What if a 'drug' were discovered which allowed the alcohol intolerant to actually enjoy alcohol? Would this be morally questionable? The market would be huge and as we all know, the market is good at making the morally questionable, morally acceptable.
Rand wrote in "The Virtue of Selfishness".....that accepting any government controls is “delivering oneself into gradual enslavement.”
Also....Rand is one of three women the Cato Institute calls founders of American libertarianism. The other two, Rose Wilder Lane and Isabel “Pat” Paterson, both rejected Social Security benefits on principle. Lane, with whom Rand corresponded for several years, once quit an editorial job in order to avoid paying Social Security taxes. The Cato Institute says Lane considered Social Security a “Ponzi fraud” and “told friends that it would be immoral of her to take part in a system that would predictably collapse so catastrophically.” Lane died in 1968....
There's an even greater irony here in that she needed health care benefits >> Rand also believed that the scientific consensus on the dangers of tobacco was a hoax. By 1974, the two-pack-a-day smoker, then 69, required surgery for lung cancer. And it was at that moment of vulnerability that she succumbed to the lure of collectivism.
Non-capitalist? Maybe. But whatever you do want to call their earlier system, it wasnt socialist because the population had absolutely no say in the way their country was governed, which is the true hallmark of the socialist ideal.
At this time Russia was (and actually still is) governed by a self appointed, self-serving elite with no regard for the consequences of their policies on people or environment. . They weren't hell-bent on a glorious future for their subjects, only a glorious present for themselves. In this respect there wasn't much to seperate them from how the 'west' is governed nowadays.