Acording to the climate changers our very existence pollutes their environment.

ROFL! Rand's statement rejecting cooperation with libertarians flies directly in the face of it. More likely one of the Scottish Enlightenment philosophers was the source.

This is a good statement of classical liberalism. And I agree with it up to a point, but we have passed that point. There is no "live and let live" accommodation possible with those who are willing to use force against our efforts to enjoy and improve our own lives. One can only fight them or surrender to them.

"Capitalism is its economic expression"

Bravo!

I guessed you were onto something better. There's a constant cycle, described in The Innovators Dilemma, of one thing being commoditized while something else is decommoditized.

There's a book called Necessary Endings about business relationships that aren't working and need to end. It's hard to quit a job and even harder to fire people, but it's usually a good thing. I got fired 15 years ago after helping to train my Chinese replacement. He was so excited to have the job. I was actually happy it pushed me to try something new, which turned out to be much much better for me. And it worked out for the company too that successfully navigated the transition to a more commoditized business with lower margins. It was kind of painful in some ways, but it's infinitely better than imaging me back in that desk doing the same thing, never having had all the new experiences that came after.

Regarding multiculturalism and diversity, that's a necessary thing. But my opinion doesn't matter. Whatever they're doing rubbed you the wrong way, so it's time to look for something new.

My dad was a banker, and he spent decades in the 80s through 00s going through all the series of consolidations and staying ahead of layoffs. I told him in 2000 it wouldn't bother me b/c all I know is tech, where job jumping is a fact of life. He said I can't say it wouldn't bother me for sure b/c I hadn't lived through the banking industry consolidation. He was right about that and most other things.

"Is this an Ayn Rand quote?"
I got it from the middle of the article linked to the OP.

Sometimes I think that she knew enough about human psychology to be a real shrink, if she had chosen to.--She was a genius.

Well, "tribal loyalty" is a great "obstacle", but, on a deeper level, envy, or irrationality made be a greater obstacle. But still, tribalism is a great evil. The article is well-reasoned, but I am not highly optimistic about its convincing people who do not accept the idea of individual rights in the first place. That's what we have to promote first.

Ayn Rand said that only individual rights and objective law were needed to prevent the spread of tribalism in America.

Notice how these two values are under constant attack now.

Here is an interesting Ayn Rand quote,

“What are the nature and the causes of modern tribalism? Philosophically, tribalism is the product of irrationalism and collectivism. It is a logical consequence of modern philosophy. If men accept the notion that reason is not valid, what is to guide them and how are they to live?

Obviously, they will seek to join some group—any group—which claims the ability to lead them and to provide some sort of knowledge acquired by some sort of unspecified means. If men accept the notion that the individual is helpless, intellectually and morally, that he has no mind and no rights, that he is nothing, but the group is all, and his only moral significance lies in selfless service to the group—they will be pulled obediently to join a group. But which group? Well, if you believe that you have no mind and no moral value, you cannot have the confidence to make choices—so the only thing for you to do is to join an unchosen group, the group into which you were born, the group to which you were predestined to belong by the sovereign, omnipotent, omniscient power of your body chemistry.

This, of course, is racism. But if your group is small enough, it will not be called “racism”: it will be called “ethnicity.”

I think it is easiest to live together if all the members subscribe to rationality. Objectivist principles would be best.

In the absence of that, if the members just subscribe to the old fashioned 10 commandments, things would probably work out reasonably.

In the absence of that, if the members just subscribe to "do unto others what you want others to do unto you", we would be better off than we are now.

currently we have adopted to mob rule, where jus the hint of believing something that somehow offends another's feelings causes violence to erupt.

A little on how the national motto was changed to "In God we trust" by conservatives:

http://origins.osu.edu/history-news/g...

Is this an Ayn Rand quote?

Tough nut when the national motto is "E pluribus unum"! Incidentally, "living together in peace to mutual advantage" IS the common goal. Having to suppress predatory urges some see as being deprived of their values and goals. Some individuals not wanting to exercise voluntary self-restraint give rise to rules, laws, regulations and the ultimate police state. "In unity there is strength" leads to group or mob formation, from clan to tribe to ever increasing communal adherence and hierarchy. Nature goes from singularity to complexity, from an ovum to a conglomeration of trillions of cells forming a single person. Retaining a sense of individual self while collaborating with others is the highest stage of evolution and enlightenment.

I am very interested in the source of this deceptively simple truth, so that I may quote it.