The 1970s and early 80s were a fog to me. I'm sure I heard a lot of memorable songs in the 70s but I just can't remember them. If I hear a good song from my past, I'm sure I will have some precious recollection of it, but I wouldn't know it was from the 70s unless someone told me. Or any of the songs in the early 80s.
Those were my dark days.
It was also a time in my life when I refused to read any books other than my textbooks in my MBA courses at Seattle University and books I needed to be familiar with to advance my career.
That was in all likelihood the real explanation for my refusal to read both "The Fountainhead" and "Atlas Shrugged," by Ayn Rand. I remember my first wife raving about both books, "Atlas Shrugged" in particular. In other words, I did not refuse to read the books just because my first wife had recommended them.
But I'm glad I did not read Ayn Rand and did not become one of her disciples.
The most famous disciple of Rand is Alan Greenspan, the former Fed Chairman, the one whom current Chairman Ben Bernanke succeeded.
Greenspan was the primary architect of the second golden age of America, he was also one of the major civil engineers of the economic collapse of the U.S.
You see, Ayn Rand taught that the best minds in society must be given absolute freedom in their pursuit of profit. Through her philosophy of Objectivism, Rand thought that such talented people would always spearhead society's march towards economic greatness through rational and superior thinking. Through objective and rational thinking, such people would always come up with the best solutions to social and economic problems.
Rand theorized that if the best minds in society went on strike and all retreated to a mountain retreat, the world would collapse. She felt that the best and most talented supported the world, just as the legendary Atlas carried the world on his shoulders and back. And if Atlas balked, or refused to carry the world any longer (shrugged), the world would simply collapse and even implode.
The world therefore owed its life, its existence to those best and brightest minds. Such people must be given absolute freedom to do their work, unfettered by government rules that tend to restrict their activities.
The unsuspecting Rand, then later Greenspan, never imagined the world they would help create.
Greed and excess eventually did the Randian philosophy in.
I read about Derek Jeter's history-making 2722nd hit as a Yankee, eclipsing the record set by Lou Gehrig seventy years ago and forever identifying him as the one who broke the great Gehrig's record. Someday, Jeter may be surpassed by someone else, but it will probably take decades, not years before such a feat happens. Jeter is one superstar who deserves all the accolades he has received in his baseball career.
There are some who like Jeter are deserving of all the hosannas and wealth that society has showered on them, such as Michael Jordan, Roger Federer, Tiger Woods, Michael Phelps, Lance Armstrong and others too many to list, but mainly the superstars of today have overblown accomplishments and certainly not deserving of society's long-term goo-goo eyes.
This, after all, is the age of the overcompensated, overweight "pillars" of society. The CEOs of today's major corporations now make 300 times what the average workers in their respective companies make. In the 1950s and 1960s, when America became far and away the major economic superpower in the world, the CEOs made 12 to 20 times what the average workers in their respective companies made.
How did the CEOs finagle such huge salaries, stock options and other forms of extra compensation for themselves? By closing American plants and relocating their manufacturing in third-world countries. The CEOs managed to increase profitability of their global operations by firing American workers and hiring workers in other countries.
Every thousand-block of American workers fired meant an uptick in the price of a company's shares in the New York Stock Exchange. For such upticks, the CEOs were rewarded with compensation previously reserved only for Eastern potentates.
The banks, investment and insurance companies made a compact. They would sell each other's products so that banks, insurance and investment companies would no longer be distinguishable. All of them would now be known as "financials."
The geniuses in the financial world created mortgage-backed securities and credit swaps that were responsible for the recent subprime mortgage crisis and the recent meltdown in the world economy.
"What?!" Greenspan exclaimed. "The meltdown occurred not as a result of the best and brightest minds going on strike (as in Atlas Shrugged) but because those best and brightest minds did a job on the world economy?" (Quotes from Greenspan were invented by me.)
The U.S. government seemingly was in on the whole farce and charade. From Reagan and Bush, Sr. looking the other way while Japanese manufacturers illegally dumped televisions and other electronic products in the U.S. market to kill American brands like RCA, Zenith, Magnavox and others, to Clinton hurriedly pushing through Nafta, which as Ross Perot had warned would create "a giant sucking sound" of American jobs being lost to Canada and Mexico, to George Bush, who did not see anything wrong with China taking over virtually all manufacturing functions in the U.S. in exchange for China buying up U.S. Treasuries which financed the Iraq War, the true war on terror, the tax cuts for the rich.
