How Ayn Rand became the new right’s version of Marx | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian
Another poorly written article that tries hopelessly to shed light on why so many people have actually read “Atlas Shrugged”.
George Manbiot, of the Guardian, actually cites the Adam Curtis documentaries, although he doesn’t name which one. The Fabians must be launching an offensive.
“They would set out to re-create the myth of America as a unique nation…”
I think it is time to speak out about this kind of crap, expecialy in celebration of July 4th holiday.
At 1:20 Curtis says, “It was one of our malitias” when talking about the antagonists in a civil war in the Congo.
Our malitias, our wars, our Playstation 2’s. One of our scientists was wrong.
We’re all guilty. No one is guilty.
This is the point of the group ownership, or “commonwealth” of England. It’s in their mind, or at least in Curtis’s.
This is an excellent response to Adam Curtis’s documentary. I enjoyed the catchy music and active pace of the show. I liked the video editing. It is mostly engaging. But the part it does not engage, or even tries to subvert, is the intellect.
I get the impression that the BBC gave Curtis full access to all footage ever shot by them. He had a monumental library spanning decades to rummage through. He needed all of this to dazzle the viewer with large quantities of interesting footage to not notice the junk that was coming out of his mouth. Why? The BBC must be shaken and scared that the ideas of individual rights will finally reach across the Atlantic and into the hallowed walls of the University of London.
Curtis has made several of these types of documentaries. One is called “The Century of the Self” in which he uses BBC library footage to show that the individual is a myth made up by Sigmund Freud’s cousin to sell more cars and clothes.
I agree with pretty much everything you are saying, accept I think you should clarify the virtue/virtues of selfishness point you are making. She did write a book called “The Virtue of Selfishness”.
As far as the roots of the collapse, they actually show Greenspan diverging from the path of Objectivism but don’t point that out to the viewer. They show him using the Fed to help Clinton. At this point he is not running the Fed as a bank but as a charity. This has nothing to do with Objectivism but Curtis and the BBC doesn’t mention this divergence.
You can only refute Rand by misrepresenting her. But for the BBC and Curtis to stake their reputations on such an attack means they think no one will notice, or they are just so desperate that they have to play dumb and try anyway.
There is an alternate explanation to the events portrayed in the show. The New Economy was laid low, not by irrational exuberance, but by a DOJ attack on it’s greatest champion.
Here is an interesting section of the Dot Com Bomb taken from here:
2000 Jan 30 Super Bowl XXXIV Features Seventeen Dot-Com Companies
2000 Mar 10 Dot-com Bubble Reaches Peak
2000 Mar 13 The Market Opens 4% Lower On Monday Than It Closed On Friday
2000 Mar 24 S&P 500 Peaks
2000 Apr 3 Microsoft Is Declared A Monopoly
2000 Apr 15 iWon.com Gave Away Ten Million Dollars To A Lucky Contestant
2000 May 18 Boo.com Goes Bust
2000 Nov 6 Pets.com Announces Closure
From the youtube comments:
"It was a vision of society where the old forms of political control would be unnecessary. Because computer networks could could create order in society without central control. this had never happened before. Because at the heart of Western political thought there had always been a fear that if you allowed individuals too much control, you would get anarchy."
Actually it has happened before. You may have heard of it BBC, it was called the AMERICAN REVOLUTION!!!!
Many British still just don’t comprehend that the American Revolution happened. The "divine right of kings" still operates there in the minds of the people and even in the laws.
It’s no wonder that revolution has failed in the emerging nations in Eastern Europe and now the Middle East. Revolution failed in the capitals of Europe and the BBC is broadcasting that fact!
"And no one believes you can change the world for the better any more"
The BBC program is filled with such blanket statements. This one is written in large, bold, all-caps at the beginning of the program.
It is such an easily refutable assertion that one must wonder if it is more of a wish.
There are many blanket statements. The manufactured dispute between Hutu’s and Tootsie’s is said to be something that "we" caused. I assume by "we" Adam Curtis means Europeans?
There are many juxtapositions of incongruous images. The film is like "The Kid Stays in the Picture". The producers had access to the BBC’s newsreels and made great use of them. But much of it is disorienting. When they discuss Bill Hamilton’s death from a hemorrhage they show a close-up of blood bursting through some membrane into another bodily fluid and then some glamorous woman dancing under a disco light.
Much of the archive footage is helpful, and of a quality that you would only expect from the BBC or other news mammoth. But a lot of it is fluff or even subterfuge.
At one point a theory is said to assert that there is absolutely no differences between humans and animals. They show a human yawning and a chimpanzee yawning. No thought is given to the fact that humans are creating such theories while chimpanzees are not.