- Hot
- New
- Categories...
- Producer's Lounge
- Producer's Vault
- The Gulch: Live! (New)
- Ask the Gulch!
- Going Galt
- Books
- Business
- Classifieds
- Culture
- Economics
- Education
- Entertainment
- Government
- History
- Humor
- Legislation
- Movies
- News
- Philosophy
- Pics
- Politics
- Science
- Technology
- Video
- The Gulch: Best of
- The Gulch: Bugs
- The Gulch: Feature Requests
- The Gulch: Featured Producers
- The Gulch: General
- The Gulch: Introductions
- The Gulch: Local
- The Gulch: Promotions
- Marketplace
- Members
- Store
- More...
Allow me to suggest that the sales of books by and about Ayn Rand, the production of the three movies, along with the continued success of The Fountainhead and the rediscovery of We the Living indicate the reasons why our society is as successful as it is. We might count 25 million people who self-identify as having been influenced by Ayn Rand and her philosophy.
It is especially significant to count those who read the books, were "influenced" but never self-identified as Objectivists.
A capitalist society is diverse and pluralistic. Even socialist communes and religious orders exist. But none of them controls all of the others. That, too, is an expression of Objectivism.
Objectivism is a philosophy for personal happiness. The broader sociology and economics are secondary to individualism. You do not need to convert anyone - certainly not "everyone" - in order to live your own life by your own standards.
Fifty years ago, President Kennedy challenged the world to contrast East Berlin with West Berlin. West Berlin was not "objectivist" in the formal sense, but was, indeed, a place where reality and reason were accepted implicitly with the consequence of political and economic freedom for all.
But it starts with the individual. And, again, about 25 million people have consciously chosen to adhere at least implicitly to the principles outlined by Ayn Rand when she formulated the philosophy of Objectivism.
looking at dictionaries only one uses the word large without definition and one states bluntly two or more people who interact.
the key is if the group is in agreement or disagreement and either way take certain common steps to implement or resolve or discard a conclusion - without changing 'fundamental' beliefs and ethics.
Too large might also be two or more.
Assuming they are all thinkers and doers but the proof of that is celebrating the millennium one year early. That sort of society exists only in subjective circles. If they cannot count how can they be objective? A is A.