Gut the SEC, Stop the Next Madoff

Gut the SEC, Stop the Next Madoff

WASHINGTON, October 19, 2009–Two of the victims of Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme are suing the Securities and Exchange Commission for “negligence.”

“While it’s not clear whether their case will go anywhere, it’s undeniable that the SEC failed miserably in the Madoff case,” writes Alex Epstein, a fellow with the Ayn Rand Center.

War Policy vs. Our Troops

War Policy vs. Our Troops

WASHINGTON, October 13, 2009–“Under current policy in Afghanistan, our forces are required to endear themselves to the local population by providing so-called humanitarian aid,” writes Elan Journo, a fellow with the Ayn Rand Center.

Let’s Take Back Columbus Day

Let’s Take Back Columbus Day

October 8, 2009

by Thomas A. Bowden

More than a century ago, America celebrated the 400th anniversary of Christopher Columbus’s voyage of discovery by hosting an enormous world’s fair on the shores of Lake Michigan. This “World’s Columbian Exposition” featured statues of the great explorer, replicas of his three ships, and commemorative stamps and coins. Because Columbus Day was a patriotic holiday–it marked the opening chapter in American history–the newly written Pledge of Allegiance was first recited in schools on October 12, 1892.

Nowadays, however, an embarrassed, guilty silence descends on the nation each Columbus Day. We’ve been taught that Columbus opened the way for rapacious European settlers to unleash a stream of horrors on a virgin continent: slavery, racism, warfare, epidemic, and the cruel oppression of Indians.

This modern view of Columbus represents an unjust attack upon both our country and the civilization that made it possible. Western civilization did not originate slavery, racism, warfare, or disease–but with America as its exemplar, that civilization created the antidotes. How? By means of a set of core ideas that set Western civilization apart from all others: reason and individualism.

Throughout history, prior to the birth of Western civilization in ancient Greece, the world seemed impervious to human understanding. People believed that animistic spirits or capricious deities had supernatural powers to cure diseases, grow crops, and guide the hunter’s arrow toward his prey. To get the attention of these inscrutable spirits, people resorted to prayer, ritual, taboo, and human sacrifice, relying always on the mystic insights of shamans and priests.

This pervasive mysticism had practical consequences: festering disease, perpetual poverty, and a desperate quest for survival that made offensive warfare against human beings seem as natural as hunting animals. Such was the plight of America’s Indians before 1492–and such was Europe’s own plight, once the civilizations of Greece and Rome had given way to the mysticism of Christianity and the barbarian tribes.

It was Western philosophers, scientists, statesmen, and businessmen who liberated mankind from mysticism’s grip. Once scientists revealed a world of natural laws open to human understanding, medical research soon penetrated the mysteries of disease and epidemic, allowing us to look back with pity upon American Indians and other historical victims of diseases now preventable and curable.

On a much wider scale, the Industrial Revolution employed science, technology, and engineering to create material goods in profusion, so that even people of average ability could become affluent by historical standards. By demonstrating how wealth can be created in abundance rather than stolen by armed force, America and the West supplied a moral alternative to the bloody tribal warfare of past eras.

Western civilization’s stress on the value of reason led inexorably to its distinctive individualism. Western thinkers were first to declare that every individual, no matter what his skin color or ancestry, is fully human, possessed of reason and free will–a being of self-made character who deserves to be judged accordingly, not as a member of a racial or tribal collective. And thanks to John Locke and the Founding Fathers, individuals were recognized as possessing individual rights to life, liberty, property, and the pursuit of happiness–rights that made slavery indefensible and led to its eradication, at the cost of a civil war.

"Just War Theory" Is Unjust to Americans

“Just War Theory” Is Unjust to Americans

WASHINGTON, October 5, 2009–As U.S. military leaders continue to argue over troop deployments and tactics in Afghanistan, American soldiers continue to die and victory remains elusive. Why?

High School Student Wins $10,000!

High School Student Wins $10,000!

IRVINE, CA, August 5, 2009–High school junior Dinah DeWald, from Phoenix, Arizona, is this year’s winner of the Ayn Rand Institute’s annual essay contest based on Ayn Rand’s novel The Fountainhead, for which she received a prize of $10,000.

First published in 1943, The Fountainhead offers the vision of a totally independent man, architect Howard Roark, who stands against society’s conventions.

ARI also awarded 5 second prizes ($2,000), 10 third prizes ($1,000), 45 finalist ($100) and 175 semifinalist ($50) prizes. A complete list of winners and information about next year’s competition can be found here.

