Hey hey, it's just the way I roll.

No guts! No glory!

I happen to be about 1/4 finished with The Fountainhead right now, and from what I've read so far, I am reasonably sure I will NOT be using Howard Roark as a role model.

What Galt encouraged in the novel for strikers was fiction and irrelevant. Socialist dictatorship would not permit states to secede and would be at war with neighboring countries by the nature of statism, and under dictatorship there is no such thing as a "mini-society" too small to be noticed. Nor would that "avoid dystopia". That is why Ayn Rand left Russia, where rational life was impossible.

One either learns and understands the proper principles of human life and spreads the right ideas, living the best one can in a mixed society, or failure is guaranteed. The constant revisiting of wistful speculation about utopian escapes or a hopeless dropping out to crash the country to save it is pointless.

Though Galt himself encouraged listeners to form their own "mini-gulches" on the outskirts of society. My thinking is that if the left gets power, forbid, and we do find ourselves under socialistic government policy, the only remedy will be for groups of strikers to resist and form their own mini-societies (too small to be on the radar), or possibly right-leaning states to secede if it comes to that.

Again, we're talking about a last-resort attempt to avoid dystopia. I don't predict it would happen under ordinary circumstances, I'm talking about somehow Democrat President and super-majorities putting the Green New Deal into law, or a runaway convention leading to the events that put Mr. Thompson in power. There'll be no choice, and even ordinary folks if pushed far enough into the corner can and would resort to that.

Not if you recognize that there are no utopias and don't have unrealistic expectations. It's better to focus on what is required for civilization and what that takes to accomplish. Ayn Rand advocated understanding and spreading proper ideas, not dropping out. Her hero in the novel, John Galt, was not a hippy dropout living in the clouds.

What a downer!

There isn't going to be a Gulch utopia in the Pacific ocean.

Here is what I can do to facilitate a Pacific island Gulch: Jbrenner assigns Homework-Planning Atlantis aka The Gulch

This was an exercise in creating an Pacific Island Gulch aka Atlantis. This is all based on purching a Pacific island by someone with deep pockets like Midas Mulligan. Here is what I can do; that is to purchase the following from the internet and by phone with the funds all done through shell companies.
1. A medium size seagoing RO/RO w/cranes for under a mil.
2. Ship reconditioned at a Portuguese shipyard.
3. Rework hull for speed for in excess of 30 knots
4. Upgrade propulsion plant with water cooled exhaust stacks to reduce heat signature.
5. Coat superstructure in radar absorbing paint.
6. Shipyard fabricated drop decks for hidden armaments.
7. A Port Engineer to inspect the vessel, register it in Panama.
8. Hire a retired/semiretired Captain, First mate, and Chief Engineer.
9. Ablebody Seaman from one of the merchant marine halls.
10. 2-20mm Oekilon Cannons (WWll reconditioned vintage) w/ammo for fore & aft install.
11. 3-50 cal. Browning Machine guns.
12. Ship supplies through a Ship Chandler(NY, Texas, Louisiana, or California)
13. Foodstuff’s from Commodity Broker-Chandlers.
14. Temporary housing assemblies: prefab containers.
15. Portable desalination modules.
16. Diesel Generator Set and Fuel.
17. Reconditioned mine boring machines to build underground facilities.
18. Satellite tracking equipment for tracking spy satellites.
19. Obtain camouflage netting since there isn't any John Galt electronic shield.
20. Purchase AK47's & ammo through the shipyard with incentive money.
21. Any additional materials brought the RO/RO where ever they could be bought.
This list has been modified from the original.

Everyone is capable of more than one job in more than one field at varying degrees of expertise. Being an expert in a field does not change that and is not a disadvantage.

Someone who has learned to use his mind in one field can easily learn simpler tasks. It is harder to be a true expert in more than one area, but still possible. Hugh Akston found it easy to cook excellent hamburgers in a simpler realm than his expertise; a lot of philosophers with the wrong philosophy can only stumble through ordinary physical reality and are incapable of even simple actions.

Midas Mulligan no longer had to be an investment banker but owned the Valley and charged rent even though he did not financially need to; he wasn't fully retired.

I also realize that early on, many newcomers to the Gulch had to take jobs that weren't in their chosen field because there wasn't yet a full-scale economy there, strikers weren't able to pursue their chosen fields in the Gulch. So in a way, it's a REQUIREMENT that you have to be multifaceted in your talents. I would change my thesis to say that being an expert in one field might be a disadvantage in some cases, unless you were one of the residents who joined through retirement, like Midas Mulligan who was independently wealthy and could sustain yourself without needing to seek employment.

Reputation matters. But that isn't the cronyism of Jim Taggart and Oren Boyle.

Reading Atlas Shrugged ought to make anyone see how much humanity is missing. But you can't be at the Valley because as a fictional device is it is unrealistic. What you can do is understand the principles for your own life and act accordingly, and understand what principles are necessary for a society based on Ayn Rand's morality and sense of life, the widely accepted principles that today make it impossible and why, and what it would take to change that.

