Dr. Michael Hurd’s New Book — Now Available!
Dr. Hurd's third book is finally available for sale! Autographed copies of "Bad Therapy, Good Therapy (And How to Tell the Difference)" are available directly from DrHurd.com.
In his new book, Dr. Hurd shows people how to avoid the dangers of most contemporary therapies and how to rely on your own judgment when facing emotional problems. It is an indispensable guide to choosing a therapist who can produce the best results for you.
Bad Therapy, Good Therapy (And How to Tell the Difference) also includes a foreword written by none other than celebrated clinical psychologist Stanton Samenow, Ph.D.Click here to get your autographed copy of Dr. Hurd's latest book.
Objectivism Politics Podcast: Obama vs Israel and More
Here’s a link to the broadcast of Amy Peikoff’s Don’t Let It Go Unheard — webcast to talk on politics and politics from an Objectivist perspective. This is the best podcast on politics from an Objective perspective so it is definitely worth a listen if you could not attend the live broadcast. Issues discussed: The (Non) Rapture; Obama’s call for Israel to use pre-1967 borders as starting point for “peace” negotiations; Obama’s reaction to GOP Senators’ request that he adhere to the War Powers Act with respect to Libya; What to do about Pakistan; The Obama Administration’s brand of “transparency”; and Planking.Israel vs. “Palestine”: The Other Half of the Story
From The forgotten refugees: Jews forced out of Arab countries. What about their right of return? – Telegraph BlogsAlmost everyone in Europe knows about the Nakba, which followed the 1948 Arab-Israeli war; although most refugees fled on the advice of invading Arab armies, they have never been allowed back, and this is a running sore. Yet very few people know that 800,000 Jews were in turn forced out of Arab lands during this and subsequent years, on top of another 200,000 Jews from other Muslim countries such as Iran.
The Israeli-Palestinian conflict as far as most people know it runs like this: Jews came from Europe, bought up bits of Palestine until they were numerous enough (thanks partly to financial support from Americans) to take on the Arabs. They then beat them in a war and took their land. Yet this is only half the story.
[...]
And if one takes the view that Palestine was not a nation before its conflict with the Israelis formed a national consciousness but part of Transjordan, then the transfer of Arabs out of Palestine and Jews in is not unusual for the era. Tragic, yes, but not unusual. Populations were always moved where competing groups vied for sovereignty, and while one can lament the older, more tolerant and more diverse world, from belle époque Vienna to pre-Nasser Egypt to the old Constantinople, one cannot blame groups for wishing independence.
[...]
Everywhere where these transfers happened there was great suffering and injustice, and the same goes for the Jews forced out of Arab countries. The story of Iraq’s Jews is especially sad even for the standards of the last century; a 2500-year-old community was destroyed in months, with ancient families who had lived among Baghdad’s plushest districts for generations finding themselves homeless and impoverished in an alien land. Just like the Palestinians forced over the border, in fact. The difference is that the Israelis did not keep Arab Jews in camps for 60 years to prove a point, but helped them to integrate. I guess that’s why third-generation Syrian-Israelis aren’t clamouring at the border for their right to return.
Netahyahu Educates Prez. Obama: 1967 Lines Are Indefensible
Moments ago, following a lengthy meeting with the president, Israel's Prime Minister Bejamin Netanyahu responded to President Obama's call for Israel and Palestine to return to pre-1967 borders, saying, "While Israel is willing to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines because these lines are indefensible because they don't take into account certain changes that have taken place."Netayahu also said, "Israel cannot negotiate with a Palestinian government that is backed by Hamas."
Video: John Allison Interview
Video: Yaron Brook on The Immorality of Government Medicine
Dr. Brook tells patients and doctors on May 14, 2011 at a Doctors Town Hall.Other panel participants are Sally Pipes, Cristina Rizza, MD, and Art Astorino, MD. Event was part of a Doctors Town Hall event sponsored by Americans for Free Choice in Medicine and The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons.No Time To Go Galt
Writes Philosopher Onkar Ghate over at CSM:
How, people wondered, could Rand have foreseen all this? Was she a prophet? No, she answered. [Ayn Rand] had simply identified the basic cause of why the country was veering from crisis to new crisis.
