Rating: 
Summary: Comprehensive view on the idea of capitalism
Review: Have you ever felt that there is something wrong with the world, but haven't been able to put your finger on exactly what it is? This book will do it for you. Ayn Rand, along with some interesting additions by Nathaniel Branden and Alan Greenspan, shows you how deep the rabbit hole really goes. This book is a collection of articles addressing the application of capitalism as a political system, or rather the lack of it, and consequently the inevitable demise of humanity due to the implementation of collectivist, anti-capitalist policies. By exploring different parts of society and the application of collectivist policies that govern us, Ayn Rand basically explains why collectivism (i.e. socialism) is the root to all evil. If you are looking for a book about Ayn Rand's ideas and philosophy of life, and are reluctant to engage in her lengthy, fictional novels like Atlas Shrugged or The Fountainhead this is definitely the book for you.
Rating:
Summary: Good Book, on "being generous with Other People's money"
Review: Ayn Rand is not the only person who authored this books' essays. The works of Nathaniel Branden and Alan Greenspan both are worth the price. These two authors do not emphasize the "moral" aspect of capitalism but its bare bones practicalities. And as such nobody has ever been able to shoot their arguments down, on moral grounds or otherwise. In one essay, Branden dissects the criticisms of capitalism during the Industrial Revolution. He shows the relationship between the Industrial Revolution and the Population Explosion. More to the point he shows how Capitalism improved peoples' lives--by providing more sustenance for people to live on. Alan Greenspan's Essay "Gold and Economic Freedom" is a masterpiece frequently quoted elsewhere, but origionates with this book. If you want to know how the Fed kept inflation down throughout Greenspan's reign as Chairman, here's the essence of his philosophy and modus operandi in a few pages. Greenspan also in another essay explains how corrupt monopolies cannot exist--without the help of government. Rand herself, while sometimes going overboard on the "Morality" side, does make some very valid points in two essays in particular: "The Roots of War", and "Man's Rights." The theme of both is "being generous with other people's fortunes." (If I had the ability to take all of your money, I will show you just how compassionate to the world I can be.) In "Roots of War" Rand explains that, outside of voluntary charity there are two ways to acquire something: take it, or swap something for it. Conquest or trade. There is no other option. Government is the agent of conquest, capitalism the agent of trade. She also shows the logical progression of each. In a conquest driven society, the pick pocket beats the honest man, but the robber beats the pick pocket, and the murderer beats the robber. Welfare states are not based on altruism but quite the opposite, and will eventually either collapse or look elsewhere for plunder. In a trade society, those who offer the best value win. In "Man's Rights" she goes over the same concepts as in the Roots of war but more on the individual's level. She also discusses how "Rights" have gone from claims you have on your own life to claims someone else has on your life, and its potential consequences. Finally, "Extremism--or the Art of Smearing", is a powerful essay on how left-leaning collectivists smear their opponents. Change the names and you've got the exact same thing occuring today, but this essay was written in 1964! Goes to show that the fundamental tactics of collectivists have not changed in at least 35 years. All in all a very good book.
Rating: 
Summary: Not a reasonable philosophy
Review: I do not think that an entirely free market is positive for the world or my own country (America). I think it makes corporations stronger and the government weaker. I feel that though the thought of having an overly strong governmental influence over the economy be scarey (like I'm sure communism under Stalin must have been horrible) but I don't see how giving that same power to your local HALLIBURTON is any less dangerous.
Rating: 
Summary: An interesting defense of laissez-faire free-markets...
