@calronmoonflower I hadn't noticed that - it's not universal but you're right. She certainly had a gift for capturing the essence of how people communicate their ideas.
Jim Taggart reminds me of 'Governor' Mark Dayton of Minnesota, who backed into the position on a questionable recount...any one out there recall his infamous vanishing act as a US Senator during the Washington anthrax scare? He was the first (and only) to close his Senate office and scurry back to the safety in his Lake Minnetonka estate...a real hero of the working class, you betcha...
Apply it to some topic you're interested in. Many people operate as if what esteemed or cool people think is a very important. As he asked at the end, where did _those_ people get their opinions. It goes without saying that what you figure out for yourself matters most, BUT it's easy to get sucked into politics, gossip, etc. It's hard to stand up for what you think is right in the face of powerful people who are unnerved by your strength to think for yourself.
In reference to exactly what this man said, I learned exactly what the statement means when you are willing to take responsibility. I read the book and would love to see the movie. When I finally got a small job of responsibility, I had learned to rationalize the way Dagny just did and when people saw "ME" saying, "I will take responsibility." I got promoted quickly.
Dagny says she studied engineering. Atlas Shrugged was written in the 50s. What modern people may not realize is that many science fiction protagonists in the Golden Age of science fiction were not scientists or athletes, but engineers. Just a bit of trivia.
In Jimbo's defense, you've got a guy promising a metal that's too good to be true, who refuses to submit a sample of his material for testing by an independent third party, and the one person who wants to use the metal has had some engineering in college, and has seen the metal's chemical formula. As an engineering major, Dagny ought to know the value of practical testing. There's a lot of context we're missing out on here. For one, she believes Rearden to be trustworthy enough to stake her own life on a bridge built of his hopefully-not-snakeoil. For another, she's also lived in a world where cronyism has infiltrated every third party scientific establishment ever, and she can't trust that an independent, or even government test of the material will be objective.
And, in the book, an "independent third party" has already rejected the Metal, because it does not fit their standards. This is later explained to have happened because Rearden refused to bribe them.
In the story's world, what "independent third parties" even exist? At this point the State Science Institute, a heavily politicized organization, has taken over all such testing.
@@BismarckDidNothingWrong No. They demanded a sample to test. That's not a bribe. They also didn't lie. They had engineers discuss publically all the problems it might have, that they'd need to test for, to call it safe. They said without doing those tests, they can't consider it safe. They may have had questionable motives, but in this case, they absolutely behaved as a regulatory agency ought.
@@billlupin8345 When Dr. Potter visits Rearden to try and buy the rights to Rearden Metal, Dr. Potter implies that the State Science institutes knows that Rearden Metal is good, but they refuse to publish the findings because he is "mindful of the social dangers". That mirrors later happenings in the book (under the Unification Boards), where people use favors and bribes to advance their interests and ideas (especially Jim does this), instead of showing that it would work. Hence I was saying that they rejected the metal because Rearden refused to bribe them. The wording might be incorrect, and I'm sorry for that. But what I meant to say is this: Yes, the Metal seems to be too good to be true. But; Rearden published his data and everybody who wanted to, could have engaged with him and shown if it was lacking. But everybody refused to do so, because they actually don't want it to be good (especially Jim) or know it's good but try to settle a personal agenda against Rearden.
The best example of the profession said, at some unspecified point the metal could melt, fracture, or corrode. Like every other metal. They also told Dangy that the complaints where propoganda and told Rearden that it did not matter if the metal was good or not. The point that Rand was making was to think for yourself rather than allow others to think for you. That is waht you called idiocy, thinking for yourself rather than allow others to tell you what to think.
If you were to bother reading the original source in the Journals of Ayn Rand, instead of the out of context quotes of those only interested in attacking her, you would know she did NOT think he was any kind of "superman". She called him a "degenerate monster". "This case showed me how society can wreck an exceptional being, and then murder him for being the wreck that it itself has created." "He is a monster in his cruelty and disrespect of all things."
I have been an Ayn Rand follower for decades, however, 10 years ago I was diagnosed with Diabetes type 1 and Hashimoto (Hypothyroid).) Neither of these were of my choosing and they put me in conflict with Ayn Rand's philosophy. What would Ayn Rand say?
*The character of "Eddie Willers" in the novel version of "Atlas Shrugged" was WHITE - not some bongo-beatin' African. A major flaw of the filmed version.*
I disagree, I see Rands work as an indictment of the people who live off of the work of others and provide nothing of value, but want to take more than everyone else. The subjugation of the makers by the takers. The moral of the story is the Makers don't need the takers, and the takers always ruin everything they touch. Leftist demonrats. Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, San Francisco........ Great cities, rich in assets, in total decay because the democrats have had control of these cities for decades, and run them into the ground.
@skins017 You are quite correct in your point associated with the movie not being true to the book but this is 2011 and not 1957 when the book came out. We live in a very different world. On the matter of Eddie being black, I think it was a good idea (for the movie) because the blacks have too many Jessie Jacksons running around. I agree with your opinion about James Taggart's age.
And yet another personb swewing hate and mistruths. It isn't the rich that Rand's work holds up, many of the richest people in Atlas Shrugged are villians. And those rich villians are seperated from the damage that their acts cause as hey leech off and destroy the productive to enrich themselves. Heck it is even in the very clip on this page with James cutting a back deal to make himself money and driving another company under because of it and Dangy taking a risk to do the right thing.