Because of the work of the best and brightest minds - not because those minds had gone on strike, as "Atlas Shrugged" had envisioned - the U.S. is now a basket case, whose problems are more gargantuan and worse than the problems faced by third-world countries like the Philippines.
Most people in the Philippines are used to having nothing. Americans are drifting because their assets have shrunk in value and even their most sacred possession, the embodiment of the American dream - now has a negative value. Many unemployed Americans have exhausted their savings as they wait for the employment picture to show some improvement. As though their lost jobs would ever come back.
There is a looming crisis in commercial real estate in this country, expected to peak as the meltdown in residential real estate is arrested and abated. The showcase for this topsy-turvy world of commercial real estate is the $11 billion City Center project in Las Vegas, the biggest privately-funded real estate development in the U.S. The geniuses who dreamed up this project never imagined that the decade-long boom in Vegas real estate would ever end. This, despite the fact that real estate booms don't last very long and are always followed by busts.
The new U.S. jobs that President Obama promised would be created in the alternative energy industry - what are the chances that such jobs will materialize? China and Europe are so far ahead of the U.S. in alternative energy they see us now as the poachers and not the other way around, which it should be since the alternative energy technology was an American invention.
The best and brightest minds are locked in the struggle between good and evil, between the haves and have-nots, between pure capitalists and the so-called socialists. Very little is being done in partnership. One side opposes what the other side proposes, as if by gut reaction.
The overarching debate on who should bail out the country, however, has recently been settled. It is the American middle class. Once again, the middle class is called upon to rescue the group of prodigal sons and daughters who might be exactly the people that Ayn Rand thought were the pillars of society, the Atlas that carried the world on his shoulders and back.
The middle class has already rescued the banks, the insurance companies, GM and Chrysler. They suspect that they are being asked to rescue the American health care system from eventual bankruptcy. They feel that they and their children are eventually going to be hit hard when the tax man comes a-calling to pay for the trillions in deficits that government has been incurring in record pace.
No, Ayn Rand, was wrong. The real Atlas in American society is not the best and brightest minds. It is the middle class. And recently that real Atlas has shrugged.
It has shrugged on the airwaves, in street demonstrations, in so-called town hall meetings across the country. They're mad as hell, they can't take it anymore.
If they would just drop the racist attacks on Obama, and if they would buck those who have seized on their angst to promote the crazy-quilt of right-wing causes, the rest of the country would take them more seriously.
With my life experience, I still fail to understand the complexities and nuances of power. The brightest minds do not agree on a universal truth and power is exerted in the choice of which minds will prevail. In other words, the power structure determines the ideology which then affects everyone.
ReplyDeleteDuring a crisis there can be scapegoating in which blame is attached to a sector, or a person, or a group, when in fact the "guilt" lies in the power structure.
"Status" is another complicated issue and I wont get started on that, but it would be a good topic for a day-long kuwentohan session I tried, but failed,to initiate at our reunion (no power structure back up)
All true, Tony. The problem is exacerbated by attempts on the part of some people to create their own realities. People in power know that they can create reality by saying something untrue over and over.
ReplyDeleteAs one Democratic leader in Congress has stated, people are entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.
From Philip Raitz:
ReplyDeleteAyn Rand's Objectivism, which I have studied and I have actually read her novels, is not as negative as you are implying. Her philosophy speaks to the belief that a government's legitimate function of regulation should be strictly controlled; governments should not actually supply anything that can be supplied by the private industry.
Phil R
Hi Philip,
ReplyDeleteHere's the explanation of Ayn Rand's Objectivism, supplied by Ayn Rand herself (as proffered by the Ayn Rand Institute):
The following is a short description of Objectivism given by Ayn Rand in 1962.
by Ayn Rand
At a sales conference at Random House, preceding the publication of Atlas Shrugged, one of the book salesmen asked me whether I could present the essence of my philosophy while standing on one foot. I did as follows:
Metaphysics Objective Reality
Epistemology Reason
Ethics Self-interest
Politics Capitalism
If you want this translated into simple language, it would read: 1. “Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed” or “Wishing won’t make it so.” 2. “You can’t eat your cake and have it, too.” 3. “Man is an end in himself.” 4. “Give me liberty or give me death.”
