FReeper Book Club: Atlas Shrugged, The Immovable Movers

A Publius Essay | 7 February 2009 | Publius

[Mom MD]

I fight to give my best exactly because I am ultimately working for Christ, not for who signs my paycheck. Christians are commanded to be salt and light in the world, not to work for perfect employers (and there are none by the way) Having said that, I would do nothing at work that would violate my conscience or bring dishonor to my Lord. What corporation is too evil to work for? I’m afraid that is a matter for personal conscience, but no matter who one works for one can be a light shining in the darkness.

[meyer]

Not even a teenager has shown up. I wondered if they were all being raised in a commune-type brainwashing camp.

Like Public Schools?

[Radix]

Perhaps you might consider the particular book titled “Atlas Shrugged” the next time that you decide to pontificate on a thread that is supposed to be about a book titled “Atlas Shrugged.”

[SuperLuminal]

"What prompts people to not gave a damn about their jobs? Why is there no fear of retribution from management? "

IMHO, this mindset is the clear outcome of a strategy proposed in the late 19th century by the Fabians and finally implemented successfully during the past 40 years. That strategy being to gain control of the Nation's education system as a means to peacefully force socialism on a society.

The steps were clear:

• Create a government education agency that, in effect, eliminates the "public" school system through purse-string management;
  
• Break up the concept of local/neighborhood schools in order to eliminate the student's sense of "community belonging" by black-robed-cleric-ordered busing;
  
• Have the government schools homogenize the thinking of the student population so that no one wants to be seen as being "smarter" than the others;
  
• Staff the government schools with socialist-leaning teachers who have been churned out by the socialist-leaning universities;
• Eliminate all competitive spirit (physically and mentally) in children beginning in kindergarten and reinforce it K-12;
• Allow children to sue their "birth" parents...but not their "real" parent...the government;
• Have the government school system hide, from the "birth" parents, non-essentials such as birth control use, abortions, and, in some cases, sexual assault;
• Continually tell the government's children that their "birth" parents are wrong on the cultural and moral issues that used to be the purview of the "birth" parents;
• Inform "birth" parents that they cannot interfere with the government school social-engineering agenda; and, to make it perpetually worse,
• Have these brain-dead children go on to the socialist-leaning universities, graduate, and come back to the government schools to teach another generation. (Moronic serfs begetting more moronic serfs!)

So....we are seeing the 2nd or 3rd generation of ready-made serfs. No self-respecting serf would care about the job he/she has. In fact, in a socialist society, no serf really cares or worries about the consequences of disagreement with the boss.

When competition is bred out of a society, as has been done in this country for 40+ years: things fail, science crumbles, infrastructure rots, the entire moral fabric decays, and the government ruling class gets stronger and stronger.

So who is John Galt? "Who cares!" is the subliminal response.

[WVNight]

I can definately relate to this. You can probaly figure out why. Innovation is just plain gone now.

[WVNight]

That’s interesting. Of the three that were mentioned in the original post. One company is struggling with poor upper management decisions. One is ran by an egotist surrounded by a never ending line of yes men. One likes to lay claim to being humanistic. While the innovation that it was once famous for is bieng weaned away from the company.

[Tired of Taxes]

Welcome. I first heard about Ayn Rand in an economics college course in the mid-1980’s. When I heard she favored pure, free market capitalism and a laissez-faire government, I became a fan, without knowing much more about her.

In the late ‘90’s, I remember following discussions on atheist forums about Objectivism.

Then, in recent years, I finally watched/listened to an interview with Rand. Some of her comments were disturbing, and now that I’ve read her book, Atlas Shrugged, I can honestly say I’m not a Randian.

But, I agree with you that there is much to learn by reading her work. IMHO, her theories are not original. This book only reaffirms much of what I already knew and believed, but I’m glad she put it in writing. I disagree with a small bit of what she puts forth; then again, no one agrees with anyone 100%.

[Bob]

Easy - for all their good, they have done bad. Boeing supplies weapons that kill, Dupont has supplied materials used in war, Dow has killed people through faulty safety precautions.

So, supplying our military with weapons is somehow a bad thing to you?

As far as I'm concerned, doing that is a good thing. If it weren't for the efforts of Boeing and Dupont supplying our military during WWII, we wouldn't be communicating right now, since you'd be speaking German and I'd be speaking Japanese.

