Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

Sure, she wasn’t one to turn down an easy buck and a bit of fame. Can you fault her?

Libertarianism was never viable. It goes against human nature, just in the opposite direction from communism. Communism postulates that lazy people deserve everything (“to each according to his need”), so the wealthy and aspiring hate it. Libertarianism postulates they deserve nothing (“taxation is theft”) so the poor hate it. The gray reality is somewhere in between. The underlying truth of the situation is that when the poor have nothing to eat, they eat the rich, and moral absolutes do not help either side.




It's almost as if you didn't read my posts. You're confused about what a libertarian is. I'm one, and I don't believe I am taxed at a high enough level.

Libertarian is the opposite of authoritarian. Again, it's a broad spectrum on the political compass. There is still left and right. There are extremes and moderates. You're claiming absolutes and being polarized by assuming the loudest speak for every one.

If you read my posts, you'd see that I think Ayn Rand was a moron. You'd also already know that it is far more than just Randians. There's a wonderful Wikipedia article on the subject, if you don't believe me.


don't know why you're being downvoted - guess being sane and actually using your brain for figuring out stuff from first principles instead of political axioms isn't fashionable. perhaps never was.

i just wanted to add that the poor don't eat the rich when they have nothing to eat. they do it much sooner, when they notice that the rich eat better and better and the quality of their food increases way quicker than theirs. that's when the biggest revolutions happen, anyway.

(guess what - i actually live in a post-communist country, too. most people here probably have no idea what they're talking about when they say communism.)




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: