Objectivism, like a lot of political philosophies, sounds good on paper but doesn't quite work in execution. The idea of many aspects of reality are objective regardless of perception is indeed true for many aspects and a good counter to the type of relativists who choose not to live in reality. The idea of striving towards the happiness of oneself is also good in encouraging self-improvement. Things don't work out as well in practice, however. Not all aspects of life have objective value when definitions of categorisation or our understanding of various anomalies can change with new evidence and even if avoiding the more morally dubious actions that can come out of working opportunistically for one's self-interests and following true to its intentions, that can still lead to an embracing of hedonism for the passion over using it to further yourself beyond yourself through the production of a family or aiding in external matters for the planet. As an example, take a typical pro gamer. They embody some elements of Rand's Objectivism by striving to hone their talent for their self-interest, yet this is ultimately pointless if they don't use this as a means to the end result of also benefiting their family or those around them.
Essentially, it's a system that requires the typical flaw of many in that it hinges on the assumption that people will both be able to judge everything by a specific standard and work purely for self-improvement despite several aspects of human nature commonly preventing it. It's akin to the "muh true communism hasn't been realise" rehtoric but for a more right-leaning end of the political spectrum in that despite the ideals it strives for, it isn't feasible to obtain as a perfect system. It also doesn't help that what positive elements that can be gained from it are ones already present in most standard understanding of reality and society prior to the rise in moral relativism. Tl;dr, Ayn Rand was a hack.
entertainment though,
