exploringobjectivism

"That is a value which a rational being would act to keep." I know, but there is a difference between being a businessman who occasionally gets involved in politics to protect your own liberty, and being a statesman who devotes your entire life to protecting it, which does strike me as fundamentally selfless. Unless you're saying that there are people who actually enjoy military service/office/the judiciary, and do it out of a sense of personal happiness? If so, I find that mystifying, and perhaps even irrational.

So what about those people who weigh it up and decide that quick cash and social status is more important to them than living in a free society, even if it means a poorer, more dangerous society for them in the long run? - isn't that a form of rational egotism? And can you really define protecting liberty as being about promoting one's own goals? It's not like building a house, writing a concerto or even building up a business empire - building and maintaining a free nation surely involves devotion to an abstract concept, like justice or freedom? I just can't see that Judge N. - or, to use a real-life example, Ron Paul - is selfishly focused on attaining their own happiness and ruthlessly competitive, like Henry Rearden. I can't think of anyone more selfless than Ron Paul. Isn't there a small bloc of the population in every society who need to be selfless?

One of the major questions I have about objectivism is what it is that motivates Judge Narragansett - who represents the political/judicial authority in an objectivist society - if not a selfless desire to be a fair and balanced arbiter for the capitalists in the society? What selfish desires cause senior military/police figures to uphold the law, rather than profit more by engaging in corruption? How could a hypothetical objectivist President be driven by selfishness, and at the same time work incredibly long hours in the service of their country?