"any of the richest people in Atlas Shrugged are villians". Yes yes yesssss!!! That's what the people panning this movie don't realize. The heroes and villains are not rich vs. poor. There are rich and poor protagonists, and all the antagonists are wealthy themselves. It's earned vs. unearned wealth and the government fiats that power the latter that's the main theme. Unfortunately most on the left are so stuck on the "capitalist=rich=bad" broken record.
@Huboons Sounds like someone's got something to hide! Enjoy Valentine's Day. Will mother be personally delivering flowers to the room in the basement you rent from her this year?
"I'm not interested in their opinions" then who's opinions are you interested in? Rearden's? You are trusting his research on the metal that he makes? and don't see the problem with that? If she had said 'i've done my own research, took a sample and ran some tests, i can't find a problem with it' then i would a lot more faith in her.
@l1nkh0gthr0b, The book wasn't always realistic with the way its characters acted. Eddie was a positive character even though he wasn't an 'atlas' type. To make him consistent, he'd be trying to become more 'atlas' like.
I have myself to read that book I after watched Taylor Schilling's part 1. To complete the whole story, I need to read book. Part 2 and 3 movies are just not my thing.
What I don't understand is that *WHY people like Dagny Taggart and Henry Rearden were invited into Atlas society to begin with?* Granted that they had good personalities, BUT neither of them were inventor, or engineers, or scientists. They are managers. If it wasn't for the engineers, the railroad wouldn't exist to begin with and there's not a damn thing Dagny would be able to do about it. That's why she so desperately tried to hold on to the chief engineer offering him promotion and a higher salary. Same with Henry Rearden. Is he the chemist/physicist who created the formula for his new metal to begin with? I doubt. So why should he get the credit for something he himself did not invent?
***** See them as like directors of films, who do not make the sets, or act or handle the camera most of the time, but who are identified as being the single creative mind behind the project. These "managers" accepts the responsibility for it's funding, failure or success, and most important are the guides, defenders, and those that provide the vision. After all, if someone just built a factory, all it can do on its own is sit there and rust, you need a reason to build it, as a means to an end, people don't just build factories for the hell of it, and without the industry you have no work for skilled engineers or unskilled laborers. Businesses don't (or shouldn't) come into existence for the purpose of employing people, that is a Soviet style zombie economy, they serve a purpose (apart from the particular goals of the individuals who begin it), one that sustains them, makes them grow, provides the objective focus and standard to be accountable to, profit. The leaders have to visualize and plan the supply chains, contracts, long term plans, the mind to respond to changes in demand, etc. If you not only took the position but built the enterprise in the first place (as Rearden did) then you are the prime mover without which all the people working for you would be scattered and either working for someone else (and not as happy, as there is less choice or competition driving up their salary), or un-employed. People show genius and creativity in so many different ways, but society associates it most with artists and least with businessmen, that is a cultural bias, carefully cultivated. And it wasn't just their creativity, but their correct philosophical and ethical understanding that made them worthy. Galt didn't go around preaching his message, he at this stage was looking for people who already understood it, as it was derived form an honest and rational appraisal of the economic and political reality of the time. Objectivism is one of those few philosophies that does not need to change people's minds, as it does not invent a subjective reality, but logically extrapolates from the objective one. Ayn Rand wasn't the first or the last to do this, and she knew it. She was just the first to put it all together in one package.
***** Hey Gorilla, that's a very compelling argument, except for one very salient point: Hank Rearden did indeed create the formula for his metal. Oh gosh, that fact throws your whole premise out the window, pardon the metaphor. The Atlas Society is a group of real people who adhere to Rand's philosophy.Taggart and Rearden are fictional characters. They could not be invited to join, now could they? Perhaps you are aware of that, since you refer to "people like" Taggart and Rearden. Aside from Rearden's status as the inventor of the metal, both are more than just managers. They are entrepreneurs. This role is every bit as important as that of an inventor. Look at history. Many, many great people who were the innovators who discovered new concepts, who created new methods and products, made for lousy entrepreneurs. Others stole their ideas for themselves or made fortunes without paying the innovator anything, not even primary credit for their discoveries. Some, very few, like Rearden acted as his own entrepreneur, and was attacked by the state and his competition. Taggart was an excellent entrepreneur, expanding the railroad created by her antecedents to meet the needs of the market. Both were attacked by the state for their success, and had to spend far too much of their creative energy just to survive. Maybe you should read the book before you make statements which have no basis in fact. Just a thought.
Polo Golf 1. I watched only the movie. 2. Fictional characters or not, modern business models are built exactly the same. 3. Unlike John Galt, neither Taggart nor Rearden can create something from nothing. They depend on workforce. 4. I didn't know Atlas society was something real.
Polo Golf The whole entrepreneur concept goes against the concept of Atlas society (speaking from the movie). We cannot overlook the human nature. Where there's money and competition, there is corruption. So entrepreneurship will eventually lead to the same society they were trying to escape from.
***** Really? Care to explain how those situations occur? How the concept of entrepreneurship goes against the concept of the Atlas society? How money+competition=corruption? This may assist you in understanding my perspective. Absent state coercion, all transactions between the entrepreneurs and their customers are voluntary. The market provides the mechanism for this to occur. I strongly suggest that you invest the time and effort to read Atlas Shrugged. The situations Ayn Rand published 58 years ago are occurring now with increasing frequency. I don't agree with her premise that great minds should let the world collapse before re-applying their efforts to create a moral and just society...but she shows what would happen if they did. Read the book. If you seriously apply yourself, you will see just how prescient Rand was.
