Response to Ayn Rand's Anthem

           Ayn Rand’s Anthem portrays the ideology of a collectivist society, where people are forced to act in similar fashions. There is also no ideal sense of individuality which causes the society to lack creativity or the opportunity to value their own opinions. Through this novel, we are able to make distinct comparisons between the societies portrayed in Anthem as opposed to our societies today. The main function of a collectivist society is to have things flow in a certain order without creating any disputes or differences and allowing people to abide by that mentality. It also enforces people to put the “good of society” before themselves meaning whatever is claimed to be beneficial to the society as a whole matters more than what would be beneficial towards an individual being.

Collectivism displays controlling matters where people must go by what their authority tells them to do or they will get severely punished. It is to allow society to follow a collective structure where they feel it will be maintaining order. It is believed that once everyone have their own individual opinions and do what they want to do it will cause conflict within their society. For example, in Anthem, the Transgressor of the Unspeakable Word, was executed by being burned alive for stating their unspeakable word which is “I”. This word seems to always cause an uproar in their society because it hinders them from displaying that form of individuality. In comparison to our modern day society, people use the term I when they describe themselves and elaborate on unique characteristics about themselves or things that they do. When you are addressing yourself, you don’t speak for everyone else. One unique thing about our society, specifically in reference to America, you see uniqueness and so much creativity and diversity of things all around you. Each time you turn around you find something different that you never knew of which allows life to be spontaneous and worth living for. When you are constricted to specific regimen for the rest of your life, it becomes dull and boring, because it is like you are brainwashed into believing that this is the way that things are supposed to be. When you are forced to do something or be something that you do not want to be, it would make a person feel miserable because they are not content with the life they are living, however they must find a way to go along with it regardless because of severe punishment that follow behind it.

The protagonist of the novella, Equality 7-2521, elaborates on how he does not agree with structure of his society and feels that people should have their own individual mindsets instead being under such strict rules that doesn’t give people their own identity. He has a deep passion for finding his freedom and releasing himself from the constraints of his society. The biggest turning point for his revolt was when he discovered the light bulb and the Council threatened to destroy it and exiled him as well. He knows that he does not want to be like them and the fact that he created something so different that they are not used to, really got to them and wanted them to get rid of Equality 7-2521.

A person would go to any extent to make themselves happy. This is what draws us to the concept of rational egoism. Where a person would do anything that would be beneficial to themselves. Once Equality 7-2521 became a free man, he was able to explore himself and discover unique traits that he never knew existed. He was able to kill and enjoy is own food, as well as explore his manhood and do things that he never thought he would have the chance to do. When he finally discovered the true meaning of “I” it becomes an eye opener for him that it is only you that can perceive how you view the world, and you can’t do it through anyone else. Everyone will not see things in the same manner, so when we say ‘I” it gives so many different viewpoints.

 One can think when someone constantly refers to themselves, it brings out a selfish attitude and causes the person’s ego to expand. However, we don’t live life for another person, you are only living life for yourself. Sometimes you may want to take that extra mile to do something especially if it would have a great benefit for you. And there is a great possibility that your actions can also play a major role in the life of someone else and giving them a chance to explore and find that uniqueness within themselves. 

Response to Anthem

The story Anthem, are diary entries written from the perspective of a man labeled as Equality 7-2521. It is very distinct from other diaries in which that “I” was not present in the dairy, but rather “we” which indicated an attempt to eliminate sense of self. Equality 7-2521 lives in a collectivistic city, where the people are divided into different factions and have designated jobs appointed by the Council.  Equality 7-2521 is a Street Sweeper of the society, having his profession chosen by the Councils of the city. Equality, curious in nature is being suppressed of his thirst for knowledge.  His natural talent for comprehension of different materials was undoubtedly faster than his brothers, which was a sin in a society that preaches equality among individuals. One day while sweeping, he coincidentally discovered an underground tunnel and there he secretly experimented and educated himself about nature. Following this, he met Liberty 5300, who he found himself attached to and in turn ignited his hatred toward his brothers and the society. As the story progressed, Equality 7-2521 was caught secretly studying about nature, plotting his rebellion against the city all while he was struggling internally to rediscover individualism.

