http://mol.redbarn.org/objectivism/Writing/RandBiography.html
"Ayn Rand was born Alice Rosenbaum on February 2, 1905 in St. Petersburg, Russia. Rand hated life in Russia; she felt the dominant culture of Russia to glorify the tragic and the malevolent, the antithesis of what she wanted for her own life. And then there was the Bolshevik revolution. Not only did she witness the nationalization of her father's chemistry shop---a shop that represented the culmination of his self-made rise from poverty---but the morality of collectivism was abhorrent to Rand even as a young girl. Rand studied history at University of St. Petersburg. Although she knew she wanted to be a writer as early as age nine, she chose history because, on the one hand, she did not want to ``study, as examples, writers who bored [her] and whom [she] despised,'' and, on the other hand, history would give her the background she needed to write on the broad social issues with which she planned to deal. She graduated in 1924, only to work as a tour guide. In 1926 she left Russia for America, never to return." From the book by Barbara Brandon called "The Passion of Ayn Rand" Lawry, Arthur, Mikes, etc. I frankly don't know what Ayn Rand has to do with the Libertarianism as taught from the Arts and the European works of Sir Herbert Read and the Educator A.S. Neill. They were the "Libertarians" when I went to college and the ones we were very comfortable agreeing with. As a Cherokee we are extremely liberty driven. But I'm afraid we have more of an alignment with European Libertarianism then their American cousins. I've always considered myself a Libertarian but these Americans Libers march too much in lock step for my taste. Traditional American Indian people experience their own lives and make their own decisions and consider the relationships of responsibility and community to be sacred. We also consider culture to be property. (I would recommend a couple of books by the Canadian barrister Rupert Ross, "Returning To The Teachings" and "Dancing with a Ghost." Ross was observing Canadian Indian people from the outside and largely got it right for us as well. Someone from the list, maybe it was you, shared these books with me years ago and I found them to be an accurate codification of my upbringing. Especially the parts about community responsibility to the individual and the individual's responsibility for the good that they did with their lives their responsibility to settle what we call Ulanigvgv and the East Indians call Karma.) (Further Context) What makes all of this work is called "The Law of Blood" and is the ancient rule of law for our people. There were seven Clans that had specific responsibilities to the nation as a whole from the local to the national level. If a clan member committed an illegal act against someone from another clan, the perpetrators entire clan owed the debt unless the perpetrators was caught and paid himself. That meant that each Clan policed their own when it came to community responsibility. Marriages were also different and property was owned by the individual but family property was owned by women enforced by the male members of their direct family and their clan. It was the replacement of this legal arrangement, with the male oriented English manor system, that destroyed our people and made them open to the missionaries. Still, in my family, the equalitarian rule was still the law. As a bow to the English system, my being the eldest and male meant that I got more of an inheritance than as a traditional Cherokee (what they mean by "pure blood.") but even still I only got half and my sister got the other half and her children got the pick of the nicest objects for her children. The musical instruments, the china etc. My sister then gave me and my family what she wanted to and that was emotionally correct for me although it didn't help my business any. Not a complaint at all, but just a fact of life given the system. We were taught relative context and system's thinking from the cradleboard. The West seems to have lost their sense of the circular nature of responsibility - that death is not an escape from their wrongs but simply a doorway into a more intense instruction in the lessons of responsibility (and love) and that their insanity is passed to their children and grandchildren down to the seventh generation. (I hear you Keith, epigenetic, sigh!) (Back to the subject of the Randy folks.) As for the American Libertarians like Murray and the "Paul" father and son, I would make the judgment that no matter what these individuals get in the way of external reality they will never be free as individuals. Their jail is both cultural and between their ears. I've too have always lobbied against excessive government no matter whether it be public or private. If they think their government is evil then they should try having their religions banned for 96 years and their wives and daughters sterilized by the medical profession at the behest of the government from their "good old days." (1978 was the magic year when we could pray in public and not expect the Indian Health service to sterilize our wives and daughters when they went in for an appendectomy.) Evil is real and it can pop up anywhere there are unbalanced and damaged people. Ignorance is another a very strong wind that drives people insane when confronted by an Iphone. That's why I believe in education, personal responsibility and community because we are all small when compared to reality. Everyone needs help in the ultimate scheme of things. As for Ayn Rand, she was a "girl", a very "romantic girl" all of her life. One who longed for her hero and when the men around her were not up to that she created her ideal in Roark and Galt, but had they lived, outside of herself, they wouldn't have met the mark either. She was unwilling to be a sacrifice to the Russian followers of Karl Marx and so she came here where the "homeless and the tempest tossed" were welcomed. But her wounds were bitter and there is nothing more awful than the wound of entitlement that has been exposed as inadequate. She was a poor screen writer and a second rate thinker with