Comments on: SCHOLASTICISM

By: oldfatherwilliam

oldfatherwilliam — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 19:26:51 +0000

Social Darwinism will never die, human greed and self-justification being what they are. Which means that those of us not so afflicted must stomp it out and ridicule its remains at all opportunities. Thanks for this rant.

By: Aslan Maskhadov

Aslan Maskhadov — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 17:01:15 +0000

Anti-Communist "historian" is another field where you can pretty much pull whatever you want out of your ass, and you won't be looked at as a hack. Alexander Solzhenitsyn was a nationalistic, anti-Semitic nutcase who believed that life under the Tsar's was a happy time of gum drop houses and lolli-pop fences- if he did not gain fame by writing against Stalin and Communism, old GULAG-bait would have been labeled precisely in that manner. The only solace is the fact that the liberal establishment was embarrassed by his anti-Semitic, anti-intellectual rants. Still, the guy pulls the number 66 million out of his ass, and he is actually given credibility.

Same with libertarians, since they represent the view of many on the side of the ruling class.

By: Robert

Robert — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 16:33:41 +0000

I like these comments almost as much as I enjoyed the rant itself. Gaaaarnn, hit 'im again!

The idea that I'm raising my sons to be able to see the vapidity and implicit cruelty in the Randian/LibEc/McCurdle worldview is one of the few things that makes me continue hoping for the future. That, and being married to a wonderful man who both loves me AND is a professional pastry chef.
Score!

By: The Central Ska-roo-tinizer

The Central Ska-roo-tinizer — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 15:59:17 +0000

So, a Libertarian Economist is a whore that thinks it's a career path to becoming a pimp?

By: Susan of Texas

Susan of Texas — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 14:41:14 +0000

McArdle is so entrenched in her vision of herself as an elite journalist that she both believes and doesn't believe in what she is doing. She's attracted to Rand because the ideas confirm her already established beliefs–she is superior and others are unfairly holding her back from greater success and recognition. It is natural for her to accept the absolute authority of the financial industry, slavishly repeat what they say, and use every dishonest tactic she learned surviving in prep school to willingly serve her masters.

By: John

John — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 13:39:28 +0000

But that's just it, Ed. I don't think they know that they've whored themselves out so completely. You must remember, a large portion of Libertarians — and particularly Libertarian Economists, though I've no objective proof for that assertion — subscribe whole-heartedly to Randianism. To them, there is no shame in whoring themselves to corporate interests for money, because money and the accumulation thereof is the only objective in life. The only reasonable thing to do. They're not ashamed to do it because they subscribe to an ideology that states that they are the only people that matter in their lives. Their core belief system requires them to disregard all other humans as mere obstacles to the attainment of more wealth. Altruism is one of the cardinal sins of humanity, according to Rand, and any person who is not solely focused on their own personal gain is a weak and undesirable person.

And in that context, she's only doing what is natural and logical.

By: Evan

Evan — Tue, 01 Sep 2009 06:11:48 +0000

So you're saying that the pearl necklace she's constantly clutching was power sprayed on by the healthcare lobby/other corporate interests?

Noted.