ROOTS OF WAR

"Men who are free to produce have no incentive to loot; they have nothing to gain by war and a great deal to lose."

Ayn Rand, "The Roots Of War", Capitalism, The Unknown Ideal, 1966. 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY AYN RAND

 "My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, & reason as his only absolute."

Ayn Rand

February 2, 1905- March 2, 1982.

TRUTH IS STRANGER THAN FICTION

In America 2020 there is a disconnect between science and populism. This disconnect did not always exist. In the 1960's the triumph of American ingenuity and science was celebrated as the United States landed men on the moon. To be an intellectual, a learned man or woman of science was a celebrated profession. Scientists and Engineers were admired. They promised an almost unimaginable future of a life made easier by  computers and technology. Young boys named Jobs, Allen, and Gates became obsessed with computers. They ordered kits and built them in their garage. From their  passions, indeed their obsessions, Silicon Valley was born, and another American technological revolution led the world into the digital era. 

Fast forward to 2020. A pandemic burns throughout the world. The 79 year old American doctor of epidemiology and virology who has trained his whole life for this moment- Dr. Anthony Fauci- is marginalized and ridiculed. Doctors and scientists who are the leading experts in their fields of viruses and pandemics are criticized if they make common sense suggestions like social distancing, testing,  and wearing a face mask to prevent infections. You do not need a PhD in epidemiology to understand that staying apart and wearing face mask (and ideally a face shield) stops the spread of the virus. But these days, to understand that concept you apparently need to be anyone other than an American. Well that's not entirely fair. You need to be anyone other than an American who is a Republican. 

How and when did conservatives abandon the mind? When did being smart and well trained become inconsistent with other conservative values like capitalism and rugged individualism? 

In her magnum opus Atlas Shrugged, written in 1957, the philosopher-novelist Ayn Rand depicted a dystopian United States of the future where liberals attacked men of achievement (for all her genius, Rand's writings exclusively used the masculine pronoun). The philosophical concept and plot of the novel was that the liberal views on property rights and altruism that held that a person's ability and production belonged to the collective would slowly strangle innovation. Working for the good of everyone would produce the good for no one. In Atlas Shrugged men of production and achievement in various fields from engineering to finance to production to  music "go on strike" and disappear from society. They give up and thus show the world what happens when people scorned for their ability stop working. In the penultimate scene, New York City loses electricity and the experts needed to repair the problem are missing. 

In America 2020 the people of production and achievement have not (yet) gone on strike. But they labor in the shadows. Dr. Fauci works behind the scenes because at Republican presidential rallies "Fire Fauci Now" chants routinely breakout. The President trashes the CDC and withdraws from the World Health Organization. 

Let's take a look at two different states. Florida opened early. The Governor refused to require people to wear masks in public. The results has been a week of 10-11,000 new Floridians a day becoming infected. ICU beds are at 95% of capacity. And as Dr. Fauci recently pointed out, the death rate- low at this point- is about to explode because it takes Covid19 about 2 to 4 weeks to kill. Florida is teetering on the edge of chaos and destruction. And in the face of this scientific evidence, the governor says everything is fine rejects the advice of intellectuals and scientists that increased testing and masks will help stop the spread of the virus. 

In an almost unbelievable display of illogic,  the president and most conservative politicians argue that increased testing only leads to increased NUMBERS of people who are infected. If you do not test then the virus numbers are low (sadly, our own FDC has also adopted this philosophy, telling our federal judges every Friday that everything is fine because the virus numbers are very low. Meanwhile the first inmate just died of  Covid19).  The logic behind this belief is staggeringly dangerous. If accepted, it could be applied to cancer, pollution, gun murder rates, domestic violence, you name it. Stop reporting cancer deaths, and cancer is cured! Right? (Unless you die of cancer-but for everyone else, it's party time.)

In Rhode Island, Governor Gina Raimondo had a different approach from Governor DeSantis. She asked the federal government for help in testing and they told her to go pound salt. So she formed a partnership with CVS (which is headquartered in RI) for testing. 25% of Rhode Island citizens have been tested. The positive rate is under 2%. Florida's positive rate is in the teens. Governor Raimondo mandated masks in public, limited public gatherings, and cajoled the company Salesforce to develop a contact tracing app for free. Infosys was tasked with deploying a location tracking feature, and Survey Monkey was assigned to monitor symptoms. Rhode Island is only one of four states labeled "low risk level" by the CDC. Five people a day or less are dying of Covid19 in RI, 50 people a day or less are newly infected. That's less than the daily rate in Hialeah. 

Rhode Island was uniquely situated to be severely damaged by the virus- it has the nation's second densest population and the ninth oldest population. The virus struck quick and hard at the beginning. But testing, contract tracing, masks in public, a public/private partnership, and listening to the health experts resulted in the virus being beaten down. Rhode Island did not invent this playbook. New Zealand, Thailand, South Korea, all have done the same thing. 

