An introductory note: Hello dear Reader, in spite of what is said below I still consider myself an objectivist. A few bushels of rotten apples doesn't meant every idea from that orchard of thought is bad.

I find the idea that what was supposed to be the ideological movement for the free thinker and the scientist is more widely treated as a different flavor of libertarianism. Why have so many "Objectivists" who say they follow a philosophy freed of dogma become what are essentially "morally Christian" Free-Market™ fanatics? We can't let ourselves be constrained by ideas proven stale and still born by the reality all objectivists supposedly live in observance of?

Ayn Rand was a philosopher with perspectives compiled together in a very new and in a sense revolutionary way. As a consequence, Ayn Rand was a prolific writer on a variety of issues and a novelist who wrote works in a style I quite like. Ayn Rand was not Infallible nor was she a prophet. She was a flawed, biased human being with even less information about the world than you have dear reader.

To those of you readers who are objectivists, I ask you; do your ideals actually represent the real means of maximizing productivity and consequently maximizing human happiness, or are you believing what you want to be true?

I hope you will join me in my exploration of these concepts in some of my other content.