Looters

[Kimmler]

"In Atlas Shrugged, all this debased inhuman riffraff is lumped as "looters." This is a fairly inspired epithet. It enables the author to skewer on one invective word everything and everybody that she fears and hates. This spares here the plaguy business of performing one service that her fiction might have performed. Namely: that of examining in human depth how so feeble a lot came to exist at all, let alone be powerful enough to be worth hating and fearing. Instead, she bundles them into one undifferentiated damnation."

From Big Sister is watching you by Whittaker Chambers.

As Whittaker point out earlier in the review of Atlas Shrugged.

The mischief here is that the author, dodging into fiction, nevertheless counts on your reading it as political reality. "This," she is saying in effect, "is how things really are. These are the real issues, the real sides. Only your blindness keeps you from seeing it, which, happily, I have come to rescue you from."

Cleary Rand thought that real life mirrored the world of Atlas Shrugged. Did she ever answer this question in her non-fiction? From my own reading of Rand my guess would be that her take on this would be, the defenders of philosophy were corrupted my Kant, who convinced them to abandon reason. This would not be a problem as the masses each have a vote and in the majority, the problem is that the masses are sheep and follow the prevailing trend. They will vote how the intellectuals tell them to vote and the looters ended up in power. Now I guess that's a rough and ready answer to the question. But how did the looters get their hands on the keys to the castle?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Now I guess that's a rough and ready answer to the question.

Kimmler,

You guess wrong. It is a "rough and ready answer," but it does not reflect Rand's thinking. It only reflects your guess at Rand's thinking.

To be fair, it is closer than Rand critics usually get, but it is still too far off base to take seriously.

Keep reading. I have faith in you.

I staunchly believe that one day you will know enough about Rand's ideas to correctly portray them (instead of misrepresenting them as you constantly do). At such time it will be a pleasure to debate your criticisms and disagreements. For now, though, the task of anyone who engages you is more like janitorial work and not intellectual debate, i.e., cleaning up mess from your misunderstandings.

Michael

[Kimmler]

Now I guess that's a rough and ready answer to the question.

Kimmler,

You guess wrong. It is a "rough and ready answer," but it does not reflect Rand's thinking. It only reflects your guess at Rand's thinking.

To be fair, it is closer than Rand critics usually get, but it is still too far off base to take seriously.

Keep reading. I have faith in you.

I staunchly believe that one day you will know enough about Rand's ideas to correctly portray them (instead of misrepresenting them as you constantly do). At such time it will be a pleasure to debate your criticisms and disagreements. For now, though, the task of anyone who engages you is more like janitorial work and not intellectual debate, i.e., cleaning up mess from your misunderstandings.

Michael

So you don't know either...but do you know a man or a woman who does?