Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

How else can one succeed except by compromise?

Rate this topic


Dagny

Recommended Posts

If an Objectivist was to become a millionaire (and/or politician) but had to play by society/country's current laws/regulations...would that make them a traitor?

I began to think about this questions reading the thread about People You Admire...and how there weren't any Objectivist millionaires (that we know of). Some who were mentioned were shot down because of having to kowtow to laws or politicians or countries. When I was first introduced to Objectivism I thought of Alan Greenspan as the most successful Objectivist, but was quickly corrected on that topic. This isn't about him anyhow. I know that an Objectivist does not compromise but then how else can one be successful in this country? What if one wants to go into politics and has to make compromises along the way? Would that mean that one was no longer an Objectivist? Are there any Objectivist politicians? Finally, what is the other option? Does one just avoid a career in politics altogether because there is no way to change the current system? Does one stop voting because the political system is all screwed up? Is one supposed to shrug?

I'm very interested in hearing everyone's input!

Edited by Dagny
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If an Objectivist was to become a millionaire (and/or politician) but had to play by society/country's current laws/regulations...would that make them a traitor?

A traitor to who?? :huh: Anyway, there is nothing wrong with honestly making millions or billions.

I began to think about this questions reading the thread about People You Admire...and how there weren't any Objectivist millionaires (that we know of).

I know two personally, and know of 2 others, one of whom is not simply a millionaire, but a billionaire (Monroe Trout). I am quite sure that that list is not exhaustive either.

I know that an Objectivist does not compromise but then how else can one be successful in this country?

If by compromise you mean the unfortunate necessity of dealing with boneheads on both the left and right, including outright nihilists, well, that's current reality. If you mean that you need to lie, cheat, and steal to get ahead - umm, no.

Does one stop voting because the political system is all screwed up?

Ok, next election, you get to choose between Hillary Clinton and the literal reincarnation of Adolf Hitler. Who're you gonna choose? :D (Tough I know, but there's a right answer.)

Is one supposed to shrug?

Only if you mean moving your shoulders up and down briefly then getting back to work. Lots of things suck now, but look on the bright side - incredible technologies, a vast sea of knowledge to acquire, people to meet, places to see, etc. etc. You only have one life, and it won't get to be lived in a distant future filled with Objectivists.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I began to think about this questions reading the thread about People You Admire...and how there weren't any Objectivist millionaires (that we know of).

John Allison, the CEO of BB&T. It's a Fortune 500 company. Allison is an active supporter of ARI and has spoken at Objectivist conferences. BB&T's corporate training materials are built around principles from the Objectivist ethics, and the company has been making million-dollar grants to underwrite the academic study and defense of capitalism at various universities. As I recall, Allison was once approached by the leadership of his state Republican party about running for governor; he turned them down because politics is not his passion. But he's certainly highly successful by mainstream standards and he's achieved his success through the application of Objectivist principles in those areas that are still open to his control.

Working within current regulations, even viciously unfair ones, does not necessarily make one a traitor. You act rationally when free to do so, and you speak out in support of rational principles. The United States is a far cry from the world of Atlas Shrugged.

On a slightly different tangent, I think the threshold for major financial success these days should be set higher than "millionaire", though. Because of the ongoing inflation of the dollar, being a millionaire is not as impressive as it once was. My parents were a one-income family; that income was my father's salary working as a college professor at a state university. He retired as a millionaire. I'm just a working stiff and I'm already more than a third of the way there myself. Here in California my townhouse is worth more than a half-million dollars.

Edited by khaight
Link to comment
Share on other sites

John Allison, the CEO of BB&T. It's a Fortune 500 company. Allison is an active supporter of ARI and has spoken at Objectivist conferences. BB&T's corporate training materials are built around principles from the Objectivist ethics, and the company has been making million-dollar grants to underwrite the academic study and defense of capitalism at various universities. As I recall, Allison was once approached by the leadership of his state Republican party about running for governor; he turned them down because politics is not his passion. But he's certainly highly successful by mainstream standards and he's achieved his success through the application of Objectivist principles in those areas that are still open to his control.

Thanks for relating this. I am very surprised to find a successful CEO of a big corporate who is at the very least a devoted student of Objectivism.

Edited by tommyedison
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for relating this. I am very surprised to find a successful CEO of a big corporate who is at the very least a devoted student of Objectivism.

I was at an Objectivist conference where Allison participated on a roundtable discussion on the future of the economy that was moderated by Leonard Peikoff. Peikoff introduced him as (paraphrasing from memory) "the first actual capitalist to attend one of these pro-capitalism conferences."

The way I look at it is: one down, 499 to go.

(BB&T has their corporate philosophy available on their web site. It's an interesting read, and many parts of it should look very familiar -- particularly the "corporate values" section, which reads like an outline of the "virtues" chapter of OPAR.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really can't claim to know whether people should give up and shrug (or probably more correctly, to what extent they should do so). I do know however, that I should, to the fullest extent of my ability. I'm not at all surprised to know that many (so-called) Objectivists don't think it's bad enough in this country for withdrawal to be warranted, but I have not been so convinced. The biggest problem for me at present is the feasibility of giving up totally. As far as I can tell, this will most likely be the case for the rest of my time in this life. However, I plan to continue to work toward an existence where I no longer am required to compromise my values at the point of a gun.

I am not content to suffer the risk of fine or imprisonment for possessing or synthesizing any substance of my choice if I have not violated the rights of another in so doing.

