A Christian view of Atlas Shrugged

I read Ayn Rand’s Fountain Head and Atlas Shrugged for the first time when I was in high school and, like Paul Ryan, was profoundly influenced by her negative portrayal of socialism.  About ten years later a friend of mine read it and in his case became a “true believer.”  I read it again to refresh myself as he began to preach the gospel of Objectivism.  It was quite an eye opener to watch someone I thought I knew well transform before my eyes.  As he internalized the philosophy he became totally self-centered and selfish.  He quit his job and went back to college allowing his wife to support him and their two children.  He told me confidentially that he planned to leave her once he graduated since he would no longer need her and she would only be a hindrance to his future plans.  He felt this to be totally consistent with his new insights.  This may sound extreme but if you read the book you will see that his behavior is totally consistent with the teachings.  I don’t know what he ended up doing or what happened to him, we drifted apart shortly thereafter and I never talked with him or saw him or his family again

.

Atlas Shrugged does a wonderful job of exposing the ugly underbelly of Socialism/liberalism; the terrible ways in which it can go wrong and destroy a country.  On the other hand Ayn Rand completely misses all the ways Capitalism/conservatism or what she calls Objectivism run amok and can be equally devastating.  To somehow consider the capitalist as noble while the socialist is evil is the height of folly.  Both nobility and evil will seek any and all means to express themselves.

But even if we ignore a philosophy which preaches total selfishness and focus on the value of a book/movie which does do an excellent job of exposing the problems of collectivism, can we as Christians endorse Atlas Shrugged.  That piece of the story which exposes the problems of liberalism is certainly one that the Christian right has been struggling to tell for a long time.  The dangers of a government that uses Social Justice as the means to take control a country is real.  The fear is justified.  Whether it’s real or not in our case can always be debated but it certainly worthwhile to have the debate.  Just to give an outrageous example, almost all of Christendom applauded when the National Socialist German Workers' Party (NAZI’s) came to power in the name of establishing Social Justice in 1933.  And we all know what they did with that once democratic nation once that held sufficient power in their hands.

Cal Thomas, one of the original leaders of the Moral Majority and an outspoken Evangelical Christian who frequently appears on cable news shows, certainly believes Atlas Shrugged should be endorsed and promoted.  But, in addition to her militant pro-selfishness and derision for anyone with compassion for the needs of others, one must also overlook the fact that the book is anti-Christian and promotes sexual promiscuity, deviant sexual behavior (bondage, S&M, etc.) and abortion.  There’s a lot for the religious right to overlook in order to get their polemic against liberal economic and social policies heard.

“The Church is like a public swimming pool, all the noise is at the shallow end”

Christianity, Not One Among Many

Christian or not, any intellectually honest person must admit that there has never been anything that compares to Christianity throughout all of recorded history.  2000 years ago an obscure man from an obscure village wandered around the Levant region of the Mediterranean teaching about God for a couple of years and then was crucified.  At the end of his ministry all his followers fled, betrayed him or deserted him.

Yet, a couple of centuries later he was the center of the dominant religion of the civilized world.  It still remains the largest religion in the world 2000 years later with over 2 billion adherents.  Historians have spent at least 1500 years going crazy trying to understand this phenomenon.  There are, of course, many explanations, but few that are satisfactory and satisfying.  They range from, “God made it happen” to, “it was all an elaborate hoax perpetuate by the Apostles.” 

In order to understand the unique nature of Christianity’s growth it is necessary to look at one other key uniqueness.  Christianity did not begin with Jesus ministry on earth but with his resurrection.  Christians do not follow a prophet like Moses or Muhammad.  They follow a risen Lord.  This is absolutely critical to the understanding of Christianity.  It is impossible to teach the wisdom of Jesus’ teachings or philosophies; as Paul tells us, it will be considered foolishness.  The disciple’s job is to introduce people to Jesus Christ.  It’s his job to teach the wisdom of the kingdom’s ways.

Paul himself persecuted the Christians until Christ knocked him off his horse and blinded him with a bright light to get his attention.  Once Paul had personally met the risen Lord he underwent an very real attitude adjustment.  Read the beginning of Acts.  Massive conversion to Christianity came about because people had a personal experience with the living Jesus Christ.  It is the fact that Jesus Christ lives that makes Christianity unique among all the religions of the world.  The rapid growth happened and continues to happen because Christianity continues to have a leader who is alive and active in the world.

Jesus said that they (non-Christians) will know you (Christians) by how you love one another.  But we love one another because he first loved us.  The entire heart of Christianity rests on the assumption of a personal relationship with a living Lord which rests on the reality of the Resurrection.  This Holy Week we live in anticipation of the celebration of that unique event in history which occurred on Easter morning.