            Throughout Rand’s writing, she introduced and expresses her idea of rational egoism. Rational egoism is the principle that one’s action is rational only if it maximizes one’s best interests; meaning if the action will result in non-beneficial result, then the action is not rational.  She emphasizes the differences between collectivism and rational egoism, in which collectivism eliminates individuality while rational egoism acts according to one’s benefits. One may think that rational egoism is a potential cure for collectivism, but there are loopholes in her idea. Although rational egoism proposed that one should act for the benefits of selves only when the action is rational and moral, not everyone’s interpretation of rational or morals coincide. For instance, one may choose not to harm others simply because there are severe consequences. Since harming someone may result in imprisonment or fines, one can choose not to harm others, but what if a person who is living in poverty, who struggles to live every minute chose to commit murder in order to survive? For that individual, imprisonment may result in a better living environment than what they were living in previously and therefore one may commit murder. It still follows the idea of rational egoism but this in turn can create chaos in a society.

            I believe that both collectivism and rational egoism can be beneficial to a society, only when it is not amplified to the extreme. A good amount of collectivism in which everyone acts in the benefit of the whole, but still maintains their individuality would lead to a functional society. As for rational egoism, it can only be effective when most people share similar moral values and that’s living in a society with minimum poverty. Both collectivism and rational egoism have its benefits and flaws. Although collectivism acts to benefit the whole, but when enforced to extreme, it eliminates individualism. While rational egoism may sound like the optimal choice, it most likely won’t stand a chance to the unique environment and situations that each individual encounters.

Response to Anthem

Catherine Clark

Rand’s Anthem: Response

Utopia to Dystopia  

Rand’s novella, Anthem, leaves an impression on the reader emphasizing and embracing their individuality. Rand was born in Russia, which was taken over by the Bolsheviks, under the demand of Lenin during the October Revolution in 1917. The revolution caused most or all of Russian families to lose their livelihoods and homes to the government, who would later distribute them. I am sure that Rand was one of many forced to live a life that had been compromised in the name of communism. If so, it would certainly be exhibited through the characters in her writing. While extreme, Anthem illustrates the inner struggle to express individuality in a collective society. The character Equality 7-2521 would be a direct reflection of the feelings Rand might have had being a woman in communist Russia. As a woman, she was most likely assigned to futures and paths that she didn't want to be a part of, and she was most likely refused to go to school. This being said, I find it justifiable to write about this, even if it is in an extreme way.

Rational egoism could be considered a cure for collectivism, for the fact that it's the opposite. Egoism, of any kind, is the belief that the self should take priority in a community. I believe that the embrace of individualism is exactly what makes a community great, for with individual freedom, evolution and change can occur. Collectivism is good, too, in theory, but in practice it inhibits the members of its community from fulfilling their full potential. The cure for the problems of collectivism is found in Kant’s theory of morality. On page 58 of Anthem, Prometheus says, “Neither am I the mean to any end others may wish to accomplish. I am not a tool for their use”. This directly reflects Immanuel Kant’s theory of morality and ethics. Kant’s theory, to put it plainly, stated that People should never be used as means, and only as ends. Kant, like Rand, valued reason, and claimed that reason motivated morality. This goes hand-in-hand with the theory of rational egoism, for it essentially states that one should respects others’ reasoned motives as much as their own. For example, Kant would have argued that the scholars not allowing Prometheus to share his discovery of electricity or “the light”, was unethical. Whereas collectivists would argue that since it was not what the community wanted, it was morally sound.

The Rand’s Anthem was, of course, an extremity of collectivism. Rational egoism is the prioritization of self while not being extreme. The problem with rational egoism in practice is in the process of defining “rational”, or “too selfish”. In a collective society, there is a strict moral code, usually decided on by a designated group of people. In a world where people can act however they wish, who is supposed to say that an act of selfishness is too selfish? Also, in any decision there needs to be a stake, and if there was to be a community that didn't respect each other or valued one another and only themselves, there would end up being some sort of inequality or class based on those who win and those who lose. Kant’s would argue that by disregarding or disrespecting another person’s sense of self, one is acting unethically, which supports the application of rational egoism in a society.

