“Atlas Shrugged” Review: Is Ayn Rand Still Relevant?  

“Who is John Gault?” That’s just one of the questions asked and answered by Ayn Rand’s novel Atlas Shrugged. The others are these: What drives the motor of the world? What if the people who propel the world forward – the capitalist, creators, inventors, artist, and others – go on strike? What happens when the government is taken over by socialist and social justice warriors? 

Ayn Rand was a philosopher and writer. She’s best known for Atlas Shrugged, which is one of the most influential books in U.S. history. It’s impactful because it’s challenging. The challenge is not only it’s breadth and numerous storylines, but because it’s a work of philosophy. The book makes us think. 

The layers of the Atlas Shrugged onion are complex. While there are obvious heroes and villains, the good guys are flawed. Another complexity is that Rand seems to have blinders for some obvious faults in her philosophy of objectivism. Those weaknesses serve a greater purpose as we seek to evaluate if Atlas Shrugged is still relevant.

The Story 

Atlas Shrugged is a work of fiction, but its philosophical underpinnings are where it shines. The story is set in a dystopian version of the United States. The economy is crumbling, the Constitution is long gone, and the ruling party controls all aspects of social, economic, and administrative life. It’s in this setting that Rand sets the stage for a showdown between the heroes and villains. 

For Rand, the heroes are the producers. They are the men of the mind who create jobs, wealth, and opportunity. They are the ones responsible for advancing humanity. The bad guys are the government bureaucrats, those leading labor strikes, those running their businesses into the ground so they can get a pat on the back from the other elites. They are parasites seeking to destroy what the “producers” have created. 

Story lines abound, but the main one involves the Taggart Transcontinental Railroad operated by Dagny Taggart and her feckless brother, Jim. Dagny Taggart is one of the good guys. She’s charged with saving her family railroad, Taggart Transcontinental. She’s rational, hardworking, and cool under pressure. Dagny embodies the free market capitalism. Her brother, Jim, is an awful excuse of a man and is constantly making poor decisions that are driving the company into the ground. Throughout much of the book, Dagny is engaged in a contest to save the company by applying capitalist principles and battling forces that promote the nationalization of the railroads.

Enter Hank Reardon. Hank is a steel magnate who has developed a lighter, stronger steel that has the capacity to revolutionize the railroad industry. The relationship between Dagny and Hank is as hot as freshly poured steel, but it’s also a business relationship. Dagny uses Rearden Metal to help build new railroads. When Rearden refuses to sell his steel to the government, the State Science Institute blacklists Rearden Metal, calling it dangerous without citing reasons. As a result, many companies and people boycott Taggart Transcendental, but Dagny has other plans. 

Throughout the first sections of the book, a reoccurring question is presented in various forms: “Who is John Galt?” Alongside this question is a conspicuous disappearing of business leaders from various fields. As the novel unfolds, it become clear that a mystery man named John Galt has encouraged the “producers” of the world to strike. The men and women who create jobs, wealth, prosperity, and advancements simply disappear. 

Ayn Rand’s Virtues

Atlas Shrugged is loaded with “virtues” Rand wishes to convey to her readers. These five are central to her message and help demonstrate the type of philosophy underpinning the novel. 

1. Rand states the case against socialism better than anyone. She came from communist regime and understood not only what it is, but how it emerges. By demonstrating what happens when governments are controlled by an “elite” group of puppet masters, she shows the ills of a government by design and command economies. When a dictator or group of oligarchs are pulling all the levers of society, the society will not endure. Atlas Shrugged shows the dangers of nationalizing industry, bureaucratic departments, do-gooder social causes, and how power corrupts. In doing so, Rand proves the virtues of capitalism. 
2. Atlas Shrugged extolls the virtues of selfishness and rugged self-reliance.
3. The book engages in a different notion of justice than is popular today. For Rand, the scales of justice feature the producers on one side and the parasites on the other. In today’s vernacular, the workers v. the freeloaders. 
4. Liberty – the ability of the individual to make decisions – is at the forefront. Each of us should have the freedom to make our own choices, define our own destiny. If we are all honest about what we want and free to make those selections, then we’ll all get along much better. 
5. Logic reigns paramount in Rand’s world. It’s hard to argue with certain truths: the harder you work, the more you should make; individuals know better than governments what they need; better quality of life (money, better goods and services) is a strong motivator. Every part of her theory is logical.

To be sure, Rand hammers home dozens of other ideas, or virtues as she calls them. These are just the most obvious. 

Virtue’s Limits

For all its glory, Atlas Shrugged has its shortcomings. Foremost is the fact that Rand is an atheist. It’s hard to understand how someone as gifted as Rand could fail to know the world is not random, but she did. Her faith is placed in man, not God, which forces her to assume the behavior of people, when done honestly, will create a moral code. The problem with this assumption is that people are not the same, and many are certainly not honest. This egoistic philosophical bent clouds her writing and philosophy, but not enough to distract from her central tenants. 

The problem presents itself most regularly in the assumption that competition and money always lead to good. Central to the book is an affair between two of the main characters, and other instances of less than honorable behavior by the heroes and heroines. Most troubling, however, is the total disregard for how money can corrupt. In the book the need for social approval and collectivism corrupts the villains, but she doesn’t acknowledge how money can do the same.

Additionally, critics have long described some characters as “cold” or “heartless”. Money might drive intentions and logical decision making, but at times purely logical decisions can produce harsh results. As readers, it’s easy to buy into Rand’s hook so intensely that we ignore the Darwinian nature of Rand’s characters – that’s to say we ignore that fact that humans are driven by more than instinct and logic. People can make logical decisions, but most are also influenced by love, anger, pity, and other emotions. In Rand’s world, there is little room for emotion. It’s hard to know if she knows it or not, but Rand reveals a dark side of capitalism, too.

Is Ayn Rand and Atlas Shrugged still relevant? Yes, unequivocally. Conservatives may not love her philosophy, but there is great value in considering Rand’s logic. Asking the questions of ourselves is essential to understanding what we believe. Moreover, Rand shares the same enemies as all conservatives, so that makes her a welcomed ally in the battle for good. Few people have made a better case for capitalism than Rand. For that, she deserves our continued appreciation. 

BUY NOW