Who is John Galt?

Don't ask questions that have no answers.

On a 6.5 hour plane ride back home to Los Angeles, I decided to watch the movie Atlas Shrugged Pt. 1. Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead are my all time favorite books, and I’ve read each of them many times. The movie sucks. It’s abysmal. 

However, watching it gives you a taste of the general ideas from the book in 1.5 hours instead of over a 10 hour read. 

I originally fell in love with New York largely because I thought it embodied objectivism’s ideals. I moved to New York in September 2024, for many reasons, but also very much chasing this ideal, which is hard to explain to many. I used to be awestruck by Manhattan’s skyline, and I was moved by the sheer greatness and potential. I was sold (I think) New York as a monument to human achievement and its skyscrapers, trophies of it. I bought it and truly felt it. 

However, over the past couple months, this idealistic image of Manhattan has shattered me before my eyes. I don’t doubt objectivism, that it exists and is proper. Rather, I’m no longer deluded that there’s a place which represents it, or the fight against evil. New York is grueling, expensive, dirty and frankly a crime for what you pay. I knew all of this before moving, but underestimated how hard it would be coming from sunny, peaceful (in comparison), Los Angeles.

The concrete jungle I saw as a symbol of progress is hollow, its buildings erected not for glory but for profit. And titans take advantage of your desire to feel they’re created for anything but. The chase for money is empty, a betrayal of the objectivist principle that wealth should reflect value created, not greed. 

But then again, were the principles I admired ever here? Did Rand ever even claim they were? Was I too idealistic?

Rand very much romanticized New York in The Fountainhead, describing the skyline with violent reverence, and outside the books in her personal life. She believed the skylines were embodiments of human ambition and individualism, and a testament to what humans can achieve when driven by reason and purpose. It is a symbol of capitalism and human potential. 

However, Rand never depicted a perfect New York, characterized by smart titans pursuing greatness. The society within New York, and the general philosophy she depicts is corrupt, evil and one that causes the suffering of the minority “greats.” She depicts a struggle and suffering, and a very small group of people who fight against it. Then she shows how New York ought to be, what it was meant to represent, and how that image and ideal has been eroded. At the time of her writing the books, what it ought and was meant to be might’ve not been any more reality than they are today. What I did believe in was the group of people fighting against a struggle, and that those people might be at the forefront of their industries. 

Rand wrote Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead in an era that romanticized industrial titans like builders of railroads, steel and factories. Their work was tangible and their wealth was a reward for creation. Completely secondary. Rearden wanted to make money, not for the sake of it, but because it was reflective of his good work. Today the economy thrives on finance, tech and intangibles, where wealth feels abstract, not earned. I see this especially within industries like AI claiming they are working towards human progression and betterment but are actually pursuing power and replacement. And those at the forefront of these industries rely on you to “cover” them by believing they care about anything dignified and principled (aka: the benefit of humanity)

Email from Elon Musk to Sam Altman, Dec. 8, 2015

You can’t convince me that AI (with very few exceptions) is meant for the betterment of humanity, and that anyone at the forefront of these industries actually thinks that. Oh, and don’t get me started on finance. There is no one in that industry working for anything other than money (duh). 

I am no longer deluded by the idea that CEOs today are acting with any principle in mind, and that the excessive amount of buildings being erected in the city (and the insane cost of rent) has nothing to do with creation but everything to do with profit. They do it because they can. 

So, what happened? Where are all the great men? What happened to everyone? Am I really living in a world where greatness seems absent? Who is John Galt?

What I used to feel driving in front of JFK is an ode to a real legacy, but also overlooked clear corruption and profiteering. Living here has forced me to see the whole picture, instead of living in naivety. Although, I’ll concede New York has never been what it ought to be, I’m sure it has deviated even further from its ideal. 

There is no intrinsic value in money; It is not an end in itself. Money’s value comes from what was earned in the process of obtaining it. I’m frustrated with a modern economy that echoes Rand’s disdain for those who produce nothing tangible yet amass wealth, and the great value society has placed on those professions. High rents and ugly new buildings, driven by greed, are a byproduct of the betrayal of the principle that wealth should reflect value, not exploitation. 

If living here has exposed anything it is one of my best traits and greatest flaws - idealism. 

“Does such a thing as 'the fatal flaw,' that showy dark crack running down the middle of a life, exist outside literature? I used to think it didn't. Now I think it does. And I think that mine is this: a morbid longing for the picturesque at all costs.”

I’m sure the great men aren’t entirely gone but have rather been drowned out. Anyone who is anything close to a Roark or Galt is surely not living in New York. I’m sure they’re operating in the shadows, not in the public, but in a quiet pursuit. They’re not the Elon Musks or Altmans of the world. 

My realization isn’t a rejection of objectivism but a rejection of the illusion that any place fully embodies it, that a fight against mediocrity exists or that those fighting work in today’s corporate machines.

Xx,

The Grey Swan