The John Galt Effect

The John Galt Effect

I ran across a very interesting article by Dr. Arthur Robinson, the President and Research Professor of the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine and editor of the Access To Energy newsletter. The article is titled John Galt Effect and I highly recommend reading the entire piece. Here are some excerpts:

"A hidden effect of the November 4 elections and the national events that preceded them during this past year is perhaps best called the “John Galt Effect” in honor of Ayn Rand's famous character in Atlas Shrugged. It is occurring to a very significant extent."

"Our technological civilization stands upon the shoulders of many generations of free Americans and the great accomplishments that they bequeathed to us. Among those Americans and their counterparts in other countries have been a small special group of people whose unusual genius, work ethic, and love for their specialties were especially outstanding."

"As the pendulum of politics now swings toward tyranny in the United States and dangers to those whom they love increase, these men and women partially turn their talents more toward their personal responsibilities. Part of their thoughts, efforts, and ingenuity are lost to society -- and this loss cannot be recovered by either negative or positive incentives."

"What is the cost of the distraction of our real leaders -- of the men of the mind -- of the John Galts among us? I estimate that it is greater than the trillions of dollars being lost on government printing presses. Call this Y2009K -- and this time it is very real."

"One way to recognize them is that they constantly talk about their work to anyone who will listen. Now they are distracted. What are they talking about today?"

It may not be long before it becomes necessary to convert this "striking" by default into a national movement. We must do something concrete to make our voices heard over the din of our freedoms being flushed down the toilet. It is unrealistic to expect huge numbers of people to totally abandon their means of livelihood at this time, but it might be possible to organize a national strike for up to a week, by having everyone stay home who is concerned with the direction our country is turning. That would get some attention as the real costs to the economy are tallied. Let's discuss ideas for how something like this could realistically be achieved. Is there an existing organization with a presence that could act as an effective coordinator? What ideas do you have for publicizing such an event? It might be more effective for something along these lines a year from now after the current attempts at rescue have proven to be a failure, but I believe that by that time it will be too late as the social reengineering of our country will have taken place and be much harder to undo.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 1

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 9:02am

There is for sure hiding in plain sight, and I know lots of folks doing it.

How do you identify companies not built? Where are those statistics in our 'The Economy' running? And of the companies that are being built in the current free-for-some glomming up around the Potomac, do we recognize 'Gresham's Law' in full effect, even when it is staring us in the face?

Are they going to dream up a 'Should Have Built More Companies Tax', and assess a tax on wealth or revenue not created, but should have been created? Maybe Dionne Warwick is available to oversee the program.

I'm not even sure it requires anything like a 'movement.' I think it is happening naturally and as a matter of course, even by folks who might never have read Atlas Shrugged, or understood it if they did. (I still run into them...)

It may not be the case that Mankind needs to be led away from Really Bad Ideas, like cattle. Certainly not the subset of mankind you are referring to.

I interpreted Rand's AS as a romantic novel, not a blueprint for an actual alternative constructivist revolution. What she described with a giant crayon is happening naturally, in plain sight, and so, totally invisibly. Not as a 'movement.'

Sadly, it is happening.

She once said that she didn't mean for AS to be prophetic, she meant it as a 'wave off.'

But she did her part, she did what she could, at the top of her lungs. She can sleep well. She didn't fail, our tribe did.

What to look for in the coming years: ineffective pump priming resulting in calls for yet more ... ineffective pump priming.

'pumps on strike' will be objective evidence that Rand's theory of what drives mankind in AS was dead nuts right on.

We're already seeing the goofy frantic panic filled legislation. The last year could have been whole missing chapter from AS, verbatim.

We have nothing to fear, in the sense that, crap really doesn't float. The worst thing that might happen is 'nothing,' as in, the beast riders, parasites, and carcass carvers will modulate their attacks just enough to keep our remaining struggling herds of beast barely alive enough to sustain them.

You know, you often hear the phrase 'working harder, but realizing less.' It's true, plenty of folks are swimming in our economies just as hard as folks ever did, but it is as if the nature of 'bouyancy' has changed from underneath them, and they feel themselves sinking.

And yet, still they swim, for as long as they can, and that is what the Obama's and Pelosis and Reids and Franks and even whatever you want to call the sellout GOP idiots are counting on. So, there we are; they can't help themselves.

For all I know, we've been there for a while.