Since 1985 more than 226,000 high school students from around the world have entered ARI’s essay contests. This year, more than 7,000 students submitted essays on The Fountainhead, which is an all-time record.

Each year ARI runs three separate contests (Anthem, The Fountainhead, and Atlas Shrugged) and awards more than $81,250 in prizes. ARI has given away more than $838,000 to contest winners during the past 20 years.

###

Read more…

Record Number of Students Enter the Ayn Rand Institute’s "Anthem" Essay Contest

Irvine, CA, July 16, 2009–More than 16,000 high school students, a record number, have entered the Ayn Rand Institute’s annual “Anthem” essay contest, which will award the winners a total of $14,000 in prizes.

First published in 1938, “Anthem” is a heroic and inspiring story about the triumph of the individual’s independent spirit. “Anthem” depicts a collectivist dictatorship in a future in which the word “I” has vanished, and how a lone dissident discovers the lost word’s spiritual meaning.

Open to 8th, 9th and 10th graders, the “Anthem” essay contest requires contestants to write on one of several topics dealing with the characters and themes in the novel. The contest is designed to promote critical thinking and writing skills. Essays are judged on both style and content.

According to Marilee Dahl, ARI’s education manager, “Judges look for writing that is clear, articulate and logically organized. Winning essays must demonstrate an outstanding grasp of the philosophic meaning of ‘Anthem.’”

Since 1985 more than 200,000 high school students from around the world have entered ARI essay contests and received more than a half million dollars in cash awards.

The first prize winner for this year’s “Anthem” essay contest will take home $2,000; 5 second-prize winners will each receive $500; and 10 third-prize winners will each receive $200. In addition, 45 finalists will each get $50 and every one of the 175 semifinalists will get $30.

More information about this year’s competition can be found at http://aynrand.org/contests. To interview Ms. Marilee Dahl or to learn more about ARI’s educational programs, please contact media@aynrand.org.

Record Number of Students Enter the Ayn Rand Institute’s "Fountainhead" Essay Contest

Record Number of Students Enter the Ayn Rand Institute’s “Fountainhead” Essay Contest

Irvine, CA, July 7, 2009–More than 7,000 high school students, a record number, have entered the Ayn Rand Institute’s annual “Fountainhead” essay contest, which will award the winners a total of $43,250 in prizes.

First published in 1943, The Fountainhead tells the heroic and fascinating story of Howard Roark, an intransigently independent architect who stands against society’s conventions and refuses to compromise his standards in work and in life.

Open to 11th and 12th graders, the “Fountainhead” essay contest requires contestants to write on one of several topics dealing with the characters and themes in the novel. The contest is designed to promote critical thinking and writing skills. Essays are judged on both style and content.

According to Marilee Dahl, ARI’s education manager, “Judges look for writing that is clear, articulate and logically organized. Winning essays must demonstrate an outstanding grasp of the philosophic meaning of The Fountainhead.”

Since 1985 more than 200,000 high school students from around the world have entered ARI essay contests and received more than a half a million dollars in prizes.

The first prize winner for the “Fountainhead” essay contest this year will take home $10,000; 5 second-prize winners will receive $2,000 each, and 10 third-prize winners will receive $1,000 each. In addition, 45 finalists will get $100 each and every one of the 175 semifinalists will get $50.

More information about this year’s competition can be found at http://aynrand.org/contests.

————–

To interview Ms. Marilee Dahl or for more information on ARI’s educational programs, please contact media@aynrand.org

 

Read more…

Pakistan’s Surrender to the Taliban

Pakistan’s Surrender to the Taliban

Washington, D.C., April 23, 2009–In reaction to the Pakistani government’s decision to give Islamists the power to enforce sharia (Islamic law) in the north of the country, Elan Journo, fellow at the Ayn Rand Center for Individual Rights, warned that all of Pakistan is at risk of falling under Islamic rule.

According to Mr. Journo, “Instead of living up to its stated goal of opposing the Islamists, by defeating them militarily, Islamabad has opted for the losing policy of appeasement–a policy that can only strengthen the jihadists.” If the current trend of appeasement continues to unfold, argued Mr. Journo, nuclear-armed Pakistan may soon “look a lot like Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.”

Just like other cases of appeasement, noted Mr. Journo, Pakistan’s surrender “was predicated on willfully ignoring crucial facts about the goals of the Islamists–goals that are well known. For the last three-odd decades, jihadists all over the world have been vocal in asserting their ultimate aim of expanding Allah’s dominion across the face of the earth. Not alongside other forms of government, but in place of them.

“By evading the Islamist movement’s nature,” concluded Mr. Journo, “Pakistan has handed it a signal victory–the Swat Valley today, plausibly the rest of Pakistan tomorrow.”

————–

 

 

Read more…

Britain Should Start "Easing" Government Stranglehold on the Economy

By Alex Epstein (Sunday Telegraph, March 8, 2009)

Responding to a crisis caused by the inflationary policies of central banks, the Bank of England has decided to generate still more inflation, just in a different form: “quantitative easing.” And so Britain, along with the rest of the world, continues to fight fire with petrol.

If Britain really wants to solve its financial crisis, why doesn’t it start “easing” the government stranglehold on the economy that caused this mess? What about stripping away housing restrictions that prevented supply from keeping up with demand? What about slashing the massive government spending that crowds out private ventures? What about ending the policy of propping up insolvent financial institutions, a policy that only freezes taxpayers’ capital?

And what about calling for an international free banking system and gold standard that would make a credit crisis like today’s impossible?

The Real Meaning of Earth Hour

By Keith Lockitch (March 23, 2009)

On Saturday, March 28, cities around the world will turn off their lights to observe “Earth Hour.” Iconic landmarks from the Sydney Opera House to Manhattan’s skyscrapers will be darkened to encourage reduced energy use and signal a commitment to fighting climate change.

While a one-hour blackout will admittedly have little effect on carbon emissions, what matters, organizers say, is the event’s symbolic meaning. That’s true, but not in the way organizers intend.

We hear constantly that the debate is over on climate change–that man-made greenhouse gases are indisputably causing a planetary emergency. But there is ample scientific evidence to reject the claims of climate catastrophe. And what’s never mentioned? The fact that reducing greenhouse gases to the degree sought by climate activists would, itself, cause significant harm.

Politicians and environmentalists, including those behind Earth Hour, are not calling on people just to change a few light bulbs, they are calling for a truly massive reduction in carbon emissions–as much as 80 percent below 1990 levels. Because our energy is overwhelmingly carbon-based (fossil fuels provide more than 80 percent of world energy), and because the claims of abundant “green energy” from breezes and sunbeams are a myth–this necessarily means a massive reduction in our energy use.

People don’t have a clear view of what this would mean in practice. We, in the industrialized world, take our abundant energy for granted and don’t consider just how much we benefit from its use in every minute of every day. Driving our cars to work and school, sitting in our lighted, heated homes and offices, powering our computers and countless other labor-saving appliances, we count on the indispensable values that industrial energy makes possible: hospitals and grocery stores, factories and farms, international travel and global telecommunications. It is hard for us to project the degree of sacrifice and harm that proposed climate policies would force upon us.

This blindness to the vital importance of energy is precisely what Earth Hour exploits. It sends the comforting-but-false message: Cutting off fossil fuels would be easy and even fun! People spend the hour stargazing and holding torch-lit beach parties; restaurants offer special candle-lit dinners. Earth Hour makes the renunciation of energy seem like a big party.

Participants spend an enjoyable sixty minutes in the dark, safe in the knowledge that the life-saving benefits of industrial civilization are just a light switch away. This bears no relation whatsoever to what life would actually be like under the sort of draconian carbon-reduction policies that climate activists are demanding: punishing carbon taxes, severe emissions caps, outright bans on the construction of power plants.

Forget one measly hour with just the lights off. How about Earth Month, without any form of fossil fuel energy? Try spending a month shivering in the dark without heating, electricity, refrigeration; without power plants or generators; without any of the labor-saving, time-saving, and therefore life-saving products that industrial energy makes possible.

Those who claim that we must cut off our carbon emissions to prevent an alleged global catastrophe need to learn the indisputable fact that cutting off our carbon emissions would be a global catastrophe. What we really need is greater awareness of just how indispensable carbon-based energy is to human life (including, of course, to our ability to cope with any changes in the climate).

It is true that the importance of Earth Hour is its symbolic meaning. But that meaning is the opposite of the one intended. The lights of our cities and monuments are a symbol of human achievement, of what mankind has accomplished in rising from the cave to the skyscraper. Earth Hour presents the disturbing spectacle of people celebrating those lights being extinguished. Its call for people to renounce energy and to rejoice at darkened skyscrapers makes its real meaning unmistakably clear: Earth Hour symbolizes the renunciation of industrial civilization.

Next Page »