This post has so obviously devolved into a personal flame-war that it's not even worth voicing my opinions on Iraq (see another thread for that), or even Objectivism (although the Capitalism vs. Communism threads has some arguments for parts of it that I think are pretty nifty). So, instead, I'll jump right in and attack everyone else's (by which I mean, Kills Commies's) style of debate (if you can really call it that). One sentance, four parenthases...a regular Dickens, I'm gettin' to be here. Anyway...
First, let me just point out that the post what started this whole mess
Quote:
(snip)
and if I see ONE MORE Ayn Rand quote, I'm going to pull a Jihad of my own on Goldstandard.
(snip)
is, to be frank, a masterpiece of overreaction. "I don't like Ayn Rand, so I'm going to yell at anyone who quotes her." Begging permission to object, but quoting in no way indicates the use of someone's ideals. I've quoted Kant's argument that the only judge of an action is the good will behind it in debates a million times, even though I hate the rest of his theory (very, very loosely: duty=good will, with some religious overtones thrown in for luck). Similarly, a good friend of mine who's a major military buff quotes Nathan Beford Forest (might have the wrong spelling on that name; sorry) all the time, and he's
black, for cryin' out loud (for them what didn't know, which in no way reflects poorly on 'em, he was a Confederate calvary commander in the Civil War who went on to found the KKK). So barking up someone's ass because they quote the author of a philosophy you disagree with is just plain stupid.
Now let's take a look at Goldstandard's original Ayn Rand quote:
Quote:
(snip)
"...it makes no difference to a man whether he is killed by a nuclear bomb or a dynamite bomb or an old-fashioned club."
(snip)
Yup. Preachin' that old Objectivism there. Reason, egoism, capitalism...I can see 'em all in that post. Assuming, of course, that I only looked at the author's name. 'Cause otherwise, all I'd have seen would have been a somewhat tangental but mildly amusing quote.
Now that we've made sure everyone realizes KC was a raving idiot to start a flame war with Goldstandard like that, let me just say that neither party reacted particularly well. We all know that no one can actually take a swing at the other guy here, so pointing that out is kinda futile, not to mention petty.
Aw, hell with it...I really want to chew both parties out equally, but all Goldstandard's really guilty of is having strong opinions that the majority disagrees with. I got enough of that back on the old EN boards (by which I refer to the Keenspot ones, not the debacle of assumed names in May or whenever it was) that I gotta stick up for him. He posted a harmless quote, got pissed when KC attacked it because it came from a source KC found offensive, and allowed that to turn into an argument over the merits of Objectivism. Not hard to do, when you really ascribe whole-heartedly to a set of beliefs and someone attacks something vaguely pertaining to them as being, well, vaguely pertaining to them.
So, I guess what this all boils down to is, I'm kind of dissapointed that people are willing to buy KC's argument that Goldstandard is exhibiting "idiotic fangirliness" and "dogmatic self-denial" in posting an Ayn Rand quote and losing his temper when people disredard the quote and go on to attack the source, just because no one else here really likes Objectivism.
I guess Miss Rand was right..."no speech is ever considered, only the speaker." (Or words to that effect...been years since I read
Fountainhead.)