Perhaps it is a good idea (even maybe an altruistic act in your opinion?) to have made Willers black to fight racial stereotypes. My first post was merely an expression of my shock at finding Willers to be black when I had an already a pre-conceived notion of Willers in my mind. Their casting mistake for James Taggart I now see as a one time isolated case and does not reflect other decisions in the movie.
The one thing that does hurt this book and rand's philiosphy is the Monopoly. While TTR was run by comedic bafoon most large corporations aren't. If we still only had one Oil Company, One large bank etc. how could anyone determine what the value of a certain good is? It isn't as if we could live without electricity, gasoline and other things made by oil so a monopoly could set the price at an arbitrary level and not give any room for negotiation. Rand believes that Rockefeller would have been fair men but history shows that is opposite to reality.
abeed87 Rand demonstrates monopoly in the book, when the government creates the Unification Board to pool all the railroads together. Only governments can create monopoly, but they always call it something else like that. Without government control, in a free market, if we end up with a single supplier, that only continues while they keep their prices so low that it is not profitable for competitors to start up. Only a government protected monopoly can _"set the price at an arbitrary level",_ because government will prevent competitors.
@josephonwhidbey Very possible and good point, however I am more upset about straying from the book which describes Eddie as having blonde hair and blue eyes. Though I have seen some black people with blonde hair. I think they live in Australia. Also James Taggart is supposed to be in his 50's. Making him a young man totally changes the dynamic between him and Dagny. I can't believe they would make James so young, this makes it so his faults could be written off immaturity. Unbelievable!!
> Also James Taggart is supposed to be in his 50's. One of the early chapters mentions that James is ~5 years older than Dagny, who's ~2 years younger than the 37-year old woman in Starnesville, making James approximately 40 (plus/minus the passage of time before and after the Starnesville scene). I vaguely recall the book saying he looks older than he actually is; he should probably _look_ like he's in his 50s.
cont. "balance crime in his eyes? If society is horrified at this crime, it should be horrified at the crime’s ultimate cause: itself. The worse the crime-the greater it’s guilt. What would society answer, if that boy were to say: “Yes, I’m a monstrous criminal, but what are you? "
Your pure and simple case is an example of quoting out of context. Ayn Rand called Hickman a degernerate and a msonster. "Yes, he is a monster-now. But the worse he is, the worst must be the cause that drove him to this. Isn’t it significant that society was not able to fill the life of an exceptional, intelligent boy, to give him anything to out-"
@fuzzyone99 "They invalidate any assumption that you have enough knowledge to know what you're talking about." That's called an Ad Hominem, a type ologicalal fallacy. As such it is invalid as rebuttalel.
Why do Ayn Rand's critics have to keep repeating this personal attack, when, if they read the original source for that quote, they would know Rand thought that Hickman was a monster? Its a rhetorical question. The answer is because they have no answer to her philosophy. They can't prove her wrong. They have nothing except strawman arguments and personal attacks.
@soyerpanzen Let me guess. You are one who see's a job has to be done NOW and will say, "No, not until I have twenty forms signed in triplicate and part of this, that, and the other process filled out."
@soyerpanzen At this time, I am the guy on top, and nobody is blaming me for anything but the success we've had. If you don't take a chance on anything in life, you don't go far. That is what I am saying. In other words, I was relating my experience to how the film (and the book) was pointing at knowing when to take responsibility and to be willing to take responsibility. That your answer is in a way to make somebody willing to take a chance look like a "Duh" looks pretty "Lame."
Bad reply. No one is forcing you to use those services - but they are of immense value so you want to use them. No one is stealing from you; all trade is voluntary, unlike government interactions. Competition is more likely limited by governments than 'allowed' by them. Your 'allowed' is just another way to say 'people exercising their freedom to conduct business'. And yes, many services are better provided by private actors including those you mention.
(other than road maintenance, police, emergency services, and other non-privatized functions), but have compassion, rather than resentment, for those who must. This is because I am not an immature egomaniac who mistakenly believes that my only contribution to society can be financial in nature. As someone sympathetic to a philosophy that can't even manage to "sell" the supposed value of its own message, you should be able to understand this. But for some reason, you don't.
@fuzzyone99 Opps missed that bit >.> . But you do know that objectivists are explicitly against governments and corporations becoming 'interwined don't you?' Also don't be so anal about grammer when you can't use a idiom properly.
Why isn't there a series about Atlas Shrugged, yet? There are at least 100 shitty series on Netflix, Amazon, etc. about every crap nobody wants to know about. Atlas Shrugged was years ahead of it's time. For decades, all the hypocrites were trying 'altruism', based on 'Christian' values. There has never been more individualism and/or Objectivism as it is nowadays. A movie about Atlas Shrugged would be way too short. A series about this novel would be very interesting. And it would hit the nerve of time.
@fuzzyone99 You talk about how 'randroids' have left no significant mark on policy and then you talk about how they have interwined corperations with government which is a issue of policy. Good job you've contridicted yourself in less than 300 characters.
It more like about greed and narcissism, that rich people are so much better than the rest of us that need to live separated for the rest of society, and they no need to suffer the consequences of their actions.
Many do, Most leftists misinterpret the whole book. The concept for me is, if you want to live off my work, my brains, my sweat, you better make a light load of yourself. If I feel like you are dragging me down I can figure out how to dump the whole load, and go on without you.