Anthem

Ayn Rand’s Anthem follows the life of Equality 7-2521 through his dystopian society. His society is based on collectivism, as in, everyone works for the betterment of everyone else and no one is looking out for themselves as individuals. The collectivist society is at such an extreme that even the civilians refer to themselves as “We” instead of “I” to show that they are all connected and not individuals. Rand clearly wrote this book to propagate anti-collectivism, although, I am not sure how well her point was received since she wrote about it to such an extreme. Rand is an advocate for rational egoism, a topic she writes about in most of her works whether directly, or indirectly.  She seems to believe that rational egoism is a cure for collectivism, however these are two extreme sides to the ideologies.

In Anthem, the society runs on collectivism and Rand portrays that in a negative way. However, her negative angle is only present because its portrayal is so exaggerated. In that society, it is unthinkable to see yourself as an individual. You are a part of your community and you work for the betterment of everyone around you except yourself. If that is the case, then no one is actually benefiting from your work. If you constantly believe that your job is to help your “brothers” for the better, then who is helping you, as a “brother”, for the better? Rand created a collectivist world to express how much collectivism does not actually work for the “betterment of your brothers”. She writes her hero, Equality 7-2521, start to exhibit the beginning of individualism throughout his life in this society, though he is not aware of why his behavior is different from his brothers even though he realizes that he is different. He views himself as better than everyone else even though he is not supposed to.

Throughout his life, Equality 7-2521 seems compelled to make himself a better person than to make himself more useful to his brothers. He asked more questions in school because he wanted answers and his teachers did not like him for being so curious. Curiosity is not helpful to a society. Following rules is helpful. He thought he had more value to society by being a scholar, although, he later realizes that he did not actually think he was more valuable to society, he just wanted to make his own life happier. Being a scholar would improve the quality of his own life which is not something that is allowed to be thought about in that society. Your only function in collectivism is to improve the quality of your society with your brothers, not as individuals. This is a great concept, but very dystopian when you put it to such an extreme that you are sacrificing your own happiness for the betterment of your world. For example, societies function better when everyone complies with the society’s rules, but complying with the rules might make life very unpleasant for you. As is the case with Equality 7-2521. His society is very compliant but the civilians seem to be pretty miserable for the most part. It’s just unrealistic to sacrifice yourself to such an extent.

Rational Egoism can most definitely be a cure for this society, but again, not to an extreme. If Equality 7-2521 were extremely rational egoistic, then he would not have thought about bringing the Golden One with him when he ran away from the society. She may have compromised his freedom if she was unfaithful in her intentions with him. He also wouldn’t have thought about bringing certain civilians into his new world of freedom because they might also compromise his freedom. If one of his fellow citizens joined his new civilization and was actually a spy for the collectivist society, they could create wars between the two societies and break what both societies strive for. Even so, Equality 7-2521 doesn’t seem to care about this concept, caring about it would make him more selfish about whether or not he should introduce people to individuality. He still has a collectivist mindset where he wants his brothers to be happy and he thinks they can achieve happiness through individuality. He is expressing both a collectivist mindset and an individualistic mindset.

Too much rational egoism makes you a very solitary person. Too much collectivism makes you a rug for people to step on for the betterment of others. Neither extreme is good on its own. However, if you practice a little bit of both, it makes the world and your individual life a lot more tolerable and creates a world more closely related to our current one. Although, it seems like Utopia lies somewhere in the right balance of these two extremes.  

Response To Anthem

Kristina Schiano                                                                                               

Response 1

MW12

The idea of collectivism and its faults were showcased throughout Ayn Rand’s Anthem. From the beginning, collectivist characteristics were all over the unnamed city. The government’s goal was to eliminate individuality and always think and act in a way that could only benefit the city as a whole. Anyone showing signs of even a little self-thought could be reprimanded.  I found this to be excessive to the point where even wanting something was seen as being wrong. If a man desired something for himself, that meant he wasn’t thinking about society as a whole. I agree in a sense that other people have to be put into consideration when acting upon certain decisions, but simply sitting by yourself to think and reflect should not be against the law.

