Comment: What?

(See in situ)


What?

I don't know what this post is trying to accomplish, but I think it's obvious that the libertarian that Rand is talking about is not the kind of libertarian common to our current movement. She seems to be viewing the libertarian specifically as an anarchist, which, correct me if I am wrong but, that is certainly not the kind of libertartian common among the free market movement.
How many "anarchists" do we really have in this movement? Not many I'd assume. Capitalism is not anarchism. Laws exist to protect people's right to their capital. True anarchism, which she seems to be talking about, lacks any laws to protect an individuals right to their own capital, physical, intellectual, etc. She isn't talking about that. My guess (I'm only 31 years old) is that back then, the term libertarian, at least to her, didn't mean what it means today. In this excerpt, she obviously isn't talking about a free market capitalist libertarian, or even an anarcho-capitalist libertarian. It seems quite obvious that she is using the term "libertarian" to specifically mean ararchist. In which case, I'd agree. I don't like the idea of a sociey in which nobody agrees that I have the right to my own capital, because any law enforcing that principle goes against their "arnarchism" or "libertarianism".
As with almost everything Ayn Rand ever said, I think this particular excerpt has just been misinterpreted by people who just can't think passed their initial bias of her.

Free market capitalism isn't right for America because it works better. It's right because it's free (and it works better).