All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace

All Watched Over by Machines of Loving Grace

8.75
12345678910
Ratings: 8.75/10 from 193 users.

A series of films about how humans have been colonized by the machines they have built. Although we don't realize it, the way we see everything in the world today is through the eyes of the computers. It claims that computers have failed to liberate us and instead have distorted and simplified our view of the world around us.

1. Love and Power. This is the story of the dream that rose up in the 1990s that computers could create a new kind of stable world. They would bring about a new kind global capitalism free of all risk and without the boom and bust of the past. They would also abolish political power and create a new kind of democracy through the Internet where millions of individuals would be connected as nodes in cybernetic systems - without hierarchy.

2. The Use and Abuse of Vegetational Concepts. This is the story of how our modern scientific idea of nature, the self-regulating ecosystem, is actually a machine fantasy. It has little to do with the real complexity of nature. It is based on cybernetic ideas that were projected on to nature in the 1950s by ambitious scientists. A static machine theory of order that sees humans, and everything else on the planet, as components - cogs - in a system.

3. The Monkey in the Machine and the Machine in the Monkey. This episode looks at why we humans find this machine vision so beguiling. The film argues it is because all political dreams of changing the world for the better seem to have failed - so we have retreated into machine-fantasies that say we have no control over our actions because they excuse our failure.

Some other prominent work from this filmmaker:
The Power of Nightmares
The Century of the Self
The Mayfair Set
Pandora's Box
The Trap and The Living Dead.

Directed by: Adam Curtis

More great documentaries

guest

261 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Slim
Slim
3 years ago

It's crazy when you really think about it what they did to Africa .???.makes you wonder so over here you have crips and blood's in LA and so forth wasn't created by no tookie Williams. F***n crazy they went around the world with this and thinking about that Documentary the power principle everything is a lie and everything is not what is seems and in plain site but I don't think they can beat mother nature tho. ???..can they talk about dangerous dammm people don't research or question things for nothing now look in 2021

jammonstrald
jammonstrald
8 years ago

I'm a bit surprised at how many people seem to be misinterpreting the documentary's main premise. The most common statement I read is along the lines of "so this is saying Ayn Rand is responsible for our current economic quandary?"

No. That's not what it's saying at all. And as many other commenters have pointed out, that would be a ridiculous premise. Hearing this makes me feel like people have only watched the first half of the first part.

The true premise of the documentary is an examination of our utilizing models and languages for interpreting the world around us that are distinctly mechanical in nature, and how they are actually quite antithetical to how the natural world behaves, and how that has the potential to be quite harmful when we place such blind faith in those systems.

The approach for this examination that Curtiz uses is to present certain languages and models, and then analyze their origins to expose how often they themselves give evidence of how misguided it is and was to place such societal weight into those systems.

So in the segment focusing on Rand, he presents the importance and influence of Silicon Valley entrepreneurs and the architects of the New Economy, and examines where those individuals were drawing their own personal philosophies and ideas about how the world works, and (more importantly) how it SHOULD work. What we find is that Ayn Rand's philosophy and writing were IMMENSELY influential to many of those people. They speak of being "Randian heroes" and championing the virtues of objectivism for their good and contributing to the utopian ideals that they bought into through being exposed to Rand's work.

The irony in this, is obviously how Rand in adhering to her own philosophy actually created unhappiness for herself and others, and brought upon the collapse of her own "utopia" because of blind adherence to this "system" which she believed to be a reflection of how nature works. The point to take away is not "Rand caused ______", but rather "isn't it interesting that Rand's own life and personal group were sabotaged by her staunch adherence to the very system she thought to be the world's salvation?" If the system that Rand had devised to make sense of the world around her "failed" for herself, then what does it mean for a generation of people to became enamored with that same system, and base countless other systems around those ideas?

This is the same approach used throughout the documentary for its illustrative purposes. I've seen many claim that the third segment is not as strong in maintaining the premise, but it absolutely does. The Rwandan segment highlights yet another "system" that people were using to explain their world: hutus and tutsis are enemies, and one was always meant to be the ruling class. Except that the origin of that system shows it to be a completely bogus and arbitrary system, as it was fabricated for political purposes by the previous hierarchy. However by merely adopting that system of world-view without examination, the population in Rwanda jointly committed and experienced enormously heinous actions.

