The Resurgence of Big Government - Ayn Rand Center - 1 of 2

[MegaAvalonn]

Wrong, the Federal Reserve is about as Federal as the Federal Express. The Federal Reserve is a private enterprise and the USA government works for the Federal Reserve, not the other way around.

[wrb1957]

Heh. We haven't had a free market system since at least 1913, arguably, not since a decade or two earlier than that. We haven't had anything resembling a 'laissez - faire' system since a helluva lot earlier than that, if at all. A free market system that is burdened with more than two hundred thousand pages of legislation, on top of local, county and state regulations, is not a free market system. It's a socialist/Marxist economic system. That's the reality in America, today.

[wachman]

this is disturbingly true, and only the ones who put themselves out there and do their own research about the free market and modern monetary system of the US will know the truth about how the passed 70 something years of legislation have been completely unconstitutional.

[jakefree25]

@wrb1957 Not really, you argument and dates are shoddy to the extreme.

[PLCvideo]

How in hell is Big Brother BACK with such a vengeance today?

[dduppie]

the video just gave you some examples...

[rimbaud1020]

if it wasn't for altruistic ppl, none of you would have an education. teachers, parents, firefighters, the very ppl in the military who defend your right to debate wether you should help your neighbor or be self centered. these are all examples of altruistic thinking. do you want to be like animals, who give birth and abandon their young? if you don't like altruism, then don't date, have kids, or work in the service industry! be a hermit. now thumb me down. altruism is good if it's voluntary.

[marneedear]

How dare you assume WHY anyone does something! Who are you to say that any of these things are altruistic?  Are you saying that there is no personal gain from taking on these jobs? And if they are such great altruists why do they demand payment?

[rimbaud1020]

I say agian, altruism is good IF it's voluntary. "If any civilization is to survive, it is the morality of altruism that men have to reject" Ayn Rand. Notice the word morality. We have to ask why we're being altruistic. I really don't think parents, teachers, and the clergy are after personal gain. I am sure there are exceptions. Let's avoid polarised thinking. Very few things are all bad or all good. Venom can kill, and can make a cure. Let me ask, how can we NOT be altruistic? or who isn't?

[z2b]

interesting

[roasty6dsvn]

people are not self-interested.

theres a reason we have REASON, and are more intelligent than other animals. we evolved in group dynamics and helping the family out. if you look at planet earth, when one tiger comes and runs for an antelope, the entire heard runs away EACH not wanting to die.

if they were humans, or cognizant of a family unit, they would have all charged the tiger, and the tiger would have NEVER survived.

humans are naturally interested in the survival of their species

[qtronman]

People are not self-interested?

So you're writing this message to save me and the rest of your species?

[jvittetoe]

where is part 2?

[Skobrin]

What a crock of shit.

[jvittetoe]

go back to watching tv idiot.

[qtronman]

"What a crock of shit."

Is this lecture a "crock of shit" or are you talking about your addled brain?

[shovelcharge]

a much needed video!

[jchien]

If we need police to step in to protect us from physical violence, why do objectivists trust businessmen to never unfairly harm us financially, economically? Why the romanticizing and hero worhsipping of busnessmen? Capitalism is not pure meritocracy as Objectivists envisioned; Capitalism is about property rights, that is, those with the legal rights profit, not necessarily those who do the physically or intellectual work who profit.

[kukyona]

Who says they think some businessmen (or anyone) want try to prey on others? Last I checked Objectivism has no problems with punishing those who use force of fraud against others, in fact I'm pretty sure they insist on protecting rights from violation.

The distinction seems to be that they don't treat honest people as criminals until they commit a crime.

[jchien]

yes, Objectivists say we need police to protect us from those who initiate force and commit violent crimes. But don't we need financial/economic policing to protect us from predatory lending, accounting fraud, and other economic crimes? If your answer is yes we do need economic policing, then that calls for regulation.