@skins017 Black folks worked on railroads in our country since the 1840s so I would suppose that a section hand would rise in the ranks so to speak.and his children would rise even higher. Kindly Sent,
You should put your organization on the blockchain. Check. Out EOS DAO, Dan Larimer, Eden on EOS to learn how to set it up. Also read Dans book more equal animals on how to govern.
@jeffiek "Geanius." LOL. They invalidate any assumption that you have enough knowledge to know what you're talking about. Arguing with the intentionally ignorant is a waste of time.
Eddie Willers is black? Not that it matters but it goes against the fact that the Willers worked for the Taggarts for generations. And why is James Taggart so young, this sucks.
Well, considering she wrote the book to explain her philosophy, it is acceptable that the characters are like that, since she's trying to prove her point. However, I agree that after a certain point it does get to be ridiculous
@Huboons A resolute and persistent assertion/accusation without any direct evidence or even a request, about someone else, amounts to a lie. You keep implying that I resent being productive. You have no evidence for this. I am compensated well for what I do, whereas you have continually rejected my offer for you to tell me how "valuable" you supposedly are by informing me of your own renumeration. I enjoy being renumerated well. I do not rely on the government for anything directly -
Let us run with Dagny Taggart's logic: because I studied biology in college, my views on whatever biological problem, because they are not second hand, are somehow better than the best biological authorities. Also, in high school I took AP Chemistry. Clearly my first hand knowledge of chemistry is better than the paltry second-hand knowledge of the best chemists. I believe that these examples demonstrate the idiocy of this position.
@Huboons ""Every law IS a regulation" agreed, that's why I don't want any." So you even oppose laws against murder, as I suspected. Thanks for admitting that, not many people would! "Also, I'm not running for office, nor do I vote.." Thank God for that! I don't "worship" the state. And your "worship" of powerful non-state actors and materialism is a worship of power nonetheless. There was no "transfer" of wealth in making GM pay off its loans, half-wit. Are banks now "redistributionists"?
"All the experts say this new metal is sketchy as fuck." "I don't care about what they say." "Then whose say DO we care about?" "Mine." "And how would you know whether or not this new metal is legit?" "I took engineering classes in college." Round of applause. A woman took engineering classes in college, therefore she is right in a matter of metallurgy (not engineering) and ALL the experts are wrong.
I took a building materials course under an engineering program. I learned basic principals behind the behaviour of metals. Sure that doesn't make me a specialist of metallurgy, but I'm also not an astrophysicist and I understand Einstein's theories of relativity. The whole point of Atlas Shrugged is to stop listening to 'specialists' the way 16th century man listened to the church - based on faith. Learn for yourself, find out for yourself, trust in yourself. That's how Einstein disproved Newton's theories, that's how man discovers.
Here's my question: Why do I need some knucklehead from an "Atlas Society" telling me what "Atlas Shrugged" is all about? I thought part of Ayn Rand's idea of individualism was to think for yourself. If you can't understand what a novel is all about and need someone to "teach" you, your intelligence is sorely lacking. This "Atlas Society" sounds like some movement going on to try and control how people think, like "collectivism", which Ayn Rand was against. No thanks, pal.
![[Full] 4 ต่อ 4 Celebrity EP.922 | 10 พ.ย. 67 | one31](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/zmV5HRIxIBI/mqdefault.jpg)
![[LIVE] : ONE ลุมพินี 86 | คู่เอก "คมเพชร vs ชาติพยัคฆ์"](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/m3q_dRYDuU8/mqdefault.jpg)
I've noticed people that complain about Atlas Shrugged often talk like one of the villians from the work.
I've noticed people that complain about Atlas Shrugged never read it.
Or like Ellsworth Toohey
@@jhornburg01 Z
the essence, condensed and expressed. so very well done.
This book is so incredible!!!
All the escenes represent the book!!
This movie was really good. I'm dissapointed in myself for waiting this long to watch it!
@OaktownUSA It was in theater on April 15th. It is also currently available on DVD.
this is exactly how i pictured Dagny to look lol
Yes she is perfect for the part.
Yes I agree 👍
@calronmoonflower I hadn't noticed that - it's not universal but you're right. She certainly had a gift for capturing the essence of how people communicate their ideas.
Jim Taggart reminds me of 'Governor' Mark Dayton of Minnesota, who backed into the position on a questionable recount...any one out there recall his infamous vanishing act as a US Senator during the Washington anthrax scare? He was the first (and only) to close his Senate office and scurry back to the safety in his Lake Minnetonka estate...a real hero of the working class, you betcha...
That’s interesting. I live here in Minneapolis MN. I will definitely do my research on him. Thanks
Apply it to some topic you're interested in. Many people operate as if what esteemed or cool people think is a very important. As he asked at the end, where did _those_ people get their opinions. It goes without saying that what you figure out for yourself matters most, BUT it's easy to get sucked into politics, gossip, etc. It's hard to stand up for what you think is right in the face of powerful people who are unnerved by your strength to think for yourself.
In reference to exactly what this man said, I learned exactly what the statement means when you are willing to take responsibility. I read the book and would love to see the movie.
When I finally got a small job of responsibility, I had learned to rationalize the way Dagny just did and when people saw "ME" saying, "I will take responsibility." I got promoted quickly.
Congrats!
Cheers!!
She surprised me. She was the perfect Dagny.
A movie that's book accurate???? I just finished this chapter yesterday!
This NEEDS an HBO series treatment!
Dagny says she studied engineering. Atlas Shrugged was written in the 50s. What modern people may not realize is that many science fiction protagonists in the Golden Age of science fiction were not scientists or athletes, but engineers.