Review: Ayn Rand offers a sound moral defense of the laissez-faire capitalism, but with moral reasoning rather than theoretical or statistical reasoning. Rand makes her case that the spontaneous natural economic order of free-markets is the only social system conducive to individual liberty and the natural rights. She shreds economic myths and fallacies with her sharp wit and reason. Rand also offers a scathing, yet logical critique of an interventionist state in the economy. Rand pokes reason in the face of her collectivist critics. Collectivist pursuit of economic and social equality has left hundreds of millions dead at hands of totalitarians in the past century. It's no wonder they loathe her every word. Some of her ideas stemming from her concepts of the "virtue of selfishness" and "rationale selfishness" are thought-provoking rebuttals to radical egalitarianism, but on the same token, her critique of "altruism" is rather shallow. The essays by younger Alan Greenspan in the 1960's alone are worth the price of admission. He offered a defense of sound money... yes a pure gold standard and other essays on anti-trust and consumer protectionism. Yet today, he is Fed Chief and head of the central bank, a statist institution which personifies an interventionist socialist state. Has he grown naïve about economics with age? Or has he just sold out for power? You be the judge! Beyond this book, I cannot tolerate much if any of Rand's objectivist philosophy, particularly the atheism, materialism and relativism, which isn't overt in this book. Rand's philosophy holds to a materialism on par with Marx and in her zeal against collectivism, she espouses an individualism larger than life. (I guess I give it 3.5/5.0.)
Rating:
Summary: Myth mashing of the highest order.
Review: This book is a wonderful collection of 26 articles written by Ayn Rand (20 articles total), Nathaniel Branden (2), Alan Greenspan (3) and Robert Hessen (1). The 26 count includes the two articles in the appendix by Ayn Rand: "MAN'S RIGHTS" and "THE NATURE OF GOVERNMENT". I do have one criticism of this book but I will save it until the end here. All 26 articles relate in one way or another to the theme that 100% Laissez-faire Capitalism is the best Political-Economic system for mankind and that this fact is unknown to most people in the World --including most people in the United States. The first 13 articles deal with the THEORY AND HISTORY of Capitalism along with the opening article being true to form Ayn Rand: she defines her terms right away. Here she does it by positing and then answering the question: "WHAT IS CAPITALISM?". The next 12 articles deal with and destroy so many myths about capitalism that it is probably safe to say that anyone who reads this book will find at least 12 of their own myths about capitalism somewhere within the book. The next 11 articles (#14 through #24) deal with the CURRENT STATE of the United States in the mid 1960's and it is amazing how pertinent and informative these articles still are today. For example, for pertinence see article #20, "THE NEW FASCISM: RULE BY CONSENSUS", and for the informative see and discover the correct definition of 'freedom' on the first page of the article titled "CONSERVATISM: AN OBITUARY". There is simply too much good in this book to cover it all in one short review. It is a must read for anyone who is serious about politics and economics. Even if you disagree you will be compelled to think about your own position and attempt to solidify your thoughts about it after reading this book. The two ending (APPENDIX) articles speak for themselves and either alone is worth the price of the book. All the articles in the book were written and copyrighted in the 1960's and the book itself as collection of these articles was first published in 1967. Back then, and this is my only criticism, back then Capitalism WAS an Unknown Ideal, but today thanks to Ayn Rand and others, including the contributors to this book, Capitalism is now the KNOWN ideal, consequently the books title is not quite as accurate as it was when first published.
Rating: 
Summary: From an Ayn Rand Burnout
Review: A friend of mine gave me a copy of Rand's "The Anti-Industrial Revolution." I devoured it in a day, and from then on I was hooked. This was GREAT STUFF! It made sense like nothing I'd ever read before. Next came Atlas Shrugged, then the Fountainhead. Then I moved on to Anthem and The Virtue of Selfishness. At this point, I started to annoy friends and realtives, who always lost arguments with me when I retorted with an objectivist bromide. For example, someone would complain about how technology was ruining the world, and I'd then explain how it was actually saving the world. One friend said to me that I starting talking like a sound byte instead of a human being. When I finally worked my way to Capitalism: the Unknown Ideal, I began to realize something. The world is not a world of Howard Roarks (Human Super Beings) and Elsworth Tooheys (No Good Looters). Though Objectivism is brilliant, (as was its author) I doubt that people can live this way %100 of the time. You really can't undestand what I mean unless you read a large chunk of Rand's philosophy. Capitalism is a great book because its more "grounded," if that makes any sense. But if you've read all of the "big ones" (Atlas Shrugged and the Fountainhead), then this book will seem all too familiar. It's really not her best, or even close, IMHO. But for die hard fans, well . . . .
