Striking a Note But Not a Chord

The release of the movie "Atlas Shrugged" might be a cynical pitch for a current political sweet spot but nonetheless again raises the interesting and unanswered question in the current political debate: What are the mutual responsibilities between the producer and the general public? In the story, John Galt, an industrialist, organizes a "producer strike", a strike by the only special group in history that has never struck. Ayn Rand, the author, is an individualist and believes the sanctity of the individual and his achievements, refined down and purified. His efforts and achievements are his only reward and his alone; derivative benefits for the nonproducers are their good fortune but nothing more. Politicians, businessmen who collude with politicians and the passive but assuming public are the real evil in the world because they take, modify and regulate what they do not and can not create for their own benefit. And their reward is grudging: As is said to the successful industrialist Hank Rearden in the novel, "You have been hated, not for your mistakes, but for your achievements."

This is a harsh philosophy and Rand is nothing if not consistent. She makes no excuses and lived this belief in her personal life. (She was an atheist, thought openly that theists were fools, hated national aggression and once told a woman she was going to seduce her husband--before she did.) While there are some intense devotees to the Rand philosophy--and the books sell well--it seems the philosophy strikes a note in peoples' minds but not a chord; the notion is too isolated and too spare in a society that seems so convoluted and intertwined. But it does strike a note.

Obama's attack on "the rich" in this country is a case in point. Why is this obvious--albeit heavy-handed--populist and demagogic appeal to envy not more successful? How can it be so debated? One reason is likely those studies that show that Americans, alone as a group in the world, do not resent gaps between themselves and others because they believe in the possibility that, with work and sacrifice, they--or their children--might well become those "others." Another reason might be cynicism. The capitalist' motives are more clear to the average guy, the politician's are not. And the producer has a history in this country of success. Indeed a big problem in America might be how to manage the success of capitalism, not its failures.

Indeed, the present problems in America are not the failures of capitalism, they are the failures of government.