But here is the problem. Governor Raimondo is not a right wing conservative. She listens to experts and deployed companies with expertise to work with her and devise a strategy to succeed. She employed a NASA 1960's "lets listen to the experts" philosophy with the resulting success that makes right wing anti-intellectuals furious. 

We have some of the smartest, well trained experts in the world to help us defeat this virus. Rhode Island has given us a roadmap. And mark our words, what they did will be rejected by almost every Republican politician in the country. 

We know where we are at- Intellectuals are dangerous. Scientists who speak the truth are bad. Scientific testing leads to bad news so just stop testing. Experts are idiots and must be ignored. The Constitution enshrines the right not to wear a mask in public and drink at a bar (The murky third amendment we believe). 

What we do not know for the life of us is how we got here and how Ayn Rand, more than 63 years ago, got it right. 

HAPPY BIRTHDAY AYN RAND

She's the author of two of the best-selling books of all time. But more than that, she is one of the foremost modern proponents of the belief that ideas and philosophy matter. You don't have to approve of her philosophy to approve of her writings on behalf of Philosophy qua non. The proof that ideas matter and a philosophy is needed for an individual to lead a productive life.

Rand was at her core, an individualist who advanced the belief that a person's mind was the singular attribute a person needed to survive and thrive.

Rand has gone from being scorned as someone who hated the poor (not true-she merely felt no person had a right to the fruits of another's honest labor)  to be admired and the intellectual "fountainhead" of the neo-conservative (and non-religious) movement.

Like her or not- her contribution to philosophy, economics, law, art, and politics must be recognized.

Here are two two excerpts- a clip from a Phil Donahue- who was fascinated with this small woman with a thick Russian accent who denied the existence of a supreme being.

The second is the famous "Money is the root of all evil" speech from Atlas Shrugged. We defy anyone to identify a more concise and correct  essay on economics than this speech. 



MONEY IS THE ROOT OF ALL EVIL
(The Francisco d'Aconia speech, Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand). 

“So you think that money is the root of all evil?” said Francisco d’Aconia. “Have you ever asked what is the root of money? Money is a tool of exchange, which can’t exist unless there are goods produced and men able to produce them. Money is the material shape of the principle that men who wish to deal with one another must deal by trade and give value for value. Money is not the tool of the moochers, who claim your product by tears, or of the looters, who take it from you by force. Money is made possible only by the men who produce. Is this what you consider evil?

“When you accept money in payment for your effort, you do so only on the conviction that you will exchange it for the product of the effort of others. It is not the moochers or the looters who give value to money. Not an ocean of tears nor all the guns in the world can transform those pieces of paper in your wallet into the bread you will need to survive tomorrow. Those pieces of paper, which should have been gold, are a token of honor – your claim upon the energy of the men who produce. Your wallet is your statement of hope that somewhere in the world around you there are men who will not default on that moral principle which is the root of money. Is this what you consider evil?

“Have you ever looked for the root of production? Take a look at an electric generator and dare tell yourself that it was created by the muscular effort of unthinking brutes. Try to grow a seed of wheat without the knowledge left to you by men who had to discover it for the first time. Try to obtain your food by means of nothing but physical motions – and you’ll learn that man’s mind is the root of all the goods produced and of all the wealth that has ever existed on earth.

“But you say that money is made by the strong at the expense of the weak? What strength do you mean? It is not the strength of guns or muscles. Wealth is the product of man’s capacity to think. Then is money made by the man who invents a motor at the expense of those who did not invent it? Is money made by the intelligent at the expense of the fools? By the able at the expense of the incompetent? By the ambitious at the expense of the lazy? Money is made – before it can be looted or mooched – made by the effort of every honest man, each to the extent of his ability. An honest man is one who knows that he can’t consume more than he has produced.

“To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will. Money rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort. Money allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort except by the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return. Money permits you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth to the men who buy them, but no more. Money permits no deals except those to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders. Money demands of you the recognition that men must work for their own benefit, not for their own injury, for their gain, not their loss – the recognition that they are not beasts of burden, born to carry the weight of your misery – that you must offer them values, not wounds – that the common bond among men is not the exchange of suffering, but the exchange of goods. Money demands that you sell, not your weakness to men’s stupidity, but your talent to their reason; it demands that you buy, not the shoddiest they offer, but the best your money can find. And when men live by trade – with reason, not force, as their final arbiter – it is the best product that wins, the best performance, then man of best judgment and highest ability – and the degree of a man’s productiveness is the degree of his reward. This is the code of existence whose tool and symbol is money. Is this what you consider evil?

