GQ article on Ayn Rand's role in the financial crisis

[bascule]

http://www.gq.com/entertainment/books/200911/ayn-rand-dick-books-fountainhead

 

This was a pretty interesting read for me, especially as someone who liked Ayn Rand earlier in my life (I read her books in high school and enjoyed them)

 

It's funny how people read the tea leaves of the financial crisis and see two different things. Some people look at the bailouts and see the scenario depicted in Atlas Shrugged actually happening. This article takes the opposite perspective: Randroids caused the financial crisis.

 

The article certainly has an interesting perspective. It describes how many people become temporarily infatuated with Rand then wake up and realize "Oh wait, Ayn Rand is horrible, I should stop liking her" while for others the "infection persists". And it just so happened that some of the individuals the infection persisted in were the ones making the decisions which lead to the financial crisis.

 

What do you think? Did Ayn Rand's ideas contribute to the financial crisis?

[john5746]

What do you think? Did Ayn Rand's ideas contribute to the financial crisis?

 

To some degree, maybe. I happen to think the root problem is America has tried to live beyond its means, trying to make money with as little value added work and education as possible. We do need Atlas, but we also need those who make him possible as well. Unfortunately, I think more and more of those people will not be Americans. Instead of Atlas shrugged, it should be Atlas outsourced

[iNow]

Instead of Atlas shrugged, it should be Atlas outsourced

That's a great line. I love it. It's too bad nobody replied to it.

 

 

Here's another great line:

 

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/03/ephemera-2009-7.html

 

There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old’s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs.

[john5746]

That's a great line. I love it. It's too bad nobody replied to it.

 

 

Here's another great line:

 

http://kfmonkey.blogspot.com/2009/03/ephemera-2009-7.html

 

LOL, great quote.

[iNow]

Thanks. It gave me a chuckle, as well.

[lemur]

The thing that is so funny about this thread is that it may be right and wrong at the same time. Randian selfish individualism and total drive to succeed in capitalism may have indeed been responsible for the widespread technological innovations and investments that drove abundance to the point of financial collapse. However, it would be wrong to claim that the actual suffering resulting from the recession is due to this same spirit of capitalism, because what has emerged as a result of crisis is a socialist ethic that Rand would not have supported. She would have simply urged people to go on producing and investing and expressing their individual drive to create to the fullest in whatever way they could, imo. She would have eschewed the idea of doing so in the interest of any kind of altruism or social good, but for the ambition of the individual she would have urged to keep moving forward.

 

Capitalism is a self-annihilating system of economic regulation. It is designed to regulate scarcity by driving up prices when a commodity is scarce. This price appreciation, in turn, causes people to avoid wasting it and this creates a form of ad hoc rationing. At the same time, producers are stimulated to produce more to cash in on the high price, which brings suppliers into the market and ends the scarcity. So when a commodity like real estate becomes so abundant that the price crashes, this is actually a victory for capitalism. It's like when you are at the end of a level in a video game and you have to bombard the monster with so much firepower before it topples. Capitalism raises the price and everyone in the market bombards the market with inventory until the price topples and then it's on to the next level. So Randian ingenuity may have helped topple the real estate markets but its true failure is that it has yet to devise a new level for capitalism to move on to its next battle. What high prices are in need of toppling through a market flood and that is where capitalism must go next.