According to John Galt, selfishness is both moral and practical. Explain what he means by this and how events of the story illustrate and dramatize his point.
In a society that is run by force, where fear is the motivator, and sacrifice the greatest virtue, John Galt is the Satan incarnate. He defines morality as “a code of values accepted by choice” (927). He refuses to accept sacrifice as the highest Moral value. Sacrifice, he says, is the surrender of the right to the wrong, of the good to the evil (942).
In a society that is run by force, where fear is the motivator, and sacrifice the greatest virtue, John Galt is the Satan incarnate. He defines morality as “a code of values accepted by choice” (927). He refuses to accept sacrifice as the highest Moral value. Sacrifice, he says, is the surrender of the right to the wrong, of the good to the evil (942).
He refuses to give up the pursuit of his own happiness for that of others. He is a visionary who believes that the essence of morality lies in the worship of your own values. When the codes of morality demand you to consider the greed of the lazy and weak over your own well being, it is both a survival tactic and an extreme means of rebellion to shun this society with its charlatan values and preachers, and start your own utopia where you can work for progress and your happiness.
The mystics of Spirit and Muscles, who govern and define rules for the world to follow, both use different paths to reach the same destination. They deem sacrifice as man’s greatest virtue and selfishness his greatest evil. They make you feel guilty for not providing for those who demand from you, those needy people who themselves do not have any values except those of a parasite. They try to instill in you right from your birth that it is virtuous to give; however, they take unashamedly. John Galt demands why it is immoral to produce something of value and keep it for yourself, when it is moral for others who haven’t earned it to accept it. “I will put an end to this, once and all, he says” (617), going on the first strike of its kind, the strike of the mind.
John Galt and Hank Rearden, both radical inventors, started out the same way, with creations that had the potential to provide brilliant opportunities for the world’s progress.
However, unlike Rearden, Galt experienced the consequences of providing for an irrational and greedy public. When working at the Twentieth Century Motor Company, he and other company employees were subjected to a policy that the most hardworking should provide for the neediest. The policy was “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” (608). This later descended into chaos as the messiahs found an increasing number of converts to their creed. John Galt, with his supreme mind that could invent, realized right at the beginning the kind of society that would result out of these radical practices. He simply refused to allow the irrationally selfish world to use his invention for their betterment. This was an act which only justified his rational self-interest.
On the other hand, Rearden—the creator of a steel alloy that would be the cheapest and most versatile of all metals—fought against all odds to prove the usefulness of his metal, effort that in a rational society would surely not be required of him. Soon as the metal came under the public eye, the State Science Institute, a government-funded organization, coerced Rearden into selling them his patent rights to the metal, all the while citing their higher moral purpose of the “public good” as their only motivation. Their rationale here being that a private citizen could not be allowed to hold the sole rights for something of such great value, especially when the State Science Institute with all its publicly funded scientists could not come up with even a remotely close competitor. An outright manipulation of public perception was the aim behind these looter’s actions. It was only with time that Rearden came to realize that he was stuck in a loop where he thought it was his duty to provide for others, even at the cost of his own happiness.
In a society where a person’s dedication and hard work is punished, it is but practical to be selfish and to strive for one’s own happiness.
This is my code - and I will accept no other, he proclaims (445).
Hank and Lillian Rearden had been married for several years. Hank provided for her to the best of his limits, while she always hated him and tried to destroy him. After ten years of unceasing trials, Hank finally invents the Rearden Metal, which is the best of all alloys, and as a symbol of his life’s work, he forges a Bracelet of the first heat of the metal and gives it to Lillian as a trophy. She mocks him and comments that the bracelet to her represents bondage. She clearly fails, or does not want, to realize that Hank only wanted to share his pride and success with her.
Dagny, the epitome of rational action, understands perfectly what the bracelet symbolizes. And when at a party, Lillian announces that she would rather have a diamond bracelet, as for her that is more valuable, Dagny proceeds to exchange her diamond bracelet for the Rearden metal chain.
For Lillian, the diamond bracelet is expensive. For Dagny, the Rearden metal bracelet is priceless.
Hank’s relationship with Lillian is very moral, but Hank never finds happiness in her companionship. He does not understand the values she practices, if there are any. But in Dagny, he finds understanding. He notices that they share and practice the same set of values. They both strive for their happiness by working hard. Hank’s relationship with Dagny, under society’s eye, is itself immoral. He judges their relationship with the same moral code and is angry at himself as the code makes him consider their lovemaking as obscene and immoral. It is only later that Hank understands the true value of his love for Dagny, the only moral codes worth following are the ones you devise yourself.
He realizes that it is perfectly moral to love someone for the values that you worship in them.
“Rights are a moral concept and morality is a matter of choice” (972. In one’s choice lay happiness, and in their morality lay a choice—the pursuit of one’s own happiness. And the true morality of life is the essence of John’s oath. “I swear— by my life and my love of it—that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine” (979). And thus it shall be for any rational, practical, and moral being.
Thank you for editing this Swapneel.
