The link above includes fellow Gulcher David Kelley's interpretation intermixed with AS2.

Over the last couple of days on a different thread, I was in disagreement over whether or not John Galt ever committed sabotage. The failure of the interlocker just prior to "switching via lanterns" is an example of one case that I think, but cannot prove, was an act of sabotage.

Today I started looking at my AS2 DVD and saw the following:

Jeff Allen, recounting John Galt's walkout:

'I will put an end to this, once and for all,' he said. His voice was clear and without feeling. That was all he said and started to walk out. He walked down the length of the place, in the white light, not hurrying and not noticing any of us. Nobody moved to stop him. Gerald Starnes cried suddenly after him, 'How?' He turned and answered, 'I will stop the motor of the world.' Then he walked out.

Now I ask myself, and all of you, how could someone stop the motor of the world by only passively waiting for failure after failure? Many of them, such as the Amtrak debacle or the Taggart Tunnel, were caused by the errors of men. Some were due to lack of maintenance. The cause of some failures is intentionally left vague by Rand, however. The failing of multiple Cu wires in multiple places is an example.

D'Anconia blew up his own mines.
Rearden said he would blow up his own mills (but didn't) near the end of AS2.
Danneskjold resorted to piracy.

Why do people have a hard time accepting the possibility that Galt could have been "the destroyer". After all, he said he would stop the motor of the world. That is not passive.

Jeff Allen: "Maybe that's him, doing what he said. Stopping the motor of the world."

I don't think that lessens Galt at all in my mind.

I look forward to your insights.