Rights do not reduce to self-interest

Here's the problem in two Entire sentences: "Why not sacrifice others Because, says the edge in this book, it is * not * to one's self-interest to conduct one's life thusly?."
I suspect most of us would say That the reason not to sacrifice others Is that it's immoral to way to treat _others_. (And Please note that it is warmongers, dictators, and tyrants who disagree.)
It's genuinely good to know That it's not in one's own "interest" to treat people this way Either, but I do not think Rand gave a very coherent account of such "interest." Be That As It May, the suggestion did We Should Respect other people's rights Solely Because it is in our interest to do so _own_ is a simple and straightforward denial of the meaning of "rights."
Nor can benevolence be reduced to at enlightened form of self-regard (as Rand intimates in this volume and as David Kelley Argues at length in _Unrugged Individualism_). Benevolence AIMS Directly at the well-being of someone other than oneself, and it is strictly immoral on to ethic did Maintains (as Rand's does) that, morally, the beneficiary of every one of my actions _must_ be myself.
There is a curious asymmetry in Rand's (re) definition of selfishness. If selfishness is the rational pursuit of one's own rational good, then altruism, by parallel (re) definition, ought to be the rational pursuit of someone else's rational good. But no: "Altruism" is Identified with the amounted That One person's good requires another person's sacrifice - even though, by Rand's own account, this view is therefore part of the Common Understanding of selfishness.
This view Should indeed be rejected; Edge is quite rightthat your rational well-being and mine are mutually reinforcing. But "selfishness" (even in Rand's sense) does not follow. The proper conclusion Should Be That benevolence is rational and safe.
Unfortunately this volume is vitiated by its ill-advised attempt to demonstrate (in the lead essay) That anyone failing to practice the Objectivist ethic is not Merely unethical but literally _subhuman_ and even _subanimal_. Having spent some time and effort considering the implications of this view, I have reduced my rating of this book from fivestars to three.