Just a bit of trivia.
This movie is great. This movie is for the hard workers of the world.
@skins017 I think you're mistaken. From my memory, James Taggart was in his thirties but appeared to be much older.
The worst thing is, they were not able to find same actors for the three parts. Hollywood sucks.
In Jimbo's defense, you've got a guy promising a metal that's too good to be true, who refuses to submit a sample of his material for testing by an independent third party, and the one person who wants to use the metal has had some engineering in college, and has seen the metal's chemical formula.
As an engineering major, Dagny ought to know the value of practical testing. There's a lot of context we're missing out on here.
For one, she believes Rearden to be trustworthy enough to stake her own life on a bridge built of his hopefully-not-snakeoil.
For another, she's also lived in a world where cronyism has infiltrated every third party scientific establishment ever, and she can't trust that an independent, or even government test of the material will be objective.
And, in the book, an "independent third party" has already rejected the Metal, because it does not fit their standards.
This is later explained to have happened because Rearden refused to bribe them.
In the story's world, what "independent third parties" even exist? At this point the State Science Institute, a heavily politicized organization, has taken over all such testing.
@@Evil0tto Literally anyone who doesn't have an interest in selling Rearden metal. This includes the State science foundation.
@@BismarckDidNothingWrong No. They demanded a sample to test. That's not a bribe.
They also didn't lie. They had engineers discuss publically all the problems it might have, that they'd need to test for, to call it safe. They said without doing those tests, they can't consider it safe.
They may have had questionable motives, but in this case, they absolutely behaved as a regulatory agency ought.
@@billlupin8345 When Dr. Potter visits Rearden to try and buy the rights to Rearden Metal, Dr. Potter implies that the State Science institutes knows that Rearden Metal is good, but they refuse to publish the findings because he is "mindful of the social dangers".
That mirrors later happenings in the book (under the Unification Boards), where people use favors and bribes to advance their interests and ideas (especially Jim does this), instead of showing that it would work.
Hence I was saying that they rejected the metal because Rearden refused to bribe them.
The wording might be incorrect, and I'm sorry for that. But what I meant to say is this: Yes, the Metal seems to be too good to be true. But; Rearden published his data and everybody who wanted to, could have engaged with him and shown if it was lacking.
But everybody refused to do so, because they actually don't want it to be good (especially Jim) or know it's good but try to settle a personal agenda against Rearden.
whoever played Dagney in this one is way hotter than whoever replaced her in part II
She sure is
Nice.👍
Dagny looks perfect. Eddie is the black token I guess!
We don't need an explanation.
The book is exactly written, and the actors are doing a fine performance.
Dagny & James Taggart, are the story.
The best example of the profession said, at some unspecified point the metal could melt, fracture, or corrode. Like every other metal. They also told Dangy that the complaints where propoganda and told Rearden that it did not matter if the metal was good or not.
The point that Rand was making was to think for yourself rather than allow others to think for you. That is waht you called idiocy, thinking for yourself rather than allow others to tell you what to think.
If you were to bother reading the original source in the Journals of Ayn Rand, instead of the out of context quotes of those only interested in attacking her, you would know she did NOT think he was any kind of "superman". She called him a "degenerate monster".
"This case showed me how society can wreck an exceptional being, and then murder him for being the wreck that it itself has created."
"He is a monster in his cruelty and disrespect of all things."
It would be great to watch this movie
I have been an Ayn Rand follower for decades, however, 10 years ago I was diagnosed with Diabetes type 1 and Hashimoto (Hypothyroid).) Neither of these were of my choosing and they put me in conflict with Ayn Rand's philosophy. What would Ayn Rand say?
Dr. Andrew Weil would say all disease is malnutrition.
I just wonder what Ayn Rand would make of this man breaking down her writing?
I WANT TO SEE THIS MOVIE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
*The character of "Eddie Willers" in the novel version of "Atlas Shrugged" was WHITE - not some bongo-beatin' African. A major flaw of the filmed version.*
Dr. Kelly, where can I see all 3 Atlas Shrugged movies?
Amazon prime
Yeah, no explanation needed for me, but I'm not the only one watching this.
Rand´s work is about success and freedom from society
I disagree, I see Rands work as an indictment of the people who live off of the work of others and provide nothing of value, but want to take more than everyone else. The subjugation of the makers by the takers. The moral of the story is the Makers don't need the takers, and the takers always ruin everything they touch. Leftist demonrats. Detroit, Chicago, Baltimore, San Francisco........ Great cities, rich in assets, in total decay because the democrats have had control of these cities for decades, and run them into the ground.
where can i i find the full movie?
On youtube and/or Amazon Prime Video
I will find John Galt.
@skins017 You are quite correct in your point associated with the movie not being true to the book but this is 2011 and not 1957 when the book came out. We live in a very different world. On the matter of Eddie being black, I think it was a good idea (for the movie) because the blacks have too many Jessie Jacksons running around. I agree with your opinion about James Taggart's age.
And yet another personb swewing hate and mistruths. It isn't the rich that Rand's work holds up, many of the richest people in Atlas Shrugged are villians. And those rich villians are seperated from the damage that their acts cause as hey leech off and destroy the productive to enrich themselves.
Heck it is even in the very clip on this page with James cutting a back deal to make himself money and driving another company under because of it and Dangy taking a risk to do the right thing.
calronmoonflower But they are competitors... obstacles.
