Lileks links an article that objectivists will find very interesting

Read the Bleat and follow the links for the background. The radio broadcast on the War in Europe, as of late 1939, is especially interesting, but here's a paragraph from the article by Erma Proetz:

But someone will rise to say that there can be no dependence on the soundness of work done for a selfish purpose. Fortunately for the progress of the worl, this is becoming more and more to be realized by the great commercial organizations that the end of selfish activity--profit--cannot be accomplished unless the activity really renders service to the public. There is no substantial commercial organization in existence today that is so unintelligent as to undertake to make profit through expoloitations of a "fake" food. If you doubt that assertion look into the extent to which these commercial organizations maintain laboratories where scientifically trained people are testing the value of new things. You will find them submitting their problems to noncommercial laboratories for the purpose of checking the results which their own investigations give them.

Whoops, guess I'll have to quote one more, otherwise you'll just cite the tobacco and junk food industries at me and the argument will be dead:

The fundamental purpose of business organizations today is not to discover how the public can be fooled, but on the contrary, to discover how the public can be served.

I'd like to say, "Read the whole thing," but many of you won't (it's an article about food science and advertising, after all), so here are a couple more exerpts:

There has been, beyond doubt, a thought in many minds that there was an unavoidable point of conflict between the commercial organizations who sought to sell food for porfit and the trained teacher who sought to educate people on the subject of proper food. When we realize that there is no point of conflict; when we know that, whatever the primary or ultimate purpose may be, there is along the way a long road of parallel intent, then cooperation rather than conflict is the obvious relation that should exist in practice as it exists in theory.

This reminds me of Ayn Rand's conviction that there are no conflicts of interests between rational men. The point is to increase the number of rational men. I'm tempted to put quotes around "men" (like that, only, in this case I'm using quotes in accordance with the rules our English textbook used to teach), because Miss Rand wasn't excluding herself or any others of her gender.

The teacher of domestic science who realizes that commercial organization are interested in the same sort of education that she is striving to accomplish, will broaden the scope and strengthen the effect of her work by recognition of the fact. If she felt that all advertisements of foods were traps for the unwary, she would warn against them. If she felt that they are an educational factor of much good force, she will point to them for what they are. It is true, isn't it, that to know where knowledge may be found, and to be able to recognize it when found, is as important a phase of education as the mere acquisition of knowledge.
....
There is no purpose here to minimize the importance of teaching in schools the principles and practice of domestic science. It is the purpose only to point out that the field of real opportunity for worth while work for those trained in domestic science, is not limited to the profession of teaching. There is a big field for service, and for the profit which service supports, in the field of commercial activity. And those of us who have been living under the influence of the idea that the activity of business organizations offers opportunity only for the exercise of sordid selfishness will find a most agreeable surprise in excursions of thought and experience in the field of business.

Openness, honesty and honoring our neighbors' choices, as Dr. Mary Ruwart would say [the link is to the table of contents; if you read nothing else, read that], are the requirements of the Free-Market system. She emphasizes that neighborhoods and countries that practice these things are wealthier and happier than those in which aggression (either by private individuals or government) is rampant. I might say that God blesses us in this way, that when we act kindly and honorably we receive kindness and honor back in reward. When we produce something we are able to use that social interaction called trade to fulfill our needs and assist others in fulfilling theirs. God hasn't made such an imperfect world after all.