Who is the average Objectivist?

I will admit that I don't consider myself an expert or a spokesperson for Objectivism (that is why, as a person who cares about Objectivism, I support people who I think truly understand and advance Objectivist Ideas like The Objective Standard, The Undercurrent and Just Right Media). However, being an active Objectivist for three years, I have some opinion about who the average Objectivist is.

The average Objectivist does not mean the most rational Objectivist, or the person who understands Objectivist the best, or necessarily shares my views. It only means the most common person who can be called an Objectivist (not just someone who calls themselves an Objectivist). So, in my experience, these are the common qualities of the average Objectivist:

-Has read all of Rand's fiction (who could be an Objectivist and have only read Atlas, but I think anybody truly interested in Rand's ideas is interested in reading at least all of her fiction).

-Does not call him/herself a Libertarian, Conservative or Liberal, or any other political label. But if he or she calls him/herself anything, It would be Classical Liberal.

-Admires free-market economists like Mises and Hayek, but rejects the Subjectivist, rationalist or empiricist elements of their Ideas.

-Does not support Clinton or Trump (could also be said for the average sane human being). But will probably vote for one or the other rather than "waste" their vote on a third party or independent candidate that they do not fully support anyways.

-Follows the ARI and Peikoff, but has no opinion of or is ignorant about the Peikoff/Kelley dispute, "open" objectivism, tolerance as a virtue, or the Atlas Society.

-Supports alternative right wing media such as Rebel Media in Canada or Breitbart in the United States.

-Believes that the Iran Deal was a mistake and that Iran is the West's major enemy.

-Supports Israel as the only true western-style nation in the middle east, while rejecting Zionist or Religionist views of Israel. -Engages with Libertarians, Conservatives and Libertarian or Conservative organizations while being careful not to sanction their irrational views.

-Opposes Islam and multiculturalism.

I could add much more, but I think these points paint a good enough picture of who I think the average Objectivist is.

Any thoughts?

I think that to be an Objectivist the person needs to understand the following: ...

All of the points you added are true, but I made clear that we are assuming the people we are talking about can be called Objectivists. I am only interested in making generalizations concerning positions and ideas not core to Objectivism. I am interested in this because of my interest in the Objectivist movement as a whole, where it stands today, and how to improve it.

I frequently call myself a libertarian

Do you call yourself a rationalist because you believe in reason? Libertarians (small l and big L) accept "liberty" as a floating abstraction (a value in and of itself), and to that extent engage in intrinsisism. Not all Libertarians are intrinsisists (you might be an example), but most are. I am talking about the average Objectivist, and most Objectivists I have meet or who I know at all distance themselves from Libertarianism. In some contexts I might call myself a Libertarian, just as I might call myself a Conservative or a Liberal in certain contexts, but usually It only confuses the situation (I will get asked nonsense questions like "Why do you hate the government?" or "Do you believe the government is always bad?" which I will not get asked If I identify myself as a Objectivist).

It would make no sense to call myself as an "Objectivist"...

Why not? If the person you are talking to does not know what Objectivism is, and It is a waste of time explaining it to them, why talk politics at all? Again, in some contexts one may need to Identify as more than an Objectivist, but I would say that in most cases you should either say your an Objectivist or not say anything.

That we have some form and degree of volition. We make choices at some level

Only some level? If I said that 99% of a persons actions are predetermined and only 1% are decided by him, should I be considered an Objectivist? What degree of free will does one need to believe in to be considered an Objectivist? I would set the bar a little higher then "some level", while acknowledging that 100% free will is probably impossible.

I don't want this thread to go too far off topic (while of course still giving you the chance to respond). I am more interested in how the average Objectivist sees and engages with the world, and focus on the why and on what Objectivist should do (for example, create new media outlets so that Objectivist don't have to depend on Conservative news, create a larger network of Objectivist organizations, etc.)

As an Objectivist who lacks the skills to significantly add to Objectivist thought, but who none the less wants to see the Objectivist movement grow, I take an interest in the non-philosophical challenges facing Objectivists. Why the interest in the average Objectivist? Not because I what to become a carbon copy myself, but because I want to discuss where the Objectivist movement stands and how to improve it (correct the "average" Objectivist where he or she is wrong, rather than waste time correcting the 0.01% of Objectivists who are wrong about some other issue).

I am a member of an Objectivist meetup group in Toronto. We meet every second Sunday of the month.

Thank you for sharing the brochure, though the Freedom Party of Ontario also has similar material explaining the essence of Objectivism with the same basic points.

I didn't know an hour long video of Ayn Rand herself existed online. Thanks allot for sharing.

Thank you Marotta for your reply,

I won't comment on the validity of the Atlas Society, but I will say that from my observations their views (among those who care at all) are in the minority among people I would consider Objectivists. I believe this because of two reasons; ARI's virtual monopoly on Objectivist writings and content and from the opinions on the issue I have read (majority of the respected writers I found on ORC agree with Pekioff, if only in the basic principles). If I had to put myself in a camp, I would Identify with SOLO, but I don't consider the issue to be a deal breaker on whether or not a person is an Objectivist per se. If any one has any reason why the ARI view might be a minority view (among true Objectivists, rather than people calling themselves Objectivists), I would be interested to know.

On your second point, going beyond self-identification is not easy. I would say that if someone says their an Objectivist, and there is no obvious reason to think that they are not (ex. president of the local Kant Society), then the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate how they are not an Objectivist. I don't have a complete answer, but I think Steve's and Luke's answers are pretty good starts for establishing a good standard.

My "poll" was not just concerning the people I have meet face to face (though they have had a big impression), but also those I respect and read. I admit, I am quite bias towards those I like to read and listen to and in no way do I claim that I have an authoritative answer. I only claim to have some experience and to have made my own observations. I would be curious to here the experience of others, who they have meet, who they have read and who they have listened to. Even if the person they name I don't consider real Objectivists.

A poll of ARI essay submissions is an interesting suggestion. Two problems: firstly ARI does not make being an Objectivist or even liking Ayn Rand's works a condition for submitting an essay (a rare thing for them), secondly I have meet one other essay writer (after she contacted me when she found my name on the list of top ten Atlas essay submissions for 2015) and while I enjoyed talking with her she was by no means an Objectivist. A poll among the winners would be better but the sample size would be too small for your desired accuracy.

I stick by all of my original points being the best characterization of the average Objectivist, but I would like to thank Steve, Luke and Michael for engaging me on the issue and leaving me with more to think about.