On Rereading "Atlas Shrugged"

1957 | Ayn Rand

[GoodDay]

Despite a number of differences I have with Ayn Rand on issues of religion and philosophy, her 1957 magnum opus, "Atlas Shrugged," definitely steered me away from the leftist upbringing I had, and introduced me to the world of conservative ideas and authors: Ludwig von Mises, Henry Hazlitt, Milton Friedman, Isabel Paterson, and many others.

Universally panned by literary critics of the day, "Atlas" was, nevertheless, a bestseller in 1957, and continued to sell about 100,000 copies a year for 51 consecutive years. 52 years later -- just after the inauguration of zerobama -- "Atlas" has apparently tripled its sales and has been flying off the shelves at bookstores.

For those who have never read it, "Atlas Shrugged" -- originally titled in its draft form "The Strike" -- is about a mixed-economy United States falling rapidly into full-fledged socialism. As it does so, all the highly competent people of individual accomplishment -- in business, science, and the arts -- mysteriously start to resign their positions, quit their jobs...and disappear. Naturally, the disappearance of these achievers -- these "Atlases" whose productivity carries the rest of the world -- causes the crash of the economy and society in general to occur ever more rapidly. Why these people are disappearing and where they are going is the core of the plot...which I certainly won't give away. Love her style of writing or hate it, "Atlas Shrugged" is relevant and essential reading today.

I read it twice in rapid succession in high school, lo these many years, and am now rereading it in light of the aggressive attempts at a socialist coup in our country. There's a passage toward the beginning of the novel that flabbergasted me, since it predicts with great accuracy the "bailout mentality" started by Bush and continued and augmented under zerobama. The passage also describes how industry is complicit with government in its own regulation and what it expects to gain from it (i.e., protection from competition).

The scene has to do with attempts to regulate the railroads, an industry that plays a starring dramatic role in the novel, as well as being an effective visual metaphor for goal-oriented achievement in general.

Here is an excerpt of Miss Rand's description of the regulation from "Atlas Shrugged":

__________________________________________________

"The proposal which they passed was known as the 'Anti-dog-eat-dog Rule.' When they voted for it, the members of the National Alliance of Railroads sat in a large hall in the deepending twilight of a late autumn evening and did not look at one another . . .

. . . No railroad was mentioned by name in the speeches that preceded the voting. The speeches dealt only with the public welfare. It was said that while the public welfare was threatened by shortages of transportation, railroads were destroying one another through vicious competition, on 'the brutal policy of dog-eat-dog.' While there existed blighted areas where rail service had been discontinued, there existed at the same time, large regions where two or more railroads were competing for a traffic barely sufficient for one. It was said that there were great opportunities for younger railroads in the blighted areas. While it was true that such areas offered little economic incentive at present, a public-spirited railroad, it was said, would undertake to provide transportation for the struggling inhabitants, since the prime purpose of a railroad was public service, not profit.

Then it was said that large, established railroad systems were essential to the public welfare; and that the collapse of one of them would be a national catastrophe; and that if one such system had happened to sustain a crushing loss in a public-spirited attempt to contribute to international good will, it was entitled to public support to help it survive the blow . . .

. . . The Anti-dog-eat-dog-Rule was described as a measure of 'voluntary self-regulation' intended 'the better to enforce' the laws long since passed by the country's Legislature. The Rule provided that the members of the National Alliance of Railroads were forbidden to engage in practices defined as 'destructive competition'; that in regions declared to be restricted, no more than one railroad would be permitted to operate; that in such regions, seniority belonged to the oldest railroad now operating there, and that the newcomers, who had encroached unfairly upon its territory, would suspend operations within nine months after being so ordered; that the Executive Board of the National Alliance of Railroads was empowered to decide, at its sole discretion, which regions were to be restricted . . ."

[kgrif_Salinas]

Just finished reading Atlas. I agree with Rand on many issues - politics, econ, sex - but disagree on religion. Rand let’s her atheism get in the way. I guess I am a Christian Objectivist. Reason/mind are not incompatible with religion. I think too many people think if you believe in God, you need to stop thinking. God gave us reason/mind as a gift to use. I believe the more you use reason and your mind, the more you are drawn to God.

[the invisib1e hand]

God gave us reason/mind as a gift to use. I believe the more you use reason and your mind, the more you are drawn to God.

If I may say, you're on the right track here. Denying God leads to bizarre contradictions. For example, Rand's hero is quite messianic and the entire story is something of a mini bible story, what with the slothful man undermining the virtuous who wind up being swept a way to a place prepared for them by the hero, etc. etc.

That book, nonetheless, absolutely jarred me from the mindless leftwing fog I dwelt in before having the sense to quit college.

I prefer to think of the mind, of reason, of the imagination, etc. as weapons as much as gifts. But whatever they are, we're made in His image, which is pretty incredible and exciting.

[ThirdMate]

bump for later