And for all I know, since 1983, neither an employee nor employer have I been. I sign both sides of my paycheck, and sleep like a baby. I gladly pay what taxes I must, not what taxes I could. If a Paul Krugman et al ever figures out what actually drives our economies, maybe I'll pay more someday. If not, then not.

regards,
Fred

(Edited by Fred Bartlett on 2/02, 9:05am)

Post 2

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 12:51pm

Fred:

I agree with all of your observations about the actions of many that are "hiding in plain sight" and the inability to calculate the costs of the companies, products and ideas never realized. I believe that there are many many people across the country and the world that are deeply upset with the current trends towards tyranny as their savings are squandered on bad policies and their freedoms are eroding away at an alarming pace. I think these people are republicans, democrats and independents. I'm sure that many have never read Atlas Shrugged, and if they had, some might not under its global themes. But that doesn't stop them from caring about their own futures and considering what actions they can take to preserve their assets and remain free. These people need a venue where their voices can be heard.

I'm not proposing a movement that would attempt to mimic Atlas Shrugged. Much more simply, I'm suggesting an event which will give people as you and I have identified them, the opportunity to make a symbolic gesture and be counted. Take, for example, Earth Day. This event sparks news coverage for about a week centered on all sorts of activities related to ecology, environmentalism, recycling, and so on. We need a similar type of event that focuses on the subjects of property, freedom, rights, self-determinism and personal responsibility. And in order to get people talking about these subjects, there needs to be an action that cannot be ignored.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 3

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 1:54pm

Jeffrey:

"I'm suggesting an event which will give people as you and I have identified them, the opportunity to make a symbolic gesture and be counted. "

Yes, and draws attention to the issue, and make other people who are simply bewildered at what is happening in our nation aware of and thinking of alternatives.

I think it's a good idea, an effective political idea. I surely wouldn't discourage it.

A difficulty to overcome, and I'm not saying it is a huge difficulty, is that in general, as a tendency, this is asking folks generally suspicious of collective action to engage in a collective action.

But, that's a little like, there was once a strong idea circulating in this nation that we as individuals should all be, as much as possible, free from the unfettered arbitrary overwhelming power of all of us over any one of us, and that that was such a great idea that we'd be willing to mob up to defend that idea. And hence, the paradox of freedom : we form an imperfect mob to enforce and defend our right to be free from the arbitrary unfettered power of the mob. Said another way, we mob up to fetter the mob. In theory, via a mob fettered by rules.

As in, in WWII, we unleashed our own version of soft fascism to face down meat eating virulent fascism.

A 'strike' was certainly the theme of AS, and I think, part of the original title of the book (The Strike).

Widespread formal national strikes, as political tools, are certainly the tools of the OMIR(Old Men In Robes) that run the de facto and actual theocracies around the world, via 'hartals', general national religious strikes.

Such efforts are easier in unfettered mobs, in theocracies, in populist unions. They are likely harder to organize in the balance of the tribe that Rand wrote about, and that is the challenge your idea faces.

But roll with that idea, recognizing the above natural constraints. What -could- be done?

Also, recognize that there is an assumption in what you are proposing. I'm not saying it is wrong, it may be correct. That, via a short term symbolic act of political education, basically gesture politics, the current political context can be nudged towards perfection.

There's another possibility, and it goes beyond gesture politics, and that is, to encourage not a short term temporary gesture, but a much longer term 'hiding in plain sight.' To encourage as many folks as possible to passively 'get by,' and let the current highly leveraged and beast dependent context fail or nearly fail or fail enough.

Can the current political context be turned around more effectively and faster by encouraging as many folks as possible into passively withdrawing consent on a longer term basis and letting it fail?

I think this may already partially at least be the case. Not as an organized effort, but as a spontaneous response to insanity.

So, a short term political event to advertise and suggest the concept might be something to consider, with as many examples of strategies as can be imagined. There is a deep and growing dissatisfaction growing in the nation, and temporarily, the federal government has succeeded in deflecting that dissatisfaction towards 'CEOs, Wall Street, Capitalism, and Free Markets.' But, a misled mob can be a very fickle beast. A campaign based on 'withdrawn consent, protest by hiding in plain site' could very well catch on, mainly because I think it already is, all by itself.

For example, one strategy to hide in plain sight is to do exactly what you are asked to do. True, even doing just that puts you in the top 5% of the workforce, but for some, that is about 5% of what they can do.

For example, my business LOC is unused. Can I be forced to use it? I guess we'll see. I'm surely not holding my breath.

My office is in a multi office office building. I know others just in this same building who have been reaching the same conclusions I have, independently, in the current graceless free-for-some going on. I have long term associates who I've know for decades who have reached the same conclusions. That is not a scientific survey by any means, but OTOH, I am either very selective about my sampling, or lots of folks are quietly reaching similar conclusions.

