Hear all Evil. See all Evil. Speak all Evil.

[Victor Pross]

Recently, I have posted some rather flippant comments on Solo [i wouldn’t be surprised if any curious OL watchdogs already know that]. One post was merely my peevish whim to toss in my two cents regarding “summer tunes” and another regarded the question of the Family Values painting. Okay, big deal.

But there was one post that caught my attention. It was from a Brant Gaede who made an observation: did you know that MSK is…evil? I didn't. Wow.

This particular word struck me as outlandish in it use here. It also struck me as an example of a fancy bit of hyperbole. I godda tell you, I winced when I read the post, and the whole thing struck me as unnecessarily volatile. In fact, I had to rub my eyes to make sure that I read it right.

Now, I have a problem here: the ever-so-cavalier use of a word like EVIL is often employed to vanquish the person it’s iron-branded on. It's meant to blacken the person beyond consideration and as completely unredeemable. It’s often used for the emotional impact the word can carry, and rarely has cognitive merit when employed by what I call “religious Objectivists.” It comes across in a shrill manner that screams nothing but “I really, really, really, really hate you!” Other times it used as a nodding wink at the mob so as to say: “See, folks, I’m a real Objectivist. Okay, I don’t have any particular success stories of ‘man as hero’ to share and I don’t have any talents to exhibit—BUT I CAN CODEMN LIKE THE BEST OF THEM. I can be morally outraged and huff and puff in the face of EVIL! Pleeeeese see me as an Objectivist! Pleeeease! Accept me! Love me!”

That’s what it boils down to.

Don’t get me wrong: the word evil still exists in my vocabulary. Whenever I use this inflated word it is properly assigned to specimens such as murderers, rapists and terrorists---human debris that truly deserve it. [Now there may be certain individuals who could take issue with my using the word to describe even these types of people, but this post is not addressed to soft-hearted liberals and lefty-types]. But to call MSK evil. This is dim-witted. [i can see the posts at SOLO now: Victor mocks the idea that MSK is evil! Victor is evil!]

The point I wish to make here is this: this use of a damnation word like “evil” is way over-the-top---as its being applied in Objectivist circles. It is totally inappropriate even for someone you truly believe to be manipulative and under-handed. Really, sometimes I'm sorry Rand used the word as often as she did. Yeah, some people are, say, under-handed and manipulative. And even if some people are those things--are "slimy" and "manipulative"-- this word EVIL is simply over inflated. [Hey, I'm sorry you don't like your boss!]

EVIL! The person whose finger is always on the trigger and ready to shot down people with this word reveals, to my mind, a religious approach to Objectivism---and that is a sad, sad, comment to have to make. It seems to be that some people have simply missed their calling to be either religious fanatics or fervent card-carrying communists and who, instead, caught the Objectivist train.

Now, here’s the thing: I responded to Brant asking him to give me his reasons for calling MSK evil. [Victor is defending MSK! EVIL! EVIL!] I wasn’t being a smart-ass. Really, I was truly astonished by Brant’s post. And being a curious person, I simply wanted to hear his reasons. I simply asked Brant to qualify his remark. Period.

His response was thus:

“Because he would accept you on OL even though you said a lot of bad things about Barbara including stuff much worse than what she just referred to on OL telling you that you and she are a long way away from having any dialogue about Rand and art. You damned her to hell here. Remember? Now you are here trolling for Brownie points to take back to OL. Tell Barbara I can't stop liking her, while you are at it. It's just the way I feel. What you need to do is start your own blog and say what you really believe instead of all this obvious Peter Keating shit. Be like Ciro! Be a man!”

Now, is it just me, or does this type of response fail in a number of ways? [A] It didn’t answer my question It has all the signs of intellectual apoplexy. [C] It plunges into irrelevancies, e.g. B. Branden’s refusal to discuss art with me. [D] He insults me—simply because I asked a question.

But it’s this little gem that leaves me astounded: “Now you are here trolling for Brownie points to take back to OL.” Is Victor for US or THEM, man!? You see folks---I’m a spy! I'm a double spy! Look out for Victor! He’s joined “the other side.” "What's Victor story, man? Pick a tribe, dude. He's on OL. He is an ex-SLOPER. Now he's back on SLOP!"

I responded to Brant:

“Your remarks to me are way out-of-line--and beside the point TO BOOT. Look, I merely indicated that "evil" is a strong word and shouldn't be tossed around lightly. Listen, I'm still getting my head around all this Objectivist civil war shit, thank you very much. I don't take things on faith. Jesus, it has nothing to do with "Peter Keating." I want to hear why you think MSK is evil. Was that too much to ask? I wanted to hear a reason--and not because you "feel" it or because it's the fashionable thing to say at SOLO. [Yes, I made all the dumb-ass mistakes of tossing around insults like passing out jelly beans.] At least I now have the rationality to own up to it. I'm not kissing anybody's ass. I'm working my way threw the entire intellectual morass that caused the Objectivist movement to become fractionized war camps. I have been a "lone wolf" Objectivist for years, and I'm in the dark on the Peikoff/Kelly spilt and everything that followed it. I'm curious, but I don't really give a shit.

What makes this word so delicious? Reason and rationality as the core values of Objectivism? Yes, but how often do you see it in action? Sometimes I feel like Chuck Heston waking up in the corn field watching the fucking chimp on a pony. IT’S A MAD HOUSE! A MAAAAAD HOUSE!

EVIL. What makes the word so yummy? Some people won’t feel that they’re being ‘true Objectivists” if they don’t employ the word more often than a Born Again Christian pounces on the name JESUS? It’s very sad that a brilliant philosophy like Objectivism should be high jacked by faith-laced tribal “pick-a-side” fanatics.

[Dennis Hardin]

Victor,

This is an important issue, and I thank you for raising it. It definitely merits discussion. I certainly agree that Objectivists need to be very cautious about applying the term “evil” to other people, especially other Objectivists. At the same time, a certain context has been established, and a key element of Objectivism is a strong regard for context.

Another important element of Objectivism is an allegiance to one’s values. Something that has disturbed me about other so-called Objectivist forums is that participants typically indulge in prolonged, civilized debate with all comers, even when their past behavior (e.g., James Valliant) reflects contempt for certain values.

You are obviously a highly intelligent person with a lot to offer. However, your reluctance to address the issues raised elsewhere on OL suggests that you continue to stand by statements of yours reflecting profound disrespect for Barbara Branden. To engage in dialogue with you now, while you refuse to distance yourself from those past statements, would constitute context-dropping. It would amount to sanctioning that disrespect and—because of my allegiance to my own values--I am not willing to do that. I suspect I am not alone.

Dennis

[Roger Bissell]

Dennis, you're not alone.

Victor, are you paying attention? You are being asked to apologize to Barbara Branden for the vicious things you said about her on So-Low Bashin', if you expect us to make you feel welcome and to engage in dialogue with you here.

So....your response?

Michael, if Victor drags this out much longer, what are you going to do about it?

REB

[C. Jordan]

My first thought would be to say, that whatever Victor said about Barbara Branden is an issue that he should address with Barbara Branden.

I can no longer research what he said myself, because his remarks have been censored out of the other Forum. (That reminds me of Iosef Stalin in a way: "There is no such person as Comrade Trotsky.) At least, so matters stood the last time I visited the other Forum.

My only question for Victor is: what do you think of Ms. Branden now?

[Ciro]

I personally agree to be nice to people, but not to all people.

Those who are invadent and hurl insults around to whomever they think would be a good candidate to their cause, should just be left to rott.

CD