The psychology of exclusion is very interesting; I’m glad you brought it up. Sorry to look at a relatively unimportant part of a great posting; It’s just I see this so often in all philosophies considered “fringe” (which unfortunately includes Objectivism at the moment.)

People adopt a philosophy as a Goth would where a dog collar; it is almost an adolescent struggle for identity and superiority.

I don’t like that what I support gains the support of individuals like this. Perhaps when my ideas become more mainstream (as I think they are) these kind of people will leave.

From time to time, Whittaker Chambers’ outrageous review of Rand’s writings is wheeled out by sneering conservatives or by those who want to portray Rand as some sort of nutter. They rarely, if ever, point out that Chambers’ agenda, like that of Buckley, was to attack Rand, or indeed any other Objectivist/libertarian who defended the free society without regard to religion. They hated Rand because she built her argument on rational foundations, not those of revealed religion. To this day, conservatives who are Christians cannot deal with this in a mature way. Hence the smears.

And Ralf – I agree with your commentary. Ethics is number one, but psychology ties it. This is my pet subject and if I was younger, I would return to school. We desperately need a brilliant Objectivist psychologist. Many people resist the obvious truth of Objectivism for both philosophical and psychological reasons. For many I believe, their psychology is the major obstacle. Unfortunately the field of psychology has largely developed in an atmosphere of abysmal philosophy so we are facing a steep uphill battle. We need a rational psychological framework, which will take a long time or someone brilliant on the order of Ayn Rand.

There seems to be little understanding and willingness to understand capitalism as the only vision that supports individual freedom. As in Yoshiba’s case, the accusations say all about the metaphysics of the critic and nothing about capitalism itself.
To me it sounds unbelievable that in 2008 people say that Atlas Shrugged (1957) proposes a dictatorial solution. I cannot believe they actually read the book of 1200 pages of explanation. Well done.. mr. Yoshiba.

The road to freedom has nothing to do with ‘extremism’ or dictatorship, but with an understanding in people’s mind. Would anyone believe that a sticker on my car’s rear window stating ‘Enjoy Capitalism’ in coca cola style actually shocks people, but when, in election time, the city is filled with posters showing Hammer and Sickle (responsible for millions of deaths) nobody even questions that??

I agree, it’s all in Ethics. I would add psychology too, however. Capitalism requires self-reliance and maturity. That is something people want to avoid often. It’s better to be pampered they think. But when you discover the ‘taste’ of independence, not only capitalism becomes logical, but one can see that of course between Yoshiba’s ‘two approaches’ vision (the ‘withdrawn pessimist’ and the ‘wannabe dictator’) there is a third option: rethink your ethics and start living accordingly. To people who want to see that, sooner or later capitalism won’t be a threat.

And to those who don’t want to understand: have a look at government involvement in the economical collapse in the US nowadays.