New Objectivism: The Rise of Victimhood to Sublime Status

(1) to say nothing, in which case some of those disposed to think the best of him (but, IMO, people who aren't recognizing the realities of Chris's options) will conclude that the charges must be true;

**(1)(a) to analyse and critique each paragraph of a standardized, referenced version of the Mertz Hsieh essay. Sciabarra: stately silence.
(1)(b) to request full context, release of the 400 emails from Diana Mertz Hsieh.

(2) to quote at length from further personal correspondence -- his own *and other people's* -- a method he'd think badly of himself for using, and a method which would commit him to near-endless back-and-forth, back-and-forth, charge/countercharge ad infinitum (all of this consuming precious time and health resources).

If he simply says that a couple of the remarks he made weren't fair (I have candidates in mind but would prefer not to be specific), and lets it go with nothing else in response, this wouldn't be enough to satisfy those wanting him to offer a defense. It would likely just lead to further attempts at pushing him into talking.

Chris Matthew Sciabarra is best known as the
"dialectical libertarian" [^{BY WHOM -- THE
QUOTATION MARKS INDICATE A QUOTE. WHO SAYS THIS
AND WHERE?}] scholar of Ayn Rand's philosophy. He is
the editor of the Journal of Ayn Rand Studies [1]
(JARS), the author of Ayn Rand: The Russian
Radical [2], and the co-editor of Feminist
Interpretations of Ayn Rand [3]. For many
years, Chris was also a friend of mine*** ^{WHEN DID
YOU FIRST CONSIDER CHRIS A FRIEND?}, a rare source
of support and encouragement.***^{HOW DID OTHERS
TREAT YOU? WAS HE YOUR ONLY FRIEND? WHAT DID YOU
FIND OUT WAS SAID OF YOU BY OTHERS AT THE TIME?}

He particularly invited me to submit a proposal
for Feminist Interpretations of Ayn Rand, an essay
that ultimately became my first professional
publication. He wrote a letter of recommendation
for my application to CU Boulder's graduate
program in philosophy. He enthusiastically
supported my work. He generously offered me
professional advice. We spoke repeatedly on the
phone about my overwhelming unhappiness with The
Objectivist Center (TOC), often at great length.
<sup>*** DID YOU EVER GIVE CHRIS THE IMPRESSION THAT
YOUR CONVERSATIONS WITH HIM
SHOULD BE TREATED AS CONFIDENTIAL? WERE YOU OPEN
AT THE TIME WITH YOUR DISSATISFACTION OTHER THAN TO CHRIS? WITH
WHOM? WHAT WERE YOU SAYING PUBLICLY, OUTSIDE OF PHONE AND
EMAIL CONVERSATIONS WITH CHRIS?

YOU HAVE QUOTED FROM SEVERAL EMAILS. WILL YOU
PROVIDE FULL CONTEXT FOR THE EMAILS YOU HAVE
QUOTED?</sup>

At least in private, he supported my eventual
disassociation [4] from that organization, albeit
with some reservations*** ^{WHAT WERE THE
RESERVATIONS?} about my so thoroughly burning my
bridges.*** ^{WHY "BURNING BRIDGES"?} All in all, I
have well over 400 personal e-mails between us in
my archive. ^{HOW MANY WERE INITIATED BY YOU, AND
HOW MANY WERE INITIATED BY HIM?}

We spoke on the phone probably around 15 times but
never managed to meet in person.*** <sup>WHY NOT? DID
YOU MEET OTHERS OF TOC OF THIS ERA? ARE YOU CORDIAL WITH
THEM, NOW?

DID YOU ATTEMPT TO CONTACT OR ALERT CHRIS TO THE PUBLICATION OF YOUR ESSAY? DID YOU SEND A PERSONAL COPY TO CHRIS, OR A LINK TO YOUR POSTING ON SOLO AND ON YOUR BLOG?</sup>

After my February 2004 disassociation from TOC,
however, Chris and I became increasingly
estranged. We formally parted ways in August 2005
on apparently cordial terms. ^{PLEASE PROVIDE QUOTE
FROM EMAIL OR LETTER OR ANNOTED PHONE CALL} At that
time, I told him I would not publicly attack him
or his work out of consideration for our past
friendship. ^{PLEASE QUOTE FROM ANY DOCUMENT THAT
PROVIDES CONTEXT FOR THIS CRUCIAL ASSERTION.}