Exhuming Ayn Rand


People like George W. Bush and politicians in general serve as poster children for the fact that the proverbial cream does not rise to the top in our world. The older I become, the more I see evidence of incompetent people rising in the ranks of society, corporations and organisations. This completely bursts the values upon which we are raised in that hard work and achievement will pay off in the long run. Ayn Rand must be rolling over in her grave… and “who is John Galt?”

Let’s look at the example of George W. Honestly, of the 300 plus million people living in the United States, is he truly the best to lead? Rhetorical question. The real question is where are those who truly are worthy of such power and position? The fact is, the worthy in most organisations never rise out of the front line. There are a number of factors working in tandem that create this anti-social Darwinism. First and foremost are the factors of wealth, nepotism and who you know. What you know is immaterial. That does not mean that there aren’t any intelligent people who act on such opportunities, but rather that there are many incompetent people who also reap the benefits of their connections.

Next, there is the penis envy factor. Quite simply, people do not wish to promote those who make show them up. “Superiors” want to remain feeling as such, quick to observe if another’s talents might eclipse their own. In this regard, there is a perversion of our concepts pertaining to capitalism’s competitive tenets.

Most superiors are really looking for “yes men and women”. Let’s face it: most of the time that we ask for constructive criticism we find it difficult to accept the negative. It stings, especially when you think what you’ve done is outstanding. As much as we may make ourselves appear to shy away from the “good dog” pat on the head, it’s what we want to hear. Many outstanding people tend to be outspoken and thus are viewed as a threat – hence the reason they are repressed in the lower ranks and on the front lines. I have known so many outstanding individuals over the years, many of whom have locked horns with their managers, and have never really made any career progress.

I must admit, though perhaps somewhat vainly, that I include myself as someone who has a fair amount of insight, ideas and creative concepts. I am in now way a genius, but I am also not a one dimensional paper cut-out of a clone. I hold two degrees, speak five languages to various degrees, have traveled the world and have played sport at the international level. In spite of this, there were long periods in my life where I was unemployed. I could not get a job teaching with the local school board, in spite of the fact that I had two job offers in my practicum year. That lead me down the path to where I spent nearly half a decade working as a prison guard. At the end of the day, I am a firm believer that those employers who took the time to read my resumes thought either I was lying or were intimidated as I rarely got any interviews ( though I did get job offers on roughly 90% of the interviews I did have, hence me finally teaching in the local public system).

In any case, I am not here to make belated comments on how long it took me to break in to a teaching career. What I do want to say is that the Education Department where I did my degree, the Correctional Service and school boards in general all appear to be headed up by bureaucrats who are on the verge of incompetence. They are ideologues who are so detached from the front lines that it is beyond ridiculous and there is a general complacency amongst the masses that allow them to continue to produce their tripe with minimal accountability. I’m talking about the managers and law makers who have given murderers and rapists more rights than their victims. These are the same bunch who wouldn’t let Correctional Officers wear handcuffs and stab resistant vests because they were “intimidating and did not foster a trusting relationship with inmates”. I’m talking about the University courses on Assessment that state class sizes should be small and never use multiple choice exams as they don’t allow students to show what they really know, while the Assessment course itself is in a lecture hall of 300 students and bases grades on two multiple choice exams. I’m talking about school boards who become blinded by research and implement a multitude of new concepts with no additional funding or modification to class sizes. If you question any of those heading up policies, you get more rhetoric as they let you know who is running the show – shit rolls downhill, don’t you know Sisyphus?!

I’m tired of the trenches, but know that I could never keep my mouth shut long enough to advance in the ranks of my profession. Nor do I care to in many regards as one would still be surrounded by idiots. Perhaps I’ll exhume Ayn and see if I can’t find a valley somewhere in which to start a colony of utilitarian perfection – anyone want to come?