From: ibshambat@gmail.com   
      
   Ayn Rand stated that the project of philosophy from Plato onward was to steal   
   from the working man. What she forgot to say was that the working man was   
   himself a creature of the civilization rather than man in his natural form.   
   The natural form of social    
   organization is the hunter-gatherer tribe. The worker exists because the   
   civilization exists. And philosophy is very much a part of civilization.   
      
      
   The problem with anti-intellectual types is that they fail to understand the   
   need for things such as philosophy. Without philosophy these people would have   
   very little of what they have. It takes intellectuals to conceptualize and   
   justify things such as    
   capitalism. And Ayn Rand, as an intellectual trying to impact the world,   
   should have understood such things. Her own works have been influential in   
   supporting and justifying capitalism and democracy. Here is a philosopher who   
   is firmly in support of    
   capitalism. And capitalism gained greatly from her efforts.   
      
      
   I have value for both business and culture. The first is fulfilment of man’s   
   productive potential and the second is fulfilment of man’s creative   
   potential. The first feeds the body; the second feeds the soul. Civilization   
   owes vastly to both. The two    
   should be able to get along and work together.   
      
      
   This has happened before in America. It was called 1920s. That time saw both a   
   huge scientific-technological boom and a great cultural blossoming. The   
   conflict between the businessman and the artist is a solvable one. It is   
   possible to support both    
   endeavors. Culture is not for “snobs” or “liberal elites.” Many of the   
   best cultural contributors I’ve known came from disadvantage. They did not   
   allow their disadvantaged background to keep them from producing excellent   
   work.   
      
      
   When businessman and artist get together, the results are fabulous. We get   
   magnificent architecture such as the Chrysler Building and magnificent   
   technology such as the Packard. And from such things everyone stands to gain.   
      
      
   Are the creative types a bunch of Commies? Ayn Rand was a creative type.   
   Ronald Reagan was a creative type. So are Arnold Schwartzenegger and Clint   
   Eastwood. There are many creative people with conservative outlook. As for   
   myself, I’ve written an essay    
   deconstructing Communism and have written in favor of business. I am not a   
   Communist. I am however willing to look at the reasons why there was Communism   
   and see the correct changes made to keep the same thing from happening again.   
      
      
   What are these changes? The Communists’ main argument was that the   
   propertied class were exploiting the working class. This claim is credible   
   when business treats its workers like trash. It is not as credible when   
   business is good to the worker. In my    
   experience, business had learnt its lesson. When I was working in the computer   
   industry I didn’t feel exploited. I was being paid right and I was being   
   treated right. For Communism to not be credible to the people, it is necessary   
   for business to treat    
   workers better. That should solve many problems.   
      
      
   Neither the businessman nor the artist are good or bad. Both are capable of   
   both. There are potentials for abuses in any endeavor. I want to see both   
   business and culture to be in the best shape that they can be. And I want to   
   see the two working    
   together to create accomplishments comparable to those of 1920s America.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)