BTW, if you're referring to the Bhopal incident, that was caused by a subsidiary of Union Carbide rather than Dow.

[Tired of Taxes]

The chief problems I had with this otherwise delightful and empowering work was it's notable lack of crowds and children.... almost never are there any children in the book, except in flashbacks to Dagny's youth, etc.

I noticed the same, as I was reading the book. I don't want to spoil the story by talking about if and when children are mentioned as the story continues. (Others here have not read the book completely.) But, even at this chapter, I was wondering about children.

My thinking was: Rand didn't have children, did she? Children are important to me, and they probably would play a prominent role in a story I wrote, if I were a writer, because I'm a parent. But, when I was single, I didn't think much about children, either, and I probably would not have placed them prominently in a story, if I'd written one at that time. So, I suspect Rand is writing from that point of view, as someone who isn't a parent.

But, this question about children extends deeper, and it brings me to question something Rand puts forth later. But, I'm waiting for later chapters before bringing it up. I don't want to spoil the story for anyone.

[CottonBall]

Exactly like public schools - but more like boarding schools where they can’t go home to be reeducated by their parents.

[Tired of Taxes]

When nationalization occurred, Jim took credit for Dagny’s quick thinking, then delegated the blame for his own failures to two fall guys who were summarily fired. Is this any different from what happens today in the offices of America’s largest corporations?

Nope! At this point in the story, I remembered all the similar situations I'd encountered in workplaces.

What does this say about the current state of American business?

Too many employees are looking out for themselves, with little to no consideration for their employer nor the quality of their work. A job well done is not their top priority. The appearance of doing a good job is what's most important to them. Jim Taggart represents many executives and employees in management positions.

According to my last employer, "it's hard to find good people." I can relate to this story about a railroad. I worked for an airline, and later I worked for a family-owned business in the travel industry. At this point in the story, I found myself relating most to Eddie Willers (however, I'm female). In my last position, my employer was the woman who truly ran the company, even though officially she was second in command, just like Dagny. I was her trusted assistant for years. Most of the other employees at that company were good, too, but there were times when they were dishonest, passing the blame, like Jim Taggart.

[patj]

I struggle with contributing any worthwhile substance to this discussion. I have never done well with symbolism. Give it to me straight, say what you mean, mean what you say, don't dress it up in unnecessary verbage. That being said, and referring to the rusted engine, as someone has pointed out, is representative of letting good ideas die. Or, maybe, no good deed goes unpunished.

I remember reading of someone being in a restaurant in the old Soviet Union and waiting to be served while waitresses stood around and talked. They were going to get paid anyway, why work. Also, while working summer jobs, I worked for our city. Everyone there was there because of who they knew, everyone figured they couldn't be fired because of who they knew. Very inefficient people. Others I knew worked summers in union jobsites and were told, "Don't work so hard, do you want to make us look bad?". I think of all this when I read this book because hard work, chance taking, innovation that should be admired is punished and risk-avoidance, little effort and laziness is rewarded. I find it hard to read this book for great lengths of time because it sounds so much like what is going on around us, that it becomes an overload, and I need to get away from it for awhile.

[SoftballMominVA]

Look, you and others are reading way, WAY too much into my comment. This thread is not a referendum on Dow or Dupont, it is a discussion on the book Atlas Shrugged. The question asked concerned why people didn’t seem to give a damn and I am trying to enter the idea that they don’t believe in what they are doing and are just there for a paycheck - that perhaps something in the back of their minds sees what they are doing as antithical to their moral conscience. I could have said McDonalds or Google or GE and made the same point but I went with the easier defense contractors.

This thread is about Atlas Shrugged not about your feelings as to whether or not I offended you, or whether they have done ‘good’ somewhere in there past - which I have twice offered as a given.

My question still is on the table — Is the reason some people do not appear to care about their jobs because somewhere they feel their corporation does ‘bad’ and therefore they are just getting a paycheck and at what point do you bow out?

[SoftballMominVA]

As far as children go.....I wonder if it is a sign of the times in which the book was written. For better or worse, we are now a child-centered society. I doubt that any major piece of literature could come out of our time period without at least significant mention of children or pets as a stand-in for children.

