"Why Did You Publish that Column?"

Questions about why we published this-or-that column come up not infrequently at the Atlasphere. Below is a letter I wrote to a new Atlasphere member who had questions about how we decide what to publish, in general, and about Jessica Bennett’s most recent column, “Rationally Green,” in particular. Perhaps others will be interested to hear this information.

* * *

In general, we strive to publish lively, stimulating content of likely interest to fans of Ayn Rand’s novels (who may or may not consider themselves Objectivists). Feel free to peruse our writers guidelines, if you’re curious.

Occasionally one of our authors skirts the lines of what we find philosophically acceptable and we definitely try to keep things relatively Objectivist-ish, in that regard. At the same time, we don’t devote a lot of time to enforcing intellectual “purity.” We trust and encourage our readers to think for themselves, and we’re more interested in providing stimulating material than in providing philosophically exact content.
To provide an analogy, within the Rand-admiring community, we strive to be more of an Atlantic Monthly than, obviously, an academic journal. If you’re looking for scholarly or philosophically scrubbed material, there are others that do this much better than us. If, on the other hand, you are interested in casual worldly discussions of this-and-that, we seem to be a good place to go.
At least, that’s the conclusion I reach from the number of people who’ve signed up for our columns announcements. We’ve had well over 4,000 members sign up to receive an e-mail notification each time we publish a new column, and every day more people ask to be added.
Fewer than 5% of those who request the announcements have ever turned them off — meaning they happily keep receiving three new column announcements from us every week — which never ceases to amaze me, personally. I truly never thought our columns would be quite so popular, but they seem to be meeting some kind of need, out there.
Regarding Jessica’s most recent column in particular, I think Jessica is advocating more of the “conservationist” position, which was the old name for environmentalism, before it became a political cause and a religion for some people. Conservationists were people who loved nature and wanted to help protect it. You can kind of sense that Jessica’s groping toward a free market solution to the problem of how to protect nature. I don’t think this is hard to see.
I actually didn’t see this particular column before it was published. Our editor, Carol Brass, handles all that, for which I am eternally grateful. She and I both have full schedules, and the Atlasphere actually doesn’t get paid for the time she and I invest in these columns. On the contrary, I pay our editor and writers a small amount of money to create this content, and I receive no direct compensation in return.
So if, in the rush of day-to-day life, something slips by that one of us regrets for some reason — I don’t see it as a big deal, usually. If it is a big deal, I’ll edit or pull the column post-publication, and send the writer an explanation. But I’m disinclined to do that for this particular column, because I think it’s just a matter of whether readers are willing to entertain a position that’s fairly understandable, all things considered.
You probably wouldn’t know this, but Jessica is actually one of our more popular columnists; she has her own following at the Atlasphere. Usually she doesn’t write about topics with a strong political charge. Something about her thoughtful (“poetic” as you called it) style of writing resonates with many readers — including me, I should say.
She’s stylistically different than our other writers, and she’s got a gift. She really does make you want to think things over, which I think is great. You might be interested to browse the archives (on the search page you can enter an author’s name to view all their columns) and read some of her earlier columns, if her style appeals to you.
You asked how you could submit a reply to her column. If you’re a paid Atlasphere subscriber and you’d like to reply to her personally, you can send her an e-mail via her Atlasphere profile (linked from the bottom of any of her articles). Or, if you’re interested in publishing a column on the subject, we do welcome submissions that present alternate perspectives on a subject as long as they don’t read like a response to an earlier column. Any column you submit should stand well enough on its own, without needing to quote-and-reply to earlier content.
I should also mention that we have published other columns, like this one by Walter Williams, taking a firm stance against environmentalism. So I don’t think there’s any reasonable way to infer that the Atlasphere is endorsing environmentalism per se by publishing what Jessica wrote. Ultimately, I think, Jessica is expressing an understandable tension between her own natural pro-nature sentiments and the wacky global-warming environmentalist Kool Aid that so many people seem to be selling these days.
I hope that answers your questions. I welcome your thoughts.
UPDATE (Mar 23): As it would happen, Thomas Sowell just penned a new column called “Global Warming Swindle” (his review of the excellent British documentary with a similar title) which we are happy to be able to publish. We look forward to covering the topics of environmentalism and global warming further, as the public debate over global warming continues to heat up and more excellent material is written.