The importance of the third segment is that technology is not the evil, but rather that our human propensity to (almost willingly) view ourselves and our situation as deterministic and mechanical, is.

p
p
9 years ago

not only i believe a non hierarchical is better and possible, but i also believe ecosystem are a good analisys of nature as everything is connected and not because they are similar to computers.. actually computers are similar to nature in that sense.. i don't believe in politics and i do believe communities were everyone is equal are a good thing.. this documentary also tries to distort the study and life of buckminster fuller making him look like another of these cibernetics freaks when actually he only studied nature and build harmonic structure based on the structure of nature on earth.. and i do believe there a certain equilibrium in nature and finally what cibernetics called feedback loop is just us feeding the vacuum with information and getting the feedback from it.. i think if you actually looked a bit into what buckminster fuller did you would realize the image this documentary portrays of him and his theories is very distort and im not sure whats the point they want to make (apart from the fact computers can't self regulate our world which i agree) but it seems, from the fact they keep repeating no hierarchy as a strange thin, that they want to justify hieararchy and politicians being higher on the social pyramids than other people

i don't understand why they try to say there is no natural order in nature, as if all was chaos, and he pretend community were in place in order to create a global community based on computers ? in the point of evolution we are not only technology is unavoidable but it is also good how would we live without it ? i think the point is actually to build technology and machines that are harmonious with the patterns of the universe

Todd Morrow
Todd Morrow
10 years ago

Well, when we are without machines, just in our human nature, we bully and dominate one another.
With machines, we program them stupidly, turn them loose and they cause bubbles and chaos.
But as a group of humans, interfaced with machines, we can play pong quite well.
So maybe we can take the part that works and apply it to the rest of the problems? Say, have groups of people remotely group-controlling factory robots with energy supplied by solar power, and everyone gets to work, and get their Xbox, and be happy maybe? And forget about the equilibrium and keep expanding into Mars?

Pete
Pete
10 years ago

Love this series and the NIN throughout it.

Nothing_Is_Real
Nothing_Is_Real
10 years ago

The only part that is a lie so far is that the world trade center demolition was caused by the muslims. We know now that it was created and acted out by the new world order of things.

Bob Dole
Bob Dole
10 years ago

Re watching this I can't help but feel a strange sense of "the matrix has you" creeping into my bones.
Self replicating automatons.
Biological robots.
what the heck are we?

Dave Ace
Dave Ace
10 years ago

The only thing I can see that is the cause of all of our problems. EGO. The day our machines of loving grace are given it, is the day there will be a new "god" and all the headaches that come with it. :)

Steve Grodzki
Steve Grodzki
10 years ago

Very insightful. I had observed that governments, industries and corporations had become entities themselves driven buy (but not necessarily controlled by) the people involved with them. I guess I thought that just happened naturally but here I learn they were made that way by design! What a sad time to be alive in a system that forces the individual to suppress the feelings that make them a sentient being so they can use there lives as a cog in a machine that is ultimately destroying independent cultures, eliminating all life that dose not serve it and devouring all the resources it can as quickly as it can. A true invasion of the body snatchers.

It seems backwards to say that peoples emotions are mechanics to advance the gene. Why dose the gene want to stick around in the first place? that's like saying you drive a car so you can have a motor.

It needs to be flipped around. genes are the mechanical components of what helps create the feeling, living person like the one reading this rite now who is capable of observing there universe and gives it meaning and value ;)

failedevolution
failedevolution
10 years ago

Another great work by Adam Curtis

America Citizen
America Citizen
10 years ago

This is still the best documentary I have ever f--king seen.

Evrit
Evrit
10 years ago

The materialists emerged in modern man's history in Leipsig with Wilhelm Wundt's expansion of Pavlovian stimulus-response theory of man as an animal. This is an old, not a new, idea that is not based on "retinal" scientific observation, but mere lip-service to same in an intend to enslave the human race by those who have a hidden fear of their fellow men. Even considering they influence about seven times their number, those whose motives are toward the enhancement and survival of mankind outnumber them FOUR to ONE! Don't think for a minute that even one of these guys wouldn't destroy the human race to protect themselves if they gad the chance. Thbey ARE losing. They just appear powerful to those who can't confront the motives and consequences of their acts.

David Chard
David Chard
10 years ago

The Universe is in an ongoing state of chaos. The function of living organisms is to "manage the chaos" that shows up and over time, become increasingly clever at doing so. But the chaos is king, quite random as it unfolds and the more things unravel, the more the organisms must adapt, evolve, change their"management strategies."