I am not content to suffer the risk of fine or imprisonment for possessing or manufacturing any arm I see fit if I have not violated the rights of another in so doing.

I am not content to be forced to have insurance so that I might operate a motor vehicle for the sake of my livelihood and my enjoyment.

I am not content to be taxed in order to fund anything which I do not use or support.

I am not content to live in a house on land I rent from a corrupt government, knowing that at any time it may be confiscated to fulfill the "greater good," something we all know to be an abstraction. "Fair market value" does not take into account my assessment of value (the only one that matters if it is my property and I had every intention of keeping it).

These are only a few examples of infringements upon my freedom that I will not continue to abide for the rest of my life. If I must create my own little Galt's Gulch, so be it. I guarantee that I can find joiners, even if only a few. I guarantee that we can make the risk of men's infringement on our lives marginal, even if it takes a great amount of ongoing work. I am content to put in this work. I am content to endure this risk. I am content to fight and die for my own free existence.

I do not wish to accept any limitations on my life except those imposed by nature. Nor to I wish to expend my effort without due return in the form of some value. This does not apply only to economic and technological contributions, but to everything I do. Maybe many of you don't mind making some compromises, but my ultimate goal is to make as few as humanly possible. I'd like to get to that point within this lifetime.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do know however, that I should, to the fullest extent of my ability. I'm not t all surprised to know that many (so-called) Objectivists don't think it's bad enough in this country for withdrawal to be warranted, but I have not been so convinced.
[bold mine]

Our you implying that those who don't think it is rational to quit right now are not Objectivists?

As far as I can tell, this will most likely be the case for the rest of my time in this life.

Are you referring to the problem or to the act of quitting?

I am not content to suffer the risk of fine or imprisonment for possessing or synthesizing any substance of my choice if I have not violated the rights of another in so doing.

I am not content to suffer the risk of fine or imprisonment for possessing or manufacturing any arm I see fit if I have not violated the rights of another in so doing.

I am not content to be forced to have insurance so that I might operate a motor vehicle for the sake of my livelihood and my enjoyment.

I am not content to be taxed in order to fund anything which I do not use or support.

I am not content to live in a house on land I rent from a corrupt government, knowing that at any time it may be confiscated to fulfill the "greater good," something we all know to be an abstraction. "Fair market value" does not take into account my assessment of value (the only one that matters if it is my property and I had every intention of keeping it).

No one is content. However as long as we can change it through reason, it is rational to do so.

I am content to fight and die for my own free existence.

No one is saying you shouldn't fight for a free world. That does not mean you should give up, not so long as you have a chance.

Maybe many of you don't mind making some compromises, but my ultimate goal is to make as few as humanly possible. I'd like to get to that point within this lifetime.

There are quite a few of us here who don't like to make compromises and likely don't make compromises. And the goal shouldn't be to compromise as little as possible but to live a fulfilled and happy life which means no compromise at all. Living in modern day US is not a compromise.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Our you implying that those who don't think it is rational to quit right now are not Objectivists?

No sir, of course not. My apologies, as I probably should have elaborated further. I was trying to convey that it would be the best choice for me based on my values, feelings, and current assessment of our situation. I included "so-called" just as a reminder that a man who claims he is an Objectivist is not necessarily so. I see how that could easily be a red flag for people.

Are you referring to the problem or to the act of quitting?
I mean that as many steps that I might take toward total withdrawal, I may not get there because I lack the knowledge, experience, capital, etc. to take certain other steps.

No one is content. However as long as we can change it through reason, it is rational to do so...No one is saying you shouldn't fight for a free world. That does not mean you should give up, not so long as you have a chance.

I'd imagine what you mean is that no rational person is content (I hope so, anyway). This is true, and we can apply our effort to forming a more rational world. However, determining whether or not we have reached the "point of no return" so to speak is a highly complicated issue, requiring some degree of individual consideration (at least, until such time as it is obvious to all rational people that we should give up). If you are aware of some ways to effect considerable (positive) change upon the world within one's lifetime, I am fully prepared to be convinced that I can make a difference. Otherwise, I would think one is likely to encounter a metric assload of this: <_<

...the goal shouldn't be to compromise as little as possible but to live a fulfilled and happy life which means no compromise at all. Living in modern day US is not a compromise.

Hopefully, no compromise at all would be the smallest degree of compromise possible. Hence, "as few as humanly possible." Living in modern day US may not be a compromise, but it is filled with them.

On a site note, I found it humorous to say the least that this quote should appear in the menu bar just as I was about to add this post:

There can be no compromise on basic principles. There can be no compromise on moral issues. There can be no compromise on matters of knowledge, of truth, of rational conviction. --Ayn Rand

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've listed some of the problems that stem from our current political situation. Let's generalize it: prevailing philosophy is a severe hinderance to the pursuit of your values. I agree. I doubt anyone here questions that.

Are you saying: "I'm hindered in pursuing my values, so I won't pursue those values" ?

How will quitting help you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you saying: "I'm hindered in pursuing my values, so I won't pursue those values" ?

How will quitting help you?

I believe I need to clarify the term "giving up." When I say this, I mean to shrug. I am referring to the idea of the "mind on strike." A better summation of what I'm trying to say would be "I'm hindered in pursuing my values, so I won't pursue those values in an environment of hindrance." I am not talking about giving up on myself, but rather on the rest of the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...