Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Publius
Great job again, Publius.

I expect this chapters thread may be longer than most others because there is so many details to discuss!

I'll comment on your paragraph heading "Rand and Technology" with this post.

I have had discussions with others about 'Galts Gulch' and what it really symbolized and the one thing that I feel needs to be clarified is that the Gulch is not a 60's or 70's era 'back to the land' movement. I don't know that Rand was ever given the opportunity to explain this detail, the movement starting after the publication of Atlas Shrugged. I remember the era and the general feeling that technology was creating more problems than it was solving and that if somehow people could be convinced to shun technological advances, 'things' would get better. The more vague the description of the problem, the more convincing the argument to shun technology.

The looters are doing the same with Directive 10-289, hoping to stop any changes created by new inventions, hoping to secure their positions of power.

It's interesting to read about the Luddite movement and the consequences. A Luddite couldn't exist in Galts world ( and certainly not the Gulch! ) other than perhaps as a subsistence farmer. At this point we can ask ourselves who are most like the Luddites? The moochers are stopping the the motor of the world with their directive (tossing their shoe into the machine). They have no choice because they cannot produce, they have painted themselves into a corner. The Gulchers are embracing technology and making it work for them. They are only limiting their efforts to prevent their product from being taken and used against them.

Rands take on technology was that it should be used when appropriate for the benefit of the individual. When used collectively ( as in the camouflage of the valley ) the use of the technology is appropriate and I believe the expense and rewards would have been borne the same as our founding Fathers had intended for our national defense.

14 posted on 06/06/2009 8:49:48 AM PDT by whodathunkit (Shrugging as I leave for the Gulch)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: whodathunkit
When used collectively ( as in the camouflage of the valley ) the use of the technology is appropriate and I believe the expense and rewards would have been borne the same as our founding Fathers had intended for our national defense.

I'm going to remind you of that statement in two weeks when we dissect Project X.

38 posted on 06/06/2009 12:41:59 PM PDT by Publius (Gresham's Law: Bad victims drive good victims out of the market.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson