I reread it every 6 months or so. It's really fascinating not only because each time you read it you become aware of the nitpicky flaws in it, but because you become MUCH more aware of how there are really people who do talk like Rand villains, and it's scary.

Rand's number one rule of characterization: if someone says their ought to be a law. They are a bad character.

This is what I like least about Rand detractors: they never actually seem to have read the book.

Rand gets very specific about what constitutes a useful law and what doesn't. Mainly, she says that government should protect the people with law enforcement, protect their rights with courtrooms, and protect the nation with a defensive military - all things that private enterprise can't be trusted to do. She believes in government in a limited capacity, but she believes it should exist.

And one thing people don't seem to get while reading Atlas: she's aware that she's writing about a pipe dream. Her story is merely a hypothetical ideal, not an idea of what she actually wants to happen. Her writing worked, too: it made millions of people think about self-reliance and freedom. And that's not a bad thing at all.

I am not a Rand detractor I am a card carrying libertarian. FountainHead page 137 supports my claim. You misunderstood me I like her writing and her ideals. Its my fault for making a quick joke anyway.