“The Church is like a public swimming pool, all the noise is at the shallow end”

Using the poor in Political debates

Biblically speaking, which is better for the poor, liberal or conservative principles?  I am a gourmand when it comes to the consuming of published materials of any kind and especially if they should touch on religion or politics and especially if they should touch on both.  I find it fascinating that both ends of the political spectrum can find so much scripture to support their position. Let’s consider the two in general terms.  I admit up front that I must stereotype but I don’t think the picture it draws is invalid because of the gross generalizations.  

Our conservative would help the poor through capitalism.  The Entrepreneurs and business people work hard make money and create jobs.  The conservative enjoys the fruits of their labor by becoming wealthy.  Those they employ benefit by having opportunity and income from producing products and/or services.  Those unable to participate due to misfortune of one kind or another receive charity which is available due to the abundance produce in such a rich environment.  Since the Regan era this has been known as trickle-down economics.   Reward the wealth producers and all boats float higher in a rising tide.

Our liberal would help the poor through redistribution of wealth.  According to the Federal Reserve Board, which is probably about as unbiased a report as one can get, 85% of the wealth in the US is held by the top 20% of the population.  A worse statistic is that the bottom 40% of the population holds less than .2% of the wealth.  The liberal enjoys the fruits of their labor by become patrons.  Those they employ benefit by having opportunity and income from by support and/or services.  Those unable to participate due to misfortune of one kind or another receive entitlements as a natural part of providing for a fair distribution of the wealth produced by the country.  From each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs.

 

Let’s try to looking objectively at the two societies.  Both are classed societies.  Both have an upper class.  I challenge you to distinguish between Larry Ellison, Founder of Oracle, who flies his private jet and live in luxury we can only imagine and Nancy Pelosi, who flies her private jet and lives in luxury we can only imagine.  And yet they represent opposite ends of the capitalism/liberalism spectrum.  Both the conservative and liberal based society has their workers and both have their poor.  More importantly, both are condemned Biblically.  Neither represents the Kingdom.  To conservative I give you Luke 18:22.  Sell all your possession, give them to the poor and follow Christ.  To the liberal, read my previous blog, Hunger fast for a moral budget, were I show the fallacy of using scripture to justify stealing from the rich to give to the poor.

“The Church is like a public swimming pool, all the noise is at the shallow end”

Hunger fast for a moral budget

The “hunger fast for a moral budget” is a movement which has become closely associated with Jim Wallis who is heavily promoting it. It has gone viral and has been joined by many large organizations including a number of members of Congress who mentioned it frequently from the house floor during the recent budget debates.  It was launch on March 28^th by 4 individuals (Jim Wallis being one of them) and I first read about it, along with a lot of other people, in the March 29^th New York Times article by Mark Bittman, “Why We’re Fasting.”

For those who might not be familiar with Jim, he is a Christian advocate and activist for the poor and hungry of the world.  He writes a daily blog, GodsPolitcs (which I have followed religiously for some time) and does guest appearances on major news networks.  I think highly of Jim and his efforts for the needy in this world!  I do become troubled when the ends begin to justify the means.  What appeared to begin as prayer and fasting for God’s intervention has transformed into a fast for media attention and popular intervention; from Gospel to Gandhi.

There’s no question that throughout both the Old and New Testament there is a constant demand that God’s people have a heart for the poor, the hungry, the children and all who cannot fend for themselves.  I also agree that whether you wish to quote Isaiah 58 or James or any one of many scriptural references, the heart must be backed up with appropriate actions.  But, it is a misuse of these scripture references to defend or promote specific tax policy.  In fact, scripture leans heavily in the opposite direction.

You can always fall back on, “Render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s” but I would rather look at John 12:3-8.  Mary poured a year’s wages worth of perfume on Jesus’ feet.  Judas, who kept the purse with the money for the poor, complained that it should have been sold and used for the poor.  Jesus basically told Judas that it was hers to do with as she pleased.  It was also inferred that Judas was more concerned about the fact that he wouldn’t get his hands on it.  I think the parallels to people with money, the government as Judas, and the desire to tax “for redistribution to the poor” is fairly obvious.

If you prefer Old Testament then consider the story of Joseph and his taxation during 7 years of abundance (Genesis 41). This is often told as a positive story.  Joseph collected 20% of the harvest during the years of plenty so that no one would go hungry when the famine came.  But most don’t pay attention to what happened later (Genesis 47).  The poor and starving (which was now everyone) got food but still had to pay the tax.  The government took all their land and possessions in payment for the food that was originally theirs anyway and then rented their land and animals back to them.  Ultimately everyone ended up being a slave to the government.

I have no issues with the “hunger fast for a moral budget” movement other than their efforts to try and appropriate scripture in a selective and inappropriate way.  I find their bracelets which say, “What would Jesus cut” to be offensive.  The point of what Jesus did was to transform hearts so that the community took care of those in need.  Not to determine which group of people are righteous and which group needs to be exploited or attacked.