I don’t know why libertarians - at least those well outside of the Rand-worshiping Objectivist sect - don’t dote more on the late Rose Wilder Lane, purportedly one of the other co-mothers of American libertarianism. Given her intellect and determined rise from the economic circumstances of her youth, RWL would seem offer a valuable marketing asset for that bogus belief system, at least more so than a clearly psychologically damaged woman (IMO; IANAPsyshrink), who exhibited her warped views in her novels and selections of whom to admire, and who showed herself to be a hypocrite in the end (quelle surprise!).
I wonder if basing a belief system on counter-factual novels might in fact be a feature and not a bug? Like the TV show 24, the fact that it caters to what folks want to believe - realistic or not - may be the most important thing.*
Hmm, never mind, I think I just answered my own question.
*Since these people don’t respond to rationality, what say we reverse polarity and crank up the knob? Anyone for drafting Sally Fields to be Secretary of the Air Force, or Director of the FAA? She has flown without aid of mechanical contraptions. I’ve seen it on TV. If USSC justices can speak glowingly (also, too) of 24, and various intellectuals admire the works of Rand, why limit our imaginations to only those works of fiction when considering solutions to real world challenges?
Comment by meepmeep09 on
01/08/12 at 01:18 AM
Sorry, commenting is closed for this post.