"any of the richest people in Atlas Shrugged are villians". Yes yes yesssss!!! That's what the people panning this movie don't realize. The heroes and villains are not rich vs. poor. There are rich and poor protagonists, and all the antagonists are wealthy themselves. It's earned vs. unearned wealth and the government fiats that power the latter that's the main theme.
Unfortunately most on the left are so stuck on the "capitalist=rich=bad" broken record.
Stop blaming the actors for the film not working, the fault is that the material is shit
Dagney
@Huboons Sounds like someone's got something to hide!
Enjoy Valentine's Day. Will mother be personally delivering flowers to the room in the basement you rent from her this year?
"I'm not interested in their opinions" then who's opinions are you interested in? Rearden's? You are trusting his research on the metal that he makes? and don't see the problem with that? If she had said 'i've done my own research, took a sample and ran some tests, i can't find a problem with it' then i would a lot more faith in her.
Did you even listen to the video you're responding to?!
Stop spamming . She just says the truth.
This whole movie's coming true.
Or my name isn't Winston Smith...
Holy shit! Your name totally IS Winston Smith! OH MY GOD!
Is that Michael Corleone’s office?
@l1nkh0gthr0b,
The book wasn't always realistic with the way its characters acted. Eddie was a positive character even though he wasn't an 'atlas' type. To make him consistent, he'd be trying to become more 'atlas' like.
I have myself to read that book I after watched Taylor Schilling's part 1. To complete the whole story, I need to read book. Part 2 and 3 movies are just not my thing.
What I don't understand is that *WHY people like Dagny Taggart and Henry Rearden were invited into Atlas society to begin with?* Granted that they had good personalities, BUT neither of them were inventor, or engineers, or scientists. They are managers. If it wasn't for the engineers, the railroad wouldn't exist to begin with and there's not a damn thing Dagny would be able to do about it. That's why she so desperately tried to hold on to the chief engineer offering him promotion and a higher salary. Same with Henry Rearden. Is he the chemist/physicist who created the formula for his new metal to begin with? I doubt. So why should he get the credit for something he himself did not invent?
***** See them as like directors of films, who do not make the sets, or act or handle the camera most of the time, but who are identified as being the single creative mind behind the project. These "managers" accepts the responsibility for it's funding, failure or success, and most important are the guides, defenders, and those that provide the vision. After all, if someone just built a factory, all it can do on its own is sit there and rust, you need a reason to build it, as a means to an end, people don't just build factories for the hell of it, and without the industry you have no work for skilled engineers or unskilled laborers.
Businesses don't (or shouldn't) come into existence for the purpose of employing people, that is a Soviet style zombie economy, they serve a purpose (apart from the particular goals of the individuals who begin it), one that sustains them, makes them grow, provides the objective focus and standard to be accountable to, profit. The leaders have to visualize and plan the supply chains, contracts, long term plans, the mind to respond to changes in demand, etc.
If you not only took the position but built the enterprise in the first place (as Rearden did) then you are the prime mover without which all the people working for you would be scattered and either working for someone else (and not as happy, as there is less choice or competition driving up their salary), or un-employed.
People show genius and creativity in so many different ways, but society associates it most with artists and least with businessmen, that is a cultural bias, carefully cultivated. And it wasn't just their creativity, but their correct philosophical and ethical understanding that made them worthy. Galt didn't go around preaching his message, he at this stage was looking for people who already understood it, as it was derived form an honest and rational appraisal of the economic and political reality of the time.
Objectivism is one of those few philosophies that does not need to change people's minds, as it does not invent a subjective reality, but logically extrapolates from the objective one. Ayn Rand wasn't the first or the last to do this, and she knew it. She was just the first to put it all together in one package.
***** Hey Gorilla, that's a very compelling argument, except for one very salient point: Hank Rearden did indeed create the formula for his metal. Oh gosh, that fact throws your whole premise out the window, pardon the metaphor.
The Atlas Society is a group of real people who adhere to Rand's philosophy.Taggart and Rearden are fictional characters. They could not be invited to join, now could they?
Perhaps you are aware of that, since you refer to "people like" Taggart and Rearden. Aside from Rearden's status as the inventor of the metal, both are more than just managers. They are entrepreneurs. This role is every bit as important as that of an inventor. Look at history. Many, many great people who were the innovators who discovered new concepts, who created new methods and products, made for lousy entrepreneurs. Others stole their ideas for themselves or made fortunes without paying the innovator anything, not even primary credit for their discoveries. Some, very few, like Rearden acted as his own entrepreneur, and was attacked by the state and his competition. Taggart was an excellent entrepreneur, expanding the railroad created by her antecedents to meet the needs of the market. Both were attacked by the state for their success, and had to spend far too much of their creative energy just to survive.
Maybe you should read the book before you make statements which have no basis in fact. Just a thought.
Polo Golf 1. I watched only the movie.
2. Fictional characters or not, modern business models are built exactly the same.
3. Unlike John Galt, neither Taggart nor Rearden can create something from nothing. They depend on workforce.
4. I didn't know Atlas society was something real.
Polo Golf The whole entrepreneur concept goes against the concept of Atlas society (speaking from the movie). We cannot overlook the human nature. Where there's money and competition, there is corruption. So entrepreneurship will eventually lead to the same society they were trying to escape from.
***** Really? Care to explain how those situations occur? How the concept of entrepreneurship goes against the concept of the Atlas society? How money+competition=corruption?
This may assist you in understanding my perspective. Absent state coercion, all transactions between the entrepreneurs and their customers are voluntary. The market provides the mechanism for this to occur.
