A) This will probably be flagged by rand-fans who are sick of government keeping them down, in between paving the roads they drive on.
B) Taking something that's there for the taking is in no way inconsistent with Ayn Rand's public philosophy. Maybe with some of her books. This is someone who wrote gushingly of an armed robber and kidnapper/murderer: "A wonderful, free, light consciousness" born of the utter absence of any understanding of "the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people."
I flagged this not because I'm a rand-fan, but because I generally dislike seeing this kind of politics on HN. It does not lead to good discussions, just the same tired arguments.
On "B" I have to say that's just character assassination and anti-intellectual character assassination at that. It's perfectly acceptable from an intellectual perspective to admire some aspects of a person while disliking others. Rand's philosophy was one based around rational self interest. Rand's point seems to be that Hickman was the epitome of self interest yet was not rational (since it's not rational to turn the state against you by committing brazen crimes). So she wasn't admiring the man she was admiring one aspect of the man.
Maligning a person for expressing this kind of thought is anti-intellectual because bad people do occasionally have good ideas along with their bad ones. If you're dedicated to the intellectual pursuit of broadening your mind you have to be able to identify those ideas and admire them despite the despicable nature of the person who came up with them.
It's actually not acceptable to admire the "fuck everyone-ness" of a remorseless killer. In my book, at least. It's not like she's admiring him for being a good piano player. YMMV, I guess.
In fairness this really isn't inconsistent. You can not support the Government giving out money to everyone and still be rational enough to realize it's stupid to turn down free money (which you believe the government would only waste anyway).
11 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 37.5 ms ] threadB) Taking something that's there for the taking is in no way inconsistent with Ayn Rand's public philosophy. Maybe with some of her books. This is someone who wrote gushingly of an armed robber and kidnapper/murderer: "A wonderful, free, light consciousness" born of the utter absence of any understanding of "the necessity, meaning, or importance of other people."
http://michaelprescott.net/hickman.htm
FWIW, I don't think a lot of people have seen that piece about the psychopath before.
Maligning a person for expressing this kind of thought is anti-intellectual because bad people do occasionally have good ideas along with their bad ones. If you're dedicated to the intellectual pursuit of broadening your mind you have to be able to identify those ideas and admire them despite the despicable nature of the person who came up with them.