I am re-reading Atlas for the 2nd time. enjoying it once again, but since my first reading of Shrugged, I have learned a lot and have trouble with Rands glaring contradiction. I was somewhat conservative during the 1st reading but since have become a anarco-capitalist simply because its absence of contradiction. In the book, Rand is always attacking the idea of doing anything for the collective (as she should). She opposes the idea of theft in every other sentence (as she should). but far as I know, she does not oppose a state (as she should). In order to not have a contradiction, everything MUST be voluntary. Whether it be building railroads or Reardon metal for the good of society or National defense for the good of society, economically speaking they are both still services and if forced on someone, are a violation of rights. Nothing can begin with theft in order to be consistent. It seems that Rand makes exceptions for "the good of society", even though she spends a whole novel railing against the idea.