[CarolinaGuitarman]

"...are ruthless self monopolists right out of the Ayn Rand school of the strong individualist survives because there is nothing greater than themselves or a transcendant being they must one day answer to."

That's a complete distortion of what Rand said. Rand stood for individual rights, not the rule of strength. Your inclusion of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Gates and Ford with Stalin and Pol Pot is very revealing of your disgust for, and complete ignorance of, capitalism.

[Doctor Stochastic]

The creationists reveal ignorances in other than biology.

[blue-duncan]

"complete distortion of what Rand said. Rand stood for individual rights"

Individual rights are promoted, exercised and protected from a position of strength, not cooperation or weakness. If you read Rand that comes out loud and clear. As for capitalism, Rockefeller, Carnegie, Ford and Gates have nothing to do with it. Their empires were built on ruthless monopolistic tactics. They drove competitors out of the market place by buying them out, unfair trade tactics, copyright and trademark laws, endless expensive lawsuits or financial intimidation. Lives were ruined and businesses destroyed in their lust for power. They were no different in their tactics than Stalin and Pol Pot except the latter killed with violence rather than with banks and lawyers. But they had the same thing in common; the lust for selfish power over people, whether in the market place or in politics.

[xzins]

Your inclusion of Rockefeller, Carnegie, Gates and Ford with Stalin and Pol Pot is very revealing of your disgust for, and complete ignorance of, capitalism.

I'm thinking that the sentiment is in regards to the liberal foundations started by these men.

Armand Hammer was an industrialist. Was he a capitalist?