Columns
Tuesday Was a Turning Point
Around the State
One Wednesday morning eight years ago my daughter's political science class at the University of Florida was canceled.
The professor arrived, announced that he was too upset to continue, and left. George W. Bush had just been re-elected.
That was a silly overreaction.
But it is no exaggeration to say that last Tuesday was a watershed.
It is over. America is done.
Having grown up during America's zenith, and seeing a resurgence in the 1980s, I did not expect to live to see the day when the voters would repudiate America, reject its basic principles and vote themselves into decline and, probably, destruction.
In a century, the greatest nation in history will be but a memory. It will be Mexican, or Muslim or perhaps Chinese, and the liberty and freedom our ancestors earned in the 18th century will be gone.
Furthermore, it will not exist anywhere else in the world. Ronald Reagan was right when he said America is the last, best hope of mankind.
But the voters chose another hope; a nebulous, greedy hope, where the Takers outnumber the Makers yet hope the Makers will continue to make.
The individual will be subsumed into the collective and his own interests, dreams and desires will no longer matter. Politicians will not be public servants but our masters.
The seeds for this were sown 100 years ago with the election of Woodrow Wilson. He was not the first to attack capitalism, but he was the first to insist that government was the answer to everything.
One prescient Russian immigrant saw this coming. Ayn Rand wrote her seminal work, "Atlas Shrugged," in the late 1950s while America was at the top. Intellectuals and critics hated the book but the public loved it and today her book remains one of the most influential in history, second only to the Bible.
What she predicted already is coming true. The Makers are shrugging. They are innovating, producing, creating wealth less because the government is taking more, and spending even more than that. It is not sustainable.
But the public education system and the malfeasant media have made sure that enough voters know and care little about our political and economic history. Instead, they are grabbing for all they can, like the people in Greece who are rioting in the streets and burning buildings because of the horrid prospect that they can no longer retire at the age of 52 on a lavish pension, working half their lives and playing for the other half at the expense of others.
Some still believe the excesses of the next four years will bring about a Reaganesque revival. I no longer believe that can happen.
America had a choice and made it. Elections have consequences. The House of Representatives will not be able to stop the tax-and-spend juggernaut. Atlas will shrug.
Pray for the late, great United States of America.
Lloyd Brown was in the newspaper business nearly 50 years, beginning as a copy boy and retiring as editorial page editor of the Florida Times-Union in Jacksonville. After retirement he served as speech writer for Florida Gov. Jeb Bush.
Comments (17)
It was a time that was far more liberal economically (regulation was higher in almost all areas of the economy, taxes were more progressive, unionism was high, less free trade, etc.) and much more conservative socially.
What part did you not like about the liberal era (1933-1968)? Was it the 5% to 6% annual GDP growth? National debt shrinking as a portion of GDP? Low unemployment- typically under 4%? Bretton Woods money system?
Other than civil rights expansions, I can't think of much improvement since 1968.
How is that medicare I'm paying for? Is your social security check automatically deposited? Hypocrite. You would be selling newspapers on a corner right now to avoid starvation if it weren't for these "progressive" policies you decry. Ayn Rand, herself, relied upon medicare and social security in her old age. She tried to hide it, because she like you is a fool and a hypocrite. Did medicare produce socialism? Did social security produce communism? Does not Obama's health care plan require people to purchase insurance and thereby promotes individual responsibility? Fool. You wrote speeches for Jeb Bush? No wonder our politicians sound like dinosaurs preaching ideals that never existed while trying to lead in a manner that has no connection to our current realities.
How is that medicare I'm paying for? Is your social security check automatically deposited? Hypocrite. You would be selling newspapers on a corner right now to avoid starvation if it weren't for these "progressive" policies you decry. Ayn Rand, herself, relied upon medicare and social security in her old age. She tried to hide it, because she like you is a fool and a hypocrite. Did medicare produce socialism? Did social security produce communism? Does not Obama's health care plan require people to purchase insurance and thereby promotes individual responsibility? Fool. You wrote speeches for Jeb Bush? No wonder our politicians sound like dinosaurs preaching ideals that never existed while trying to lead in a manner that has no connection to our current realities.
Anyone who believes that Atlas Shrugged is "one of the most influential in history, second only to the Bible" is in clear need of professional help to learn about actual reality. It doesn't even make lists of the top 100.
It is relevant to the American experience (hence the Library of Congress's inclusion on its list of 88 most influential publications to Americans), but gross hyperbole is part of the politics of the "Big Lie". Intentional mis-statements of facts are not opinions, they are lies.
Since you hate this new America so much, I have $10 and will help in your emmigration to some other planet where you can find peace and a government to match your conservative views . . . or don't you believe in that old Republican motto - "America, Love it or Leave It!" . . . . . . ok, then I guess you must just be another, shrill right-wing hypocrite, striking out at your frustrations at no longer ruling America in this increasingly multi-cultural nation. . . . .
Pathetic.
Feel free to resume your irrational hatred now.
I believe you're confusing a Book of the Month Club/LOC SURVEY (non-scientific) with a non-existent literary finding and ranking BY the LOC. I'm sure it's #2 among certain types. No scientific literary ranking puts it #2. That's pure Tea Party LaLaLand.
As one extensive "pro Atlas Shrugged" reviewer put it:
"No one knows exactly how influential Atlas Shrugged is, because there has never been a proper study done to check. The "second most influential" claim comes from a Survey of Lifetime Reading Habits conducted in 1991 by the Book-of-the-Month Club and the Library of Congress. Printed surveys were sent to members of the Club, asking them what books had most influenced their own lives. A little over 2,000 responses were received. The Bible ranked first, and Atlas Shrugged ranked a distant second. Because the survey targeted an audience of book lovers (members of the Club) and an active effort was required to mail in a response, it is likely that the results were skewed towards people who were influenced especially strongly by a particular book. Such a result cannot be reliably interpreted as reflecting the entire US population, although enthusiastic promoters of the novel sometimes make such claims. (The survey is also often inaccurately described as a "poll" or "study," and various incorrect sources are cited for it.)"
A few hundreds of responses does NOT make it the 2nd most influential book ever written. . . . . . . . . .that's a pure wishful (and non-supported) desire by far right partisans. . . . . sort of made-up . . . much like the name Jyrik Johns appears to be (i.e. ZERO web presence) . . . .
Leave a Comment on This Story