In discussions with most Libertarians (that I have personally encountered, especially of the Ron Paul ilk here in Oklahoma), the conversation inevitably always leads to an urging for me and other like-minded individuals to, “read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged.” As though this epic book’s airtight logic will somehow magically turn us “collectivist moochers” and other “non-producers” into Austrian-economics and virtue-of-selfishness loving radical individualists who will instantly see the error of our ways immediately upon cracking into its 1069 pages (paperback 35th anniv edition).
I attempt to be an intellectually virtuous person (even though I fail miserably at times, as do we all). To me intellectual virtue means truly making an honest effort to grapple with the ideas presented by people you currently disagree with strongly. It means trying to see things through others’ eyes and honestly wrestling with the ideas that other people find so persuasive. Therefore, after years of resistance, I have decided to take these people’s urgings seriously and just read the damned* book and get it over with. [*]And when I say read the damned book, I mean the word literally, in the sense that C.S. Lewis used the word damned in Mere Christianity not as frivolous swearing but instead to refer to a philosophy or idea that is “damned … under God’s curse, and will (apart from God’s grace) lead those who believe it to eternal death.” †
Yes, I believe that Ayn Rand’s Objectivist “philosophy” and her elevation of the “virtue” of selfishness due to a rejection of her straw-man made up definition of altruism (that she basically invented and pulled out of her ass) is rotten to its core. I have made no attempts to hide the fact that I am a Christian. However, as rotten philosophies go, Objectivism is not only internally inconsistent, but it is evil from a secular humanist perspective as well. One can reject the existence of evil outright (I do not, but that is a discussion for another day), but Objectivist principles are also inconsistent with principles of compassion and human mercy, which many atheists and secular humanists embrace wholeheartedly. [And as a side note, I embrace atheists and secular humanists wholeheartedly, as many of them are some of the most well-rounded, caring, intelligent, and generally awesome people I know. And YES, atheists can be moral - just not Ayn Rand (likewise, believers in God(s) can be VERY immoral)]
The Libertarian will respond, “No the principles of compassion and human mercy are not inconsistent with Objectivist ideas and the Virtue of Selfishness because in our perfect Libertarian Utopian society there will be basically no want. There will be virtually no poor. If there are any needs to be met, the poor will be taken care of by private, non-coercive, charity… out of the goodness of those private actors’ hearts. This is simply how the truly unregulated free market works. Oh, and P.S. all taxes are coercive aggressive theft.”
Did you think that Libertarians were just about limited government, deregulation, and little to no taxes? Nope. Modern Libertarians base their entire worldview around a bedrock principle, set in stone, as though written by the hand of God (or some immutable “natural law”), of what they call the “Non-Aggression Principle” or NAP. Read up on it. There may be a test 
Anyway, back to my quest to read Atlas Shrugged. I imagine it will take me quite a few weeks or months as I tend to abandon books as quickly as I start them. However, I have to admit that after the first 30 pages or so of sub-par writing I’m a little intrigued. Perhaps bad writing appeals to me. I am already familiar with the entire basic plot of the book, just not the specifics. There are a few plot points I’m already speculating on, such as who (or what multiple people) Dagny Taggart is going to end up hooking up with / getting raped by. At this super-early stage I’m voting for either Hank Rearden or the young brakeman on the train who knew of Halley’s Fifth unpublished Concerto (Is the young brakeman Richard Halley? Is he a relative or Halley? Oooh… the plot thickens). OR… will Dagny hook up with John Galt? I mean, Who Is John Galt, after all? Why ask questions there are no answers for?
Or will Dagny hook up with / marry 3 different guys like Dominique Francon does in The Fountainhead? Oh, but wait, only the man Dominique is TRULY an equal with (Howard Roark) gets the honor of raping her in the violent sense (excluding the regular marital rape that goes on throughout the book with her other two husbands)… Er, I mean, she gives herself willingly to Roark, a complete stranger at the time, willingly in a violent way when he breaks into her room at night and has rough forceful sex with her simply because “she likes it rough.” Yeah. That’s it. Not rape at all. Not marital rape. Roark’s breaking and entering does not equal rape in the least either. Rand definitely does not glorify rape in her novels. </extreme sarcasm>
Yes, I have already read The Fountainhead in full.
In the first 30-ish pages alone of Atlas Shrugged I have highlighted some of the most ridiculous dialogue ever (“Jim, I studied engineering in college. When I see things, I see them.”) But perhaps I’ll save it for another blog post and get back to my trashy romance novel. I’m trying to be fair. The book is moderately entertaining so far. I’ll give her that!
