Replies

Ayn Rand's "shruggers" weren't primarily business leaders. They were the real creators, the real doers inside businesses. The CEO isn't usually that. A lot of Ayn Rand readers seem to miss that. There aren't really that many doers. Does the CEO of Enron know both where and how to drill for natural gas? Does the CEO of GE know a dot product from a cross product? Does the CEO of GM know how to start up the CAD program on his desktop? Doers know these things, these are the John Galts who work for the CEOs.

You said it better than I did....thanks.

I naively thought Herb Kelleher of Southwest might be nearly almost kinda' sorta' maybe a potential Rand type, until I learned that he was instrumental in borrowing without permission 737 components from a corporate 737 parked nearby when Southwest couldn't afford to buy spares (an aileron I believe.).

Any nominees in your opinion?

kj

I agree with you completely but I think the connection that writer here is trying to make with the book is the greed that drives them to do what they do. Thats just my opinion.

On a side note, I just received an email from a friend of mine who works at the St. Regis in DC:

Well, my hotel lobby is full of secret service guys right now, we are expecting the Vice President to give a speech to Business Roundtable meeting. Subject: General Policy. People attending the meeting are all CEOs from different businesses... let's hope that this meeting carries out some sanity...

My first thought was that maybe they are gathering in masses to get their stories straight..lol :-)

Ayn Rand's "shruggers" weren't primarily business leaders. They were the real creators, the real doers inside businesses. The CEO isn't usually that. A lot of Ayn Rand readers seem to miss that. There aren't really that many doers. Does the CEO of Enron know both where and how to drill for natural gas? Does the CEO of GE know a dot product from a cross product? Does the CEO of GM know how to start up the CAD program on his desktop? Doers know these things, these are the John Galts who work for the CEOs.

These people tend to be "craftsmen". Michael Macoby in "The Gamesman" said these folks don't usually obtain positions of power and when they do aren't typically successful. To the gamesman, however, life (and career) is a series of games with winners and losers. The gamesman plays the game to win at all costs. Makes no lasting relationships because they are "users" of people. When there are no more games to play, gamesmen usually retire to a life of solitude and drink themselves to death. They don't serve on boards, they don't seek to make a difference in the lives others.

Clinton was/is the consumate gamesman. He will be around as long as he feels like he is a player. If he is ignored he may really go away.

Gamesmen have been around since the beginnign of time, but have been called different things. May be just a reflection of the human nature.

What about a firm full of "Galts" that have no organizational coordination, coordination provided by a leadership structure.

In my experience it is the best "Galts" who eventually end up in leadership positions in a firm.

Ayn Rand's "shruggers" weren't primarily business leaders. They were the real creators, the real doers inside businesses. The CEO isn't usually that. A lot of Ayn Rand readers seem to miss that. There aren't really that many doers. Does the CEO of Enron know both where and how to drill for natural gas? Does the CEO of GE know a dot product from a cross product? Does the CEO of GM know how to start up the CAD program on his desktop? Doers know these things, these are the John Galts who work for the CEOs.

I agree completely!

Ayn Rand often said "capitalism" when maybe she should have said "free enterprise." Capitalism, as I understand it, is just a way to make money by already having money.

A free-enterprise economy might have capitalists in it, but the heroes in Rand's novels are more like enterpreneurs and inventors. They were heroes because of their individualism and their prowess as productive visionaries, not because they had big piles of other people's money and talked like winners(except maybe Midas Mulligan).

Paper-shufflers, conformists, smooth-talkers, schmoozers and posers were generally the bad guys.

... Atlas Shrugged ...

In fact, now that I think of it, what you described was EXACTLY what John Galt was -- and Engineer who developed a revolutionary energy source, but the company he worked for was full of morons and conformists who wouldn't follow up with the project, so he quit and went underground!

I agree. Many of the execs in the business world are probably fascistic in their outlook towards government and their fellow man. This is why major corporations seemingly have no problem lobbying the government to restrict the entry of competitors into the market AND the survival of small businesses already present.

The funding of major foundations with leftist or fascist goals is yet another reason to suspect that, while commerce is the lifeblood of a free society, that there are those with wealth and power that would seek to create compliant slaves , er workers.