The author has a copy of a fascinating philosophical novel, Ayn Rand's "Atlas Shrugged", in his library, which he has read with delight on more than one occasion. Rand describes a utopia, called "Galt's Gulch," which is unique among utopian literature in that it is not a socialist society. Indeed, Ms. Rand is bold enough to suggest capitalism as a basis for a utopian society, something revolutionary enough to upset and offend the intellectual community. Despite being the polar opposite of the traditional perfect society, however, Ayn Rand's community suffers from the same fatal problem as every other proposed utopia since Plato's Republic: it assumes that members of the society, at least the majority of them, will both believe in (or be convinced of) the ideology behind the community and act accordingly.

Plato's Republic is particularly honest among utopian literature in that it admits the existence of a ruling class. Plato naturally thought that the intellectuals were best suited to rule, a view still popular among academics who to this day suffer from superiority complexes that sometimes overwhelm their reasoning. Other authors, such as Bellamy¹ and Marx² try to convince their readers that a truly classless society can be created, implying or stating explicitly (as in the case of Bellamy) that a society can be set up where corruption cannot occur among those who administer the government. Bellamy replaces class with national honor (which could be argued to be a class system of its own), under the assumption that the members of society will be satisfied with this form of distinction. Rand's "Galt's Gulch" is comparable to Bellamy's society in this aspect of being classless yet having classes per Rand's "aristocracy of money." Ayn Rand's pseudo-classes are more believable than Edward Bellamy's, in that a sort of wealth-based aristocracy does indeed exist in capitalist societies. Inheritance may be a flaw in Rand's ideology, as old money means that wealth is not necessarily owned by the capable or productive, though she seems to think that this will be a self-correcting problem in the long run, as in the case of James Taggart's mismanagement of the railroad or implied in Francisco D'Anconia's statement: "Why should I wish to make money? I have enough to permit three generations of descendants to have as good a time as I'm having."

Ms. Rand is more realistic than the proponents of classlessness in the understanding that there will always be a social distinction between the great industrialists (her upper class) and the dedicated though less capable employee as represented by Eddie Willers. Her problem is the assumption that in the laissez-faire capitalist society, a reason-based ethics will somehow prevail upon employers to pay a fair wage, and employees to provide a just amount of quality work in exchange. Indeed, if employers were willing to pay well and employees were willing to work well, it would make little difference whether a society was structured as capitalist or socialist. Class mobility is also a key element in Rand's utopia: the incompetent among the upper class need to fall, while the shining stars of the lower class need to rise to prominence. Ayn Rand believes this will naturally happen in a capitalist society, where the capable will provide themselves an education and push their way up the corporate ladder. Unfortunately, recent research suggests that class mobility, even intergenerationally, is much more a fantasy than a reality in the United States³ and Europe.⁴ Followers of Ayn Rand might argue that this is due to the fact that modern capitalist economies are highly regulated in a manner that decreases the mobility of the lower classes in an unnatural manner. This is true to some extent, but would be offset by other government programs that provide loan guarantees and grants to allow members of the lower class to acquire the same University education offered to members of the higher classes.

Crime is another issue that must be dealt with by any utopia. Many utopias fail to live up to modern society's ideals in their dealings with crime. For example, Thomas More solved this in his Utopia by the institution of slavery for convicts.⁵ Bellamy considered that the abolition of money would do away with almost all crime, and most of the remaining would be corrected by a higher standard of education among all members of society. Whether anger can be almost entirely suppressed by education is debatable, but Ayn Rand offers neither the abolition of money nor a universal education in order to combat crime. She seems to think that a certain portion of crime is the result of desperation among the masses, who are unable to take care of themselves in a highly regulated society. Police and military are also proper functions of government, according to her philosophy. This is sort of a compromise between More's imposition of slavery, and Bellamy's fantasizing away of crime. Rand lives up to the reality that crime will exist, though she doesn't speak much of it, implying that it will somehow be under control, or rare enough as not to merit mention.