In other words, there is no such thing as a stable system, there is only the persistence of organisms as they seek to survive in ingenious ways in the face of constant change. Any and all attempts to "control" this process are absurd. That doesn't mean we can get away with destroying the environment which supports our species.

The current focus should be on our species' survival not the Earth's survival. The Earth knows it isn't going to survive in the long term. In the short term, it only has to survive us, which it will. Ultimately, nothing survives; its the process, the journey that is more interesting.

Living things are pretty good at "surfing" the waves of change; however the wholesale destruction of our environment is happening faster than we can adapt to it. In the end, we are in interesting species but not likely to be around much longer. No worries, something else will emerge.

Lynne Gordon
Lynne Gordon
10 years ago

Price is a prime example of a scientist who labors under inaccurate information and develops skewed conclusions because of it.

Today we know that the nucleus of a cell is simply the reproductive organ and the genes inside it are used by the cell to produce proteins that the cells requires.

Genes do not control human behavior. Dr. Bruce Lipton has demonstrated this conclusively.

And again in part 3 at 29:00, this video states that white mercenaries began their own war in 1967! Mercenaries do not start wars, they fight for money... and someone hired them.

Finally, I only wished that Fossey had loved black humans as much as she 'claimed' to love apes. She might have done a great work.

Madeline Stephens
Madeline Stephens
11 years ago

sorted the sound issue out.... (silly me I thought it was the vid!)

Madeline Stephens
Madeline Stephens
11 years ago

the sound is v poor on the 2nd vid at my end. On the subject of being self serving I think it can be in one's own interests to be altruistic. It can make you feel good to help others and also it is about spreading happiness and goodness to create a better world and a better world is good for all of us. Sometimes if we are totally selfish others lose out and we can lose out if others behave selfishly towards us. We are social creatures by nature but we are becoming isolated and selfish because western culture has led to a lot of people being absorbed in their own things their own home their own technology. I liked episode 2 series 1 of black mirror. Not too much of a stretch of the imagination to see a world like that in the future

Daniël van der Keur
Daniël van der Keur
11 years ago

Atlas shrugged is the worst book I ever (tried to) read. After a few sentences I was fed up with the terrible way of writing. Objectivism is the most stupid philosophy ever. And Ayn Rand.... well anyone who believes in her stupid philosophy is even more stupid than Ayn Rand. OMG was that woman silly!!!

quisanum
quisanum
11 years ago

Perhaps Price had second thoughts about degrading himself to serve the agenda of the unseen manipulative 'controllers' of the planet. Unlike Hamilton, he felt abused and refused to be totally assimilated by this dominating anti human minority. His final 'altruistic' escape (he would not take a pill to that end - unlike Hamilton, who seemingly caused internal systemic inconvenience by looking too closely into some ape sh*t) appears like a ritual bloody 'sacrifice' he paid nontheless; an act which makes you wonder if and whether it demonstrates or disproves free will, and for us where to go from there.

Oliver Charles Gurr
Oliver Charles Gurr
11 years ago

I have serious trouble with the ending statement of this film, it could be argued that as the west really seeks to supress Africa and keep it with a low population and use it as a resouse basket, that the Hutus were encouraged to rebel and kill the Tutsis, not simply as an act of regret seeking to rebalence the country but rather an attempt to eliminate the one group that had experience in leadership. "Always with the best intencions is the worst work done" or maybe better said:- always with the noble lies do monsters inspire horror.

Whose failure? Really, it´s business that is ultimately controlling these conflicts and for the resourses, they got what they wanted:- the resourses, a country that is weak and consistenly in conflict(more business and so more resourses).

It´s funny that peoples get caught up in these religious and ethic conflicts, while business just sits back and munches what it can. All being played so a corporate can get more.

Well the western politicains are powerless to stand against this corporate domination, afterall they have given them power today. It seems what you really have going on, is different corporate interests fighting for control over those resourses. All hail the button trading masters of the universe, what a qualification to rule!

Nadiyah
Nadiyah
11 years ago

I can't even watch the rest of this (part 3) because of the inaccurate information presented about what happened with Lammumba and the unrest in the Congo. It was a coup funded by the British and American oil companies and others interested in exploiting the land for its natural resources. Lummumba was making legitimate progress; they needed a corrupt leader in place that will allow that exploitation to take place.

