Robert Bradley, Jr. - Ayn Rand and Best Business Practices—Atlas Summit 2016
Session recorded 7/12/16 at the Atlas Summit, Planet Hollywood, Las Vegas, NV, as part of the Symposium on Success in Business.
The heroes in Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead are successful businessmen. All readers of the novels can agree that the heroes behave heroically. But do they behave in ways that characterize successful businessmen?
This lecture compares the behavior of Rand’s heroes with the insights of four authors in the classical-liberal tradition whose works identify key aspects of free-market business success: Samuel Smiles, Joseph Schumpeter, Ronald Coase, and Friedrich Hayek. Along the way, it demonstrates that the classical liberal capitalist Charles Koch has adopted and updated all of these insights. It then argues that Rand thoroughly understood the insights of two of these authors but slighted the insights of two others. And it suggests that her moral and aesthetic philosophy may have been responsible for her oversights.
Listen to part one here
Release date: 12 September 2016
Read Article : Atlas Summit 2016
The inclusion of Branden’s lecture and question-answer session in this collection gives him a voice in his own commemoration. Published here for the first time, and transcribed by Roger Bissell, the lecture was given to the California Institute for Applied Objectivism in 1996. Its tenor can be gleaned from the opening paragraph in which Branden compliments his audience for being “dedicated to the broad philosophical ideas of Objectivism, but not in a religiously constricted and independent-thinking-discouraging way.”
Here Branden echoes his implicit criticism of the ARI camp. Debates between the Branden-ARI factions go beyond the personal disagreements between Branden and Rand to a broader philosophical question: is it better, at the outset of an intellectual movement, to insist upon the purity of a set of ideas at the expense of its slower adoption or to engage in an open dialogue that allows for give-and-take?
This is not a subject that can be answered by labeling either side as “religionists” or “compromisers.” It’s a unique problem elevated to historical significance by the profundity and uniqueness of Objectivism. If Objectivism is the most exceptional philosophy to emerge in over two thousand years and one believes, as Objectivists do, that philosophy is the motive force of history, then the answer could reasonably impact the course of civilization itself. The stakes, in other words, are high for those involved.
The question-answer session thus raises an issue of great...
Read Article : Nathaniel Branden, In His Own Words
Over three decades ago, in 1982, I booked a private telephone consultation with an Objectivist philosopher (associated now with the Ayn Rand Institute) on reading The Romantic Manifesto, Ayn Rand’s classic non-fiction work on aesthetics.
At 24, I was both an artist and an Objectivist. A fine art major; I had taken several art history classes including contemporary art theory. At the time, I had just completed the painting Promethia, and even though it was a thematic work, I didn't understand how one objectively identifies a theme of an artwork. With that in mind, I was excited to be mentored by an Objectivist philosopher.
In our consultation, he pointed to Willem Kalf's still life painting in the classic art history book, Gardner's Art Through the Ages.
“How do I discover the theme?” I asked, genuinely.
“The theme of this painting is malevolent because of the dark background!" was the swift and vociferous response.
This was “obvious” -- i.e. self-evident -- he said. No further reasoning or discussion was necessary.
I ended the session and never consulted him again.
Alas, I had yet to learn how themes work in painting. So I returned to what Ayn Rand herself had written.
In the Romantic Manifesto she writes:
“Now a word of warning about the criteria of esthetic judgment. A sense of life is the source of art, but it is not the sole qualification of an artist or of an esthetician, and it is not a criterion of esthetic judgment. Emotions are not tools of...
Read Article : Art and Judgment
Recently I was invited by the esteemed author, economist, and professor Mark Skousen, to teach his business school class at Chapman University -- the topic: John Allison’s excellent book, The Leadership Crisis and the Free Market Cure.
The class was part of Skousen’s course on “Libertarian CEOs.” These include not just Allison, but also John Mackey of Whole Foods and Bill Bonner of Agora. All three of whom shared the stage with me in a panel moderated by Skousen at last year’s FreedomFest, the largest gathering of libertarians in the world.
Mackey and Bonner are not Ayn Rand fans, but hey, nobody’s perfect. John Allison and I are not just Ayn Rand fans, we subscribe to Rand’s philosophy, Objectivism, and have practiced its principles throughout our lives and careers.
John Allison was CEO of Branch Banking & Trust from 1986 to 2008 and during that time built the company’s assets from $4.5 billion to $152 billion, making it the tenth largest financial
holding company in America. No wonder Harvard Business Review named Allison one of the world’s top 100 CEOs. He was also named BB&T’s “Employee of the Month” 217 times.
But what makes John’s leadership lessons and philosophy uniquely relevant to our times is the fact that his bank survived the crash of 2008 when other...
Read Article : The Objectivist Crisis -- and the John Allison Cure
There was a time, when Ayn Rand’s new essays came out monthly and, as often as not, mentioned or enthusiastically recommended some writer or specific book, that her readers immediately tracked down every work by that writer. Mickey Spillane, Donald Hamilton, Ira Levin, Ian Fleming, and dozens more were added to the Objectivist canon as recommended reading. In fact, sometimes the only lead was the appearance of a new book for sale by the Nathaniel Branden Institute bookstore. I once ordered almost two dozen to be shipped to me at Brown University, where I was a sophomore.
I am virtually certain that that did not happen in the case of the Polish Romantic novelist, Henryk Sienkiewicz (1846-1916). In her essay, “Bootleg Romanticism,” available in The Romantic Manifesto, Ayn Rand promoted Sienkiewicz to the Pantheon:
The (implicit) standards of Romanticism are so demanding that in spite of the abundance of Romantic writers at the time of its dominance, this school has produced very few pure, consistent Romanticists of the top rank. Among novelists, the greatest are Victor Hugo and Dostoevsky, and, as single novels (whose authors were not always consistent in the rest of their works), I would name Henryk Sienkiewicz’s Quo Vadis and Nathaniel Hawthorne’s The Scarlet Letter.
That is called “making the shortlist.”
Strangely, neither in that essay nor anywhere else, as far as I know, did Ayn Rand ever mention Sienkiewicz again. And yet, there is evidence that...
Read Article : Henryk Sienkiewicz and the Climax of Romanticism