Was the solution to “go Galt” and quit society? No, Rand again answered. The solution was simultaneously much easier and much harder. “So long as we have not yet reached the state of censorship of ideas,” she once said, “one does not have to leave a society in the way the characters did in Atlas Shrugged.... But you know what one does have to do? One has to break relationships with the culture.... [D]iscard all the ideas – the entire cultural philosophy which is dominant today.”
Now, if you’ve only seen the movie, the fact that "Atlas Shrugged" is not a political novel might surprise you. But the book’s point is that our plight is caused not by corrupt politicians (who are only a symptom) orsome alleged flaw in human nature. It’s caused by the philosophic ideas and moral ideals most of us embrace. ['Atlas Shrugged': With America on the brink, should you 'go Galt' and strike?]
For more on Rand's philosophy read Leonard Peikoff's Objectivism: The Philosophy of Ayn Rand.
Why I Won’t Vote For Ron Paul
Writes Amy Peikoff over on Why I Won’t Vote For Ron Paul:Today the top story on Ron Paul’s web site says that, according to a recent poll, Ron Paul would, if elections were held today, have a realistic chance of beating Barack Obama. [...]
The reason that he has so much appeal as a candidate for 2012 is, of course, because of the Tea Party. In fact, I believe someone during the first GOP/conservative/whatever debate that was conducted in South Carolina last week actually called him the “godfather” of the Tea Party. Ron Paul’s been around for years and there was no Tea Party until recently, so just using Mill’s Methods you can see that isn’t true. It was Rick Santelli who started the Tea Party movement and he credits Ayn Rand for inspiring him. “I’m an Ayn Rander,” he said. (He mentions Ayn Rand in this video, for example.)
Nonetheless, Ron Paul seems to be the candidate who has the longest track record with respect to supporting the drastic spending cuts and radical reforms in monetary policies that Tea Party members would like to see. For instance he has supported “open competition” in currency and the gold standard for years. He advocates abolishing the Income Tax and the IRS, and would instead finance the federal government via excise taxes and non-protectionist tariffs (which would be possible to do only because he also advocates massive cuts in spending). He has criticized race-based quotas and, while he at first seemed to be duped (like virtually everyone else) about the dangers of global warming, he has since described it as a “hoax.” Music to our ears, right?
In fact, if all one considered were the statements he made during the recent South Carolina debate, Paul sounded like the best candidate on the stage, on nearly every issue he discussed. But some important issues weren’t discussed, and...
Read thefull article.
Remembering Elian Gonzalez
Remembering Elian Gonzalez | Scott Holleran | 22 April 2003 I met Elian Gonzalez during a visit to the Miami house which had become the flashpoint for a profound philosophical conflict--days before his pre-dawn seizure on Saturday, April 22, 2000.A Sin to Deport Elián | Leonard Peikoff | 20 January 2000 In the name not of Cuban nationalism, but of Americanism in its original and deepest philosophical meaning, Elián Gonzalez must be allowed to remain here. Let this poor boy have a chance to live a human life. If "compassion" is one of our politicians' chief values, as they keep telling us, can't they show him any of it?The Rights of Elián Gonzales |Peter Schwartz | 14 January 2000 Is communism physically harmful to human life? That should be the fundamental question in the Elián Gonzalez case.The Life of Six Year Old Elián Gonzales is in Bill Clinton's hands |Mark Da Cunha | 13 January 2000 The fundamental issue is not about "Florida's large and politically powerful anti-Castro Cuban community" versus the "bond between parent and child" as one commentator insinuated (USA Today 7 Jan 2000). There is something far more important than the "parental bond" between Elián's father and "the dignity of the Cuban people" as Elián's father referred to his son in a Castro sponsored rally (observe that even Elián's father admits that his son is first and foremost a political tool). That something is Elián's inalienable right to his own life -- in Cuba that inalienable right does not legally exist.Speech on Elián Gonzalez in Washington, D.C., Part 1 | Edwin Locke | 5 May 2000 On July 4, 1776 America's Founding Fathers identified the fundamental moral principle on which our country was based. This principle was that every individual possessed the inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. The Founding Fathers also identified the proper role of government; it was to protect individual rights -- specifically, to protect individuals from the initiation of force by other people, including the government itself.Speech on Elián Gonzalez in Washington, D.C., Part 2 |Edwin Locke | 8 May 2000 The difference between Cuba and America is not just a matter of lifestyle, as some have claimed. It is not a difference like that between Republicans and Democrats.Speech on Elián Gonzalez in Washington, D.C., Part 3 |Edwin Locke | 10 May 2000 Let us address a deeper question: why do Clinton and Reno want Elián back in Cuba?Why Was Elian Gonzalez Less Worthy Than Giselle Cordova? | Scott Holleran | 12 July 2001 Giselle's father, Dr. Leonel Cordova, defected to the United States last year after escaping from a Cuban medical mission in Africa. Tragically, on June 17, 4-year-old Giselle's mother was killed in a motorcycle crash in Cuba. Like Elian Gonzalez, Giselle's father demanded that his child be sent to live with him. But, unlike Elian in America, Giselle was at the mercy of a dictator. Castro refused to release the girl.A Firsthand Account Of Child Abuse, Castro Style | Armando Valladares | 16 May 2000 I was in solitary confinement in Fidel Castro's tropical gulag -- where I spent 22 years for refusing to pledge allegiance to the Communist regime -- when I heard a child's voice whimpering. "Get me out of here! Get me out of here! I want to see my mommy!" I thought my senses were failing me. I could not believe that they had imprisoned a child in those dungeons.Elián: Supreme Court Upholds Slavery Over Freedom | Chris Wolski | 1 July 2000 Wednesday's decision by Supreme Court Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, refusing to hear an appeal that would have kept Elián Gonzalez in the United States, should have every American hanging their head in shame.Elian Gonzalez: The Day America Lost its Soul | Nicholas Provenzo | 24 April 2005 Life under a communist dictatorship is abuse and in the Elian Gonzalez case, our government erred in falling to acknowledge it."Life" in Cuba for Elián | Jose Alvarino | 3 June 2000 I'd like to share some thoughts regarding life in Communist Cuba, important to know and understand prior to formulating an opinion on the Elián Gonzalez case, or life in the Island.“Obama, Osama and Operation Infinite Sacrifice”
Writes Richard Salsman over at Forbes:
Read the rest.President Obama deserves a modicum of praise for finally allowing a team of U.S. Navy Seals to kill mass-murderer and al Qaeda kingpin Osama bin Laden last weekend, but only disdain for delaying the operation for so long, and harsh condemnation for extolling “extraordinary sacrifice” at his Ground Zero visit. Like his feckless predecessor, Mr. Obama deserves the lowest grade for continuing to appease political-militant Islam, as evidenced by the tender care and deep respect he bestowed on bin Laden during the burial at sea.
“Shameful” is the only word fit to describe a U.S. foreign policy that did nothing to bin Laden after 2005, when he first occupied his conspicuous compound in Abbottabad, just 30 miles from Pakistan’s capitol and close to the Pakistan Military Academy, which counted among its notable visitors U.S. Defense Secretary Robert Gates and Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Pakistan’s foreign minister Salman Bashir told the BBC recently that in mid-2009 his nation’s intelligence services (ISI) told the Obama regime about bin Laden’s not-so-secret hide-out.
The CIA and Pentagon gave Mr. Obama a specific raid plan last August, yet he dithered and remained reluctant to take military action. In time it’ll likely be revealed that Mr. Obama gave the go-ahead only because he feared leaks would reveal him to be weak and appeasing.
Of course, Barack Obama isn’t the only U.S. president who hoped to give bin Laden a pass.
Tax Cut 101: Getting Less Loot is Not the Same Thing as Being Robbed
Another brilliant op-ed over at Forbes by Yaron Brook and Don Watkins of the Ayn Rand Institute:
[...] The truth is that Ryan actually proposes increasing government spending in the coming years–just at a lower rate than current projections. So why are Ryan’s critics so up in arms?
Because Ryan’s plan dares to touch (albeit, merely to scratch) the untouchable entitlement state. Ryan’s plan would, among other things, trim and reorganize Medicare and Medicaid and reduce federal support for education. To the plan’s critics, this amounts to “reverse-Robin Hood redistribution,” as former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve Alan Blinder put it. “[A]bout two-thirds of Mr. Ryan’s so-called courageous budget cuts would come from programs serving low- and moderate-income Americans, while the rich would gain from copious tax cuts.”
The “reverse-Robin Hood” line suggests that Ryan’s plan robs from “the poor” and gives to “the rich.” But cutting entitlements is not robbery–and cutting taxes isn’t a gift.
Entitlements are essentially government handouts: the government takes money from some people in order to finance other people’s retirements, doctor’s visits, and whatever else the government deems worthy. They are unearned benefits. It is shameful that in a civilized society we have to say this, but getting less loot is not the same thing as being robbed.
A tax cut, meanwhile, is not a government handout–it is a reduction of how much of your income the government takes. Whether you’re a millionaire, billionaire, or an ambitious stock boy, a tax cut means you get to keep more of what you earn.
In this context, consider president Obama’s recent budget speech, in which he criticized Ryan’s plan for implying that “even though we can’t afford to care for seniors and poor children, we can somehow afford more than $1 trillion in new tax breaks for the wealthy.” When Obama speaks of what “we” can afford, he is obviously smuggling in the premise that all wealth rightfully belongs to society and that the government–as society’s representative–will dole out that wealth as it sees fit.
We reject that premise. On our view, you earned your wealth and it belongs to you, and no politician has any business talking about how much of your money he can “afford” to let you keep.
Read the rest of It’s Time To Kill The ‘Robin Hood’ Myth.
Philanthropist Yuri Vanetik Donates . . . Books?
IRVINE, Calif--Orange County business leader and philanthropist Yuri Vanetik’s contribution to the Ayn Rand Institute’s (ARI) Free Books to Teachers Program is estimated to provide more than 2,000 Ayn Rand novels to high schools in Orange County, California. In the last nine years, ARI, a nonprofit educational organization, has distributed more than 1.9 million copies of “Atlas Shrugged,” “The Fountainhead,” “Anthem” and “We the Living” to schools across the country.Ayn Rand’s novels have been popular among English and literature teachers for decades. “They portray events of profound, timeless significance, and are inspiring and exciting stories with heroic characters fighting for their ideals,” says Yaron Brook, president of the Ayn Rand Institute. “They challenge readers to decide not just what will happen to particular characters, but what their own lives and the world should be like.”
“I know firsthand the importance of reading Ayn Rand,” says Vanetik. “Learning about her ideas on collectivism and individualism will challenge students to think about the impact that government, business and they themselves have on our future, and I am proud to be a part of this program.”
Funding for the Free Books to Teachers program comes from private donations. Yuri Vanetik is a private investor and philanthropist. He is the principal of Vanetik International, LLC, a consulting firm, and a National Board Member of Gen Next, an organization of business leaders dedicated to learning about, and becoming engaged with, the most pressing challenges facing future generations.
Pigman Takes Out Osama Bin Laden
Here 's a scene from Bosch Fawstin's graphic novel where the hero takes out Osama Bin Laden. Enjoy...
Also, in case you have not read it check out his interview over at Capitalism Magazine: Art Against Jihad: An Interview with Bosch Fawstin Creator of The Infidel and Pigman
Order a copy of issue#1 of the Infidel at Bosch’s website.
This Atlas Isn’t Shrugging: John Allison vs. The Anti-Capitalists in Academia
Reports Bloomberg in Schools Find Ayn Rand Can’t Be Shrugged as Donors Build Courses on John Allison, former chairman of bank holding company BB&T Corp's strategy to spread Ayn Rand's laissez-faire principles on U.S. campuses:Allison, working through the BB&T Charitable Foundation, gives schools grants of as much as $2 million if they agree to create a course on capitalism and make Rand’s masterwork, “Atlas Shrugged,” required reading.So donors should give their money "with no strings attached" to causes that support some professor's own political agenda that the donor opposes?
Allison’s crusade to counter what he considers the anti- capitalist orthodoxy at universities has produced results -- and controversy. Some 60 schools, including at least four campuses of the University of North Carolina, began teaching Rand’s book after getting the foundation money. Faculty at several schools that have accepted Allison’s terms are protesting, saying donors shouldn’t have the power to set the curriculum to pursue their political agendas, Bloomberg Markets magazine reports in its June issue.
“We have sought out professors who wanted to teach these ideas,” says Allison, now a professor at Wake Forest University’s business school in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. “It’s really a battle of ideas. If the ideas that made America great aren’t heard, then their influence will be destroyed.”What about the possibility of giving money to professors who share your agenda?