[jchien]

Objectivists, including the lecturer in this clip, are saying businesses need to be left along, without supervision or oversight. This lecturer is saying Enron and Worldcom were heavily regulated and implying that big gov't regulation was the fault for Enron/Worldcom fiasco.

[jchien]

And why is it that objectivists believe we do need policing in our neighborhoods to protect us from "predation" but not in the marketplace? What's so special about the marketplace that would guarantee all businessmen to be rationally self-interested as opposed to being predators? Regulations are needed in the marketplace to protect us from economic predation, economic crimes, just as our neighborhoods need police to protect us from crimes.

[qtronman]

"And why is it that objectivists believe we do need policing in our neighborhoods to protect us from "predation" but not in the marketplace?"

Depends on what you're policing for. Objectivists believe in anti-fraud policing, for example. But that is only after the fraud has taken place, not in-advance regulation.

[jchien]

You guys go off in all different directions in your replies but I am only making one point: the marketplace needs policing just like our neighborhoods need policing. The lecturer seems to be saying what went wrong with Enron and Worldcom was over regulation when in fact it was just the opposite; Enron and Worldcom lobbied for deregulation n committed accounting fraud.

[jchien]

Wall Street's complex financial instruments were deregulated n that led to predatory lending, subprime mortage, housing crisis, credit crisis, global economic crisis. So to prevent fraud and financial crimes of all kinds, we need regulation. Since you agree with me that "anti-fraud" policing in the business world is needed, then you agree government oversight and regulation are needed. Thank you.

[WarVideo]

Npbbody is arguing for policing against real crimes that violate individual rights, but the policing you call for does, regulation is essentially saying that any business man is "guilty until proven innocent".

[qtronman]

"Do Objectivists, including the lecturer in this clip, say businesses need to be left along, without supervision or oversight?"

When a man searches for a wife, do you say he needs to be left along, without supervision or oversight? Or does the government have to overlook and approval each and every one of his dates before you will let him out of the house? This is exactly analogous to our view of business.

[jchien]

Well, I don't know if that's an apt analogy but I get your point. What I mean by government supervision or oversight is policing of the marketplace to prevent economic crimes, fraud. If objectivists agree we do need policing in the marketplace, then why are you guys always saying gov't oversight or supervision in the marketplace is always bad? It's obviously needed in light of Enron/Worldcom fiasco and subprime mortage/housing/credit/economi­c crisis we are in.

[politEgoEgonomics]

There is an aspect of creativity in any successful business. Intervention forcing business to conform with set acceptable standards of the moment, in effect, stagnates, suffocates and inevitably kills the entrepreneurial spirit. Wrap your mind around the internet if its propagation had been restricted and policed for any and every new development because the television lobby -to protect its market- had demanded immediate govenment clampdown on everything that existed and could exist as video.

[jchien]

Human beings can't help but be self-interested but our self-interests have to be enlightened and if not enlightened, regulated by the rest of the community, the collective, the government.Our self interest needs to be enlightened or regulated so we do not lie cheat or steal in our pursuit of our selfish ends.We need police to protect ourselves form those who wish to use force and violence against us.Likewise, we need gov't oversight on unfair, unscrupulous business dealings that harm us.

[shovelcharge]

It isn't selfish to cheat or steal, that is the whole point. Human beings aren't inherently self-interested--they must choose to use reason, as individuals. Morality is private; it isn't a social or collective matter.

[jchien]

How do you mean lying cheating or stealing isn't selfish behavior? Human beings like all other life forms are inherently self-interested, self interested in competition for survival and replication. As Thomas Hobbes said, without government, in the state of nature, life would be a war of all against all, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short. Following Hobbes, John Locke's tradition, our constitution is a social contract to ensure the survival of the collective.

[jchien]

It's really quit insane to hear people blaming over regulation in our world today.  Enron and Worldcom lobbied for deregulation n they got it; that's why no one stopped their accounting frauds, "hedge accounting". Wall Street was buddy with Bush n Greenspan deregulated the financial market n that's why we are in this housing/credit/global economic crisis. Greenspan himself admits his ideology of the infallability of free market has been proven wrong. Republican has been big on small gov't.

