Abaco

A Concept I Found in Atlas Shrugged

12 posts in this topic

I am about 75% through Atlas Shrugged. There is one point of the story that really jumped out and grabbed me and I wonder if it's often overlooked by "my fellow scholars" of this fine book. In the scene where Rearden is about to sign over the Certificate for Rearden Metal he gets very introspective and thinks of Dagny. Since Ferris is bribing him over his affair with her Rearden realizes that these people (the looters) take what is most valuable to you, your finest attributes (such as the love for those you are close to) and use it as a weapon against you. He thinks of his own wife in this light, also.

Reading that was very powerful for me. For so many important times in my life when I felt somewhat backed into a corner I now see that the same methods were often being used against me - perhaps by people that didn't even realize that was what they were doing. I see this concept as very important to Atlas Shrugged, and to life. Is it overlooked somewhat?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think it's overlooked. In fact, it's implicit in any analysis of altruism. Collectivists use man's virtue as a weapon in two ways. Against those without pride, they use altruism to brainwash virtuous men into believing that their values come from others and at their expense, so that they can guilt the virtuous into surrendering their souls to the needy. Against those with pride, those who would not willingly surrender, they simply assemble a gang to pick up a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am about 75% through Atlas Shrugged. There is one point of the story that really jumped out and grabbed me and I wonder if it's often overlooked by "my fellow scholars" of this fine book. In the scene where Rearden is about to sign over the Certificate for Rearden Metal he gets very introspective and thinks of Dagny. Since Ferris is bribing him over his affair with her Rearden realizes that these people (the looters) take what is most valuable to you, your finest attributes (such as the love for those you are close to) and use it as a weapon against you. He thinks of his own wife in this light, also.

Reading that was very powerful for me. For so many important times in my life when I felt somewhat backed into a corner I now see that the same methods were often being used against me - perhaps by people that didn't even realize that was what they were doing. I see this concept as very important to Atlas Shrugged, and to life. Is it overlooked somewhat?

No. This is one of the major points in Objectivism. The passage you cite is when Rearden begins to understand the principle of "sanction of the victim." You'll read more about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Since Ferris is bribing him over his affair with her Rearden realizes that these people (the looters) take what is most valuable to you, your finest attributes (such as the love for those you are close to) and use it as a weapon against you. He thinks of his own wife in this light, also.

Ayn Rand called that "White Blackmail" which is one of the chapter titles in Atlas Shrugged. That is the process by which those who create values are extorted by threats to the things they value and deserve. That is how they are held hostage by their own love of their values, which is also the theme of another chapter: "By Our Love."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the responses. I'm such a rookie at this.

It seems as though white blackmail is a staple of our current government. I have heard several stories of abuses carried out by Child Protective Services, for example.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. This is one of the major points in Objectivism. The passage you cite is when Rearden begins to understand the principle of "sanction of the victim." You'll read more about it.

The "sanction of the victim" reminds me of the defensive art of Aikido where your own motion can be used against you. As long you remain motionless you are offering nothing that can be used against you... while you patiently wait for your opponent to make the first move that can be used against them.

Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. This is one of the major points in Objectivism. The passage you cite is when Rearden begins to understand the principle of "sanction of the victim." You'll read more about it.

The "sanction of the victim" reminds me of the defensive art of Aikido where your own motion can be used against you. As long you remain motionless you are offering nothing that can be used against you... while you patiently wait for your opponent to make the first move that can be used against them.

Greg

So do two masters of the art just stand there and stare at each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. This is one of the major points in Objectivism. The passage you cite is when Rearden begins to understand the principle of "sanction of the victim." You'll read more about it.

The "sanction of the victim" reminds me of the defensive art of Aikido where your own motion can be used against you. As long you remain motionless you are offering nothing that can be used against you... while you patiently wait for your opponent to make the first move that can be used against them.

Greg

So do two masters of the art just stand there and stare at each other?

...until one of them blinks... then the other one takes him down by his eyelids.

Greg :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No. This is one of the major points in Objectivism. The passage you cite is when Rearden begins to understand the principle of "sanction of the victim." You'll read more about it.

The "sanction of the victim" reminds me of the defensive art of Aikido where your own motion can be used against you. As long you remain motionless you are offering nothing that can be used against you... while you patiently wait for your opponent to make the first move that can be used against them.

Greg

Is this poster a troll?

Aikido is a martial art that relies completely upon the attacker to supply the energy to throw or submit him. Those that choose to learn Aikido do so understanding that they will use the body of another, and it will be returned in kind. There is a respect in this matter, since there is no true "attack" technique in Aikido, it is necessary to demonstrate how to defend against such an attack. For example, in order to train to defend a "hacking" arm attack, we need someone to be willing to do so in order for one to we learn to diffuse this threat.

The sanction of the victim is a moral concept that explains how good, decent people can let other people run over their lives and supplant their own good judgment about what is the best to demonstrate about the human spirit.

Understandably, a wary eye is cast over the martial arts in regards to mysticism. I think that the artistry and technique of Aikido is beautiful, in that it renders attackers submissive and that it has all the grace of dancing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the responses. I'm such a rookie at this.

It seems as though white blackmail is a staple of our current government. I have heard several stories of abuses carried out by Child Protective Services, for example.

Do fill me in on those. My god-sister works in CPS. I think if I had to have someone taking away children from their parents it would be her. Or at least she works for 'social services' and I think it's the same thing. She has to take away kids sometimes.

The bad stories I hear are the same with any bureaucratic institution. People advancing because of politics more than anything else. It can sometimes attract people with emotional problems. Apparently it also breaks down peoples sympathy due to all the incredibly depressing situations they're in until they stop caring.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Thanks for the responses. I'm such a rookie at this.

It seems as though white blackmail is a staple of our current government. I have heard several stories of abuses carried out by Child Protective Services, for example.

Do fill me in on those. My god-sister works in CPS. I think if I had to have someone taking away children from their parents it would be her. Or at least she works for 'social services' and I think it's the same thing. She has to take away kids sometimes.

OK, here's an example. In this State, parents of children with autism and other, similar disabilities have meetings with their public school disctricts to plan the child's education. Luckily, in America, we still make education available to all children...or are supposed to. Lately, the trend has been for schools to take money that has been slated, by law, for the education of children with developmental disabilities and use it for other purposes. If the parents of a child disagree with the tactics used by the districts in one of these IEP meetings they may find CPS waiting for them on their doorstep when they get home afterward. That would be an excellent example of white blackmail, I would think. "So, Mr. Smith; we understand you have an anger management problem. We need to speak to your children." I know, it sounds crazy. But, it does happen to good people. Luckily, it hasn't happened to my family.

A very good friend of mine works in CPS here. I think they do very good work, in general. They are woefully understaffed for a county that is now overrun with child neglect and abuse - entirely linked to the proliferation of meth, according to my friend.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The bad stories I hear are the same with any bureaucratic institution. People advancing because of politics more than anything else. It can sometimes attract people with emotional problems. Apparently it also breaks down peoples sympathy due to all the incredibly depressing situations they're in until they stop caring.

In most businesses politics are necessary as there is no way to determine precisely who did what. (this is, incidentally, a big factor in my decision to work in investing, esp. derivatives trading - hard to claim somebody else's P&L as yours!)

Regarding the original thread, I wonder why people are surprised. The manipulators want to achieve their aim in the most efficient way possible, and this way is to attack the only thing that can be attacked, to use as a lever what matters most to somebody (e.g. they can't bribe you). The problem with having integrity is that it's usually clear to the altruists. Bam, you're a target.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites