Skip to content

…or else what’s a meta-phor?

So imagine two enemies, Parasite and Producer (John Bunyan, eat your heart out), each with a hostage.  It’s an unstable stalemate, the dramatic conclusion of a cheesy movie. Who’s gonna flinch first? Will both hostages perish? Why is that guy smirking?  What does he know that we don’t, or is he bluffing?

Cramming Atlas Shrugged into this framework, we know why Producer is smiling. Parasite’s hostage, which is the world Parasite knows, means nothing to Producer. Producer’s hostage, his own productivity, means everything to Parasite. So Producer has nothing to fear; he holds all the cards, and he doesn’t even care if Parasite figures it out.

Of course, that’s not how I characterize the situation we face today. Because there is no Atlantis, the world Parasite knows is the only world Producer knows too, and Producer loves her dearly, and is anguished at the pain she’s already suffered, and is terrified that Parasite just might kill her.

Producer also knows that Parasite will never let his hostage go voluntarily; Producer has spent the whole movie up until now trying to appease Parasite, and the situation has only gotten worse.

So Producer has taken a hostage of his own, his own productivity. But Parasite is smirking at Producer. “I know you’re never gonna pull that trigger, because you love your own hostage more than I do!” And Producer thinks Parasite might just be right, and then it’s game over.

mgBut Producer can turn this situation around in two ways. First, he can let Parasite know that he’s just bat-shit crazy / punitive enough to pull that trigger. Parasite is searching Producer’s eyes, counting on seeing a glint of fear. What if Parasite saw something else?

The second scenario, well, let’s just hope we don’t get to that point. Parasite’s hostage is sick, and getting sicker. In the back of his mind, he knows that if she reaches the point of no return, there won’t be anything holding Producer back. Producer will be mourning, free, and in a mood for vengeance.

I wrote up this little metaphorical analysis because it helps clarify what I’m going for here. And it’s not how some of my readers see things, which is fine. They feel like they’re in the same situation as Atlas, that they don’t care about Parasite’s hostage. Obviously, their path is easier than mine. They’re not hurting me in any way, and I wish them luck. Heck, I hope I can help them as well. But because I want to save Producer’s hostage so much, and I don’t think Producer can bluff his way through this conflict, I’m trying to think of ways to convince Parasite that Producer means it, and to remind Producer that yes, the situation is bad, and isn’t going to improve.

Posted in The Project.

13 comments

By John – March 22, 2009

Better Living Through Technology

One last post about the blog, rather than what the blog is about. I’ve decided to create a WordPress plugin for this blog to enable individual readers to filter out comments they don’t wish to read a second time. I plan on it working as follows:

  • The average reader would see the site totally unfiltered, all comments visible
  • A reader could choose to click a “Filter Comments” link over in the sidebar
  • If they have used the Filter Comments capability before, if would use their most recently used settings
  • If not, the reader would create / have created for them (not sure yet) a unique ID that could be preserved as a cookie, so their filter choices could be preserved
  • With an ID, a reader could toggle on/off the visibility of any comment on the site, and have that visibility choice retained for subsequent visits to the site.
  • If comment filtering is enabled, the reader can pick a “Show All” link where they can unset their previous filtering choices.

Pretty simple, eh? My comment policy remains the same, but this little bit of functionality puts more control in the individual reader’s hands. And while I think the idea behind it is philosophically consistent with the ideas motivating this site, it has a much broader applicability. Imagine the benefit to, say, the proprietor of a feminist site who gets periodically hit with ugly misogynistic comments, but who has an objection to deleting them outright. This plugin would empower their readers to customize their reading experience for the site.

Now I have no experience with creating WordPress plugins, and I’m curious to see what the API is like. But it’ll be worth the effort to make something reusable that I can donate to the WordPress community. WordPress is a fantastic technology that I have enjoyed immensely, and it’s good and proper to finally make a contribution of my own.

I’ve got a lot on my plate (hello, iPhone 3.0 SDK beta!), including a promised post on a wonky job action idea of mine, but I’m looking forward to getting cracking on it this weekend. What do you folks think, good idea? bad? lacking key features?

Posted in Under the hood.

1 comment

By John – March 17, 2009

Comment Policy Monday

I had really wanted to post on a possible job action, but circumstance demands that I address this site’s comment policy, as it appears to be widely misunderstood by those who are in general agreement with the site’s overall mission, probably due to my tendency to wax poetic a bit when getting my objectivist on. So let me break it down.

1) People who are only here to troll, mock, etc., are free to say whatever they want. Their comments will always be approved. The only circumstance under which I might delete one of those comments would be if they contained potentially libelous or otherwise illegal content, but that holds true for anyone’s post. And anyway, I’m not a lawyer, so what the hell do I know.