Brian J. Farley
Brian J. Farley
11 years ago

The spanish subtitles are annoying, but very compelling doc

just_a_thought_or_two
just_a_thought_or_two
11 years ago

Interesting. It seems that these mathematical geniuses that were so bent on the gospel of so-called rationality were also the creators of the atomic bomb. They believe cold computation can save us if calculations are correct. This all sounds so comfortable and cozy in concept. Yet, all the rationale in the world did not stop the world from dropping the bomb, instead of demonstrating it. All the logic and data that we apply doesn't provide for the need to adapt to world in flux. The most overlooked factor in model building, calculation, and system's theory is the specific and always varying process that is change. Promoting rampart greed, a broken status quo, and weapons capable of destruction of the world, despite it's claims of cool rationality is really not rational, nor is it insightful. Computers will not and cannot save us from these logical fallacies, as we created them and so these things are not any more perfect than the flawed people who made them.

Devon Griffiths
Devon Griffiths
11 years ago

Sorry Mark but the scientists who have put their lives on the line for a theory are literally legion. It happens very often. Curiousity killed the cat, as they say.

Science isn't about "truth" either - although it does utilize truth, as defined by formal logic (real and definite truths, not the wishy-washy vagaries of religious speculation), but it isn't a quest for truth. It is a quest for models that will predict events under certain conditions.

Eric Smith
Eric Smith
11 years ago

My two cents on ecosystems, fuzzy though it may be. Firstly ecosystems DO have relative stability, lasting for many thousand years in their basic assemblies of species. However it is useful to think of everything in nature as ocurring in WAVEFORMS NOT STATIC STATES. Yes these species DO ebb and flow constantly in their relative dominance, involving for example related population explosions and crashes of interdependent species. And of course the all important complex, niche filled climax ecosytem (for example mature forest) undergoing disturbance(fire, flood,volcanoes, etc.) and reverting back to simple pioneer systems evolving thru time back to complex climax yet again. But these assemblies are stable over long periods of time with perhaps even little evolutionary change UNTIL a major widespread disruption that causes a major extiction event, instigating rapid evolutionary "revolution" to often dramitically different life forms- this too can be seen as a waveform type of cycle. Ecology deserves MUCH more attention and respect than it still recieves.

Mark Adam
Mark Adam
11 years ago

These are great observations, but the real issue has to do with the forgetfulness or preservation of the Truth. Science cannot create a stable world (though it seems everyone in this economic system worships it and expect all truths to arise from it). There's a reason religion keeps asserting itself into consciousness -- it has to do with a Truth getting denied and buried. Consider, from an anthropological point of view, why no scientist has put their life on the line for a theory, but yet the religious will do so easily to preserve their truth....?

That being said, through mastery of the technology, one can transcend it, seeing all dualisms inherent in it, and form the bridge to the balanced world we all want. If you want a glimpse of this world, see pangaia.sourceforge.net.

Alistair Moss
Alistair Moss
11 years ago

machine men with machine minds...

ThegreatRAM
ThegreatRAM
11 years ago

Its all about control and justifying the existense of those not worthy of life, It is like in nature, the weak are sacrificed in good to save the mass. So now in saving the weak, they grow up to be dictators, and a-hole ho screw everything up, and send off the strong to die. Oh thats right that is how the world is, human are a vile and disgusting creation, and we will be the destructors of ourselves.

Nate Mcclennen
Nate Mcclennen
11 years ago

i do not agree with the below people. The problem of existence is troubling indeed. Without a rational mythological structure people growing up will never be able to appropriately find their place within the mystery of life. You can peruse economics your entire life- but it wont solve a bit of the exetential angst about why we are existing in a world of seemingly infinite adjustment.

write_light
write_light
11 years ago

A static machine theory of order that sees humans, and everything else on the planet, as components – cogs – in a system.

I like how that (without any context) turns the naturalistic theme of living organisms and natural flux into something entirely opposite. As if systems HAD to be inorganic.

Maartenfromholland
Maartenfromholland
11 years ago

fascism: privatize the profits, socialize the losses

we need a truely free market, john maynard keynes' idea's are quite harmfull, thats what caused all this nonsense, i cant stand the abuse of the word anarchy. anarco capitalism is the only solution in the end

madscirat
madscirat
11 years ago

This is some advanced propaganda right here. It works by giving you half truths. Yes nature isn't a perfect equilibrium, but it is a dynamic equilibrium and it does have feed back loops which keep it from veering to far in any direction. Yes Greenspan knew Rand, but his fiscal policies flew in the face of everything Rand recommended, I mean he was a banker working for the government for God's sake, that is a stereotypical Randian villain.