Rating:
Summary: Excellent Source of Information
Review: After taking an Intro to Business class in college and having learned only about communism and socialism and that capitalism was the root to all evil, I started to question a lot of things. If the US is founded on capitalism, does that mean that the US is the root of all evil? Of course the answer is no! If you're interested in learning some of the facts about what capitalism is and should be, this is the book you want to pick up. This book should be required reading in college business, law, and all government classes. Ayn Rand covers all aspects of capitalism in a very organized, logical way. This book is very easy to understand and is clearly and concisely written. It is a must have if you want to pick up anything about capitalism.
Rating:
Summary: thought provoking
Review: this book has some good points but there still is no true objectivism other than an empty ideal falsely attributed to rand's (and her cults')subjective view of what rationality is. Also, this book always seems to be brain candy for eager young students of business, civil law, etc.. but they might also look into the newer ideal of compassionate capitalism.
Rating:
Summary: Greenspan's Early Beliefs
Review: This is the best of Rand's non-fiction. In addition, it contains two articles by Alan Greenspan. Most strangely, in "Gold and Economic Freedom", he argues that the federal reserve is unnecessary, immoral, founded on a misunderstanding of economics, distructive to freedom and wealth, exists primarily to support chronic deficit spending and the welfare state, and was the cause of the great depression. That's right, our current Fed Head!
Rating:
Summary: Should Morals and Philosophy Guide Our Society and Economy?
Review: Being a collection of essays written in the 1960s by Objectivist, novelist and non-academic philosopher Ayn Rand and certain of her like-minded associates (including Alan Greenspan, prior to his arrival at the Fed), this book reads in part as a reasoned exposition of the moral and philosophical foundations of an ideal capitalist society based on individual rights and freedom, and in part as an emotionally charged, pejorative criticism of modern society for being misguided, amoral and a-philosophical. Ever wonder what's behind the truly remarkable economic success of the U.S. over the past two centuries? Ms. Rand explains that the U.S. began as the "first moral society in history," uniquely founded on a Constitution that explicitly places limitations on government while guaranteeing the rights of private individuals. According to her thinking, inherent in man's nature (metaphysics) is his faculty of reasoning (epistemology). Only through having the freedom (politics) to reason, judge, choose and act can man exercise his individual rights (ethics), including his economic rights to acquire property and trade it freely with others. The purpose of government (police, armed services and court system) in laissez faire capitalism is reduced to that of protector of individual rights. As the authors' analysis goes, it is no surprise that the individual rights and freedom on which capitalism is based vaulted the U.S. economy ahead of all others in the world during the 19th and 20th centuries. However, as advocates of pure laissez faire capitalism instead of today's mixed economy (i.e., laissez faire capitalism mixed with government controls), the authors find themselves at odds with virtually everyone else--liberals, conservatives, altruists, collectivists, academic philosophers, pragmatists, logical positivists, the press, Berkeley activists, the Federal Reserve (note the irony of Greenspan as longstanding Fed Chairman), and the Pope. The authors even chide the business community for compromising capitalism by supporting antitrust legislation, the Sherman Act, in 1890. The authors' ideal society is an as-yet-unrealized world with no antitrust laws, no government intervention in the capital markets, neither tariffs nor subsidies, no compulsory education for children, no minimum wage laws, no inheritance tax, privatization of communication airwaves, no building codes, no FDA, no SEC, etc. Could such a world with moral law placed above society ("No society is better than its philosophical foundation") reasonably lead, as the authors insist, to a higher standard of living, more prosperity and more fulfilling lives for all of us? If so, they've got quite a tantalizing proposition, at least in theory. . . .
|
