"Why hasn't this society, despite widespread communication, not embraced Rand's philosophy?"
It might be happening slowly.
1750 - A nation based on philosophical writings about liberty is still an unlikely dream, a philosophical thought experiment. It's always been kings partnered with religious leaders.
1850 - The time before the US passes beyond living memory. People question slavery, but it still exists in the US.
1950 - People dream of people's rights being respected without regard to race or sex, but it's controversial.
2000 - The dream isn't fully realized, but it's not controversial. Most people say they agree with respecting everyone's rights.

I didn't include the list WWII and it becoming normal for gov't to tax a large chunk of people's income. It remains to be seen of the pendulum will swing back away from gov't intrusiveness or if it will get worse.

It may take a long time for a philosophy of reason radically different from tradition to gain widespread sway.

I will not argue that the Enlightenment was based on reason and individualism. It was, but communication was a critical element. Arguably, the Enlightenment would not have been possible without the invention of the printing press, for example. You are right that the Enlightenment never achieved a consistent philosophy of reason, and to your point, Rand's philosophy was indeed a great achievement. Furthering your point, this generation has not achieved a consistent philosophy of reason either. And the great question is, "Why hasn't this society, despite widespread communication, not embraced Rand's philosophy?" Certainly it was explained clearly enough, and it was readily available to those who sought it out.

I like this: How can you hate me when you don't even know me?". That is real, basic truth. That is because you cannot hate someone, you can fear them, and call it hate, you can be jealous, or you can misplace your own agnst about whatever bothers you, and justify it as hate. But you really cannot hate until you KNOW who you hate and why. That is the same emotionalism the left uses, the same thing the Nazis used (substitute Jews, Communists or anyone of several other groups, they used them all). Listen to the Democrats and that is all they say, why you need to hate the Republicans, and Trump, because they are: (insert label here). This then goes back to education, and the huge failure it is, and why it is so important to the left, uneducated people can hate easily, because they have no reference, no facts to compare too. The Newsweek article clearly shows that, which is why I was surprised to see it. However, it is from Nov 2017, and so it was before the Dems were in full panic mode, I doubt it would be published today because it clearly shows the process at work.

Harris is a racist anti-gay, monotheistic lesbian homophobic misogynist with extreme liberal tendencies to attempt to stick her head up her rectum maximus and recirculate her airflow. There it must be true, because it's here. That is their idea of Knowledge, Reason and Logic applied. It doesn't matter what is said, as long as it is said with conviction, therefor it must be true. That it serves their purpose of demonizing their enemy, well, that doesn't matter.

Well, let me provide an example as to how HARD is it is to use Knowledge, Reason and Communication: read this article and you will just want to cry at how much power the education establishment has over youth and how well they can be programmed, watch the Steve Martin skit from the 70's Saturday Night Live show, regarding the King Tut exhibition and his point of commercialization, and then read the students programmed, and totally unreasonable, nonfactual and illogical responses. The go find your safe space to cry.....

https://www.newsweek.com/steve-martin...

The Enlightenment was based on reason and individualism, not "communication". Some other countries did try to politically copy the US success, allowing some degree of economic freedom, but could not do it enough or consistently because they did not accept the reason and individualism. No one said that a philosophy of reason is "self evident". The Enlightenment never achieved a consistent philosophy of reason, particularly in ethics, in which egoism was only implicit. Ayn Rand's philosophy, based on an Aristotelian approach, was a great achievement in all the main branches of philosophy, and is so radically different than traditional views that it is still poorly understood, and not understood at all by most.

The United States was the first country to base its founding on knowledge, reason, and communication. Given its success, one would think that other countries would have replicated the US model, but for the most part, they haven't. Two hundred plus years of success should have been more than ample example of how knowledge, reason, and communication defeats bad ideology. Many of those spreading the philosophy of reason erroneously think that the benefits of a philosophy of reason should be self-evident. Perhaps to us, such benefits are self-evident, but not to most others. What I am saying is that the intentional blankouts and fakings of reality are so pervasive that the world is like a garden overrun with weeds.

Knowledge, Reason and Communication are anathema to the left.

Did you watch any of Harris's persecution of Cabinet members since she was elected Senator?

The worst Stalinist and Nazi methods come to mind, for those who know what those were. The new generation has no idea so the left's taking the pages from these regimes, being fully aware how effective they were and hoping they will succeed in their drive.

Spreading a philosophy of reason that is radically different than tradition takes a lot more than refuting the most overt, crude racism which is mostly gone in this society anyway.

Leftists IMO are for the most part just Low Information voters. I think as long as their pied piper is playing their tune they will follow along and most often just to have something or some alternative ideology to complain about. With my left leaning friends it is nearly absolutely predictable, if I say North they will inevitably say South but for no reason other than to disagree. Many have no idea why they don't like Trump other than the propaganda they have been force fed all the while being informed that Hillary should have won. We have all heard of Hillary supporting Anti Trumpers switching parties and coming over to the light side but we never hear of Trump supporters going over to the dark side.

Interesting point

Maxine for president with Pocahontas as vp

As with a number of political or even religious groups, as long as the majority condones the immoral and/or unethical methods of extremists, problems will continue to grow.

Fortunately, as best we can determine, the extremists among Democrats make up only about 8%. There varying degrees of liberal thinking among the rest, but the party has mistakenly assumed the radicals make up their entire base. The Walkaway movement is one indication that Democratic leadership is alienating part of their members. Whether disgusted moderate liberals will vote Republican, Libertarian, some other minority party, or simply not vote will make a notable difference in November.

One or more of those above is lacking. Some bad ideologies are actively preventing it. Which is why many people feel that being objective is too scary. Which is why more bad ideologies will take root and grow.

Very well said. I second Dino's motion.

I read an article recently, about how the son of a white sup. leader woke up as a result of friendships made in college.
Leftist just complain but they secretly support these wacky groups and want the chaos to continue.
Notice we hadn't heard from these groups for many years until recently when the postmodernist started to ramp up their bull crap.

Bingo!
Talk aboiut nailing it!
We need a Gulcher Of The Day Award!

Bravo to this gentleman!

Knowledge, Reason and Communication defeats bad ideology.... Do they? They should, but if they had, Objectivism would be the default, not the exception.

A beautiful story.
The influence of genes on character- doubtful-
"The fault dear Brutus is not in our stars but in ourselves .."
Shakespeare, Julius Ceasar

Yes, it often seems to work that way.
The most vociferous against something are often the worst at doing the very thing they speak against.

If you hear someone saying "racist" all the time, they are most likely the true racist.

It is interesting that the ones that complained about him having civil communication with white supremacists were black supremacists.

Yes indeed. He is a braver man than I.

If leftists did use Knowledge, Reason and Communication, they would end up defeating their own bad ideology.