[kukyona]

@jchien

I think you're failing to see the distinction between selfishness and predation. One is putting your own interests, rational or otherwise, first and puts other concerns second... the other is ignoring the interests and rights of others and uses them for one's own purposes.

Objectivism supports rational self-interest and condemns all forms of predation.

[jchien]

How can we be protected against financial/economic predation, or what normal people call unchecked greed and selfishness, without regulation?

[qtronman]

Is it true that human beings can't help but be self-interested?

False. Man can and does be self-sacrificial or anti-self, e.g., Jesus.

Is it true that our self-interests have to be enlightened?

How?

Is it true that our interests need to be regulated by the rest of the community, the collective, the government?

So you do not trust yourself? You do not have judgment? You do not have a mind? You need to submit your will and choices to other people?

[jchien]

Look, self interest or self preservation is the most powerful instinct in all life. Self sacrifice or altruism is the exception that makes the rule. What needs to be explained isn't selfishness, it's altruism. Scientists came up with some theories to explain altruism and they are basically saying since the unit of evolution is genes (see Richard Dawkin's Selfish Genes), it makes evolutinary sense to sacrifice for others who share ur genes. That's one theory and the most subscribed one.

[GamblerJustice]

What instinct?

[qtronman]

"What needs to be explained ... {is} altruism."

You don't have to explain altruism any more than you have to explain suicide, cowardice, cheating, lying and theft. People have free will; they can make destructive choices. What else needs to be explained? Why do people act altruistically? For various reasons, e.g., fear, cowardice, giving in to social pressure, failing to think, listening to their pastors or professors, etc. What does that need to be explained any more than murder or rape?

[jchien]

Scientists want to explain all human behaviors. Selfishness is easily explained. Altruism is less obvious because it appears to go against the instinct for self preservation. Evolutionary psychologists and biologists today largely subscribe to the explanation for altruism I described above. There are many who spend their entire lives studying why people do what they do, be that murder, rape, or self sacrificial behavior. So I don't get ur point here.

[rimbaud1020]

altruism is the opposite of ego...therefore thinking of others instead of yourself. altruistic thinking is good :)

[KeyserX]

Actually, altruism is thinking of others BEFORE thinking of yourself. Neglecting your interests in favor of the interests of others is self-immolating behaviour. It goes against reason by willfully defying the necessity for the pursuit of selfish interests (in order to exist).

Altruistic thinking is good you say? How so? Because you're told it's good, and that isn't surprising, because it makes you sacrifice yourself for others.

The point here is that there is no rational obligation to do that.

[rimbaud1020]

I wasn't trying to start a debate, just trying to shed some light on the topic. the other user was contrasting altruism against things that have no realation to this topic in my opinion.

[philosophyarchitect]

"Wasn't trying to start a debate, just trying to offer a contrasting opinion because the other person's opinion was inconsistent with my view." Lol.

[Psy500]

Yet altruism is what capitalism is for the proletariat, the proletariat has to give up a significant portion of the value they create for the good of their capitalist masters as they are not paid the full value of their labor since they are the source of all value and profits come unpaid labor value.

Altruism ignores ignores that it is a individual interest of the proletariat to act collectively against the interest of the capitalists due to the class conflicts that exist in capitalism.

[Psy500]

The last part should Objectivism ignores that it is a individual interest of the proletariat to act collectively against the interest of the capitalists due to the class conflicts that exist in capitalism.

[KeyserX]

Well, that argumentation completely neglects the laws of supply and demand.

Profits aren't the source of unpaid labour. You have to ask what that labour is worth to the person EMPLOYING the labourer, not to the person buying the product, because the labourer cannot make the product without the enourmous capital his employer has invested into machinery etc.