C'mon, Al. Step up to the plate!

British scientist Lord Monkton — a former policy advisor to Margaret Thatcher during her years as Prime Minister of the United Kingdom — says:

A careful study of the substantial corpus of peer-reviewed science reveals that Mr. Gore’s film, An Inconvenient Truth, is a foofaraw of pseudo-science, exaggerations, and errors, now being peddled to innocent schoolchildren worldwide.

“Foofaraw” … I love it.
Better still, he has challenged Mr. Gore to a formal debate to evaluate the scientific merits of his global warming hype.
And the venue? “[T]he elegant, Victorian-Gothic Library of the Oxford Museum of Natural History, which was the setting for the ‘Great Debate’ between the natural scientist T. H. Huxley and Bishop ‘Soapy Sam’ Wilberforce on the theory of evolution, following the publication of Darwin’s Origin of Species.”
From Monkton’s formal invitation to Mr. Gore:

The Viscount Monckton of Brenchley presents his compliments to Vice-President Albert Gore and by these presents challenges the said former Vice-President to a head-to-head, internationally-televised debate upon the question, ‘That our effect on climate is not dangerous,’ to be held in the Library of the Oxford University Museum of Natural History at a date of the Vice-President’s choosing.
Forasmuch as it is His Lordship who now flings down the gauntlet to the Vice-President, it shall be the Vice-President’s prerogative and right to choose his weapons by specifying the form of the Great Debate. May the Truth win! Magna est veritas, et praevalet. God Bless America! God Save the Queen!

Al has science on his side, right? He has nothing to be afraid of, right?
This, I would pay money to see.

Nick Provenzo on the Founders' College

We’ve mentioned the Founders’ College before on our blog (see here and here). Apparently, the project has received a chilly reception from at least a few proponents of Ayn Rand’s philosophy.
Nick Provenzo, on the other hand, provides a spirited defense of the project in a post last week called “Understanding the Founders College Vision” at the Rule of Reason blog.
Update: Wow, Lee Sandstead has taken some stunning photos at the site of the college. (I discovered this gallery from a link in Nick’s earlier post on this topic.)

Management Job Opening (Monsey, New York)

Long-time Atlasphere member (and Objectivist Singles founder) Dan Edge sends the following job announcement for his company:

Growing medical transcription company seeks full-time production manager.
Dan’s company is a small, growing company which provides transcription and other services to the medical communications market. We are currently seeking a production manager to coordinate subcontractors, manage projects, and ensure that deadlines and quality standards are met. We need a detail-oriented individual with exceptional organization and time-management skills. You need to know how to make lists for yourself, manage priorities, and operate under pressure.
Responsibilities Include:

  • Convert audio / video to a format usable by transcription software (i.e., MP3).
  • Contract, coordinate, and supervise subcontractors (transcribers, editors, proofreaders) on assigned projects to ensure that deadlines are met.
  • Complete administrative tasks including order status tracking, Purchase Order creation and approval, etc.
  • Proofread final product at various stages of process to ensure quality and accuracy

Requirements:

  • 0-2+ Years Experience in Project Trafficking or Production Management
  • Good familiarity with MS Office (Word, Excel, Power Point), and very computer-savvy in general
  • 2- or 4-Year Degree greatly preferred
  • Good written and verbal communication skills
  • Willing to learn new things, work creatively, and grow with the business
  • Willing to commute to Monsey, NY

I’m willing to train the right candidate.
Salary – $36k +, commensurate with experience
Call 845-558-9328 or email resume and cover letter to dedge (at) edgetranscription.com
Dan Edge
845-425-5495w
845-558-9328c
dedge (at) edgetranscription.com
25 Robert Pitt Dr
Suite 218
Monsey, NY 10952

Mexican Billionaire Carlos Slim Slams Bill Gates & Warren Buffet's "Santa Clause" Routine

From today’s New York Post:

