|
I'm reading the book right now. I'm almost finished with the first book (I believe there are three or four in all). I like to read Ayn Rand. I've read The Fountainhead and We the Living. So far my favorite is The Fountainhead.
WRT Atlas shrugged: I think that the expression "who is John Gault" refers to apathy. Basically, so far in the book Dagny Taggart and her business partners are basically battling other business leaders who have become apathetic towards being the best businessmen they can be. They no longer strive to make their businesses run more efficiently, rather they do the bare minimum to simply get by. Also, rather than competing with each other they use the government to make shady deals that stifle competition. When "who is John Gault" is used it is basically an expression of hopelessness. Why are are rail roads in decline? Why can't the leadership of the Taggart lines run the business efficiently enough for me to keep my job? Who is John Gault? That is why Dagny names her rail road the John Gault line. To show rail road workers, as well as those whose lively hood depend on the rail roads, that there are those who understand their frustration and to throw the "bad guys' apathy right back into their faces.
WRT Mrs. Rands philosophy, the common theme in all of her books that I've read is that of individualism trumping collectivism. She purports that when we as individuals work hard and do what is best for ourselves we do what is best for everyone, assuming of coarse the rule of law is followed. She believes that organizations or alliances that advocate or give advantages to one group of people over another are antithetical to the principles of liberty and freedom..
She despises collectivist thought. One example would be in The Fountainhead. The hero is Howard Roark. He is an architect who gets kicked out of his university for daring to design by his own rules. He was a modernist architect who disagreed with the prevalent idea of decoration for its own sake. His main "enemy" in the book is Elsworth Toohey, who through several art organizations seems to dictate popular thought on matters of architecture, art, literature, etc. The members of these groups basically write glorious reviews of each others shitty work. At the same time they denounce people like Roark who refuse to accept the status quo. Roark eventually wins out by working hard and designing the best buildings that he can and staying true to himself.
I think that many of her themes are amazingly applicable in todays world. A big trend in todays politics is that the common good can be better served by government intervention. Taking money from one group of people and using it to benefit another group of people. This is rationalized by stating that the more "fortunate" are obliged to help out the less "fortunate" and describe this line of thought as everyone helping out for the common good. My question is are those individuals who unfairly take advantage of government programs really helping out? Is it really fair to give people an incentive to not work hard and try to succeed? How much better off would we be if we, as a nation, made individual commitments to ourselves to "help out" by doing the best we can to be self reliant? If people could make it a point to take care of themselves rather than counting on and voting for politicians who promise to give them more of other people's money the need for these programs would largely cease to exist. Why can't we start working on making our individuals more self reliant? Well..... who is John Gault?
|