>This is one of the reasons I find this thread and other
>discussions like it frustrating: We have one of history's
>great minds in front of us.
This thread is about a book that is a prolonged smear job, which one can't take seriously beyond noting what a dishonest hash it is. One can either ignore such a book or slam it. I chose to slam it rather than ignore, so that at least a few of those who would pretend that the screed has something cogent and worthy to say will understand that their own complicity in the smearing will not unnoticed or un-remarked.
Would it be better if discussion of Rand were entirely substantive? Yes, it would. And in fact there are many books that do offer such discussion. It's also a different thread.
This thread was inaugurated in response to Valliant's prolonged smear job of two persons who are not the horned malefactors he makes them out to be: Barbara Branden and Nathaniel Branden. Yeah, that's right. Valliant started it, guys. His book is a moral atrocity, and he shouldn't be allowed to get away with it. I don't think he will; and the tactics of those readers who, say, demand a list of Valliant's lies, get a list indicating several of them, and then carefully and repeatedly lurch to side issues to avoid any response to the listing, aren't going to be very successful either.
But I also know that if such a book were written about me, I wouldn't want those allegedly concerned with the relevant matters and, for that matter, justice, to merely stand by silently and pretend the only thing important to do is be fair to somebody else, while the smear job on me gets a free pass from the alleged practitioners of objectivity and justice. Not everybody has to take up every cudgel. But in this thread, that's the issue. The smear job.
(Edited by David M. Brown on 5/28, 2:24pm)