Reflections on Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged

Reflections on Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged

Review: January 8, 2013

Dr. Joe Alain

Atlas fainted! Ok, Atlas didn’t faint, but I almost did a few times as I spent many an evening and morning wading through Ayn Rand’s massive 1168 page work, Atlas Shrugged. This makes my last two reads over 1,000 pages. I think my next book will be something light, maybe the Avengers VS X-Men or perhaps some Max Lucado.

Atlas Shrugged is a novel, but don’t let that fool you, this is a philosophy book written in the form of a novel. This is both a strength and a weakness. A strength in that Rand flesh’s out her philosophy (known as "Objectivism") through a number of characters in the book. This however is a weakness at times because you get the feeling that she’s trying to say a little bit too much through the characters. It’s a little trying at times to imagine that every industrialist is as pure (philosophically) and thoughtful as Rand makes them out to be. Similarly, every altruistic person in the novel is thoroughly depraved. This makes her "heroic" characters come off as a little "preachy." This is especially true in John Galt’s radio address (I would call it a "sermon" or "manifesto") near the end of the book.

Admittedly, Ayn Rand was no Christian and at times she openly mocked Christianity, proclaiming it anathema to reason. So what compelled me to read this book by a noted atheist? First, aside from Rand’s name popping up in discussions with one of my favorite bands, Rush, her philosophy has been associated regularly with conservative Republicans and Independents the last few years, for example, Congressman Paul Ryan and Senator Rand Paul. Ryan, the once GOP Vice Presidential nominee even called Rand’s works the inspiration for his government career. Second, I’m one of those individuals that actually enjoys reading theology and philosophy, so knowing that this was a work of philosophy sparked my interest.

Essentially, in Atlas Shrugged there is the epic struggle between the people who produce (the people of reason, the people of mind) and those who spend their days trying to figure out how to obtain what the thinkers have produced (sound familiar?). Rand calls the latter group appropriately, the "looters." By the way, the looters are the ones in the story who live conflicted, miserable, fake lives. The heroes in the story are the industrialists who produce what their minds have conceived, they make the world as we know it work, they are the ones who are virtuous because they live their lives consistently by reason, the mind.

Led by the mysterious figure John Galt ("Who is John Galt," the question repeatedly asked throughout the book), the industrialists of the nation decide that the only way to defeat the looters (the government sanctioned system of plundering the producers) is to deprive them of further loot; thus they go on strike, a strike of the mind. What happens when the thinking people, the people who are the motor of the world, go on strike? Atlas shrugs! And the consequences are devastating for the looters soon realize they need the people of the mind. However, the thinkers will only come back on their terms, terms that will prove to be unacceptable to the looters; thus, hastening the society’s demise and preparing the country to once again accept the industrialists on their terms. "Whew!" I did say it was 1168 pages didn’t I?

There are many things that Rand says that make perfect logical sense, especially some of her thoughts on limited government, capitalism, and the freedom of the individual. For example, one of her characters Dr. Askton makes a profound statement concerning the nature of the world that we chose to live in. He says, "Every man builds his world in his own image. He has the power to chose, but no power to escape the necessity of choice. If he abdicates his power, he abdicates the status of man, and the grinding chaos of the irrational is what he achieves as his sphere of existence – by his own choice" (791). This is brilliant and theologically correct! To live in a rational (and I would add God-centered) world is a choice. In refusing to choose, you still have made a choice.

The dystopian setting of the novel is eerily prophetic. What happens if the people who invent, who produce go on strike, a strike of the mind? What happens to a society when that which is produced is plundered? And what happens when a government sanctions the looting through regulation? A society that exalts mediocrity will soon despise everyone and everything that is excellent. Likewise, a society cannot last long when looters with government sanction plunder the productive, the people of thinking. Similarly, there is a warning to any state, you cannot force men of the mind to produce at the point of a gun to continue producing for the looters. I found Rand’s argument on why governments make endless and restrictive laws insightful.

Of course, there are many criticisms that I have both of the book and its philosophy. Rand’s insistence on the ethic of self interest as the human goal and her rejection of altruism oppose the very basic tenants of the Christian faith. This is why some prominent conservatives who are Christian have cautioned against adopting Rand’s philosophy. The late Charles Colson denounced Rand’s philosophy warning his fellow Republicans saying, "It’s hard to imagine a world view more antithetical to Christianity."

Even Rand’s economic views would be considered extreme by many conservative Christians who take seriously the call to follow Jesus and to live sacrificially, a term and concept that Rand abhorred. Cynthia Tucker writes, "In Rand’s philosophy, the brilliant, the well-born and the lucky have no obligation to the struggling stiffs whose jobs don’t guarantee riches. Indeed she believed altruism was foolish." The title to one of her works, "The Virtue of Selfishness" pretty much sums up her philosophy.

Rand’s most distasteful anti-Christian views are on full display in the chapter where John Galt addresses the nation. It is in this chapter that the virtue of selfishness is fully explored as well as Rand’s rejection of the idea of sacrifice. For Rand, production and wealth is the barometer of a society’s virtue, not how people treat one another. Reason and logic are the utmost guides to man. According to Rand, faith, compassion, altruism, all of these are weaknesses and lead to the death of man and society.

As mentioned, the book is massive in length, about 500 pages too long in my estimation. The plot develops slowly and the real action unfolds in the last fourth of the book. Rand’s writing has been criticized at times as being not unlike a bad romance novel and this style does come through occasionally. This is especially prominent when Rand’s female hero Dagny Taggart (one wonders if this is not Rand herself personified) has an affair with each of the three heroic men of the story, Francisco d’ Anconia, Hank Rearden, and eventually John Galt himself. But even in these mild scenes, philosophy is being taught. Interestingly, when the looters who lack virtue make love, it’s portrayed merely as animal lustful passion. However, when the heroes of Atlas Shrugged make love, it’s always seen as pure and virtuous, no matter the fact that in every instance each person is married to someone else and they are committing adultery. However, in Rand’s thinking there is no contradiction here because her characters are living by their own standard, their own ethic, the virtue of selfishness.

While we may glean some helpful material from Rand’s works in making a case for limited government, capitalism, and the freedom of the individual, Christians would do well to read her works and her philosophy in light of Scripture and our Lord who lived a life that was antithetical to selfishness, and who commands his followers to do the same. "For the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many" (Mk. 10:45). And "As the Father has sent me, I am sending you (Jn. 20:21).