I will send you my information by email soon. Every time I watch/read Part III and I see the party at Midas's place and all these successful people, I confess I do get envious. I want to be at that party. I know I can be part of that club and tell myself I'd do anything I need to do to live in that valley and be amongst those fine people.

"I'm glad you specified no cronies"
In choosing employees and vendors it not efficient to do a careful search of all candidates out there and to evaluate their merits. People often just go with who they know or who comes recommended.

Ragnar illustrated a superior morality and intelligence beating the statists at their "own game", but in fictional, essentialized form. What he did in the plot could not happen in reality. Going "head to head" with a Federal agency would likely get you killed after the first skirmish.

Not "fitting in" is a good problem to have in this context. Howard Roark had that "problem", too.

As for Eddie Willers, he was included in the novel (as one of Ayn Rand's favorite characters) to show what happens in a collectivist society to morally good people with no exceptional abilities. He should not be used as a negative example.

Implementation of her philosophy is practical in one's own life, and if the ideas are sufficiently spread and understood, for a morality-based society, and she did spend a lot of time on explaining that. But that should not be confused with the fiction of the plot in Atlas Shrugged, which is not realistic and could not happen -- and not just because the statists with power wouldn't allow it.

On a cultural scale it requires widespread understanding of the philosophic principles and how to apply them, which is what Ayn Rand advocated as a prerequisite for national reform. If that happens on a wide enough scale nationally then the statist-collectivists in power now could not stop it, though if they tried to crack down while politically entrenched in some kind of dictatorship they could cause a civil war. But the reform would come through the spread of ideas, not by trying organize a "strike" to collapse the country, assuming that what rises out of it could be successful without widespread understanding of a philosophy of reason and individualism.

No, a real-world Gulch could not be created, and not just because the "pool of talent" on this forum is overestimated. Atlas Shrugged is romantic fiction, written to portray what Ayn Rand called her "ideal man" in essentialized, fictional form. She was not proposing her own version of the hopeless 19th century utopian communities.

She wrote that Atlas is "completely my kind of universe" in sense of life as a fiction writer because it has a "very strong plot gimmick", it is "built on an unusual plot device which is not naturalistic in any sense; it's not even realistic", and it is "completely detached from any journalist reality" -- quoted in Essays on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged, edited by Robert Mayhew.

What is realistic is her "philosophy for living on earth" when understood and implemented in living one's own life, and if spread sufficiently, a morally-based potential society. That is why so much of Atlas stands out as so familiar as sense of life and behaviors (of all kinds), though in abstract, essentialized form. But the fiction of the plot is not a strategy to try implement with a "strike" or copied in a utopian Valley even for those with an interest in and understanding of her philosophy (which few on this forum have).

Richard Branson? Elon Musk? Where are you? We could use your space rockets. Mulligan's Mars, I like that.

I'm glad you specified no cronies, I was about to go all D'Anconia on you ;)

Wow! I used to be a teacher, and got out of the profession, but it's a dream of mine to work with homeschooling organizations.

Well, I did mean in the context of the book :) Reading and watching, I'm thinking, "No way can they have the physical resources and diversity of talent for a completely self-contained, self-sustaining society with no trade with the outside world."

Was that the same guy whose truck Dagny "borrowed" in the movie?

Servo, I admitted up front I could be wrong. But I am hoping by letting you know that was my initial take, it would give you something to think about.

There is "what you are saying" and "what you are communicating". When Obama Said "You didn't build that", he was communicating "You don't deserve what you have.. You OWE Others for what you have". He may NOT have used those words.

So, I was taking a bit of freedom with you, because I felt I saw my best friend in you. You are similar in many ways, already.

Take what you can from it that helps you to be a better you.

Also, you really need to see yourself in a better light. Read some of Scott Adams (Dilbert Creator)... He talks about how a Talent Stack of unique talents is incredibly valuable. How technology that blows the doors off the world is similar, because it almost ALWAYS combines 3 or more disparate technologies. (iPhone: Phone, Music, Camera, Smart Device, Internet).

You are probably ahead of your time in seeing these things, but too far ahead to have your footing right. Maybe?

Regardless, I have to ask, what type of career are you looking for. Feel free to message me directly. Also, I help people cleanup their resumes (having read thousands of them to hire people, and I used to work in Career Development and Placement Services at Michigan State as an undergrad. I literally gave presentations on how to build your resume). I tend to find the things other people miss (what they re saying, vs communicating).

One gal got ZERO responses. She sent me her resume. I saw the problem immediately. This was 2003... Her last job, her first bullet "Built the Business Plan for the company" (it was a failed Dot Com business). While it was a true statement, it was NOT putting her best foot forward. Also, it was not worded to imply impact. She fixed her resume and within weeks had 2 offers. (She had went months with ZERO bites)... Willing to look. This is how I tithe... Helping those who are willing to help themselves...