This is where rational egoism comes into play. This idea is backed by the basis of something being rational only if it benefits oneself. This, of course, goes completely against the ideas of collectivism. However, since collectivism is so extreme in Anthem, I argue that rational egoism in moderation could benefit the society.  Being able to think about oneself would bring back a person’s individuality. People could do what made them happy and express themselves. Basic human needs could be met by ensuring their own happiness. This, however, opens up the risk that someone’s happiness could be negative for the society and cause damage or a rebellion.

Under Rand’s collectivism, I feel that free choice is eliminated. This ties in with the concept of altruism. Other people’s needs are supposed to be put in front of yours at all times. Being selfish or even a little self-aware is not an option. This leads to people automatically doing things without necessarily thinking about them. Rational egoism could balance this all out by giving the power back to the people and their minds. Acting in ways that could benefit the society and acting as individuals could coexist. For instance, when Equality 7-2521 made the light bulb work, he was doing what made him happy and exploring his curiosity. He then wanted to share his discovery to benefit society as a whole. I argue that this is how the concepts of rational egoism and collectivism can coexist in one society.

My argument is that rational egoism and collectivism both in moderation can work together. Having either as an extreme could be harmful to the society over time. Too much rational egoism can lead to selfishness, jealousy, arrogance, and narcissism, whereas too much collectivism can lead to loss of individuality and freedom of choice. There should be a balance of different concepts to make a Utopian society stand the chance of surviving.

Honestly, what would be the point of living in a society that basically makes you act like a robot? With no free choice, no individuality, and not being able to explore your curiosities, there really is no point. That wouldn’t be living. It would be going through the motions in a fog and wasting time until death. A Utopia is supposed to be the “perfect” society. My interpretation of perfect would be having the opportunities to actually live your life, and by “live your life,” I mean having the opportunity to be truly happy, being able to discover new things, and have relationships.

With all this being said, collectivist concepts can still take place. The fact that people earn the same wages, work similar hours, and take part in community activities would still work. These would not take away a person’s individuality. Allowing people to still do what they truly want and not reprimanding those who think differently will benefit the society. There will always be someone who strays away from the norm, and allowing both rational egoism and collectivism in moderation, can balance out what once were seen as issues.

Anthem Response

Ayn Rand’s Anthem presents an interesting narrative, in which collectivism and rational egoism are pitted against each other.  This novella that describes the struggle against collectivism, the idea society has the right to direct one’s life for the benefit all. Rand’s story ultimately leads to the conclusion that a society in which people live collectivism is under strict planning and control. The collectivist society barred the individuals experience to develop their own thinking. Ayn Rand, introduces both cases to the narrative to show you the difference of both, but she ultimately believes that rational egoism is the way to live. Rational egoism cares oneself and promotes self interest. This is where Equality 7-2521 is freed from collectivism and introduced to a new political philosophy called rational egoism. Equality 7-2521 finds that rational egoism to the right way to live. He finds out about the word “I” and this ultimately gives the signification that rational egoism is illustrated in the narrative. Rational egoism is ultimately the cure of a collectivism. It shows that individuals will want their freedom. They would want to express their ideas as freely as possible. Equality 7-2521 expresses that he wanted his freedom from this society. They feel that collectivism is passing on their opportunity to prosper. For example, Equality 7-2521 could not live under the collectivism because he wanted to introduce his new invention. In this situation, rational egoism is a cure of collectivism. Rational egoism promotes the idea of the newer ideas, and gives individuals the opportunity to think outside of the “box.” 

I truly agree with the way Rand portrayed the difference between rational egoism and collectivism. Her arguments through the narrative are properly conveyed. Rand’s explains the difference between the two. Rational egoism and collectivism, in my opinion, does not portray the perfect utopia. The two ideologies provides bad characteristics that does not contribute to the perfect utopia. In today society, I believe we live in an rational egoism, we can see the various potholes in the ideology. In conclusion, rational egoism can be bad as collectivism for many reasons. Rational egoism can have the negative aspect on the society, because everyone will have this idea of doing things their way. Also, being a collectivist is not good. They must find the balance between the two to make this perfect utopia. If we can find the ideal acceptance between the two, this can everyone the idea that they do things on their own but live under the guidelines. These guidelines can be put in place so we regulate what is going on in the society. Collectivism cannot rule over rational egoism and rational egoism cannot rule over collectivism.