I’m pretty sure that the author of this little “ditty” uses the same journalistic techniques as most of Rush Limbaugh’s critics... Don’t actually read Rand, just read the criticism of Rand, and go from there.
There are so many false assumptions that the author makes, it’s difficult to list them all, but 1 really stands out to me... “#3 Rand Creates Fanatics.” Someone may want to break it to the author, that Ayn Rand is no longer creating anything, as she’s gone to the “Great Galt’s Gulch in the Sky,” or more realistically for her, she simply no longer exists. The point is that if you have employees who read something and they become “fanatics,” maybe you’re hiring employees who have “issues” far before ever reading Rand.
Frankly, the posts on this thread, as well as the many pages of comments on the original article at the CNBC website pretty much says it all. That the author really has no understanding of what Rand wrote.
Mark
When the author derides “fanatics” he is really deriding passion. Passion is one of the top 5 indicators of success. Any manager or employer SHOULD be celebrating Rand “fanatics,” as these are the truely innovative and passionate. If these “fanatics” are not allowed to flourish, they will find a more satisfactory situation. If employers/mgrs are happy to see them go, then they should realize that they are stagnating and will soon see failure.
Of course the collecrivists, such as this author continually deride success, so they consider passion to be a negative. They celebrate drones!