Ayn Rand's 1957 preeminent novel Atlas Shrugged ushered into the American conscience the idea that mediocrity and incompetence were crippling the world's talent, and along with it, the talent of great men and women. This mediocrity and incompetence, according to Ayn Rand's philosophy, came from collectivism in society, which disdained and exploited individualism and self-reliance, the pinnacles of success and achievement.
The embodiment of this self-reliance was Rand's hero John Galt, who realized that it was a sin for his talents to be exploited and used for an ungrateful society's gain, and so he "shrugged" the world that he carried on his shoulders, and he quit achieving so the forces who were using him couldn't exploit him anymore.
Within the last year, since Obama's election, many conservatives on the right have championed this principal as an indictment of the left's policies that prefer stronger government power to regulate and control out of control individualism.
But it is liberals who have "shrugged." If America's recent turmoils have taught us anything, it is that nothing drives us apart like out of control self-interest, and nothing drives us to success than common effort and the meeting of great minds.
There is a sea change across the country that can be felt in the goals and motivations of our next leaders and eager work-seekers. Throughout the U.S., the younger generation is following a matured and updated version of the 1960s mantra to "turn on, tune in, and drop out." Back then it meant that youth should seek the mysteries within their own mind, and unfortunately this could best be accomplished by taking LSD and other drugs. Now, it means that people in their 20s and 30s should seek life-long goals that are far different from that of their parents or even their older siblings. Instead of a Wall Street job that promises riches and materialistic gain, college graduates now seek a job that truly makes them happy, whatever the financial cost. As opposed to a stable job at a firm and moving up through the ranks over decades, the youth of this generation embrace a riskier strategy that often involves switching companies and even entire vocations that grow and evolve out of a life-long strategy of self-fulfillment and service.
It's no accident that this is occurring as a direct result of Obama's election. The president is a cause of this revolt through his encouragement, just as he is a real-life embodiment of its results. Throughout the election, Obama encouraged his young supporters to "quit that Wall Street job," and become a teacher, or join the peace corps, or become a community organizer. The message, not to subtle, is that we should "shrug" the material comforts of a high salary in order to help others. To put the icing on the invitation, Obama promised that if they did, they might just find that they had quite the adventure by the end of their lives that they otherwise might not have had. But don't just take his word for it. Obama, a star graduate from college and the right race in the 1990s for any white shoe law firm to woo him for any salary he wanted, instead took the route he encourages others to now take.
Importantly, this seems not to be a characteristic of young conservatives in this country. Many conservatives follow the same mantra of their parents: that the government, although composed of regular and competent people, becomes dysfunctional when organized for any "Washington" goal. That whenever a group of people band together for something other than producing and profit, the goals are somehow perverted and wrong-headed. So it isn't the young conservatives who are shrugging, its the liberals who reject the "ordinary" goal of a six figure salary for a life well lived.
Take Tim, a Teach for America teacher who graduated from NYU and worked a year for a Wall Street firm. "I didn't like the people around me, Also, I wanted something actually challenging. My salary was cut it half, but that's ok." Scott, another teacher who graduated from law school in 2005 and also worked a a large firm in New York, agreed along the same lines. "A smart high school student could have done what I was doing. Now, as a teacher, I feel I am barely doing it competently. Every day I wonder whether I'm doing a good job at all for these kids, and that makes me a better teacher every day I go to work. I'm all these kids have, and for many, I'm their favorite teacher. They tell me so."
Both young men in their late 20s attribute their decision partly to Obama's message of service. It is the ultimate "shrug." In pursuit of self-happiness and self-interest, many talented, skilled and brilliant young Americans are choosing the route of service and hard work.
It may be too early to ultimately indict Ayn Rand for her message. Its easy to understand Rand's earnestness about a powerful central government run amok while encouraging sacrifice and altruism but which actually exploits its people for its own power and wealth. Ayn Rand was born in and escaped Revolutionary Russia. During this time of social and political upheaval, millions were killed by their own leaders in pursuit of a country which stressed the principals that all citizens should be equal and that they should serve their country before themselves.
But we are not Russia. We know that with elections and frequent turnover of talent in the government that the risk of absolute and out of control power is far less risky than a CEO who can be appointed for life, and who has no accountability to anyone really as long as he/she can justify their decisions to a shall group of shareholders.
The youth of this country understand that the only real risk is a life of unfulfilled dreams, and that serving a company for 45 years is less likely to accomplish this goal than starting one's own business, or even helping those who didn't have the same comforts growing up.
This is America, where anytime, anywhere, and anyone can shrug off the chains of the old for a life that provides much more that creature comforts.