March 14, 2007 — Carlos Slim, the Mexican tycoon just a hair from being the world’s richest man, scoffed yesterday at Bill Gates and Warren Buffett for “playing Santa Claus” to cure poverty’s ills.
Slim climbed on his meanie soapbox just days after his $49 billion fortune was ranked by Forbes as the third-richest behind that No. 1 Gates and No. 2 Buffett – only a few billion shy from eclipsing them both.
“Poverty isn’t solved with donations,” he said at the unveiling of his own health care initiative. Slim continued that building good businesses do more for society than “going around like Santa Claus.”
Slim wants to build huge hospitals in northern Mexico where the U.S. can ship tens of thousands of Medicare patients for health care that can be delivered at much cheaper costs.
Slim was unimpressed at how Buffett and Gates vowed late last year to combine their entire fortunes into the world’s largest foundation to do good works.
“Our concept is more to accomplish and solve things, rather than giving,” Slim said.
Slim, 67, has expanded his empire of telecom and energy assets faster than any of the other top billionaires of the world, growing at 64 percent last year.

Interesting. And very Randian-sounding. Could he be a celebrity Ayn Rand fan?
UPDATE: Then again, maybe not. Reader Ashley March at the Cato Institute writes:

According to our Director of the Center for Global Liberty and Proserity, Ian Vasquez, far from understanding Objectivism, “Slim is the biggest hypocrite and worst mercantilist in Latin America. Heâ??s one of the reasons mexico has not grown faster; among other things, heâ??s ruthlessly maintained a telecom monopoly in mexico, making it a huge bottleneck in the economy and one of the most expensive places to make calls.”

"Voice of America" Program on Ayn Rand

Voice of America (broadcast in 45 languages) now offers a newly-produced program about Ayn Rand that seems reasonably objective. (I’ve not listened to the program itself.)
UPDATE: One of our members points out that “While I’m happy to hear that VOA did a generally positive piece on Ayn, it does contain a number of errors, such as she wrote a book on love (a confusion about the Romantic Manifesto) or that the Collective helped edit Atlas Shrugged.”  Thanks for the heads-up.

NPR Interview with 300's Frank Miller

Based upon the trailer, the new movie 300 appears to glorify virtues like strength, courage, and determination. No wonder, then, that so many liberal reviewers are dismissing it.
The following excerpt, from a recent interview with Frank Miller (upon whose graphic novel the movie is based) on National Public Radio, seemed pretty telling. (I can’t find a way to link to it directly, but the transcript appeared in the comments, at Mar 9 12:58 pm, from a post by Dean Barnett about the movie.)
From the interview:

NPR: [â?¦] Frank, whatâ??s the state of the union?
FM: Well, I donâ??t really find myself worrying about the state of the union as I do the state of the home-front. It seems to me quite obvious that our country and the entire Western World is up against an existential foe that knows exactly what it wants â?¦ and weâ??re behaving like a collapsing empire. Mighty cultures are almost never conquered, they crumble from within. And frankly, I think that a lot of Americans are acting like spoiled brats because of everything that isnâ??t working out perfectly every time.
NPR: Um, and when you say we donâ??t know what we want, whatâ??s the cause of that do you think?
FM: Well, I think part of that is how weâ??re educated. Weâ??re constantly told all cultures are equal, and every belief system is as good as the next. And generally that America was to be known for its flaws rather than its virtues. When you think about what Americans accomplished, building these amazing cities, and all the good its done in the world, itâ??s kind of disheartening to hear so much hatred of America, not just from abroad, but internally.
NPR: A lot of people would say what America has done abroad has led to the doubts and even the hatred of its own citizens.
FM: Well, okay, then letâ??s finally talk about the enemy. For some reason, nobody seems to be talking about who weâ??re up against, and the sixth century barbarism that they actually represent. These people saw peopleâ??s heads off. They enslave women, they genitally mutilate their daughters, they do not behave by any cultural norms that are sensible to us. Iâ??m speaking into a microphone that never could have been a product of their culture, and Iâ??m living in a city where three thousand of my neighbors were killed by thieves of airplanes they never could have built.
NPR: As you look at people around you, though, why do you think theyâ??re so, as you would put it, self-absorbed, even whiny?
FM: Well, Iâ??d say itâ??s for the same reason the Athenians and Romans were. Weâ??ve got it a little good right now. Where I would fault President Bush the most, was that in the wake of 9/11, he motivated our military, but he didnâ??t call the nation into a state of war. He didnâ??t explain that this would take a communal effort against a common foe. So weâ??ve been kind of fighting a war on the side, and sitting off like a bunch of Romans complaining about it. Also, I think that George Bush has an uncanny knack of being someone people hate. I thought Clinton inspired more hatred than any President I had ever seen, but Iâ??ve never seen anything like Bush-hatred. Itâ??s completely mad.
NPR: And as you talk to people in the streets, the people you meet at work, socially, how do you explain this to them?
FM: Mainly in historical terms, mainly saying that the country that fought Okinawa and Iwo Jima is now spilling precious blood, but so little by comparison, itâ??s almost ridiculous. And the stakes are as high as they were then. Mostly I hear people say, â??Why did we attack Iraq?â?? for instance. Well, weâ??re taking on an idea. Nobody questions why after Pearl Harbor we attacked Nazi Germany. It was because we were taking on a form of global fascism, weâ??re doing the same thing now.
NPR: Well, they did declare war on us, butâ?¦
FM: Well, so did Iraq.