Crime is merely one aspect of a larger problem facing any utopia: the assumption that the vast majority of its members will believe in and follow the values of their society. That assumption is already at work in any society that isn't a police state, and can be readily seen to be less than adequate for transforming those societies into utopias. Ambition is not to be underestimated as a threat to any utopia. Bellamy assumes he can get around it by offering honor to the best and brightest. More assumes ambition will be done away by the uselessness of money internally in his imagined society. It is doubtful that doing away with money and the offering of honor in its place will provide sufficient satisfaction to the ambition of man. Zimbardo's famous prison study shows the tendency of man to not only seek power, but to seek more of it once it is granted, to the degree of abusing his authority.⁶ Rand doesn't even do away with money, but somehow believes that the honest pursuit of it will satisfy ambition in her ideal society. Where there is a government, however, there are government officials willing and ready to extend their power, and even anarchy doesn't last long until a government is instituted by those who seek power.

It should be noted that even those who believe in a particular ideal don't necessarily follow it themselves. One popular recurrent theme in the media, for example, is that of the politician who breaks whatever ideal he wants to impose on the public.⁷ The concept of confession in Christianity is based on the fact that people don't live up to their own values. Nor should we forget the lazy, who will seek, if in a less than honest manner, survival at the expense of society, that is, wealth without productivity on their own part. Ayn Rand's idea of a perfect society is nice, but unless everyone cooperates it just won't live up to the hype. An employer who wants to extract a little extra profit will pay his employees less than the true value of their work; it would be naive to assume that competition alone could correct this. Accordingly, the employees will, on the one hand, give less than their best in labor, and, on the other hand, seek redress from the government. The latter will result in regulation, and eventually we're back in the same society from which Rand's industrial geniuses wanted to escape. Man's self-interest, tempered with his reason, won't save him from destruction, because there will always be another whose self-interest won't be combined with the same ethics.

One recurrent theme in Bellamy's novel was his insistence that his utopia was possible without changing the fundamental character of people. For a Christian, this is particularly naive, considering the Christian belief that man is in a fallen state. Likewise, as already briefly observed in the present work, this assertion on the part of Bellamy holds up neither to reason nor to empiricism. More used severe punishments, such as slavery and death, in order to keep his people in line. Rand recognizes the existence of people of a character antithetical to her ideals, the "moochers." Oddly, she has no suggestion for dealing with them on a long-term basis. The most brilliant mind in Atlas Shrugged, that of John Galt, proposes the merely temporary solution of going on strike while the moochers destroy society, then raising it up again out of the ashes. What is to be done when the looters return to the newly rebuilt society? It doesn't matter if it takes a day or a generation, Ms. Rand's utopia is only a temporary respite from the society that precedes it. Just like any other utopia, the society idealized in Galt's Gulch needs a change in the fundamental character of humanity in order to succeed. In over 2300 years since the birth of Aristotle, philosophy alone hasn't been able to do the job. Followers of Ayn Rand, as well as the other utopists, need to look beyond philosophy to search for more effective ways to market their ideals.

Notes

1. Bellamy, Edward, "Looking Backward: 2000-1887" (New York: Signet Classics, 2000).
2. Engels, Friedrich and Karl Marx, "The Communist Manifesto".
3. Perruci and Wysong note that "the popular image of class differences is that they are temporary and constantly changing. But in fact, nothing could be further from the truth when it comes to the new class system in the United States." Perruci, Robert and Earl Wysong, "The New Class Society" (Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc.: 1999), p.29.
4. Blanden, Jo, Paul Gregg and Stephen Machin, "Intergenerational Mobility in Europe and North America" (2005). <http://cep.lse.ac.uk/about/news/IntergenerationalMobility.pdf>.
5. More, Sir Thomas, "Utopia" (New York: The MacMillan Company, 1912), p.155.
6. Haney, C., et al., "Interpersonal Dynamics in a Simulated Prison," International Journal of Criminology and Penology 1 (1973):69-97.
7. Popular recent themes include Larry Craig, the U.S. Senator who strongly supported traditional family values, and was caught soliciting sex from another man in a public restroom, and the criticism of environmentalist Al Gore's energy consumption.