pretensions. Failure, to such grandiosity, is a terrible thing. Look at the young man who armed himself and shot up that theater. It seems he was the Golden Boy Neurology student who failed and everyone had to pay for the curse of his "bad genes" that revealed themselves as he studied neurology. (At least that is the message we are getting.) It's a sad truth that externally motivated folks tend to try their theories out on their neighbors rather than constructing less toxic trails for their "philosophies." That is a tough one, especially for teachers. American Libertarians are miserable and nothing short of personal power will relieve their misery. But when my old libertarian colleague got the power he craved, he got Leukemia and died leaving a mess. There is no escape from Ulanigvgv. Ayn Rand loved heroes in her heart. Unfortunately, the only heroes I know are the artists who have a 98% failure rate and still work for the culture of the country. I would call the Artists who don't sell out "super heroes." Dietrich Fischer Dieskau brought the German people back from the edge with the power of the art in spite of the people who said that it was dead after the War. The problem now is that the Germans have the U.S. Marine, "leave no German behind" mentality that precludes having losers in a "Winner Take All" environment such as here. In that environment, obviously the loser "can't be German and must be 'defective' like the Greeks, the Italians or the Spanish." Before the war, the German government thought the English/Americans would agree with them about the need for war because of their cousinship. If you want a good description of that bizarre notion from that time, read the "We are Three Sisters Who are not Sisters" poem by Gertrude Stein or you can buy on Amazon my recording of Ned Rorem's Opera set to the text. http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/B000003W30/boosehawke-21 Ned will be 90 next year. There is another opera called "A Childhood Miracle" also on the CD. It is set to a New England Nathaniel Hawthorn story and was Rorem's first opera. The performance is by my company, "The Magic Circle Opera Repertory Ensemble." My experiences in the American Arts community and with the economic community reminds me of a Jules Feiffer play from years ago called: "Little Murders." Watching the gun community here and the degradation of quality culture I am drawn to Feiffer's thesis as it seems to be acting itself out. In the Arts you could call it "Little Human Sacrifices" because they open up the culture and sacrifice years being able to do it and once there, they are told they need to work in a fast food joint at minimum wage in order to do valuable work. Wait a minute, wasn't that Alice Rosenbaum's complaint about being a university trained tour guide in Moscow and what caused her to start this whole "creative greed ultimate selfishness" answer to it in her chosen country? REH -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of de Bivort Lawrence Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 2:03 PM To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism I'm greatly enjoying this discussion. Thanks to all. Who is the Alice you refer to, Ray? Cheers, Lawry On Jul 22, 2012, at 11:14 AM, Ray Harrell wrote: > Arthur, if corporations are individuals then what kind of individuals are > they? I would also point out as the late Louis Castaldi president of IBM > world in the 1960s said to me. "IBM is a socialist organization." > Lou was speaking as to the system of all corporations as governing structures. He > didn't see a corporation as an individual but as a type of government. I > said to Lou, "why is it not a feudal government?" He said: "Look around > you, they are into community." He was speaking of the beautiful atrium > with the string quartet that all of the management and employees were > sharing. Lou was the last of the CEOs to make under a million dollars a > year. After he retired all hell broke loose and the angry Jewish girl from > Russia that had lost everything and escaped to America began to > justify her anger and her need to fight to live. Alice became Ayn Rand and being > selfish was the highest good. She was the antithesis to Karl Marx. Not > one tenth as smart but perfect for a nation of wounded souls and scars. > Lou had been a partisan in the Italian underground during WWII and he > too had lost everything but somehow the scars only made him a realist. Perhaps > it was the Italian culture. Alice's culture had been taken over by a group > that venerated a Jewish Messiah (Marx) but that didn't like individual Jews. > What a strange world it has been these 2000 years with people blaming > others for what they themselves then choose to do as they make excuses for their > bad behavior. Unfortunately greed is addictive and most of Rand's wealthy > followers are like an anorexic looking at their bank account and screaming > that their ideal is never enough. Whether skinny or billionaire it is > still a pscho-pathology that has wounds and sin at its root. > > REH > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Arthur > Cordell > Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:33 AM > To: 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, EDUCATION'; > [email protected] > Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and > the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism > > We may be seeing an indication of technology and economic development. > Economic development, it seems, may be --in some ways--about moving > away from community to the individual. And in this case, without > other institutions that develop trust, development may be at odds with > social cohesion. > > arthur > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of michael > gurstein > Sent: Sunday, July 22, 2012 10:17 AM > To: [email protected]; 'RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, > EDUCATION' > Subject: Re: [Futurework] FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and > the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism > > Thanks Mike, you've carried the argument forward into some interesting > and unexpected areas... > > Macpherson's