They also love to paint the revolution as the oppressor. Hearing these advocates of top down control criticizing bottom up control because it sometimes has led to top down control is a bit like hearing a King criticize a mob because it might lead to a dictator.

Seems to me the old structures of power are scared. They see how obsolete they are becoming and they pump out propaganda like this where they discredit the life's work of geniuses with snippets and sound bites, all in order to explain how vital they really are to a world they have almost completely succeeded in destroying.

Christian Klinckwort Guerrero
Christian Klinckwort Guerrero
12 years ago

The first part of the documentarie was perfect, astonishing. Once you presented the colaps of the towers, refering it as an islam attack, sory, you just ruined it

Mark Stouffer
Mark Stouffer
12 years ago

Ayn Rand called Alan Greenspan "The man who doesn't know if he exists".

Yet in this documentary Alan Curtis tries to make him out as the archetypal Objectivist.

Ch H
Ch H
12 years ago

As the creature said to Frankenstein in the novel: "You are my creator, but I am your master."

Joshua Hogan
Joshua Hogan
12 years ago

I watched this with alternating interest and frustration. It basically is a take down of the idea that science and reason are objective and free of any ideology or bias. Science as modern religion.
What is frustrating is that Curtis goes about dismantling these ideas using the very reason and science he is criticizing.
I thought some about Gurdjieff's ideas concerning the idea that almost all modern people live as machines and are not conscious of most of their actions. I think that in some ways the human invention of machines and computers is a manifestation of how people have thought for a long time, reducing reality down to the 'necessary' data (like the scientist trying to create a virtual version of a prairie by collecting as much data as possible). The machines are a reflection and magnification of the Western mind.
Through all three episodes, no alternatives to the flawed systems are even hinted at. And quite complex thinkers like Buckminster Fuller are given a rather surface analysis and dismissed. I understand that Curtis is making broad statements and connecting things in an interesting way but it often feels slapdash and manipulative in some way, like he gives you just enough information to prove his point and then moves on.
At times I felt like I was watching a less nuanced Chris Marker film.
Chaos and order.

Terry Beaton
Terry Beaton
12 years ago

This documentary is little more than a critisism of everything progressive and wholistic. As for what things really are about, it say absolutely nothing. If it did, I have a sneaky feeling that it would be a very right wing vision. It seems to be propoganda of a very sublte variety. If you scratch the surface deep enough, you just might see Billy Grahams face. Or the Republican Party. Watch it with open eyes!

devlinwaugh
devlinwaugh
12 years ago

I would like to take this time to say we should thank the host of this website and give a big thankyou for giving so much and asking nothing.I hope if you have time over the next week to give a nice word for the man/women that makes this possible,i do not know him/her have never spoken to him/her but hope you understand the humanity and freedom he/she gives us ,thanks again host this is my personal homage thankyou.

Robert Finniss
Robert Finniss
12 years ago

This documentary can be summed up by this:

No matter what you believe, good or bad, the consequences of our actions can never be predicted. I would say, don´t put your faith and trust in a system. The only thing that keeps you alive is the Earth....not economics, computers, or politics.

This was a very intriguing documentary, one that needs time to be pondered. we are all selfish individuals, and I am starting to believe that the good and evil things we do are all of the same selfishness, they create the same consequences, good actions just kill in the long term, while evil actions kill in the short. it´s like the what if you met Hitler when he was a baby scenario?

AH
AH
12 years ago

Forget all that non-sense, Ayn Rand was a lunatic, who as all lunatics, dealt in extremes, it's like saying i like salt on my food, so you then throw a jar of salt on it, everything in moderation, but the best thing in it, is Alan Greenspan, and what a complete nutter he is, and how he had so little self confidence, that he capitulated to the clowns in power in the US, and let the world descend into financial chaos, and also how UTTERLY Thick Bill Clinton was, and is!! undoubtedly the dumbest president ever in office!! Finally the present European Crisis, this proves that there can be only one outcome Chaos, Riots, Government collapse, and ultimately a collapse of the Eurozone experiment

TheRealMax
TheRealMax
12 years ago

110 mins is interesting.

