Interesting article. Appears over-generalized. Rand was not against individuals making choices, only against others presuming to have a veto on the choices you make.
Its always interesting to see how those who deem to comment on Rand, almost always, cant resist inserting generalizations, conclusions and characterizations of Rand as if they are qualified to make such judgments and or implied smears...e.g., “self styled philosopher” ... One may not like Rand’s Objectivism but I defy the author to produce a proposed superior philosophy as comprehensive and deeply rational. Rand is a giant of several fields and her book sales alone raise the importance of her work to towering heights. The last four years have emphasized to any thinking person the continuing relevance of her work.
I would recommend that Rand critics to be taken seriously first demonstrate they actually understand the full scope of what she has to say and its implications for our civilisation and for the life of a free individual. It is clear to me, that most of her critics have only skimmed her work and are left feeling stung, having found in Rand, valid critiscms of long held but poorly thought out assumptions that control their lives and actions. Attacking Rand may restore their self esteem, but it does not make them right nor competent to hold the opinions they express.
Thanks, GW. This is as good as it gets on FR.
+1