I’ll try to blog sporadically through the book under the category “Shrugging Atlas”. I think my next post may be just a listing of some of the more ridiculous quotes from the book I have encountered thus far.
Full disclosure: If you couldn’t tell from the entire prior post, I am incredibly biased. This is why I am reading Atlas Shrugged in the first place – to see what all the effing fuss is about. In fact, my bias against Rand’s philosophy runs so deep that it can almost be entirely summed up in this GQ article from a few months back: The Bitch is Back. The entire 6-page article (mostly about ARA’s – Ayn Rand a-holes who never outgrow the “Ayn Rand stage” that most young college kids go through… much like lip rings or purple hair) is well worth your 20 minutes to read, but if you skip to the 6th page and start with the FU’s, in a moment of brutal honesty I’ll tell you that those words just about entirely sum up my personal feelings on Ms. Rand.
Now bring on the trolls!!!
____________________________________________________________________________
† Full text of C.S. Lewis’ Mere Christianity – http://lib.ru/LEWISCL/mere_engl.txt
December 31, 2009 at 8:29 am
I have to admit that I sort of enjoyed Atlas. It’s bad writing, sure. And about 700 pages too long. But I stayed interested in it throughout (except through a 30+ page speech towards the end). It sort of seemed cinematic to me. I could sort of envision the movie (or at least a mini-series) playing out as I read.
And I don’t even have that big of a problem with her ideas, her philosophy. Ideas can be supported or refuted and then accepted or rejected. And it’s kind of admirable, if tedious, how she lays those ideas out in a 1000+ novel.
I don’t know. I don’t have a problem with Ayn Rand or her book. I just have a problem with how some people behave in reaction to her and her writings. Then again, I’m kind of suspicious of any personality or book that is taken for gospel.
December 31, 2009 at 3:19 pm
Hey, the speech toward the end is around 60 pages in my version of the book. Bring it!
I pretty much agree with everything you’ve said here regarding the cinematic nature of the book (I’ve enjoyed the first 30 pages), and that it is admirable how Rand is able to lay out her ideas in the form of a novel (excepting the speech at the end). She was clearly a brilliant human being who made some very astute observations about the world. There is a great deal to be admired about her work. In reading her nonfiction and watching interviews with her, I do find quite a bit that I agree with… However, it is her main thesis, the crux of her entire worldview and philosophy, that I find fault with.
I agree with this. But unfortunately in this case, those “some people” include the likes of Glenn Beck (who has quoted from Atlas on his show), Rush Limbaugh, Alex Jones, Ron Paul, most of the modern-day “tea party” crowd, and paranoid conspiracy theorists innumerable (Timothy McVeigh was a fan, for one: http://www.esquire.com/ESQ0501-MAY_MCVEIGH – note the “Have you ever read Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged?” letter. There is other evidence of McVeigh’s admiration for Rand elsewhere on the web).
Rand’s philosophy gives people a superiority complex, as she believed that those who disagreed with her philosophy were not just wrong, but stupid, inferior, and basically unfit to even live. She implies her disdain for the idiotic “mooching” masses in her novels, and she stated it explicitly in videotaped interviews. Her books and philosophy are taken as gospel by many people right now, and they will forcefully argue with you in the most condescending way imaginable. I don’t think all of it can be accounted for by these people’s individual personalities… the condescension and arrogance is inherent in Rand’s core philosophy itself. That’s the problem.
Just my $.02
December 31, 2009 at 8:41 am
Oh, and I’m kind of intrigued by the “damned” usage. I’m somewhat taken aback by the notion that a belief in certain ideas or philosophies would lead to “eternal death.” I’m not offended or anything–an eternal death is just an oxymoron to me. I guess it’s just such a foreign concept to me that I was surprised by it that’s all.
December 31, 2009 at 3:36 pm
I can understand why one would be intrigued by that comment. You’re absolutely right that “eternal death” is an oxymoron from the perspective of philosophical materialism. It only makes sense in a theological or spiritual context.
I wrote that particular statement intentionally for a specific audience who I assume already accepts a form of spirituality. I know this is likely due to the demographics of my particular location in the country, but 95% of Rand’s philosophical adherents I have personally encountered have been self-professing Christians. That is who the comment was written for. Yes, I know I’m making assumptions, but I have personally encountered a lot of professed Christians who love Ayn Rand.