There are no government statistics to measure business not waged and wealth not created and value not circulated. The constructivists in Congress are clueless and blindly 'doing something' to try and cling to their 'The Economy Running' gig. They are going to cling to their power until their fingers and the nation's asses bleed, but that may be exactly what needs to happen to ultimately cure us of what ails us, which is them.

I say, let them run 'it', until not even a complete fool could fail to recognize their total impotence.

regards,
Fred

Post 4

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 3:37pm

Fred:

I think it unlikely that you could convince many people to go completely on strike, regardless of how bad things will get. That is why I believe that any event that is mounted must appeal to the self-interests of potential participants. It must have a positive message that points towards a more beneficial social order with tangible consequences and not simply be a negative reactive statement against the status quo.

You wrote:

"A difficulty to overcome, and I'm not saying it is a huge difficulty, is that in general, as a tendency, this is asking folks generally suspicious of collective action to engage in a collective action."

Actually, I think this is actually a larger issue than you suggest. Certainly, within Objectivist circles, I have found considerably more willingness to disagree than to come to a meeting of the minds - let alone actively cooperate in any sort of organized action. For thinking individualists, it appears to be much easier to pick apart the flaws in another's argument than to think about how one's own action could be directed to patch those flaws in support of an important ideal.

I agree with your observation and that of Dr. Robinson in the original article, that there is already a substantial degree of striking by default going on. What I am suggesting is that we need to find a way to make those actions explicit and seen. This will require some sort of overt action rather than simple passivity. Even then, I am not fully convinced of the effect. But we must start somewhere in doing a better job of getting the pro-freedom message into the national dialog. The alternative is, as you say, letting things get run into the ground. I do not think this a good strategy, because the further in the hole we go, the difficulty of undoing steps along the way increases geometrically. And the weaker the US becomes, the more likely we risk aggressive attacks by foreign nations.

I do like your phrase "hiding in plain sight". This could be used effectively in a pro-freedom marketing campaign.

Keep the ideas and dialog coming.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 5

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 5:21pm

I think you could organize this. I just don't think Objectivists possess the inclination or organization to pull the logistics off.

Post 6

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 5:33pm

Because I first posted this article and then created the poll, there are now two locations where portions of this discussion are occurring. If you are interested in this discussion, be sure to also check out the poll thread as well.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 7

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 5:56pm

Keep in mind using the statement from Obama's inauguration speech that was the subject of a thread here.

Post 8

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 5:58pm

I think it shouldn't be an event or really a traditional movement, but rather a 'meme' that is transmitted from one mind to another based on the premise that each productive soul on Earth is a value onto itself. Whether they're a construction worker, a teacher, a medical doctor, a scientist, a salesperson, an inventor, a software engineer, a cook, a server, or some other human being carving out a viable existence in a hostile world, that these individuals are what make the world less hostile, and more fruitful for everyone (and themselves). If such an idea were to catch on, there wouldn't be a need for a John Galt 'event' as it would happen on its own for each person involved at some level (great or small), and as such it would shatter the veneers of power across the world.

I can't say that such is entirely possible as it seems that for many years the educational systems at least here in the United States has robbed many people of their capacity to think critically. It seems to me that such a cognitive revolution is going to be an up hill battle. But who knows, maybe someone or some people can really get the message out. Maybe it's this time in history through the relatively unfettered Internet and the many methods of using it to get the message out that such a revolution is possible (although, very hard). If each and every one of us that seek a better world are willing to pay for it in whatever price it may carry.

Post 9

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 6:37pm

"Shrug off _______________2009 and prove your worth to the world."

Post 10

Monday, February 2, 2009 - 6:49pm

Mindy, that's a very good idea. Of course, I would have to then listen to BO's speech! :-)

Teresa, I love your tagline. It's a keeper.

Bridget, I think that the atheist cause has been making a lot of headway lately, partly due to some of the ideas you mention. The outspoken stances of a few people in the spotlight have done a great job of getting atheism into the vocabulary of the general public, and this has been reinforces with numerous atheistic websites. Possibly, something like this could be done more effectively than has previously accomplished with the freedom/individualism movement.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 11

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - 9:29am

Certainly no harm in helping things along. I don't know if what is happening spontaneously is 'enough', but it is already happening, and it is happening across a broad spectrum of people, as Bridget outlined, in lots of different ways, maybe even barely conscious ways in some cases.

Folks are folks. The closer we try to move to the Soviet model, the grayer our economies get. That's what I mean by Ayn Rand's novels not being so much a blueprint, but a wave off. She saw what human beings do under similar constructivist circumstances, she waved us off, 'Don't go there.'