I strongly suggest that you invest the time and effort to read Atlas Shrugged. The situations Ayn Rand published 58 years ago are occurring now with increasing frequency. I don't agree with her premise that great minds should let the world collapse before re-applying their efforts to create a moral and just society...but she shows what would happen if they did. Read the book. If you seriously apply yourself, you will see just how prescient Rand was.
Perhaps it is a good idea (even maybe an altruistic act in your opinion?) to have made Willers black to fight racial stereotypes. My first post was merely an expression of my shock at finding Willers to be black when I had an already a pre-conceived notion of Willers in my mind. Their casting mistake for James Taggart I now see as a one time isolated case and does not reflect other decisions in the movie.
AMONG three. (not 'between')
The one thing that does hurt this book and rand's philiosphy is the Monopoly. While TTR was run by comedic bafoon most large corporations aren't. If we still only had one Oil Company, One large bank etc. how could anyone determine what the value of a certain good is? It isn't as if we could live without electricity, gasoline and other things made by oil so a monopoly could set the price at an arbitrary level and not give any room for negotiation. Rand believes that Rockefeller would have been fair men but history shows that is opposite to reality.
abeed87 Rand demonstrates monopoly in the book, when the government creates the Unification Board to pool all the railroads together. Only governments can create monopoly, but they always call it something else like that.
Without government control, in a free market, if we end up with a single supplier, that only continues while they keep their prices so low that it is not profitable for competitors to start up. Only a government protected monopoly can _"set the price at an arbitrary level",_ because government will prevent competitors.
You do realize Ayn Rand supported a police force?
@wangsta25
why not? because she's an objectivist?
You ever notice how people that read Ayn Rand talk like her characters?
@josephonwhidbey Very possible and good point, however I am more upset about straying from the book which describes Eddie as having blonde hair and blue eyes. Though I have seen some black people with blonde hair. I think they live in Australia. Also James Taggart is supposed to be in his 50's. Making him a young man totally changes the dynamic between him and Dagny. I can't believe they would make James so young, this makes it so his faults could be written off immaturity. Unbelievable!!
> Also James Taggart is supposed to be in his 50's.
One of the early chapters mentions that James is ~5 years older than Dagny, who's ~2 years younger than the 37-year old woman in Starnesville, making James approximately 40 (plus/minus the passage of time before and after the Starnesville scene). I vaguely recall the book saying he looks older than he actually is; he should probably _look_ like he's in his 50s.
cont.
"balance crime in his eyes? If society is horrified at this crime, it should be horrified at the crime’s ultimate cause: itself. The worse the crime-the greater it’s guilt. What would society answer, if that boy were to say: “Yes, I’m a monstrous criminal, but what are you? "
when was this movie out?
Your pure and simple case is an example of quoting out of context. Ayn Rand called Hickman a degernerate and a msonster. "Yes, he is a monster-now. But the worse he is, the worst must be the cause that drove him to this. Isn’t it significant that society was not able to fill the life of an exceptional, intelligent boy, to give him anything to out-"
@fuzzyone99 "They invalidate any assumption that you have enough knowledge to know what you're talking about."
That's called an Ad Hominem, a type ologicalal fallacy. As such it is invalid as rebuttalel.
Why do Ayn Rand's critics have to keep repeating this personal attack, when, if they read the original source for that quote, they would know Rand thought that Hickman was a monster?
Its a rhetorical question. The answer is because they have no answer to her philosophy. They can't prove her wrong. They have nothing except strawman arguments and personal attacks.
@l1nkh0gthr0b,
The writers changed some things to make the movie more watchable.
And to play down the systemic corruption as it mirrors our present system too closly.
@soyerpanzen Let me guess. You are one who see's a job has to be done NOW and will say, "No, not until I have twenty forms signed in triplicate and part of this, that, and the other process filled out."
OMG "cock-loaf"! I am laughing so hard. Whew... thanks! You just made my day.
@soyerpanzen At this time, I am the guy on top, and nobody is blaming me for anything but the success we've had. If you don't take a chance on anything in life, you don't go far. That is what I am saying. In other words, I was relating my experience to how the film (and the book) was pointing at knowing when to take responsibility and to be willing to take responsibility. That your answer is in a way to make somebody willing to take a chance look like a "Duh" looks pretty "Lame."
@l1nkh0gthr0b first chapter he walks in and talks to james in his office about the rail line.
Bad reply. No one is forcing you to use those services - but they are of immense value so you want to use them. No one is stealing from you; all trade is voluntary, unlike government interactions. Competition is more likely limited by governments than 'allowed' by them. Your 'allowed' is just another way to say 'people exercising their freedom to conduct business'. And yes, many services are better provided by private actors including those you mention.
Taylor Schilling is a dead ringer for the legendary Darby Lloyd Rains.
(other than road maintenance, police, emergency services, and other non-privatized functions), but have compassion, rather than resentment, for those who must. This is because I am not an immature egomaniac who mistakenly believes that my only contribution to society can be financial in nature. As someone sympathetic to a philosophy that can't even manage to "sell" the supposed value of its own message, you should be able to understand this. But for some reason, you don't.
@fuzzyone99 Opps missed that bit >.> . But you do know that objectivists are explicitly against governments and corporations becoming 'interwined don't you?' Also don't be so anal about grammer when you can't use a idiom properly.
Yes, Please Save Colorado. The dialogue's delivered like repartee and the acting's stiff.
I would have selected A. Huffington to play Dagny
Why isn't there a series about Atlas Shrugged, yet?
