I think I just proved Objectivism wrong...

http://www.tnr.com/article/books-and-arts/wealthcare-0

I like the idea of synchronicity and the quantum physical approach to reality that contends that nothing exists until we observe it (and thus we act continuously in the creation of the world around us).

I start this blog and this book comes out. And a few days after I start reading Atlas Shrugged, this article is published in The New Republic.

Read it... it's a little long, but eye-openeing!

Who is John Galt?

Atlas Shrugged: Part 1, Chapter 1- Theme

Well, If I learned anything from the start, it's this: Ayn Rand doesn't try to hide her thoughts in this book.

I think as I started reading, I imagined that deep inside this story, hidden away from sight, waiting to be discovered, would be the theme and principles that Rand was trying to show. Well, I was wrong. She doesn't wait long to set up the players and she doesn't hide her thoughts.

Enter James Taggert- weak, foolish, a yes man, a follower, a poor CEO. Enter Dagny Taggert- decisive, focused, competetive, strong, a leader. The duality between the family is striking and my initial response is that it seems like a fool's choice. James talks about his desire to "take part in developing an underprivleged country that never had a chance" while Dagny fuels scare tactics of nationalization and how the entire Rio Norte Line project is a waste of money. Well, it is in the example. James chooses to do things he thinks are good for others at direct loss to himself and his company. He almost goes along his path with an unstated goal of bankrupting himself for the "good" of others. In the setup Rand has given us, it's obvious that we'll root for Dagny- she's the winner and James is obviously a complete loser.

Is that the only option? Isn't there a middle ground where the ideals that James seems to hold can work in concert with basic winning buisiness principles? Rand makes her case right off the bat- Do what's good for you and that will end up being good for everybody. Do what you think is good for others and reward them for doing nothing and watch as all suffer the consequences.

In some ways, I can see why Ringo told me not to read this book. I have a strong feeling it's going to be quite a compelling argument- One that attempts to tear down liberal ideals and expound on the virtues of self-interest. But something isn't sitting right with me about it just yet and I don't quite know what. I'm not convinced yet that the story is rooted in reality and is rather an image of a world that doesn't exist (or at least one that exists only in a vacuum).

By the way... Who IS John Galt?

One thing I can see is that in the winding and weaving third person narrative that shifts effortlessly between the thoughts of different characters within a scene, that I'm kinda looking forward to the story. I haven't read any good fiction in a while (my last few attempts in the last few years have failed 20, 100, or 150 pages in). There really is something that a book can give you inside your head that visual media can not. Maybe that's why I like the radio so much.

If there's any parallel I can draw already about what's going on today in our political climate it's that any position can be argued by accentuating the worst in the "other" side. Rand, not unlike FoxNews or Michael Moore, doesn't let you get away with being in the middle. You're either with us or you're against us. There's black and there's white. Choose a side.

Cheers to chapter 1! 26 of 1168 pages!

September the 11th

Ok, so today's Sept. 11th. What a day to have as day 2 on my blog adventure about conflicting and contrasting viewpoints. I'm just going to throw this out there because I'd love to discuss this event at some later date, but for now I just have one thing to say:

When you see a firefighter, go over and just tell them "thanks".

My Dad was a firefighter for over 30 years and, man, does he have some stories. Stories of long nights, medical emergencies, hard labor, time away from home, brush fires turning into firestorms whipping over them and the engine... I don't think there's a profession that is more selfless in the whole world- people who literally risk their lives everyday for others' lives and property.

So... Thanks, Dad. And Thanks to all the other professional and volunteer firefighters around the world who are always on call ready to do whatever is necessary for all of us. And today, I raise my glass to New York's Bravest- the people who ran into the buildings, not away from them.

Where do I begin?

Hello! Welcome to my voyage of discovery. I'm glad you're here.

The 2000's have been a crazy decade haven't they? Bush v Gore. 9/11. Afganistan. Iraq. Kerry. Cheney. Hillary. McCain. Obama. Financial Meltdowns. Enhanced Interrogation Techniques. Health Care. What's happened in our country? Why can't we all get along? Why are we so polarized?

Living here in Northern California, I listen to NPR all day, I watch Jon Stewart and Bill Maher on my DVR, and I wake up everyday feeling like everyone around me believes the same things I do. I feel like I've settled in nicely to a set of beliefs about economics, politics, and in a lot of ways, morality. When I look around me, I see the world through a lens that I've created and it's so easy to tell myself that everything I think is right and everything on the "other side" is wrong. I don't know why I've gotten to this point and I want to find out.

I've toyed with the idea of starting a blog for a while now, but I never quite thought I had anything that anyone else would want to read or follow. I talk to the TV or radio when I'm alone and I know what I say, but after frustrations subside, I think I'm just plain saddened by the fact that we can't have a good old fashioned debate about issues without it degenerating into a game of spin on both sides. I LOVE to have intellectual conversations. I love to play devil's advocate and debate and argue. I love asking questions. so... maybe this could be a vehicle for my own enjoyment.

So... How did I get to here, writing my first post on Blogger? Well, this morning I made a comment to an old friend's facebook status update and over the course of half an hour 20 or 30 comments streamed in from his friend list. (Full disclosure: my old friend is on "the other side" and most of his facebook friends are, too). Some people expounded on ideals, some got mad, some were conciliatory, some flamed mean things. I've posted my thoughts on his facebook page many times, mostly hoping to learn more from the "other side" but in today's political climate, I'm sure many of his friends thought of me as "the other side" and I never quite got what I wanted. So, in a moment of brilliance (to myself anyway), I posited the question, "Which should I read first, The Fountainhead or Atlas Shrugged?" The response, "The Fountainhead's a better read, but Atlas Shrugged is more relevent to today's times" Aye-Aye, Capn'!

After work I drove over to Borders to pick it up. I called my best friend and asked him the same question. His response was shocking. He laughed and said, "Neither! Everyone who I know who's read either turns into an a**hole for 6 months. Read Friedman or Adam Smith." Wait a second... What is in this book? I don't want to read about dry economics, I get that. I want to get to something deeper. I want to learn about the morality that's contained in it. Why should I be afraid of a book?

So I go inside and pick it up. JEEZ this thing is dense. Now I need to tell you I don't read enough for pleasure. I read news, I read on the internet, but I don't really sit down and read. I was all of a sudden worried that I wouldn't have the gumption to follow through with this plan.

On my drive home, it hits me. Like the movie "Julie and Julia"- I would blog the adventure. I'll use a public forum to inspire me to keep to it. I'll ask for motivation to stay the course. Maybe people might enjoy coming along for the ride. Or, maybe this will become something else. Maybe, just maybe, this blog could become a forum for discussions and ideas and become a way for people on both sides to learn about what the other side thinks. If we can get a better perspective through an honest conversation, maybe we can start to find that common ground.

Ok, I'm a liberal intellectual idealist. That can't happen. Can it?

Join me?