3 ms·
This argument, which I see come up every few years, is disingenuous and misleading propaganda at best. I don't even like Ayn Rand, but to have her name smeared
by kolbe 10y ago
This argument, which I see come up every few years, is disingenuous and misleading propaganda at best. I don't even like Ayn Rand, but to have her name smeared by anti-intellectual shit like this so much worse than the overly-simplified libertarian utopias she tried to convince us could exist.
Edit: apparently I need to have a supporting argument for why this is "anti-intellectual shit" or else I face a ban or something. The reason: Ayn fought to change the US into something that fit her vision of a properly organized society. She failed to make that change, and the US continued to be organized in a manner that she very much disagreed with. The fact that she participated in the legal framework that she was subjected to doesn't make her a hypocrite, nor does it imply that she changed her opinion of welfare states at the end of her life. The fact that the author of this article comes to this conclusion, or the fact that he even thinks its noteworthy to rub in her face her failures to insight the changes wished for, is anti-intellectual shit.
- throwayawnotime 10y agocitation needed. Inspired by Rand's naive theories, greenspan and his ilk did indeed implement a policy of robbing those producers of wealth that did not also happen to be owners of politicians. That is a fact in my books. Interesting article thanks for the post.
- dang 10y ago> disingenuous and misleading propaganda [...] anti-intellectual shit This is the kind of thing the HN guidelines refer to as name-calling and ask you to edit out: https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html. Indeed if you did edit it all out, this comment would arguably be reduced to nothing. Please don't post unsubstantive comments to HN.