3 ms·
She made the argument as a simple point - that they're anarchists and that anarchy begets collectivism. I think the broader purpose of the post, though, is to
by richardjordan 14y ago
She made the argument as a simple point - that they're anarchists and that anarchy begets collectivism.
I think the broader purpose of the post, though, is to point out the irony in folks who think of themselves as Rand acolytes and Libertarians. This is a common position, and I hear it a lot in Silicon Valley/startup circles.
Personally I don't think much of her ideas, I find them simplistic and in some places naive and immature, other places disingenuous. I think many Libertarians suffer similar failings and propose positions that are vastly simplistic in the context of the real world. I know that many smart people I respect disagree with my position, and that's fine, I'm not looking for argument on those points.
So, as a critic of both groups it doesn't bother me to see them lumped together. But it's amusing that Rand wanted nothing to do with that.
- phaus 14y agoI'm not criticizing, but what's a better alternative to the two mainstream political parties we are currently saddled with? I'm asking because while I don't belong to any political party, there are aspects of libertarianism that do appeal to me, such as dramatically reducing government spending, government waste, government corruption, and actually observing the constitution.
- richardjordan 14y agoSadly I don't think this is a great forum for useful dialogue on that topic, but the two parties seem to be taking turns driving the bus into the ditch and heckling from the sidelines. I do think that the key is in market mechanisms and efficient markets need strong regulatory control (a market is just an efficient computer for processing collective decision making, and without proper programming it won't deliver answers to the questions you think it's answering), and libertarians often fail to appreciate the value in this leading to laissez-faire market rigging.