I don't know how anyone can read her and not feel the overt reader manipulation. Her skill, if any, is to break the 3rd wall without seeming to acknowledge that 3rd wall and constantly tell the reader they are one of these special people that are borne better than others.

Rand is a clear intellectual trap for lazy thinkers. If you like her, you're not thinking.

I think reading philosophical arguments masquerading as novels, or any sort of fiction, is an intellectual trap in general. Anything can be made to work in a fictional work simply by saying that it works. It means nothing.

"Genghis Khan the 73rd, who got high on some really weird drugs in the fifth year of his reign, decided that everybody in his empire should be tortured for at least 73 minutes every day. And everybody loved it and completely voluntarily sang his praises and said it was the best thing that ever happened to society and there were just all sorts of benefits and you should totally organize your society this way too because look how well it is working for this one."

The parent comment has more nuanced opinion than yours. They also substantiate it by raising a point of value in reviewing contrary viewpoint, whereas your comment is devoid of any arguments.