If you held these concepts with total consistency, as the base of your convictions, you would have a full philosophical system to guide the course of your life. But to hold them with total consistency—to understand, to define, to prove and to apply them—requires volumes of thought. Which is why philosophy cannot be discussed while standing on one foot—nor while standing on two feet on both sides of every fence. This last is the predominant philosophical position today, particularly in the field of politics.
My philosophy, Objectivism, holds that:
Reality exists as an objective absolute—facts are facts, independent of man’s feelings, wishes, hopes or fears.
Reason (the faculty which identifies and integrates the material provided by man’s senses) is man’s only means of perceiving reality, his only source of knowledge, his only guide to action, and his basic means of survival.
Man—every man—is an end in himself, not the means to the ends of others. He must exist for his own sake, neither sacrificing himself to others nor sacrificing others to himself. The pursuit of his own rational self-interest and of his own happiness is the highest moral purpose of his life.
The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism. It is a system where men deal with one another, not as victims and executioners, nor as masters and slaves, but as traders, by free, voluntary exchange to mutual benefit. It is a system where no man may obtain any values from others by resorting to physical force, and no man may initiate the use of physical force against others. The government acts only as a policeman that protects man’s rights; it uses physical force only in retaliation and only against those who initiate its use, such as criminals or foreign invaders. In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church.
Copyright © 1962 by Times-Mirror Co.
From Lynn Abad Santos:
ReplyDeleteCHAY,
GREENSPAN WAS INTERVIEWED EARLY THIS YEAR AFTER HE TESTIFIED IN CONGRESS ON THE DEBACLE OF WALL STREET
I AM NOT SURE IF IT WAS ANN KOURY, OR KATIE COURIC.
THE BOTTOM LINE IS HOW DID THIS ALL GO WRONG?
AFTER ALL IT WAS GREENSPAN WHO CONVINCED CLINTON IN 1998 THAT THE SAFEGUARDS WERE SO FOOLPROOF, THEY COULD DISMANTLE THE SAFEGUARDS INSTITUTED AFTER THE GREAT DEPRESSION ON 1929.
GREENSPAN SAID THAT THE SYSTEM WAS MATHEMATICALLY PERFECT, SELF CORRECTING, AND DISCIPLINED BECAUSE IT WAS PREMISED ON THE LOGIC THAT NO ONE ENTITY WOULD EVER WANT TO WORK AGAINST IT'S OWN INTERESTS. AFTER ALL THAT WAS SUICIDE.
SO HE WAS ASKED WHAT HE THOUGHT OF THAT LOGIC NOW AND IF IT WOULD HAPPEN AGAIN. HE SAID IT IS VERY LIKELY TO HAPPEN AGAIN. WHY? BECAUSE HE SAID MAN IS INCAPABLE OF DOING WHAT IS RIGHT EVEN WHEN IT IS IN HIS OWN BEST INTEREST.
HE NEVER FIGURED THAT THE MANAGEMENT DIDN'T GIVE A DAMN ABOUT THE COMPANIES THEY WORKED FOR. THEY JUST WANTED TO RIP-OFF EVERYBODY THINKING THEY WOULD BE LONG GONE BEFORE IT BLEW UP IN THEIR FACE.
SOMETIMES SMART PEOPLE HAVE NO STREET SMARTS.
YOU WOULD THINK HE WOULD HAVE LEARNED FROM THE FIASCO OF LONG-TERM-CAPITAL. BUT IT SEEMS HE THOUGH THAT WAS A FLUKE SINCE IT DID NOT IMPLODE BECAUSE OF GREED BUT MY INCOMPLETE FACTORING OF SOME OTHER VARIABLES. HE ALREADY HAD SUCH A HARD TIME BAILING OUT LONG TERM CAPITAL BEFORE DISSOLVING IT, YOU WOULD THINK HE MIGHT HAVE BEEN MORE PARANOID AFTER THAT INCIDENT. THAT HAPPENED BARELY 2 YEARS AFTER THE INDUSTRY WAS DEREGULATED BY HIM SOMETIME IN 2000 THEREABOUTS.
LYNN
Hi Lynn,
ReplyDeleteI always look forward to your comments because you're always right on the money.
Cesar