Is it moral to live as an Objectivist without being an activist?

Obliging activism as a "moral imperative" goes against Objectivist principles. Passive resistance is often more effective in addressing statism and moral relativism than confrontation and political endeavor.

I disagree.

Being willing to engage in "activism" is different than assuming it to be an integral, or imperative. The latter I reject vis Objectivism, but the former requires a bit more thought it seems to me..

Willingness, per se, does not imply, or stipulate, an imperative. One could suggest this is merely semantics, but my sense of Objectivism is that it is a philosophical system premised upon reason as man's fundamental means of knowledge; the use of his rational mind is his only means of obtaining values. If those values are threatened (or ones ability to achieve them is thwarted) by others who insist upon, and in fact have established, a political system premised upon irrationality, faith, or subjectivism, and that sytem demonstrably affects ones ability to achieve values, then in order to achieve ones values, to truly live, as Objectivism clearly demonstrates, then one must be capable and willing to engage in purposeful, chosen, actions to bring about the social, political, or economic change needed to live.

Otherwise, one is left merely entertaining reason as the only means of obtaining knowledge / values as a thought experiment. Such would be antithetical to reason and rationality ... Passive resistance cannot simply be concluded as an effective means to anything because of definitional problems associated with what, specfically, is meant by "often," "more effective," and "confrontation." Moreover, it is contextual insofar as the degree and scope of tyranny into which one is immersed. Passivity in pursuit of ones values cannot be elevated, or evaluated, on the same plane as price. Price in pursuit of one's values when viewed from an environment of tyranny (particularly over the mind of man) carries little value, or is, in fact, no object.

In short, I believe it IS moral to "live" as an Objectivist without being an activist assuming one CAN live. If one is incapable because of the force applied by externals of pursuing ones values, then I do believe that one must be "willing" to engage in some degree of activism.. or die.

I look forward to Diana's discussion!!!!

Having said that, what I do agree with the rejection of the notion that Objectivism demands the indoctrination of others, or an implicit requirement of proselytizing for it. THAT would be, in my humble view, un-Objectivist and contrary.