That some anti-reason, anti-capitalist professors despise Ayn Rand and have banned her from their curriculum (whether out of malice or in many cases pure ignorance) only reveals their academic bias. Ayn Rand's ideas are part of the conversation over the battle of ideas.Allison, who promotes Ayn Rand’s writings, will likely generate more conflicts on campuses as he seeks to expand his foundation’s gifts to 200 schools nationwide. [...] As private donors gain more power on campuses, it’s just the kind of shift away from state control that Rand would applaud.
Thanks to John Allison students who are interested will now be able to study Rand in an academic setting and come to their own conclusions.
Eight Effective Writing Approaches in Atlas Shrugged That The Movie Adaption Missed
Over at the The Story Department an anonymous writer "Mystery Man" elucidates on "8 Effective Writing Approaches in Atlas Shrugged":In any case, I could not put the book down. I flew through the thousand pages without a sweat. It’s amazing to me how on the one hand, some 120-page amateur screenplays require monumental acts of willpower to get through them and yet, on the other hand, there are giant, thousand-page books that are hopelessly addictive. Why is that?We think the Atlas Shrugged producers obviously missed this one.
What is it about one story that makes it addictive and another one arduous? How can a writer hold a reader’s attention so intensely for so many pages?
While I didn’t agree with every idea advocated in the book, I’m not here to impose my own political or philosophical ideas. I’m here to talk about the craft of writing, and I must admit, there were some fabulous approaches to the art of storytelling that are worth mentioning. [Who is John Galt?]
The Fountainhead Movie Success at the Box Office in 1949
In the aftermath of the mediocre results in the box office for Agilardo adaption of Ayn Rand's novel Atlas Shrugged, writer David Hayes sets the record straight on the success of The Fountainhead (1949) movie:It has become an article of faith among critics of Ayn Rand that the movie made from her screenplay adaptation of her novel The Fountainhead was a box-office failure. Such critics have either never examined the evidence or have willfully disregarded it.
Evidence has been available in research libraries for decades which dispel the myth. Respected industry trade papers in operation at the time of the release of the film provide comparative information on how The Fountainhead the majority of other American feature-film releases in 1949.
The American Film Institute catalog shows that there were 387 American feature films in 1949. [...]
The film industry’s best-known trade paper, Variety, cut short the list of 1949 films at the 92 releases which met its threshold of achieving the minimum rental income it set to deem a film worthy of inclusion on its list. Even with this threshold, several releases from major studios which feature significant stars from the time, failed to make the list (see below). Despite not being major companies, Republic Pictures got in two releases, and Eagle-Lion and Film Classics had one each on the list. (Twelve films from 1949 were excluded from the list because they were released too late in the year to estimate how they would do. More on these later.)
The Fountainhead scored in the top half of the list compiled by Variety limited to releases earning the kind of money which only a major studio release would earn (a threshold that even some major studio releases didn’t meet). When one adds back in all releases for the year, The Fountainhead did better in ticket sales than nine out of ten films of the year.
For comparisons among competing releases, a better source of information is Box Office magazine. Releases in theaters at the time of publication of each weekly issue are compared to normal business for theaters in tracked cities, and in that way different films are compared. The Fountainhead did business consistently above average.
[...] The Fountainhead had its premiere engagements beginning June 26, 1949, and went into general release on July 2, 1949. [The Fountainhead movie success at the box office in 1949, David P. Hayes]
The Aftermath of the ‘Atlas Shrugged’ Movie: Part One
'Atlas Shrugged' Producer Promises Two Sequels Despite Terrible Reviews, Poor Box Office - The Hollywood ReporterThe man who says he spent $10 million of his own money to bring Atlas Shrugged: Part 1 to the big screen vowed Wednesday to go through with his plans to make the next two installments, even though critics hate the movie and business at movie theaters has fallen off a cliff. [...]Or, perhaps they liked Ayn Rand's work of art and actually did hate Aglialoro's movie (who did not use the script written by Rand). Let's hope he doesn't turn Part III into an opera.
[John Aglialoro] defended his film Wednesday by accusing professional film reviewers of political bias. How else, he asks, to explain their distaste for a film that is liked by the audience? At Rottentomatoes.com, 7,400 people gave it an average 85% score. Peter Travers of Rolling Stone, though, gave the movie zero stars, and Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times gave it one. A dozen others were equally dismissive.
"It was a nihilistic craze," Aglialoro said. "Not in the history of Hollywood has 16 reviewers said the same low things about a movie. "They're lemmings," he said. "What's their fear of Ayn Rand? They hate this woman. They hate individualism.