Who's John Galt?

I am watching the Atlas movies. The government is killing the economy to pad accounts of the super wealthy. The means by which wealth is distributed is regulated under the Fair Share Law; a law that rewards mediocrity and under production, a law that stunts real growth and the products of imagination. People are out of work, common commodities are priced out of reach of all but the very literal 1% of the world's population. Intellectual property has no protection. And the laws stand with support from the majority of the populace. A populace who does not seem to understand that the fair share law is eroding their ability to care for themselves and allow the government puppet masters to hoard wealth for themselves.

In the meantime there is John Galt and a rash of disappearances of the best and brightest talents across the complete spectrum of abilities, people who have been diminished by having their work hampered. Talent is leaving en masse to a purpose as yet undisclosed.

It is a two part problem as presented by critics. Big business & government against the people. The government consistently uses "fairness" to convince the general populace that businessmen like the protagonists Reardon and Taggart are the bane of their existence by making it a social crime to work for accolades and prosperity because the "social good" is more important. The problem with making this a two party issue is that it isn't a two party issue.

Ayn Rand had a purpose with this book. Some declare it nefarious, a cloying codex on the value of socialism. She has been accused of writing this book to acclimate the American People to the idea of turning over everything to the American government. I am just at the part of the movie in which the government Economic Recovery Board has transferred control of everything (essentially) to an entity known as the Unification Board. The policies of the Unification board are in fact, a short order for Communism. The Public Good has just been revealed (to any sheeple paying attention) to be the Government noose and not the Noose of Big Business as was earlier purported.

This follows a board meeting in which 6 men of Affluence have declared that

"Capitalism doesn't work without government as a partner."

And mocked the concept of free-thinking while condemning those who would adhere to the Constitution and the inherent value of a work ethic intoned in its precepts as Cry Babies. Thus revealing something that Ayn Rand's critic don't want the rest of us to understand. This is not a 1% v 99% problem. It is not enough that the middle class is reduced to poverty. All person's not deemed of significant sociability to those 6 (Builderbergers)  should be reduced to the status of government mules that the rest of the general populace, for whom the government has made a marketing slogan of "for the common good". This is not a two part problem.

It is a problem of multiple dimension. Rand had been accused of being a beltway insider, the product of feminism which is often accused of undermining the fabric of a true American society and working to make sheeple of us all. Aldus Huxley was accused of the same when his Brave New World was picked apart. One could say it is Gattica all over again. I do not know if the charges are true. I do not know if these books were written with the support of the Builderbergers in hopes of making the transition to a neo-feudal system easier to achieve. All I know, is that if Ayn Rand wrote this book as a blueprint for us to check our brains at the door she failed.

As I said, if you are really paying attention to this movie (I couldn't slog through the book) the problem is multi-dimensional. It is the 6 against the 1%. And the 6 against the 99%. The fight between the 1 and 99 is a smoke screen. The 6 who are in control of the government are the problem. And in the meantime everyone is asking who is John Galt?

I want to know who John Galt is.
Is he a savior? Or is he someone who has filled people's head with garbage of a perfect Utopia that will fall apart in the end as surely as Thomas Moore's did in the second part of the book?

I have my own idea. But we will have to see what happens.