discussion was based on a deep analysis and critique of > the foundation documents of political "liberalism" (whiggery)... > Locke, Hume, Hobbes, although it linked into and closely paralleled > the somewhat earlier discussions (Maine, Toennies, Durkheim... > describing the fall of medieval society and the rise of modern "contract" based social relations. > > The Sociologists however, were focusing at the "social" level and > Macpherson and the Anglo's were discussing individuals and individual > rights. They were basically arguing the same thing but Macpherson > seems somehow more appropriate in this context since he (and those he > discusses) aren't beginning from the notion of a decline but rather > are looking at the role that individual property rights played in the > broader social (and political) transformation. > > (The underlying notion I'm trying to present in the blogpost is the > highly corrosive role that individualized and property defined > information (as determined through mobile communication) will likely > play in many currently somewhat "communally" structured rural > environments.) > > Best, > > M > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike > Spencer > Sent: Saturday, July 21, 2012 11:07 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: [Futurework] Re: FW: New Blogpost: The Mobile Revolution and > the Rise and Rise of Possessive Individualism > > > Mike G. wrote: > >> http://gurstein.wordpress.com/2012/07/21/the-mobile-revolution-and-th >> e >> -rise- >> and-rise-of-possessive-individualism/ > > and in the referenced paper wrote: > > An example, in a recent excursion here in Ghana I happened to notice > that the local artisanal in-shore fishery consists largely of boats > with up to a dozen fishermen. When it comes time to haul in the nets > up to 30 or so villagers may be involved. These folks don't need to > know as individuals what the local price of fish might be in a > particular market (they aren't selling the fish as individuals).... > > .... > > So, in the vast majority of instances (and the design of both the > mobile systems and the individual applications almost require this) > the information is made available only on a one-to-one (individual to > individual) basis. Any follow-on as for example through the sharing of > this information with others say in the village is solely at the > discretion (and the responsibility) of the individual without there > being any formal or informal (let alone technical) structures to > support this (in fact community radio often becomes a means for > "community"integration of mobile communication but that is a subject > for another blogpost). > > In a village there's no privacy. So if Cousin Alice sends word to Bob > that fish prices are better up-town than down-town, everybody in the > village knows Bob had a visitor. They probably know from whom the > message comes and what it's about. In fact, the messenger may deliver the message in public. > > So getting private info on the fish market will require deviousness > and subterfuge which will themselves be noticed by other villagers. > > Now Alice calls Bob on his mobile. No one knows what he learned and > probably can't guess who the call was from. > > Taking the Devil's Advocate role here, if the *possibility* of private > information leads to individuals abandoning communitarian behavior in > favor of maximizing personal gain, shouldn't we assume that > "possessive individualism" is the natural thing a la Friedman -- that > communal behavior was the result of surveillance, not of any deeply > felt commitment to community? If there were such a commitment, Bob > would immediately go tell Claire & Dennis the news and pretty soon everybody would know. > > So is the moral here that privacy enables deviance and a local but > distributed panopticon ensures conformity to community values? > > Well, I haven't read Macpherson (whom you cite [1]) but perhaps I > should. I did read the cited Wikipedia page: > > WikiP> For Friedman, economic freedom needed to be protected because > WikiP> it ensured political freedom.[9] Friedman appeals to historical > WikiP> examples that demonstrate where the largest amount of political > WikiP> freedom is found the economic model has been capitalist. In > WikiP> Friedman's words, "history suggests...that capitalism is a > WikiP> necessary condition for political freedom."[10] Macpherson > WikiP> counters that the 19th-century examples that Friedman uses > WikiP> actually show that political freedom came first and those who > WikiP> gained this freedom, mainly property owning elites, used this > WikiP> new political freedom for their own best interests which meant > WikiP> to open the doors to unrestrained capitalism. It follows then, > WikiP> that capitalism will only be maintained as long as those who > WikiP> have political freedom deem it worthwhile. As the 19th century > WikiP> progressed and suffrage was expanded, there were corresponding > WikiP> restraints placed upon capitalism which indicates that > WikiP> political freedom and capitalism are at odds with one another. > WikiP> "At any rate", Macpherson contends, this "historical > WikiP> correlation scarcely suggests that capitalism is a necessary > WikiP> condition for political freedom. > > which makes sense to me as do the rest of the ideas attribute to him. > [2] > > Is the village panopticon a necessary political constraint on economic > activity? How does it scale to modern nation states and transnational > corporations? > > OTOH, how do the tangible, best-case benefits of ICT in the village > context scale to help we'uns sitting alone at our computers and > already more or less wedged in possessive-individualism mode? > > - Mike > > > [1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C._B._Macpherson > > [2] Except for two sentences that I can't parse. > > -- > Michael Spencer Nova Scotia, Canada .~. > /V\ > [email protected] /( )\ > http://home.tallships.ca/mspencer/ ^^-^^ > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework > > _______________________________________________ > Futurework mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