If the labourers work was worth more than he is being paid, why wouldn't he just go into business for himself? Answer that.

[Psy500]

If you recall history laborers use to be in business for themselves they were the artisan class. The capitalist class drove artisans out of busniess (thus you had events like the Luddite uprising, where artisans smashed machines as they were driving them out of busniess and forcing them to become wage laborers).

You also ignore that the machinery is build by other workers, and while workers are paid they are paid a fraction of what their class collectively built.

[WOLFARG]

yes, but the core idea is that values are not in the things ( as Marx thought ), values are subjetives. This may be sound against Ayn Rand`s philosophy, but it´s interesting to see what she thought about austrian school of economic ( Mises, Hayek, Rothbard)

[1337melee]

I believe that Rands main problem with the Austrian school was that, although they did good economics, they believed that value was subjective. Ayn Rand believed that an object could have more value to one person than another, but this value was objectively based on known facts about their specific situations. Values are not subjective, nor are they intrinsic, they are objective.

[stephleom]

@WOLFARG No, values aren'y intrisic or subjective, they're objective.

Throw out Mises and read Say

[KeyserX]

Also, that it is in the rational self-interest of the proletariat to act against industrialists is something I would strongly object to.

I propse looking at history for the answer to this one: Has it, in the past, been to the advantage of society when the masses would antagonize the industrialists in this way? Just compare the DDR to West Germany and you'll see that there are no "class conflicts".

When the masses try to undeservedly profit from the few, everyone suffers.

[Psy500]

So that is East Germans are disillusioned by capitalism? Anyway the Soviet block wasn't a workers state, there was power struggles over worker control and in the end the Bolsheviks lost to Stalin that meant the workers played no role in decision making.

[jchien]

So you trust everyone in the marketplace to be motivated by rational self interest eventhough you do not trust everyone in your neighborhood to be? Do you think everyone in the business world always has the presence of mind to exercise their best judgment? Do you want ur fellow citizens to submit to law enforcement but do not want big businesses to submit to gov't supervision??

[philosophyarchitect]

That's an arguement against anarchy, not a market economy. The objective laws based on intolerance to the initiation of force that apply to everyone should apply to business as well; there should also be certain business-specific laws such as laws against fraud or misleading your stock holders. But this doesn't mean that businessmen are our slaves that can be disposed of at will. They are not there to serve society. In a free market, incompetent businessmen have no ability to hurt us.

[jchien]

When did I ever say businessmen should be our slaves to be disposed of at will? That's a false dichotomy, a tendency of Randians. If you havn't noticed, you live in reality not Ms. Rand's novels; incompetent, unscrupulous businessmen hurt us all the time.

[philosophyarchitect]

...as they do in Rand's novels. There are lots of businessmen antagonists in Rand's novels. They do so through the government. Without government help, businessmen cannot hurt anyone except their voluntary associates. Except through fraud, but that should be illegal according to Objectivism.

[666norton420]

"So you do not trust yourself? You do not have judgment? You do not have a mind? You need to submit your will and choices to other people?"

like when driving, it's not myself i'm worried about, it's everyone else who sucks at driving that makes me cautious.

most people don't have good judgment, a fuctioning mind or make any real sense 90% of the time.

most people almost need the directions on shampoo bottles.

;d

[qtronman]

Do our self interests need to be enlightened or regulated so we do not lie cheat or steal in our pursuit of our selfish ends?

Cheating and lying is NOT selfish. You have no clue what genuine selfishness ~is~.

[jchien]

Cheating and lying are not selfish behavior because that is the objectivist definition of selfishness. There is no essence of words. Words are symbols and their meanings are what we human beings invest in them. I can go along with ur definition for the sake of the argument, that selfishness is defined as rational self interest as opposed to predation. No problem. Again, my point is, the marketplace needs policing just as our neighborhoods need policing.

[chris3443]

Thanks a lot for this!

[Kurtyoungblood]

Great video! I'm ready for part two. (Typo: "Yaronn")