Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand is probably one of the few books that truly shaped me. If I had to describe what it was about, I’d say that it’s about evil. The most repugnant, vile, purest form of evil.
The premise of the book is that socialism/communism has taken root in the world and that corruption and redistribution of wealth from the able industrialists to “looters.” Looters is basically the term she uses in the novel for moochers. The more power these looters get, and the more decrees, taxes and directives they pass, the worse the economy starts to perform and successful businessmen start to go bankrupt. There’s also the aspect of corruption: Lesser businessmen conspire with these socialists to make profits.
The answer Ayn Rand provides is so simple yet brilliant. All the capable men; industrialists, inventors, grease monkeys, doctors people of any profession who have mastered their art go on strike. They simply stop working or outright disappear.
The novel and fascinating part is that the factions affected by the strike are reversed to a degree. A strike is usually associated with workers i.e. people who do hard, menial labor ceasing their work and not the industrialists or the inventors. It also shows us who are replaceable and who are not. Pretty much anyone can press buttons, use a hammer or carry the goods. But can everyone invent? There was a great line in the novel about the invention of the wheel that I never really thought about. If the wheel hadn’t invented, we would have had trouble carrying all the stuff. But what really made me wonder was what kind of a brilliant person had invented the wheel and whether I could have come up with that idea if I were living either in those times or in the present that didn’t have a wheel. Honestly, I don’t think that I could have come up with something like that. So perhaps I am and probably many of us are taking this invention for granted.
Looking at the U.S. or European countries with a flavor of socialism like Germany I wonder: What’s the price of your life? What’s the price you are willing to pay for healthcare? Is the U.S. system too unfair for the average Joe? Or is the German system that provides rudimentary healthcare for a fixed price unfair to a doctor? After all, a doctor has to be someone of above average intellect to study the human body, recognize patterns, and have to train for almost a decade, pass several exams and work at abysmal shifts in a hospital. Not to mention the enormous responsibility they carry for human life. So, what’s the price of your one and only life? I think many people take the healthcare service for granted.
We also hear the villains talk about morals. That the strong owe something to the weak and not the other way around. In the book we hear (unsuccessful) philosophers and sociologists devise such ideas. If we take a look at the present, we see the same ideas purported by the same crowd. Journalists, philosophers, sociologists and career politicians. They all have one thing in common: They haven’t produced anything worthwhile.
A career politician is usually someone who lives off taxpayer’s money with the urge to regulate i.e. limit freedoms. If a politician had such outstanding ideas, why wouldn’t he apply them in a way that would benefit him or his business? Is he driven by altruism or is he driven by the feeling of exercising power to limit other’s freedom? Or perhaps he only wants to pass legislation with the hope of getting a kickback.
A journalist is nowadays someone who paraphrases the reports of news agencies or makes a report of who said what on social media. We also see that journalists aren’t capable of just reporting. They have to shoehorn their own worldview either by framing, agenda picking or writing opinion pieces. In 2023, the population enjoy a much higher level of education and thanks to the internet and social media, we can be informed even before journalists. So yes, they aren’t as valuable as they (may) were before.
The same applies to philosophers and sociologists. What was the last groundbreaking idea a philosopher had presented? And more importantly, did a philosopher make a suggestion that was applied and solved a hard problem? No. When it comes to sociologists, I’d like to differentiate between those who try to use statistics to at least try to make a scientific prediction and those who merely come up with theories. Among others, stuff like “critical whiteness”. Things that defy common sense and would only fail if they were applied. In that sense, I’m both terrified that nothing has changed since the times Atlas Shrugged was written and relieved that we know without a fail who spreads this dangerous nonsense.
A funny “prediction” was the character Emma Chalmers and her soybeans. It’s amazing how Ayn Rand foresaw the soyboys.
If I had to criticize the novel, I’d say the prolixity is a problem. Especially John Galt’s speech was way too long. Oh and why is Dagny such a slut? She went from Francisco to Hank and then to John. And all the men were completely fine with it I guess. Except maybe Hank not having heard of Dagny spreading her legs for John. Nevertheless, that’s not the important part. The important part was to put the evil on display. And that’s what Ayn Rand succeeded to do. Whether you agree with her views or not (and I don’t agree with everything she says) is up to you.