So, just as in our economies, there is a spectrum of responses to what is happening. Other threads have mentioned 'shrugging' and 'gulching' and more active forms of withdrawn consent, but there is also passive 'hiding in plain site' and simply 'getting by', or 'ducking while the storm passes' to simply being uncertain about the current tribal regime nonsense and deferring risk, effort, activity in our economies. A general vague 'slow down.' Not putting as much skin in the game as one might if the tribe was not so intent on trying history's latest 'free-for-some.'

The cumulative impact of all of that is a slow down in our economies. Exactly what a government intent on 'running The Economy' does not need. A resounding 'thud' in response to constructivist pump-priming. If cheerleading and speeches are enough, then we are in good shape.

But, constructivist pump-priming is a dead end if it is not followed up by folks energetically pulling on pump handles and taking risk and putting their own future skin into the economies, and with the current political clowns demonizing risk takers and beast builders in the name of their petty politics, I don't see how all of this noise leads to much of that. It appears to be leading to a lot of exactly what you would expect; failures lining up for more subsidy, trough riders lining up for political handouts, cronies taking care of their own.

I mean, look what is happening to AIG, the early report card is in. (WSJ this morning.) Talent, ie, anybody who can, is fleeing AIG. Who is anxious to do business with a propped up bleeding hulk that already had JFK's entire federal budget plus thrown at it and is already making noise about more. The very act of trying to 'save' this failure is guaranteeing its failure. Failure can't be subsidized into success.

The harder the constructivists try, the deeper they sink. It's exactly like the first test vertical t/o flight of the Harrier. (The ground effect aerodynamics was a little messed up, the more throttle that was applied, the deeper the wheels sank into the ground.)

I suspect we're going to see ever more panic filled legislation in the coming two years, to rival the art in Rand's AS. In this environment, it isn't going to take a whole lot of additional slowdown, orgainized or based on simple human response to insanity, to push it over the edge and break it. But that event might be an organized intelligent 'strike' of some kind, or that event might also be an external terrorist attack, throwing this nation into a blind panic, and truly toppling it into either mayhem, or as bad, a submissive voluntary serfdom to the state in exchange for never realized safety.

There is a risk -- a significant risk -- that what comes out the other side of that breakage is not in fact some age of intellectual enlightenment or idealogical rebirth. What comes out of that could be lots of things. A MadMax world? A new dark ages? A half is, half isn't still limping along, barely surviving herd of beasts of burden, the new serfdom to the state, where beast riding is modulated just enough to support all the carcass carving, parasitism, and constructivist meddling that it enables? Or as bad, a new virulent fascism?

Because DC has the guns, has the printing presses, has the power, and is not going to devolve power without first clinging to it until its' fingers bleed, thirsty mainly for the next 'crisis' to guarantee its power.

But, that is also a consequence of the non-ordered, and non-ordereable nature of our economies. When they are constructivistly broken, they can break hard, and History isn't going to wait for us to make up our collective minds and get it 'right.'

This is easily predictable; be prepared that such an organized event would be smeared as 'unpatriotic' by half of the tribe.

In fact, as time goes on, be prepared that 'shrugging', 'gulching', and even 'hiding in plain sight' will not only be smeared as 'unpatriotic', but actively legislated against.

regards,
Fred

Post 12

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - 10:47am

Fred:

I like your line: "Failure can't be subsidized into success."

You wrote:

"In fact, as time goes on, be prepared that 'shrugging', 'gulching', and even 'hiding in plain sight' will not only be smeared as 'unpatriotic', but actively legislated against."

I hope we can reverse course before reaching this point, but it is certainly a possibility. However, things would have to get much much worse before anything like this could be put forward.

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 13

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - 2:43pm

"However, things would have to get much much worse ..."

Well, they're surely doing their best to bring that about...

regards,
Fred

Post 14

Tuesday, February 3, 2009 - 4:09pm

Darn it, Jeff, you stole my compliment. I, too like that line, Fred. Do you write like this off the top of your head? It's very impressive. You should join the futurists.

Post 15

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - 9:08am

Mindy:

On a good day, it is off the top of my head. On a bad day, it is coming out of my butt.

On all days, it is my cheap substitute for much needed therapy.

regards,
Fred

Post 16

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - 1:26pm

John Stossel's latest piece is called "We Can't Spend Our Way to Prosperity". I guess great minds think along similar lines Fred! Two sides of the same coin. :-)

Regards,
--
Jeff

Post 17

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - 2:49pm

Reading John Stossel's work is like taking a sanity shower after getting caught in a day long crap storm. I enjoy the Hell out of him, and thanks for posting those links.

regards,
Fred

Post 18

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - 5:19pm

There is an interview with him on Reason.TV...
http://reason.com/blog/show/131475.html

Post 19

Wednesday, February 4, 2009 - 7:29pm