Rand's first bestseller, The Fountainhead, received far fewer reviews than We the Living, and reviewers' opinions were mixed.[208] Lorine Pruette's positive review in The New York Times was one that Rand greatly appreciated.[209] Pruette called her "a writer of great power" who wrote "brilliantly, beautifully and bitterly", and said "you will not be able to read this masterful book without thinking through some of the basic concepts of our time".[210]
There were other positive reviews, but Rand dismissed most of them for either misunderstanding her message or for being in unimportant publications.[208] Some negative reviews focused on the novel's length;[11] one called it "a whale of a book" and another said "anyone who is taken in by it deserves a stern lecture on paper-rationing". Other negative reviews called the characters unsympathetic and Rand's style "offensively pedestrian".[208]
Atlas Shrugged was widely reviewed, and many of the reviews were strongly negative.[11][211] In National Review, conservative author Whittaker Chambers called the book "sophomoric" and "remarkably silly".[212]
He described the book's tone as "shrillness without reprieve". He accused Rand of supporting a godless system (which he related to that of the Soviets), claiming, "From almost any page of Atlas Shrugged, a voice can be heard, from painful necessity, commanding: 'To a gas chamber—go!'".[213]
Atlas Shrugged received positive reviews from a few publications, including praise from the noted book reviewer John Chamberlain.[211] Rand scholar Mimi Reisel Gladstein later wrote that "reviewers seemed to vie with each other in a contest to devise the cleverest put-downs", saying it was "execrable claptrap", "written out of hate", and showed "remorseless hectoring and prolixity".[11]
Rand's nonfiction received far fewer reviews than her novels. The tenor of the criticism for her first nonfiction book, For the New Intellectual, was similar to that for Atlas Shrugged.[214][215] Philosopher Sidney Hook likened her certainty to "the way philosophy is written in the Soviet Union",[216] and author Gore Vidal called her viewpoint "nearly perfect in its immorality".[217] Her subsequent books got progressively less review attention.[214]
The political figures who cite Rand as an influence are usually conservatives (often members of the Republican Party),[249] despite Rand taking some atypical positions for a conservative, like being pro-choice and an atheist.[250] She faced intense opposition from William F. Buckley Jr. and other contributors to the conservative National Review magazine, which published numerous criticisms of her writings and ideas.[251]
Nevertheless, a 1987 article in The New York Times referred to her as the Reagan administration's "novelist laureate".[252] Republican congressmen and conservative pundits have acknowledged her influence on their lives and have recommended her novels.[253][254][255][256]
She has influenced some conservative politicians outside the U.S., such as Sajid Javid in the United Kingdom,[257] Siv Jensen in Norway,[258] and Ayelet Shaked in Israel.[259]
The financial crisis of 2007–2008 spurred renewed interest in her works, especially Atlas Shrugged, which some saw as foreshadowing the crisis.[260][261][262] Opinion articles compared real-world events with the novel's plot.[249][262]
Signs mentioning Rand and her fictional hero John Galt appeared at Tea Party protests.[261] There was increased criticism of her ideas, especially from the political left. Critics blamed the economic crisis on her support Opinion articles compared real-world events with the novel's plot. [249][262] Signs mentioning Rand and her fictional hero John Galt appeared at Tea Party protests.[261] There was increased criticism of her ideas, especially from the political left. Critics blamed the economic crisis on her support of selfishness and free markets, particularly through her influence on Alan Greenspan.[256] In 2015, Adam Weiner said that through Greenspan, "Rand had effectively chucked a ticking time bomb into the boiler room of the US economy".[263]
Lisa Duggan said that Rand's novels had "incalculable impact" in encouraging the spread of neoliberal political ideas.[264] In 2021, Cass Sunstein said Rand's ideas could be seen in the tax and regulatory policies of the Trump administration, which he attributed to the "enduring influence" of Rand's fiction.[265] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ayn_Rand
hap, Actually i had 2nd thoughts on my Christian comment re you and ended up searching your posts way back. Some freaky Objectivist-type positions i felt, but connecting you to that giant superstition was my mistake. I'll cop to that blunder.
Don't want to get into it here and now, as i've never been attracted to labels and also have never felt i understood the different schools enough to say i was one or the other as you have committed to that selfish beast Rand, but whenever i've been asked to choose one i felt closer to it's always been
Some interpret the imperative to define oneself as meaning that anyone can wish to be anything. However, an existentialist philosopher would say such a wish constitutes an inauthentic existence – what Sartre would call "bad faith". Instead, the phrase should be taken to say that people are defined only insofar as they act and that they are responsible for their actions. Someone who acts cruelly towards other people is, by that act, defined as a cruel person. Such persons are themselves responsible for their new identity (cruel persons). This is opposed to their genes, or human nature, bearing the blame.
As Sartre said in his lecture Existentialism is a Humanism .. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Existentialism_Is_a_Humanism : "man first of all exists, encounters himself, surges up in the world—and defines himself afterwards". The more positive, therapeutic aspect of this is also implied: a person can choose to act in a different way, and to be a good person instead of a cruel person.[30]
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
