4 ms·
I can only presume the author hasn't actually read any of Rand's writing. Either that or this is an intentional smear piece.
by duncan_bayne 13y ago
I can only presume the author hasn't actually read any of Rand's writing. Either that or this is an intentional smear piece.
- seehafer 13y agoSalon is well known for intentional smear pieces (against Rand and others) EDIT: Not that I want to draw attention to hackery, but here is another example: http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/ayn_rand_is_for_children/ http://www.salon.com/2013/01/19/ayn_rand_is_for_children/
- duncan_bayne 13y agoRight, that makes sense. I'm totally okay with strongly-worded debate over Rand's philosophy; she was (intentionally) inflammatory in a lot of cases. But Salon's piece was ... well ... so much of a strawman that I really didn't understand how the author could characterise Rand's work in that way.