A typical ivory tower professor who reads the equivalent of Cliff Notes on Ayn Rand and thinks he's got her down. Libertarianism frightens these types because it straddles a few of their sacred cows, and as a result is looked upon by leftists as potentially more dangerous than conservatism.

I think he was referring to when business (read: big corporations) benefit from the "interference" of the government--their lobbyists actually help create the wording of many new rules and regulations. But his whole article is purest mierda, and even in this instance he acts like it would be impossible to actually get the government to pull back.

I had the pleasure of hearing her speak in Boston several times at the Ford Hall forum. During Q&A, she was usually very gracious, but if you asked her a stupid question, that she had probably had heard a million times, then she was hell-on-wheels. I never saw that as a flaw.

As far as all of the "inner circle" and "personal" stuff, I was a few steps removed from it when I moved to NYC in 1976, but I saw a little. Some of it bothered a lot of people I knew, but compared to her work and eternal legacy, that didn't amount to anything to me, either.

Ayn Rand was an individual rights advocate and a Constitutionalist in that she agreed with America's founders on the need for a severely limited government. About as far from an "authoritarian" as one can get.

One can write a book on what Wolfe got wrong in this article.

The problem with Rand is that while she could invent an ideal, she couldn't become one herself. She was, after all, human. However, it was a delight to hear her lecture and in a debate, especially with someone who thought they could cut her to ribbons. They would walk away bloody and battered hardly knowing what hit them.

Just wait, the Establishment is going to have a heart attack when Rand Paul and Ted Cruz get into the debates. I love it as I am sick and tired of the establishment candidates, like McCain, Dole and Romney. We need new blood, in the like of Reagan to re-energize our Republic. Now Trump is talking, again, of joining the fray. With Bush declaring, the total now stands at 12 for the right wing of the Big Government Party. Sorry for the soliloquy but my dream ticket would be Paul and Cruz, doesn't matter what order or who is on top. It would drive both the left and right wings crazy and I would love it.

It's Reuters. Last refuge of hacks (just after the AP.)
Move along, nothing to see here.

Sad thing is that so many voters don't realize just how irrational this is.

This reminded me, very much so, of the original rant against Atlas by Whitaker Chambers' in his screed in the National Review in 1957, with the (in)famous line "To a gas chamber - go" he could hear on every page. (Unintentionally eponymous?)

That was as jaw-droppingly as off-the-mark as this current piece of trash, including its claim that her ideas "inevitably lead to dictatorship".

It was interesting that to verify my recollection of the quote, I Googled and found it in yet another anti-Rand piece (of crap) from 2014, on a Catholic web site whose tag line is: "Hosting the Conversation on Faith". How surprising. The author was not very original, as the piece was mostly lengthy quotes from Chambers' article, with his own approving filler around it.

It has always puzzled me how seemingly intelligent people can get things so very, very wrong. Well, maybe not really.

My "favorite" from personal experience was when I found my older brother (a doctoral candidate in psychology at the time) wrapping a Christmas present for his best friend, apparently to impart some enlightenment upon him. They were two books: Atlas and BF Skinner's "Beyond Freedom and Dignity". He had read Atlas on my recommendation, but apparently not Rand's scathing review of Skinner's book in her newsletter.

Extreme jaw-drop and speechless moment for me. My brother explained he considered them as making similar points about "elitism", his own worldview. Huh?

Yes, folks, fear and irrationality are in the air, be prepared. But then again, that's an unnecessary reminder to Gulchers.

I can't think of anything about this piece other than they are trying to make Rand Paul look like a lunatic. There are so many falsehoods and blatant misrepresentations I stopped reading after the first few paragraphs. I had to force myself to finish the article. It wasn't even particularly well written: even if i had agreed with it!

Precisely! These weak kneed "Establishment" types who fear what they don't understand will do anything to make sure the Liberal "Fix" is in and the debates are designed to restrict true debate! As usual....

I would have to add that Ayn was bossy in her circle because it was her circle, her creation. Anyone with a creation should be in complete control of that creation or destroy it and create anew.

Nevertheless, I don't see this control over her own creation in the slightest as even hinting of Stalinism.

People hate and fear what they are incapable of comprehending!

I would say the same thing - "where to begin".

There is no doubt that Ayn Rand was bossy in her circle. But to say she wanted a culture or politics that was authoritarian is to misunderstand her ideals.

I would add Wolfe is right that libertarianism has trouble as a practical view in today's politics.

But two things are needed to make liberty more popular:

1) Gradualism.We need more liberty now, and pure liberty can come along down the road.

2) Ideals. We need to teach people that capitalism is ideal.

No one serves to lose more from arguments for freedom than government or the press.

No longer would pleas against the injustice to one solitary individual be able to be whipped into a lynch-mob frenzy for narrow, well-meaning, misguided legislation.

I may have lost an IQ point or 20 just now.

Alan Wolfe (wolf! wolf!) must have rabies.
I had to stop laughing before quoting a question he asks--
"But how, exactly, does one get government "interference" out of business when business wants it there most of the time?"
Three cheers for all the businesses who want to waste time and money on government intrusion most of the time.
Old dino has never been a businessman but he knows laughable crap when he reads it.

Not once did the author defend his title! Life based on principle completely evades these people!

The enemies of freedom always like to throw off on those who stand up to them.

Yes, and we'll see a great deal more of it before next years election. Imagine the debates!

Yes, my thought also, and with all the lashing out at people and ideas ("novelist Ayn Rand [...] was an authoritarian at heart"), this guy is like a wounded rattlesnake trying to strike anything before it dies.

Don't you smell the rank odor of fear starting to rise from the 'old school'.