Guest
Guest
12 years ago

28:50 ...This gets cheap here, an understanding of objectivism discredits such a posturing, but several members of Rand's inner circle cared more about the idea of an objectivist club than it's practical application (especially Barbara Branden).
Rand's idea of selfishness is complex and multifaceted.
Wanting somebody else to be happy for your own reasons, and providing assistance in this can be completely objectivist - selfish and not altruistic.
I find there is a common misconception amongst Randian 'commentators' who seem to have taken the common consensus on her instead of reading her body of work and coming to conclusions based on her own statements (in context).
It's selfish to want the happiness of others: family, friends, neighbors because just as one example, it creates a better environment in which to exist for yourself.
The difference that Rand is promoting: the state can't demand you sacrifice yourself (time, resources etc.), it must be a rational choice on your part. It's not an obligation, you can't be made to do it. The state may only protect the citizens.

Common sense, instead of hyped up emotion, eventually leads to the realization that taking care of your fellow man is necessary for survival in the long term.

Plus there has NEVER been ACTUAL 'laissez-faire' capitalism. Blaming Rand is cheap and distracts from real issues.

Things_are_different
Things_are_different
12 years ago

28:50 ...This gets cheap here, an understanding of objectivism discredits such a posturing, but several members of Rand's inner circle cared more about the idea of an objectivist club than it's practical application (especially Barbara Branden).
Rand's idea of selfishness is complex and multifaceted.
Wanting somebody else to be happy for your own reasons, and providing assistance in this can be completely objectivist - selfish and not altruistic.
I find there is a common misconception amongst Randian 'commentators' who seem to have taken the common consensus on her instead of reading her body of work and coming to conclusions based on her own statements (in context).
It's selfish to want the happiness of others: family, friends, neighbors because just as one example, it creates a better environment in which to exist for yourself.
The difference that Rand is promoting: the state can't demand you sacrifice yourself (time, resources etc.), it must be a rational choice on your part. It's not an obligation, you can't be made to do it. The state may only protect the citizens.

Common sense, instead of hyped up emotion, eventually leads to the realization that taking care of your fellow man is necessary for survival in the long term.

Plus there has NEVER been ACTUAL 'laissez-faire' capitalism. Blaming Rand is cheap and distracts from real issues.

posi x mosh
posi x mosh
12 years ago

Who doesn't read their mail daily? What are we supposed to read it weekly (except the junk of course)? Someone give Adam Curtis a blog on the BBC already! What? He already.... Oh.... Well get him an OBE then...JK JK
I love how Ayn was shocked, shocked I say! ...That a book written from a sociopath perspective would only appeal to sociopaths who, in turn, were too self-involved and self-centered to stick up for her.... Classic!

Daniel Wright
Daniel Wright
12 years ago

Are you a Daily Mail reader perchance?

FreemonSandlewould
FreemonSandlewould
12 years ago

So let me understand this more. This is all a conservative conspiracy that we can use mathematical models to predict nature. That of course brings to mind the Great Global Warming Swindle. But is not that the religion of the left?

FreemonSandlewould
FreemonSandlewould
12 years ago

Why is it liberals who contend to believe in evolution are the ones who reject WE are machines? It would seem they would be the ones who would most easily accept the concept.

We ARE machines. The system consisted of machines - us - before computers and after computers.

I find it a running theme that liberals do not understand machines. They are fundamentally unable to grasp hard sciences in general. They like the soft sciences where it is hard to put a number on something. That allows them to interpret anything any way they like. It for this reason I prefer the machines over liberals.

FreemonSandlewould
FreemonSandlewould
12 years ago

OOoh! the big liberal bugaboo!

Oh how they hate the idea that we can't raise taxes!

FreemonSandlewould
FreemonSandlewould
12 years ago

Its always the "liberals" who aggitate agains replacing government as it is presently constituted!

.... they fear free minds

FreemonSandlewould
FreemonSandlewould
12 years ago

Ayn Rand is the best!

Computers have to be better than the first Affirmative Action Dictator!

Barry the Loser

Brandon Costa
Brandon Costa
12 years ago

Great doc. So if I get this straight a shifty eyed Russian-American philosopher infected Alan Greenspan with her idealist views on objectivism which he implemented into the market thereby spinning the global economic structure out of control?