One of the stupider things I have heard lately « A Conservative Shemale

What’s objectionable about Objectivism – I’ve noticed that a lot of novelists seem to be purists. I guess that is because in novels you can force a system to work. It seems to be true of bloggers too. Probably for the same reason. Things look good written down that fail when you try and put them into application. Just ask any engineer tweaking of some sort is usually required.

There’s a lot of ignorance out there about Rand and Objectivism. Some of it is honest - I class Jen’s identification of Rand as a “novelist”, rather than what she actually was - a philosopher who used novels to advance knowledge of her philosophy. And some isn’t ignorance at all, but malevolent intent masquerading as ignorance - and that is how I class the attack I found when I followed Jen’s link:

Pundit & Pundette: Objecting to Objectivism

Ms. Rand may have been a popular novelist, but her philosophy is deeply problematic and morally indefensible.

Ayn Rand was, of course, the founder of Objectivism – whose ethic, she said in a 1964 interview, holds that “man exists for his own sake, that the pursuit of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose, that he must not sacrifice himself to others, nor sacrifice others to himself.” She has argued that “friendship, family life and human relationships are not primary in a man’s life. A man who places others first, above his own creative work, is an emotional parasite; whereas, if he places his work first, there is no conflict between his work and his enjoyment of human relationships.” [emphasis added]

This is presented as if it is on its face abhorrent. It is, of course, not so, as anybody actually conversant with Objectivism understands.

The real problem with Rand, as far as her “conservative” - really socon - detractors go is that Rand was an atheist who supported abortion as the right of a woman who was the inviolate owner of her own body.

What Rand was peddling is a brittle, arid, mean, and ultimately hollow philosophy. No society could thrive if its tenets were taken seriously and widely accepted. Ayn Rand may have been an interesting figure and a good (if extremely long-winded) novelist; but her views were pernicious, the antithesis of a humane and proper worldview. And conservatives should say so.

Yeah, that’s a calm, reasoned, informed shriek of rage.

Another champ of “compassionate religious collectivist conservatism” heard from.

Rand would have eaten this bozo alive in face-to-face debate.

Submit to Stumbled Upon!