Philosophy and the working man

Ayn Rand stated that the project of philosophy from Plato onward was to ste=
al from the working man. What she forgot to say was that the working man wa=
s himself a creature of the civilization rather than man in his natural for=
m. The natural form of social organization is the hunter-gatherer tribe. Th=
e worker exists because the civilization exists. And philosophy is very muc=
h a part of civilization.

The problem with anti-intellectual types is that they fail to understand th=
e need for things such as philosophy. Without philosophy these people would=
 have very little of what they have. It takes intellectuals to conceptualiz=
e and justify things such as capitalism. And Ayn Rand, as an intellectual t=
rying to impact the world, should have understood such things. Her own work=
s have been influential in supporting and justifying capitalism and democra=
cy. Here is a philosopher who is firmly in support of capitalism. And capit=
alism gained greatly from her efforts.

I have value for both business and culture. The first is fulfilment of man=
=E2=80=99s productive potential and the second is fulfilment of man=E2=80=
=99s creative potential. The first feeds the body; the second feeds the sou=
l. Civilization owes vastly to both. The two should be able to get along an=
d work together.

This has happened before in America. It was called 1920s. That time saw bot=
h a huge scientific-technological boom and a great cultural blossoming. The=
 conflict between the businessman and the artist is a solvable one. It is p=
ossible to support both endeavors. Culture is not for =E2=80=9Csnobs=E2=80=
=9D or =E2=80=9Cliberal elites.=E2=80=9D Many of the best cultural contribu=
tors I=E2=80=99ve known came from disadvantage. They did not allow their di=
sadvantaged background to keep them from producing excellent work.

When businessman and artist get together, the results are fabulous. We get =
magnificent architecture such as the Chrysler Building and magnificent tech=
nology such as the Packard. And from such things everyone stands to gain.

Are the creative types a bunch of Commies? Ayn Rand was a creative type. Ro=
nald Reagan was a creative type. So are Arnold Schwartzenegger and Clint Ea=
stwood. There are many creative people with conservative outlook. As for my=
self, I=E2=80=99ve written an essay deconstructing Communism and have writt=
en in favor of business. I am not a Communist. I am however willing to look=
 at the reasons why there was Communism and see the correct changes made to=
 keep the same thing from happening again.

What are these changes? The Communists=E2=80=99 main argument was that the =
propertied class were exploiting the working class. This claim is credible =
when business treats its workers like trash. It is not as credible when bus=
iness is good to the worker. In my experience, business had learnt its less=
on. When I was working in the computer industry I didn=E2=80=99t feel explo=
ited. I was being paid right and I was being treated right. For Communism t=
o not be credible to the people, it is necessary for business to treat work=
ers better. That should solve many problems.

Neither the businessman nor the artist are good or bad. Both are capable of=
 both. There are potentials for abuses in any endeavor. I want to see both =
business and culture to be in the best shape that they can be. And I want t=
o see the two working together to create accomplishments comparable to thos=
e of 1920s America.