Intriguing.
I read Steven Pressfield’s Gates of Fire last year and enjoyed it a lot. The Spartans are truly inspiring, and the movie 300 seems to be the latest example of their particular brand of inspiration.
At least, the trailer makes it appear that way.
UPDATE: Diana Hsieh writes that 300 was ultimately disappointing. And she’s got some good arguments about why.
UPDATE 2: On the other hand, the movie receives a glowing review from Aaron at Rebirth of Reason:

Most significantly, 300 presents heroes without doubt or apology. There are no anti-heroes to be found, none just going through the motions, no muddled or conflicted ‘heroes’ succumbing to this or that weakness or folly. The rhetoric of Leonidas and others inspire, touting reason, freedom, and deriding the mysticism not only of the East but of the Greek’s own gods and Oracle. Their confidence is unshaken, resolve unrelenting, and words matched by actions to the last stand. Not just imagery, not just presentation, but heroism and sense of life make this film awesome.

Mark Skousen on Atlas Shrugged in the Christian Science Monitor

Mark Skousen has penned a new (and ultimately disappointing) article called “Atlas Shrugged – 50 Years Later” for the Christian Science Monitor.
Seems he digs the novel’s capitalist politics but can’t quite stomach its ethic of enlightened self-interest. Still choosing between sadism and masochism, as Miss Rand would say.

Hudgins, Bidinotto on Air America Radio

The Atlas Society sent the following notice:

Edward Hudgins, executive director of The Atlas Society, and Robert Bidinotto, editor of the group’s magazine, The New Individualist, will each appear on “The Thom Hartmann Show” on Air America.
Hudgins will be interviewed on Thursday, March 1 at 12:07pm Eastern time ; Robert will be interviewed on Friday, March 2 at 1:34pm.
Hartmann’s the guy who replaced the Al Franken last week. Here are the affiliates that carry the show. The show also will be carried on Sirius/XM satellite radio; you can go here to listen live. There’s a call-in line for listeners, too: (866)303-2270.
Hope you can listen in!

Robert Bidinotto blogs about these appearances at Bidinotto Blog.

Movie Recommendation: The Lives of Others

From 1960s Rand associate Bob Hessen:
I warmly recommend THE LIVES OF OTHERS, dealing with East Germany before its collapse in 1989. The secret police (the “Stasi”) spy on the lives of everyone suspected of being disloyal to the regime or the ideal of socialism. Ulrich Muhe, who won a Lola, the German equivalent of an Oscar for his brilliant performance, detects a trace of independence and non-conformity in a leading playwright and his actress girlfriend, so he begins round-the-clock surveillance of their apartment, spying on every conversation and intimate moment. But his adversarial attitude softens when he discovers that his boss, who approved the surveillance, has sexual designs on the actress. The story is exceptionally suspenseful and superbly acting. This movie earned eleven awards in Germany last year — and I shall be rooting for it to win an Academy Award as Best Foreign Film this year.
It opened last week in Menlo Park and presumably is playing nation- wide, but there is no telling how long it will play, so see it soon if it appeals to you.