There are at least 100 shitty series on Netflix, Amazon, etc. about every crap nobody wants to know about.
Atlas Shrugged was years ahead of it's time. For decades, all the hypocrites were trying 'altruism', based on 'Christian' values. There has never been more individualism and/or Objectivism as it is nowadays.
A movie about Atlas Shrugged would be way too short.
A series about this novel would be very interesting. And it would hit the nerve of time.
is Eddie black in the book?
Novel, not novle (NOT even a word!)
@Huboons Adherence to pre-school notions of selfishness?
@fuzzyone99 You talk about how 'randroids' have left no significant mark on policy and then you talk about how they have interwined corperations with government which is a issue of policy. Good job you've contridicted yourself in less than 300 characters.
It more like about greed and narcissism, that rich people are so much better than the rest of us that need to live separated for the rest of society, and they no need to suffer the consequences of their actions.
@jeffiek But you ARE stealing my lines. Fancy that, eh!
Do we really need an explanation of this secene?
Many do, Most leftists misinterpret the whole book. The concept for me is, if you want to live off my work, my brains, my sweat, you better make a light load of yourself. If I feel like you are dragging me down I can figure out how to dump the whole load, and go on without you.
@skins017 Black folks worked on railroads in our country since the 1840s so I would suppose that a section hand would rise in the ranks so to speak.and his children would rise even higher. Kindly Sent,
I hope I'll marry a woman like Dagny Taggart. She could also look like that acrtress. Wouldn't mind ;)
Too bad philosophies came out of mediocre novels - one is Scientology, the other Objectivism. Both are bullshit.
Eddie willers is black?
@naadde amen to that!!!!!!
In the book, James was bald.
Kaitlin Jenner in Drag
You should put your organization on the blockchain. Check. Out EOS DAO, Dan Larimer, Eden on EOS to learn how to set it up. Also read Dans book more equal animals on how to govern.
Eddie's Black? This will work. Token and all that.. Koff... This is Clifff notes. Don't try to make a movie out of this. It's impossible. Read it.
He was black in the book, why wouldn't he be black in the movie?
@fuzzyone99 Which is why I'm not arguing with you.
@jeffiek "Geanius."
LOL.
They invalidate any assumption that you have enough knowledge to know what you're talking about.
Arguing with the intentionally ignorant is a waste of time.
Eddie Willers is black? Not that it matters but it goes against the fact that the Willers worked for the Taggarts for generations. And why is James Taggart so young, this sucks.
IIRC he has bland hair and blue eyes in the book.
Well, considering she wrote the book to explain her philosophy, it is acceptable that the characters are like that, since she's trying to prove her point. However, I agree that after a certain point it does get to be ridiculous
@Huboons A resolute and persistent assertion/accusation without any direct evidence or even a request, about someone else, amounts to a lie. You keep implying that I resent being productive. You have no evidence for this. I am compensated well for what I do, whereas you have continually rejected my offer for you to tell me how "valuable" you supposedly are by informing me of your own renumeration. I enjoy being renumerated well. I do not rely on the government for anything directly -
I would like to see someone make a TH-cam Poop of this movie.
Let us run with Dagny Taggart's logic: because I studied biology in college, my views on whatever biological problem, because they are not second hand, are somehow better than the best biological authorities. Also, in high school I took AP Chemistry. Clearly my first hand knowledge of chemistry is better than the paltry second-hand knowledge of the best chemists. I believe that these examples demonstrate the idiocy of this position.
No, it doesn't, b-c you're attacking a caricature
James Taggart is everything I detest about my upbringing...
I'm not quite positive at what juncture "greedy prick" or "insufferable c*nt" became social fashion, but so far, it's not helping.
@Huboons ""Every law IS a regulation" agreed, that's why I don't want any." So you even oppose laws against murder, as I suspected. Thanks for admitting that, not many people would!
"Also, I'm not running for office, nor do I vote.." Thank God for that!
I don't "worship" the state. And your "worship" of powerful non-state actors and materialism is a worship of power nonetheless.
There was no "transfer" of wealth in making GM pay off its loans, half-wit. Are banks now "redistributionists"?
"All the experts say this new metal is sketchy as fuck."
"I don't care about what they say."
"Then whose say DO we care about?"
"Mine."
"And how would you know whether or not this new metal is legit?"
"I took engineering classes in college."
Round of applause. A woman took engineering classes in college, therefore she is right in a matter of metallurgy (not engineering) and ALL the experts are wrong.
I took a building materials course under an engineering program. I learned basic principals behind the behaviour of metals. Sure that doesn't make me a specialist of metallurgy, but I'm also not an astrophysicist and I understand Einstein's theories of relativity. The whole point of Atlas Shrugged is to stop listening to 'specialists' the way 16th century man listened to the church - based on faith. Learn for yourself, find out for yourself, trust in yourself. That's how Einstein disproved Newton's theories, that's how man discovers.
@naadde Dagny is a good person, but a good MAN in a woman's body - not the type to marry. Business partner yes, wife no.
@ZodiacStationAlpha lol yeah i expected him to be about 15 years younger and 20 times uglier XP
Here's my question: Why do I need some knucklehead from an "Atlas Society" telling me what "Atlas Shrugged" is all about? I thought part of Ayn Rand's idea of individualism was to think for yourself. If you can't understand what a novel is all about and need someone to "teach" you, your intelligence is sorely lacking. This "Atlas Society" sounds like some movement going on to try and control how people think, like "collectivism", which Ayn Rand was against. No thanks, pal.