Not a bad idea, if you can find the ones who will consider an alternative viewpoint. Sad to say, I have yet to have that enlightening experience.

Good points, and you tap on one of the main things I find so wrong with the Liberal philosophy, it is similar, but it says "me first" and nothing about anyone else. If it takes 100 million dead to make me happy, ok. That is a worse philosophy than even a conservative. It is denial and selfish interest, mixed with manipulation and no moral code.

Or they suddenly have an incredible, undefinable sense of guilt....

Agreed, that was the way I felt listening to the audiobook version.

Sad to say, a common reaction, as I have had several friends who claim to be "a political" yet stand on the left side of every issue. Their biggest complaint is that the story makes no sense as it is about a railroad, and no one uses railroads anymore. Ack....

Excellent point AJ. So much of what is going on has a bearing on the Objectivist viewpoint, but moreover, is almost like material straight out of AS. To ignore it is to put ourselves in the vast un-named public that was the background of the story. I saw so much of today's world in a story written 50 years ago, and yet could easily see how it has been there all along back to before it was written. Yet the things that were "wrong" in the book, are what passes for "normal" in today's world. That is a very scary proposition to me.

Indeed. I had a similar encounter (online) when I outlined the full-spectrum fraud of Obamacare. I also offered some anecdotal evidence that the PPACA is destroying the private medical practice (my own provider had to sell out to a larger mega-hospital because he could no longer afford to pay the compensation packages to the two new employees that were needed simply to handle the PPACA red tape). The modern liberal responded that the main point of Obamacare is to kill the private practice and move to single-payer (like that of the enlightened European Union). I concluded by asserting that the liberal was blinded by their conceit and arrogance.

Essentially, your modern liberal (progressive) lacks self-awareness. If they could really see who they are, by the implementation of their views and beliefs, and understand the damage that they cause, they would be horrified.

I agree with you AJ, except the gulch has fallen into being just another news feed for the conservative/religious right. Not a lot of Objectivism going on. That was my point. I still fondly remember the old Gulch and the lively debates/discussions we used to have. I do miss it.

Liberals are known to use projection.

Politics = ideology which is a groups philosophy.
Faith or Religion = people's belief system, their ideology or their life philosophy.

To bring into discussion matter of politics or mysticism (your word choice, I'm sure) only invites the opportunity to discuss Objectivism's position in those matters. I would think the diversity of current events and how Objectivism fits would be something this site or any objectivist blog would welcome simply to present how relevant Objectivism is in today's events. This is the primary reason I repeatedly say that Ayn Rand was a visionary.

Personally, I'd much prefer a respectful discussion site to an echo chamber or a bully pulpit. I tend not to stay very long in those places.

I was having a discussion about rational self interest with a very left-leaning family member the other day. I made the comment that I believe it to be true that most people on this planet are actually good people and want to leave happy, productive, and honest lives. He was absolutely appalled and perplexed at my "idealism" and declared that he believes in the exact opposite. I thought that was a pretty sad, cynical world view, but it explains everything.

The feeling is the driver. Reason be damned.

"It's good to suffer. Don't complain. Bear, bow, accept—and be grateful that God has made you suffer. For this makes you better than the people who are laughing and happy. If you don't understand this, don't try to understand. Everything bad comes from the mind, because the mind asks too many questions. It is blessed to believe, not to understand. So if you didn't get passing grades, be glad of it. It means that you are better than the smart boys who think too much and too easily."

Yes, tarring anyone with the same brush is a prejudice unless evidence suggests it is appro po . Characterizing the anti reason aspect of a proponent for a hypocritical philosophy like collectivism or socialism or anyone claiming it is for the "greater good" , they are as an ancient but not yet extinct Dino says libretards.

Saw it this afternoon. It was lot more scary during the "I want to spread the wealth around" "Let's level the playing field" regime of O the great and powerful with the Evil Hag all lined up in waiting for her entitled coronation. At least I though she'd be queen.

I had read the book in college (@64-66) just after "The Fountainhead" which a friend had given me. When the 35ft Anniversary Edition showed up as a book club reading selection I bought it and have read both in succession three or four times since then. What struck me first was that actions of Mouch, Ferris, and James Taggart read like the playbook for the Obama administration. Odious regulations, conformity to 'public opinion' (a la Ellsworth Tooey), and equalization (redistribution) of wealth and resources to make things fair, the public good of which the public has no input but the politicians know what's best; "I'm from the government and here to help you!", No thanks. The last is the destruction of those who oppose the above, Hank Reardon, read Donald Trump, for the liberals are still at it. The scary thing in Part II that became reality was when Obama told businesses, "You didn't create that!" They had no right to the exclusivity of their processes or patents, they should be shared by all.
Part I and Part II caught the essence and spirit of the book, (Part III was a mish-mash on a cheap budget that deviated fo far from the book that I can't..!), I'll even forgive some time-line shifts but miss certain nuances, especially Eddie Willers who opens the story line, acts as the common man caught up in events he has no direct control over but is affected by them, and in the end is looking into the uncertainty by the light of the engine following the tracks which disappear into the uncertain darkness. The tag at the end is only a promise.
For liberals to watch this would be like holding up a mirror to their souls and they would either turn away or dismiss it conservative propaganda; it is but it was a vision of the future which they made reality. They won't like it because it mostly about people expressing ideas (a real no no), talking; the action is limited to a train wreck, pouring Reardon Metal, and the oil field fire!
"I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine!" The antithesis of liberal doctrine: the subjucation of individualism, the bending of the will to serve the state, and the abolition of liberty and freedom!

2 year commitment. :)

Send all liberals to Venezuela to live. They should be happy there.

I have just simply removed all hillary supporters from my list of "friends". I gain nothing from friendship with these people, and they take up my time. I would rather Hillary supporters wear an arm band identifying them. It would make my life easier as I would not associate with them, and I would know who my enemies are.

It would be totally useless for hillary supporters (liberals) to be exposed to Objectivism. Their attraction to collectivism is 100% EMOTIONAL, and has no relation to reason. They should go live in Venezuela or one of the socialist havens and be happy there.

Most liberals didn't like A.S.1 for two reasons. #1 No big explosions or car chases. #2 Dwayne Johnson wasn't in it.

Rational thinking is hard, ideology is easy. Lib-progs are inherently lazy.

I know someone who took a liberal friend to see AS Part I. Not unexpectedly, the liberal left the theater saying something to the effect, "Huh! THAT would never happen!!!" (speaking, I guess, of the scenario where socialism, if given a free hand, will cause the downfall of civilization as we know it, e.g, the power grid, because nobody is left to do the work, etc...) Liberals live a life where objective reality does not exist, only their Utopian fantasies.

Amazing article, not to degrade the benefits of Part II, or Part III. Now I'm going to have to go back and review my AS Video's ( I got 'em all) again, just to hear some of those lines that may have just gone over my head the first time. And I just might have to send your link to the few liberal friends I have left the next time they send me some of their biased media links. In fact I might even invite them to a showing at my house. And if they admit that they appreciate it I just might even loan them one of my copies of Atlas Shrugged. I've even got one reel of the film, of which I was supposed to get the rest to have a complete set, but never did.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Maybe liberals would be more willing to see it if you quit tarring them all with the same brush and assuming they're all alike and hold the same views? I know of many liberals who've read the book and have varying views on it.