2) People who are here to explain why the whole endeavor is doomed, evil, unwise, etc., are similarly free to say whatever they want.  Their comments will always be approved.

3) People whom I see as a potential ally in the promotion of liberty face onerous restrictions. Essentially, you are not permitted to engage anyone from 1) or 2) above. If you find yourself itching to reply to something you see as demanding a smackdown, take a walk around the block. Do not succumb to the temptation. If you do, your comment will be deleted. And it doesn’t matter if it’s a direct fisking or a veiled response, straightforward or sarcastic, confrontational or conciliatory. It has no place here. Additionally, general attacks on “the enemy”, however you see it (“leftists”, “socialists”, “moochers”, etc.), are also not permitted. 

I have endeavored to be consistent in my application of this policy, and I will continue to do so.

There’s a method to my highly arbitrary fascism. Regarding 1) and 2) above, I just don’t care. As to 3), for good or ill, you people reflect on me, and on lovers of freedom in general. And when you engage in comment policy violating behavior, what you are saying is that freedom is primarily a debate club position. You’d rather just rehash the same old arguments for the millionth time than work towards actually developing ways to advance freedom.

I am stipulating that you are right to favor freedom and independence. But you think you are showing the world that you favor them by repeatedly arguing your case while things fall apart around you. You aren’t. You’re demonstrating that the actual loss of freedom is less important to you than the opportunity to type another essay, or to call names.

I’m trying to train you. If you can’t keep your eye on the goal because someone is saying something stupid somewhere, you won’t be of much use in the fight ahead. 

Who am I to be such a hardass? Honestly, I’m nobody. I’m a smart guy, but I’ve got no particular skills when it comes to this sort of fight. But I know that in looking back on the time that I’ve spent engaging in random running battles with cranks online, I don’t think that time was well spent. I’m not speaking of discussions with people I know personally, or people I respect; those have paid great dividends. But the eternal internet flame war has just been a monstrous deadweight loss when judged by the proper standard of actual liberty achieved, instead of by the usual standard of vaguely satisfying snarkiness.

Okay, I’ve said my piece. I will be updating some links and information pertaining to the comment policy. From this point forward, I’ll be leaving moderation on to keep me from being put in the position of needing to delete comments after they’ve already been published. Furthermore, I’ll be deleting offending comments without explanation. You’re smart enough to figure it out. If you’re concerned that your essay will be lost, save it locally first.

Posted in The Project, Under the hood.

5 comments

By John – March 16, 2009

Coming Attractions

Hope everyone’s having a nice weekend.  I’ve been busy with rehearsals for a concert on Sunday, so rather than let the site stay stale for days, I figured I’d let you know what was coming up here. First, I’ll post on a possible incipient job action plan on Monday or Tuesday. Then I think a post explaining the purpose behind the comment policy is in order. That’ll drop the day after. And probably the day after that will be a bit on a tool I’m developing for use on this site and others, but I don’t want to say much about it before the comment policy post.  So stay tuned!

Posted in Under the hood.

3 comments

By John – March 14, 2009

Most Peculiar, Mama

What an odd 24 hours. For what it’s worth, the site had over 4,000 visitors today, and over half of them were using Firefox. I had no idea IE had lost that much market share! I had some real nice comments, many thanks, and I appreciate the folks who actually signed the Public Declaration. I’m hoping at least half of you are real. Just a bit too tired to look into it right now.

Just an FYI, I’m real unavailable for the next 15 hrs or so, so don’t freak out if your comment doesn’t show up because it’s held in moderation. I should be able to get to it in the afternoon or evening. That’s of course assuming the site doesn’t fall over again. We’ll see.

In short, an interesting day, but nothing that changes the fact that there’s a lot of work to be done, and i don’t even know what it is :-/ .

Posted in Under the hood.

20 comments

By John – March 12, 2009

1,000

1,000 unique visitors today (as of 11:05 AM).  Surprising doesn’t begin to cover it.  I hope some of you have found something you like, and I wish I had some more goal-oriented content for you. There’s a bunch of us (and our numbers are growing) who don’t think the world can continue on the way it is without some pretty disastrous consequences, but know that changing course is a tough endeavor. Just “trying anything” is costly in itself, so I’m committed to finding a real solution. Unfortunately, I realize being deliberate about finding a solution can look a lot like dithering; what can I say — I’m honestly not sure what I can offer, but I’ll be damned if I’m not trying. Look around, judge for yourself, and if you find another place you think can get the job done better (or if you think you can), then tremendous! Be sure to let me know.

Posted in Under the hood.

33 comments

By John – March 12, 2009

You gotta be shitting me.

