The Great Divide

"I spit in the face of you Saddamites & I absolutely will not engage you again. I hold you in the same utter contempt that Ayn Rand would, & wish you the hell of Saddamite totalitarianism that you deserve." -Lindsay Perigo (from post on SOLOF)

I don't care to be a participant in a group whose leader does not respect me. Notwithstanding his most recent outpouring of malevolence, it's been clear for quite some time that Linz does not respect those who do not share his views on the war. I argued hard against Linz's position and tactics for quite some time, hoping to change his mind. I now believe that was a mistake.

It was never proven nor disproven (you can't prove a negative) that Saddam's government represented a significant threat to Americans -- let alone one that justified a full-scale war and occupation. Some, like me, chose to give the benefit of the doubt to the taxpayers and soldiers who would ultimately be called on to bear the costs of a war. Others gave the benefit of the doubt to the Bush Administration and took up the government's cause as their own.

I am willing to associate with respectable people who believe in Bush's war (they do exist). But people masquerading as Objectivists who can't and won't articulate clear principles by which they believe the Iraq war is a necessary function of government are evading. They're evading the fact that their attempted justifications for the Iraq war could be used just as logically to justify literally hundreds of other wars right now. People who claim to be for a strictly limited government that acts only to defend citizens' rights, but grant a government the open-ended power to force its citizens to bear the costs of wars against any or all bad regimes anywhere on the globe, are not mistaken on whether a particular war meets objective criteria (an honest person can be mistaken) -- they reject the very idea of objective criteria altogether.

Ultimately, then, they rely on emotion to make their case. Linz's hateful diatribes have no intellectual content or value whatsoever. Such behavior is typically designed to intimidate and, I think, to cover up the attacker's own self-doubts and insecurities resulting from inner confusions and contradictions. Instead of addressing the contradictions and attempting to work them out with a mind open to wherever reason leads him, the insecure person grows ever more fanatical about maintaining his unsupported conclusions and ever more dismissive and contemptuous of persons and information that draw attention to his contradictions.

If a person has contradictions, that's his problem. If I continue to associate with a person whose contradictions cause him to unjustly and irrationally demonize me, that's my problem. I have too much self-respect to continue my association with SOLO under these circumstances.

I invite those of you who wish to be in a virtual community where you will be respected to join my Individualism group (http://groups.msn.com/Individualism).

-Logan
www.individualistvoice.com

Post 1

Friday, June 18, 2004 - 10:56pm

(From SOLO Forum)

I want to make a few observations about this post.

The charge of evading is utterly without foundation. Every single one of Logan's points about the war has been answered over time, repeatedly, in posts or articles by me & others. As it happens I have rather the same frustration about the Saddamites - they simply evade certain crucial questions that are put to them over & over. For instance, why was Saddam entitled to be given the benefit of the doubt? Or - on what grounds can you, logically, proclaim yourselves pleased by Saddam's toppling?

But the problem Logan has with me clearly has as much to do with my style as the substance of the argument - I get extremely angry at times & express myself in emotion-charged language. Well, I'm sorry, but that's me. I cannot feign indifference to things I consider an affront to humanity - in this instance, succouring Saddam & his ilk. This is the way I perceive it & no argument I've seen has yet persuaded me otherwise. Yes, I've excoriated Saddamites because I want them to realise that they are helping prop up an egregious evil in the world. If I go over the top occasionally, so be it. If that's the worst that can be said about me then I haven't done too badly.

This is actually my Forum & I am, believe it or not, free to vent. So too is everybody else. That's my policy. Folk pull me up for this or that reason & don't get bollocked or excommunicated. I do believe Logan has abused the liberality that prevails here by urging others to follow his example & leave. It's one thing for him to leave & state his reasons here - it's dishonourable for him to encourage others to do so.

Something else Logan should have considered before departing: SOLO is *not* just Lindsay Perigo. It's way more than just "Linz's group." The organisation that propagates "rational passion & passionate reason" was, assuredly, *started* by me but is now staffed by a host of admirable people with whom Logan probably has no quarrel. He may think he's punishing me, but he's really punishing himself if he cuts himself off from them & all the things that SOLO offers via SOLOHQ. It all seems a bit of an overreaction to Lindsay doing his bun.

He *is* effectively punishing me, too, when I think about it. I regard his abilities highly & am sad to see him go. I've happily published his work in The Free Radical & have always been pleased to see his articles & posts appear on SOLOHQ. He has a first-rate mind & a writing ability way ahead of that of his peers. I would urge him to reconsider, not for my sake but in recognition of the enormous good that SOLO has done & will do - even if he thinks that's *in spite of* me. But if he insists on leaving ... well, I
wish him the best possible.

Linz

Post 2

Friday, June 18, 2004 - 11:12pm

(Copied from SOLO Forum on Yahoo, which I help moderate)

I, for one, do not intend to leave SOLO. The organisation is run by a
number of people, many of whom are opposed to the Iraq invasion.

Having said that, while I recognise that harsh words are sometimes
used in the heat of debate, I am like Logan greatly angered by Linz's
continued insults, which I think are a rather poor way to treat
friends who respect him. I've said so repeatedly, both publicly and
by private email. I simply will not allow unjustified insults against
me or my friends to pass without comment, and have even defended Linz
against various insults or criticisms from others opposed to the
invasion when I thought *those* to be unfair (which is partly why
Linz' accusations of disloyalty are particular offensive to me).

All things considered though, Linz appointed me a Moderator of this
forum (first as Ash's assistant, lately as "co-moderator" with her).
And whatever my disagreements with him, however fierece our arguments
have become, I remain a Moderator (a status which Linz could revoke
at the touch of a button were he of the mind to do so). Despite
Linz's personal views, SOLO and indeed the Free Radical remain open
to both sides of this argument (witness Linz's publication of Chris'
piece, mentioned above), and I would urge Logan to reconsider.

MH

Post 3

Saturday, June 19, 2004 - 6:18am

Logan sneered: "But people masquerading as Objectivists who can't and won't articulate clear principles by which they believe the Iraq war is a necessary function of government are evading... Linz's hateful diatribes have no intellectual content or value whatsoever.... If a person has contradictions, that's his problem. If I continue to associate with a person whose contradictions cause him to unjustly and irrationally demonize me, that's my problem. I have too much self-respect to continue my association with SOLO under these circumstances."

Now, is it just me, or do the words 'self-important twat' spring to mind? Logan: Wake up to yourself. Your interminable whining and hand-wringing has been asked and answered again, again, and again. If only you had the eyes to see that you were born with! Your petulant grandstanding earns you no respect, just my contempt.

Oh, Objectivism! What sad sick souls you somehow seem to attract. :-/

Post 4

Saturday, June 19, 2004 - 7:45am