In general, I agree with the articles' author. Trump has the nerve to call out looters and moochers for what they are. Those who criticize him illustrate Objectivism's weakness. Ayn Rand's philosophy may be worthy of emulation. In her lifetime, she migrated from the Soviet Union to America because back then, America still remained a nation largely free of looters and moochers. However, starting around the time she arrived, the wrongheaded ideas she fled came here with her via Woodrow Wilson and later FDR and others.

Now only America, and only because Trump and Musk were willing to sacrifice temporarily to create an America worthy of their triumphant futures, has a future. Trump and Musk chose Ben Franklin's republic ... if you can keep it. The unwillingness of Objectivists to sacrifice temporarily prevented them from keeping a republic that was of worthy of their ideals, but in need of vigilant protection. President Reagan correctly noted that the American ideal was only a generation away from being lost.

So what exactly is Objectivism's weakness? Ayn Rand should have checked her own premises more carefully. The premises that she underestimated are the nature of men and women who seek power and the number of those who seek the proverbial free lunch.

John Adams said in 1798, "Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other," Ayn Rand rejected that religiosity, rightly or wrongly. Regardless of whether she was right or not about religiosity, Objectivism could never be and will never be a governing philosophy for any more citizens than those in Galt's Gulch. Remember that Galt's Gulch was a restricted community, and it would have to be; otherwise, the crickets and cockroaches (i.e. looters and moochers) would overwhelm it.