Quote:
Originally Posted by zerospinboson
Probably because Marx was proposing something that could be argued with, rather than railed against (because no argument can be made to "refute" Rand)
|
LOL. Arguing against Marx used to get you into a "re-education" camp, while railing against Rand got you tenure at a third-rate university.
But what do you mean, by insisting, that Rand is "irrelevant" outside of the US? It's like insisting that because Locke was "irrelevant" in Siberia, we can safely ignore his work.
Many intelligent, educated people outside of the US and the UK, have at least some idea of Rand (even if based on a bad French translation.
Regardless of where one is on the political spectrum, dismissing her work as "irrelevant" is just silly.
As silly, as approaching her ideas with the preconceived notion to "figure out what is wrong with them, and move on."
But, what if, some young, open, inquisitive mind in the classroom, finds some appeal in these "atheist capitalism" ideas...?! Oh the horror..., the horror of it!