“But money is only a tool. It will take you wherever you wish, but it will not replace you as the driver. It will give you the means for the satisfaction of your desires, but it will not provide you with desires. Money is the scourge of the men who attempt to reverse the law of causality – the men who seek to replace the mind by seizing the products of the mind.

“Money will not purchase happiness for the man who has no concept of what he wants; money will not give him a code of values, if he’s evaded the knowledge of what to value, and it will not provide him with a purpose, if he’s evaded the choice of what to seek. Money will not buy intelligence for the fool, or admiration for the coward, or respect for the incompetent. The man who attempts to purchase the brains of his superiors to serve him, with his money replacing his judgment, ends up by becoming the victim of his inferiors. The men of intelligence desert him, but the cheats and the frauds come flocking to him, drawn by a law which he has not discovered: that no man may be smaller than his money. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

“Only the man who does not need it, is fit to inherit wealth – the man who would make his own fortune no matter where he started. If an heir is equal to his money, it serves him; if not, it destroys him. But you look on and you cry that money corrupted him. Did it? Or did he corrupt his money? Do not envy a worthless heir; his wealth is not yours and you would have done no better with it. Do not think that it should have been distributed among you; loading the world with fifty parasites instead of one would not bring back the dead virtue which was the fortune. Money is a living power that dies without its root. Money will not serve that mind that cannot match it. Is this the reason why you call it evil?

“Money is your means of survival. The verdict which you pronounce upon the source of your livelihood is the verdict you pronounce upon your life. If the source is corrupt, you have damned your own existence. Did you get your money by fraud? By pandering to men’s vices or men’s stupidity? By catering to fools, in the hope of getting more than your ability deserves? By lowering your standards? By doing work you despise for purchasers you scorn? If so, then your money will not give you a moment’s or a penny’s worth of joy. Then all the things you buy will become, not a tribute to you, but a reproach; not an achievement, but a reminder of shame. Then you’ll scream that money is evil. Evil, because it would not pinch-hit for your self-respect? Evil, because it would not let you enjoy your depravity? Is this the root of your hatred of money?

“Money will always remain an effect and refuse to replace you as the cause. Money is the product of virtue, but it will not give you virtue and it will not redeem your vices. Money will not give you the unearned, neither in matter nor in spirit. Is this the root of your hatred of money?

“Or did you say it’s the love of money that’s the root of all evil? To love a thing is to know and love its nature. To love money is to know and love the fact that money is the creation of the best power within you, and your passkey to trade your effort for the effort of the best among men. It’s the person who would sell his soul for a nickel, who is the loudest in proclaiming his hatred of money – and he has good reason to hate it. The lovers of money are willing to work for it. They know they are able to deserve it.

“Let me give you a tip on a clue to men’s characters: the man who damns money has obtained it dishonorably; the man who respects it has earned it.

“Run for your life from any man who tells you that money is evil. That sentence is the leper’s bell of an approaching looter. So long as men live together on earth and need means to deal with one another – their only substitute, if they abandon money, is the muzzle of a gun.

“But money demands of you the highest virtues, if you wish to make it or to keep it. Men who have no courage, pride, or self-esteem, men who have no moral sense of their right to their money and are not willing to defend it as they defend their life, men who apologize for being rich – will not remain rich for long. They are the natural bait for the swarms of looters that stay under rocks for centuries, but come crawling out at the first smell of a man who begs to be forgiven for the guilt of owning wealth. They will hasten to relieve him of the guilt – and of his life, as he deserves.

“Then you will see the rise of the double standard – the men who live by force, yet count on those who live by trade to create the value of their looted money – the men who are the hitchhikers of virtue. In a moral society, these are the criminals, and the statutes are written to protect you against them. But when a society establishes criminals-by-right and looters-by-law – men who use force to seize the wealth ofdisarmed victims – then money becomes its creators’ avenger. Such looters believe it safe to rob defenseless men, once they’ve passed a law to disarm them. But their loot becomes the magnet for other looters, who get it from them as they got it. Then the race goes, not to the ablest at production, but to those most ruthless at brutality. When force is the standard, the murderer wins over the pickpocket. And then that society vanishes, in a spread of ruins and slaughter.

“Do you wish to know whether that day is coming? Watch money. Money is the barometer of a society’s virtue. When you see that trading is done, not by consent, but by compulsion – when you see that in order to produce, you need to obtain permission from men who produce nothing – when you see that money is flowing to those who deal, not in goods, but in favors – when you see that men get richer by graft and by pull than by work, and your laws don’t protect you against them, but protect them against you – when you see corruption being rewarded and honesty becoming a self-sacrifice – you may know that your society is doomed. Money is so noble a medium that it does not compete with guns and it does not make terms with brutality. It will not permit a country to survive as half-property, half-loot.

“Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money, for money is men’s protection and the base of a moral existence. Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values. Gold was an objective value, an equivalent of wealth produced. Paper is a mortgage on wealth that does not exist, backed by a gun aimed at those who are expected to produce it. Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs: upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it becomes, marked: ‘Account overdrawn.’

“When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, ‘Who is destroying the world?’ You are.

“You stand in the midst of the greatest achievements of the greatest productive civilization and you wonder why it’s crumbling around you, while you’re damning its life-blood – money. You look upon money as the savages did before you, and you wonder why the jungle is creeping back to the edge of your cities. Throughout men’s history, money was always seized by looters of one brand or another, but whose method remained the same: to seize wealth by force and to keep the producers bound, demeaned, defamed, deprived of honor. That phrase about the evil of money, which you mouth with such righteous recklessness, comes from a time when wealth was produced by the labor of slaves – slaves who repeated the motions once discovered by somebody’s mind and left unimproved for centuries. So long as production was ruled by force, and wealth was obtained by conquest, there was little to conquer. Yet through all the centuries of stagnation and starvation, men exalted the looters, as aristocrats of the sword, as aristocrats of birth, as aristocrats of the bureau, and despised the producers, as slaves, as traders, as shopkeepers – as industrialists.

“To the glory of mankind, there was, for the first and only time in history, a country of money – and I have no higher, more reverent tribute to pay to America, for this means: a country of reason, justice, freedom, production, achievement. For the first time, man’s mind and money were set free, and there were no fortunes-by-conquest, but only fortunes-by-work, and instead of swordsmen and slaves, there appeared the real maker of wealth, the greatest worker, the highest type of human being – the self-made man – the American industrialist.

“If you ask me to name the proudest distinction of Americans, I would choose – because it contains all the others – the fact that they were the people who created the phrase ‘to make money’. No other language or nation had ever used these words before; men had always thought of wealth as a static quantity – to be seized, begged, inherited, shared, looted, or obtained as a favor. Americans were the first to understand that wealth has to be created. The words ‘to make money’ hold the essence of human morality.

“Yet these were the words for which Americans were denounced by the rotted cultures of the looters’ continents. Now the looters’ credo has brought you to regard your proudest achievements as a hallmark of shame, your prosperity as guilt, your greatest men, the industrialists, as blackguards, and your magnificent factories as the product and property of muscular labor, the labor of whip-driven slaves, like the pyramids of Egypt. The rotter who simpers that he sees no difference between the power of the dollar and the power of the whip, ought to learn the difference on his own hide – as, I think, he will.

“Until and unless you discover that money is the root of all good, you ask for your own destruction. When money ceases to be the tool by which men deal with one another, then men become the tools of men. Blood, whips and guns – or dollars. Take your choice – there is no other – and your time is running out.”

SOUND FAMILIAR?

Much is being currently written about the events in Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand's masterpiece on what happens to a society based on collectivist- statist principles and altruistic ethics.  Many are writing that we are seeing the events in Rand's novel played out today, in a frighteningly all too real  display of altruistic collectivism implemented by the state (federal government). 

In one part of Atlas Shrugged, the story centers on the ruination of a bank- Community National Bank, run by Eugene Lawson. Rand had Lawson labeled in the story as the "banker with a heart." His actions in running his bank were guided solely by altruism;  "need" was the only standard for which decisions were based. The results were predictable. 

From Atlas Shrugged, here is Lawson explaining how the bank went under: 

“They [the borrowers] were perfectly good men. They were a perfectly sound risk—though, of course, I am speaking in human terms, not in the terms of cold cash, which you are accustomed to expect from bankers. I granted them the loan for the purchase of that factory, because they needed the money. If people needed money, that was enough for me. Need was my standard, Miss Taggart. Need, not greed. My father and grandfather built up the Community National Bank just to amass a fortune for themselves. I placed their fortune in the service of a higher ideal. I did not sit on piles of money and demand collateral from poor people who needed loans. The heart was my collateral. Of course, I do not expect anyone in this materialistic country to understand me. The rewards I got were not of a kind that people of your class, Miss Taggart, would appreciate. The people who used to sit in front of my desk at the bank, did not sit as you do, Miss Taggart. They were humble, uncertain, worn with care, afraid to speak. My rewards were the tears of gratitude in their eyes, the trembling voices, the blessings, the woman who kissed my hand when I granted her a loan she had begged for in vain everywhere else.”

The bank crashed.

Sound familiar?

Credit: We adapted this post from the post "The Banker with a heart" by Henry Mark Holzer, who was Rand's lawyer for many years in the 1960's and 70's and runs his blog here.

The idea to post the particular except with regard to the current problems we are experiencing today, along with the closing line "sound familiar?"  were his. 

We did this because he, and Rand, were right.