atlas Shrugged Part 1
Jonathan Kim: Atlas Chugged! The Inevitable Atlas Shrugged, Part 1 Drinking Game
Ellis Weiner: What I Learned from Parodying Atlas Shrugged
Atlas Shrugged: Part I (2011) - IMDb
It's hard for anyone to hijack Ayn Rand and turn her into somebody she wasn't. That's why I'm surprised by your attempt to present her as an upholder of morality. This is the same Ayn Rand whose book, The Fascist New Frontier depicted the war hero John F. Kennedy, the President of the United States, as a fascist and his administration as promoting fascism. This is the same man who stared down her Soviet Union during the Cuban Missile Crisis. Because Kennedy was assassinated, her publishers declined to allow the printing of her title.
It was said that the Movie Atlas Shrugged received standing ovations in Dallas. Well, so did Kennedy's assassination.
Let's not forget that Rand's hero was a child murdering serial killer named William Edward Hickman, whose infamous motto, "What's good for me is right" Rand adopted as the cornerstone of her "morality." She praised Hickman for possessing what she called the psychology of the "real man," not a wimp. No doubt, Lee Harvey Oswald represented such an enlightened exemplar of the "morality of self-interest" as her hero, Hickman. After all, he murdered the man she called a fascist and portrayed as a threat to America.
The acting? Well, I willing to give young performers a break, especially when they have so little material to work with.
By the way, the latter group are those who can't make ends meet who support tax breaks for the wealthy because they think they're "reserving" their own future privilege. For you folks in this category, I've done the math on the odds of winning the lottery, you have almost the same chance of winning whether you play or not.
Another thought to consider, since the lottery in this country is really voluntary taxation, who's really benefiting from those who play?
Miles "A Rising Tide Floats ALL Boats" Long
The movie, was/is a joke. The acting, the script, the message and the way it's all been fashioned is utterly nonsensical.
I can see where this movie would be very successful with a certain crowd - they're being told what they want to hear, oblivious to the blatant shortcomings of the film's quality and integrity.
The movie, just like the author's editorial, is an opinion, couched as fact. Not surprisingly, it uses fear to motivate - or it tries to. These people don't have an original bone in their bodies. But then that's my opinion.
This movie is laughably bad, in that it takes itself so, so seriously; again, not unlike the editorial author.
To try to paint anything laudable on Rand's overriding "philosophy" is childishly ridiculous. And, to urge people to see a movie that critics and attendees have panned under the guise of "this bad tasting patent medicine is good for you, so drink up" is just plain pitiful.
Miles "Embarrassed Ms. Mola Even Tried" Long
"To try to paint anything laudable on Rand's overriding "philosophÂy" is childishly ridiculousÂ." Trying to substitute childish ad homs for arguments is ridiculous.
"to urge people to see a movie that critics and attendees have panned under the guise of "this bad tasting patent medicine is good for you, so drink up" is just plain pitiful." The only thing pitiful is the straw man you just created. Mola didn't say the movie was bad but you should see it anyway because it is good for you. She (wrongfully in my opinion) believes it is a good movie - claims that the majority of people who have seen it agree (unlikely) - and thinks the critics are trying to discourage those who would like it from seeing it (in some instances, this is obviously the case - but certainly not in all, or even a majority of them). So while one can certainly disagree with any or all of her points, it is fallacious and fraudulent to depict her as saying something else.
This lack of community is what demonstrates a regressed perspective more animalistic than human. To expect to exist absent the repercussions and consequences of community membership and "go it alone" by insulating one's self with wealth is delusional.
Having read the book, and "discovered" the myriad flaws in the premise and structure of the Rand philosophy, I need not see the movie except for, possibly, to look at the structure of the script and the quality of the production; it is a meal of little substance, barely palatable in taste.
Personally, I truly hope you enjoyed the movie. With ticket prices and refreshments as high as they are today, I would hat.e to think you wasted your money on something you found without merit.
Miles "On A Pablum-Free Diet" Long
Who are her fans? Just our friendly citizens who want to feel moral about ending welfare assistance, medicaid, and any government spending that doesn't go to wars and building railroad lines.
Why do we have to call that a "philosophy"? There's nothing very deep about it. The "Thanks, I'll keep mine" philosophy.
Most of us have jobs, support ourselves, and still see the benefit of using some of our resources for the sick and poor. Maybe I'll call that the "I'm smarter than a toddler" philosophy.
"Who are her fans? Just our friendly citizens who want to feel moral about ending welfare assistanceÂ, medicaid..." False. We *are* moral, because we reject the evil notion that men are slaves who must 'service' the needs of others.
""Thanks, I'll keep mine" philosophyÂ." - straw man again
"see the benefit of using some of our resources for the sick and poor." Everyone is certainly free to do so. The only thing anyone objects to is you pulling out a gun and forcing them to do so. That is the action of a criminal, not the 'compassionate'.
Compassion is not achieved through the swinging of a fist.
I've said it before and apparently it keeps having to be said - if you guys really want to try to demonstrate Miss Rand's ideas are wrong, you have to start by, you know, actually presenting HER ideas. Presenting BS and *pretending* it is her idea does nothing to discredit Rand. Such fraud only discredits the person using such useless fallacies to attack her.
Every single libertarian I've spoken to would have no intention of helping anybody else with the oxygen mask. Once they get their own mask on they wouldn't care about anybody else. Like one Canadian libertarian I knew said about health care-yes he was against his country's health care system-if you can't afford health care ask your family and friends for help. Raise money yourself to pay for it. If you still can't afford it.Well, good luck to you.
The thing is, I've also known libertarians, who suddenly found themselves unemployed, now turning towards public assistance. What if they were successful in eliminating such aid? Apparently Ms. Rand turned into a socialist cause she later applied for social security and medicare. Seems to me Rand's "screw you, I've got mine" philosophy only works when you do have something. But when you suddenly have nothing, it doesn't look as appealing, as Ms.Rand later found out.
It's an old and bad trick. Sorry.
"I've also known libertariaÂns, who suddenly found themselves unemployedÂ, now turning towards public assistanceÂ." You mean they've taken BACK the money which was stolen from them in the first place (and which they could have otherwise saved/invested for just such an emergency)? Wow. Who would imagine anyone would ever do anything to achieve such justice? It's inconceivable anyone who is against government theft of their money would EVER want it back.
LOL again.
"Seems to me Rand's "screw you, I've got mine" philosophy only works when you do have something. But when you suddenly have nothing, it doesn't look as appealing"
And here we have the same lie. Miss Rand certainly did "have something" - due to the fabulous success of her writing (and speaking engagements - right up to the time she died). So why in the world would she apply to get the money back that had been taken from her all her life? Geez. That makes no sense whatsoever!
The frauds people are having to resort to here as they evade Rand's *actual* ideas is truly astonishing - and amusing. :)
Both philosophies are willfully naive about human nature and the disaster both approaches can wreck on a society.
I'm not sure why so many HP bloggers are pushing for us to go see this movie (which has gotten stinko reviews just on the merits as entertainment).
We are living through the new age of the Robber Barons. I'm not interested in seeing a movie that glories them as wise and benevolent olympian gods. Its rubbish.
/golfclap
Seeing something for one's self is certainly one way to validly learn about reality. But it is not the *only* valid way (so long as one applies logic and integration to those other methods).