Hartcher touches on Greenspan and Ayn Rand in his latest article. http://www.smh.com.au/opinion/polit...-fresh-financial-meltdown-20110404-1cyil.html
He was absolutely truthful and honest in this statement. I am personally still not sure what game he's played in the downfall of the US system. I do wonder if he's acted as an antagonised to rip it down on purpose, only to be rebuilt later as Ayn would have envisioned? Is Alan Greenspan the Ragnar Danneskjld of the modern system, seeking to deliberately undermine it and separate the mindless sheep from the intelligent few who understand that the only path to real lasting prosperity and freedom lies in Gold (and silver) and not endless debt? It does make me wonder at times and it's hard not to point a finger at Greenspan and assume he's just a crazy old man. But he might have also done the world a favour in the end, regardless of the pain we will feel in the meantime. Raise the debtors unto themselves, let them feed from the trough of gluttonous fruit, derived from the labour of others only to let them fall on their own swords and cleanse the path to a better future? History will be the true judge, but a strong part of me really hopes that these Fed chiefs which seem to be making decisions almost designed to rip the system apart are doing it for more than just lining the pockets of the malignant few on Wall Street.
Others Objectivist never took to him because of his support for the gold standard and working for the Fed but Greespan and Rand were always close.
Can you give me an example of who didn't take to him because of his Gold attitude? Even Ayn Rand herself bestowed the virtue of an honest money system in her work over and over again. Gold always was honest money and Ayn made absolutely certain this was a running theme in her works. I can assume his role in the Fed would distance him from the Objectivist movement, but surely his attitude towards gold would place him right at home in the movement. I'm an Objectivist and I absolutely value Gold as the core of moral money system!
Well I'm going off memory so it take it for what its worth but I had the impression most of the collective argued against adding his paper but Rand of course wanted it in.
Protest against fiat currency I can certainly understand. The government issue paper money is certainly against the Objectivist ideology - so if we're looking at the fiat situation, protest would certainly be amongst any movement at that point. But for the return of a Gold standard? I think any Objectivist would shout very loudly for it. Perhaps Greenspan's role in the Fed was by design to rip it apart from within? It's hard to draw the line between protagonist and bumbling fool, but readers of the book will be able to draw a parallel to Fransisco in a similar role, albiet with much less influence than what Alan had at the Fed. Who honestly knows though? I can say this for certain though. I look at the actions, not the words, which bind events and I think it's fair to say that the processes which brought the US to it's current position in no way co-incide with the ideological statement Alan made in 1966 except for only a few reasons. 1 - He went senile early. 2 - He cut a deal with the devil. 3 - He had the intention to wreak havoc in the system all along. Considering he gave away such a substantially paying job to head the fed and screw up the system as badly as he did, It really makes me wonder. You have to put aside the emotional & moral implications and simply look at the why in order to rationalise the truth. But look at what we have right now. 1 - A massively destablised world currency base. 2 - Artificially CHEAP Gold and Silver. 3 - Growing anti-government sentiment, world wide. If you have the intelligence to read between the lines, I think there's a case to be argued that this is actually the dose of medicine the world really needs, regardless of the pain it'll inflict along the way. We're not at the point yet where people are abandoning their posts in the middle of the night and the great minds have gone into seclusion, abandoning the world to it's fate. Or are we? How many of you who stack also reject the state of the world and your assumed position in the consumerist society? How much of the cleansing process will see the blind, ignorant and foolish ruined and those who have the moral fibre, intelligence and ability to prosper? How many of the fools will get suckered into this end game process, only to be wiped out - whilst the few 'nay sayers' who stood on the sidelines and bought commodities will prosper once more? A lot of questions. A lot of questions indeed...
The article certainly stirred up some interest. There's as much posting, if not more, than on the property articles.
I don't have much of an opinion on Bix Weir because I don't know much about him but I know his credibility has been questioned alot on SS. Interesting that this columnist has basically laid out the same theory as the road to roota folks.