Apparently this site was mentioned on The Colbert Report? Really?  I haven’t received any direct confirmation, although James Emms’ comment gives me pause… (UPDATE: okay, looks like evidence is strongly suggesting it did happen.  Whaddya know!  Thanks I guess for the mention, and let me say that I always enjoyed the “Even Steven/Stephen” bit on The Daily Show back when I used to watch it.)

Anyhow, assuming my G4 Mac Mini hasn’t crapped out again, welcome one and all.  Enjoy your look around, and I hope some of the stuff I and my commenters have written are of interest to you (please keep the comment policy in mind, thanks).  I’ve linked some of my favorite posts on the sidebar, and I kinda like this recent one too.  Like I said in that post, “The culture is changing; what’s happening here [at this site] is both a symptom of the change, and an agent of it.” But change is tough, and I could use your ideas.

(Another Update: I guess that means the site will fall over when the show hits the west coast too. C’est la vie.)

Posted in Under the hood.

44 comments

By John – March 12, 2009

Blue Law Sundays!

I’m thinking of making this a weekly feature, in honor of having grown up in Bergen County, NJ where all retail stores were closed on Sundays: I’ll just throw out a few questions and let the readers respond it they feel like it. (Considering I only post a few times a week anyway, the logic of this stunt is even more questionable then it would be under regular blogging conditions.)

1) Not surprisingly, some of the interest in this site and the concept of going John Galt is an expression of resistance to Democratic control of the executive and legislative branches of the US federal government. Understandable I suppose, but it was the October bailouts that spurred me to get this project underway, with a Republican in the White House, and supported by the Republican presidential candidate. So I’m wondering if people think we’d be better off, short-term or long-term, had McCain been elected? (I’ll give my answers later; it’s Blue Law Sunday today!)

2) The unconcealed joy some folks experience at informing us of the futility of our efforts shows a side of human nature I wish I could un-see.  But I think those people are overrepresented in political commentary.  What’s your gut estimate of the ratio of people who are actively rooting for us to fail vs. people who simply don’t think we can succeed?

Posted in Current Events.

9 comments

By John – March 8, 2009

100

100 unique visitors today (as of 11:35 PM). Surprising, to say the least!  Where the hell did you folks come from?  I’m really curious.  Please tell your story, brief or long, in the comments if you would.

Posted in Under the hood.

24 comments

By John – March 5, 2009

More Interest

I note with pleasure that the notion of “going John Galt” is being commented on by two of my absolute favorite bloggers, Megan McArdle and Will Wilkinson. While I disagree with each on some of their ethical and political positions, their deep intelligence and humor is evident in their thoughtful analyses of human psychology and economics.

While Megan posts on the worthwhile point that Ayn Rand partly knew what she was talking about because she had witnessed society collapse during her childhood, Will takes a look at the motives for “going galt” and whether or not they fit the likely outcomes. He endorses the notion as an expressive act, to a point, but cautions that we are certainly almost unanimously Eddie Willerss, not Galts.

True enough.  But I’d add a little more to the exploration of the concept. For starters, I think the personal dimension of “going Galt” is as important to most people who talk of scaling back as the, let’s call it, punitive dimension.  Most of us know that the larger society would hardy notice the absence of one of us, but that one person might still judge their personal strike to be a net benefit; I might rightly derive relative happiness from no longer contributing to society’s decline even if the decline continues unabated and unaffected by my lack of contribution.  

More significant to an analysis of the social consequences is the relationship between labor supply and tax rates. Leaving aside any consideration of whether or not a large impact could be achieved by a few key individuals striking, there remains the noticeable aggregate response of millions of ordinary people just feeling like that next hour of overtime (or that promotion, or that new job) is worth the effort. And of course the size of that response is not only a function of the tax rate alone, but culture and individual psychology. What I’m seeking to accomplish through being vocal and public and proud is to increase the size of the response, to encourage others to take more pride in the value they create, and to be less sanguine about the next dollar that gets expropriated.

Will echoes a point I’ve heard from other skeptics and detractors in his post:

But insofar as this is all about taxes on the wealthy (as the link to Malkin suggests) it’s a bit hard to see tax rates somewhat exceeding the Clinton era’s as a move over some inflection point from the tolerable to the completely outrageous.

He’s quite correct to say that the rates themselves do not justify the rhetoric we’re observing (and producing :-) ) compared to our prior silence (speaking for myself). But the truth is that to my current mindset, the prior rates were also intolerable. For me personally, the October bailouts were the final straw, the moment I realized that things were not going to get better without a more extreme response. Some people had already realized it, and it appears that a few more realized it after the November elections, and a whole bunch more after the current stimulus package passed.  

The culture is changing; what’s happening here is both a symptom of the change, and an agent of it. None of us may be Atlas, but we might just be Archimedes, shifting the world toward the good with a fulcrum of individualism and a moment arm of pride.

Posted in Current Events.

1 comment

By John – March 5, 2009