What is that Sir-thing, Lee? You asked for a rational debate and now
you are winding yourself out by referring to your instincts - the
lower ones, as we can see. Think about it.

On 28 Aug., 11:39, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Patience sir, as you can see by the words that I used, this is indeed
> my first instinct and mentioned to 'get the ball' rolling, plenty of
> time to discect it huh.
>
> On 27 Aug, 19:57, BB47 <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > On Aug 27, 8:29 am, "[email protected]" <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > Umm yeah good one Chris.
>
> > > My first instinct is that communist philosphy on paper says the right
> > > things, whilst of course Rand does not.
>
> > Thank you for the opening thoughts, will there be a more thorough
> > analysis forthcoming?  Will there be any rational debate or more in
> > depth discussion or even semi-rational exchanges on such a wonderful
> > topic?
>
> > > On 27 Aug, 16:12, Chris Jenkins <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> > > > From 
> > > > here:http://www.willwilkinson.net/flybottle/2009/08/24/what-we-are-not-emb...
>
> > > > "
>
> > > > Here is a good debate proposition: It ought to be less embarrassing to 
> > > > have
> > > > been influenced by Ayn Rand than by Karl Marx.
>
> > > > The most powerful way to argue the affirmative is to compare the number 
> > > > of
> > > > human beings murdered by the devotees of each. That line of attack 
> > > > ought to
> > > > be decisive, but I’m afraid it won’t get you far with the multitude of
> > > > highly-self-regarded thinkers influenced by Karl Marx. Fact is, 
> > > > commitment
> > > > to some kind of socialism and fluency in the jargon of Marxism used to 
> > > > be
> > > > mandatory for serious intellectuals. And there’s something glamorous in 
> > > > the
> > > > very idea of the intellectual. Even for those of us who came of age 
> > > > after
> > > > 1989, Marxism, like cigarettes, remains linked by association to the 
> > > > idea of
> > > > the intellectual, and so, like cigarettes, shares in the intellectual’s
> > > > glamour. I don’t know if cigarettes or Marxism have killed more people, 
> > > > but
> > > > it’s pretty clear cigarettes are more actively stigmatized. Marxists,
> > > > neo-Marxists, crypto-Marxists, post-Marxists, etc. have an enduring
> > > > influence on intellectual fashion. So it is not only possible proudly to
> > > > confess Marx’s influence on one’s thought, but it remains possible in 
> > > > some
> > > > quarters to impress by doing so. It ought to be embarrassing, but it 
> > > > isn’t.
> > > > Being a bit of a Marxist is like having a closet full of pirate blouses 
> > > > but
> > > > never having to worry."
>
> > > > This gave me pause for consideration. Rand's philosophies have been much
> > > > maligned as "uncompassionate", while certain "socialist" (Marxist 
> > > > Communist)
>
 > > > policies have been held up as an ideal, and yet, how many
people have been
> > > > killed in the name of Randian philosophy, and how many have been killed 
> > > > i
> > >
> > > > the name of Marxist philosophy?
>
t do YOU think? ;)- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to