Notice this book also mentions very very little of anything of a soft, cuddly nature. No one is mentioned as having a pet or of anything gentle. There are adults that do the stand in for children, and they are there for us to ridicule

I think Ayn purposely leaves out any type of tenderness or presents it in only the most adult of lights also because this is an adult book - it is not there to evoke smiles or light moments brought on by big eyes and cute expressions. Without ruining the book for those that havent finished it, there will be moments coming that one will really scratch their heads at the lack of mention of children and I think it is partly deliberate and partly a result of the adult centered society in which the book was written.

[M Kehoe]

$

5.56mm

[florida grl]

Could you add me to your ping list? I’m reading this book now and these discussions are helping me get more out it.
Thanks

[gracie1]

Another point that I’d like to bring up is when Dagney is walking through NYC.

The meaningless symphony that is playing. Now I realize that personal tastes vary greatly, but much of what passes for “art” these days is pointless, destructive, empty and celebrates the vile and vulgar. I can’t remember if is Alinskys Rules for Radicals, or if it was the oft quoted list tasks to achieve a communist takeover of the US that had as one of its tenants the destruction of art as an expresssion of the beauty in life.

Next is the novel that denigrates the greed of the businessman. The popular culture currently elevates the trait of altruism. Now as a Christian, we are obliged to tend to the basic needs of those who are truly helpless. That is what Christian charity is about. Secular altruism/charity is quite another thing. Secular altruism is the confiscation of what is mine to those someone else has deemed worthy (usually a member of a protected victim class). We see this in the countless “human interest stories” in the newspapers. The most outrageous one I’ve seen lately was the one in a Detroit paper about the 28 year old woman with 10 kids, and all of the difficulties she encounters.

The next item is the trivial movie playing in the theater. Now I enjoy theatrical escapism as much as the next person, but again like the music playing from the radio, much of popular culture today is either vapid or destructive.

They man and the woman staggering from the nightclub represent how people, when confronted with such a meaningless existence, simply resort to feeding their fleeting appetites, no matter vulgar or self-destructive.

[Publius]

Excellent work!

[gracie1]

The competition of the railroads you discussed brought something else to mind. The railroads represent an older technology. The auto, the truck and the highway represent new innovation. People and businesses no longer had to rely on the railroads, with there schedules and fixed system of tracks. Travel was now at the convenience of the shipper, the traveler, the businessman. I can get up and go anywhere I want, whenever I want thanks to the interstate highway system. The railroads had to go through an agonizing restructuring lasting decades to return to a profitable business model.

Compare this to our system to transporting something even more important, ideas. The old system was the print media and the broadcast establishment. They alone decided what was reported on, how it was reported, and how it was disseminated. Enter first talk radio, and now the internet with the blogosphere. No longer are we dependent on ABC news, the NY Times. We are free to report, opine upon, discuss and disseminate ideas as we all see fit. It is truly the free market place of ideas. And the old media is facing the same fate the railroads faced in the mid 20th century. Either face the competition, find a niche and compete as best you can, or face destruction. That is why the next battleground will be free speech. Shutting down talk radio, then regulating the internet.

[Radix]

"I remember reading of someone being in a restaurant in the old Soviet Union and waiting to be served while waitresses stood around and talked."

When I was in the Army overseas, I spent a month or so as an "Augmentee" for the APO. I was assigned to the "Locater" area. We forwarded mail to Military who had PCSd.

I never before witnessed such a slovenly group of Troopers in my entire Enlistment period. A bunch of layabouts with the cushiest MOS I'd ever imagined. I could not believe my own eyes at was going on there.

After the Christmas Season was over, I went back to my own Unit. I was told later that Company was attempting to get me reassigned to the APO permanently. It was tempting, but I declined. Apparently the vast majority of "Augmentees" were chomping at the bit to get such an EZ assignment.

My point is, human beings do things because of their diverse interests. People are indolent generally because of their upbringing or their individual level of intelligence. IMHO!

A person (people) does themselves a favor by at least attempting to assimilate the symbolism of a great work.

In the world that you seem to prefer, there would be no such things as Pi and the wheel would never have been invented.

I do not intend to seem insulting, I am simply intrigued by your expressed lack of interest in the sublime.