comments

1. Coop on August 26th, 2009 at 10:06 am

   Y’all already know that I set myself up for mockery quite frequently, so I’ll do it again. I haven’t read Marx and don’t intend to defend or denounce him, but I have lived in a capitalist society–this one–for 55 years and don’t mind saying that, as far as I am concerned, it is a system which knows the price of everything and the value of nothing. (Was it Wilde who first used that formulation in another context?) I think the Europeans have found a workable middle ground, which the US keeps flirting toward, then backing harshly away from.

2. Deron Bauman on August 26th, 2009 at 10:08 am

   the conceit in the article is flawed. it equates marx to marxism but doesn’t equate rand to capitalism.

3. Dave Vogt on August 26th, 2009 at 11:27 am

   Yeah. Where in there does it become less embarrassing to be influenced by Rand?

4. Brian Beatty on August 26th, 2009 at 12:29 pm

   Because the majority of Americans have read neither — but remembers that Marxism is supposed to be some kind of boogeyman threat to the American way.

   We’re an idiotic, jinogistic people.

   Too bad it’s too late to rename the failed experiment of American capitalism after somebody like Rand, who represents the ideal’s worst tenets, but there’s a cart-horse order to be established.

   In the meantime, we should re-shelving her books in the true crime section of our favorite bookstores. That’s where they belong.

   How’s everybody been?

5. Brian Beatty on August 26th, 2009 at 12:30 pm

   Jingoistic. Urgh.

6. Brian Beatty on August 26th, 2009 at 12:31 pm

   I’ll be back when I get my typing under control.

7. Andrew Simone on August 27th, 2009 at 11:08 am

   It’s okay to hate them both, right? I don’t want either of them to be my priest.

   As an aside, his claim that “intellectual” culture finds Marx as glamorous as cigarettes is spot on in my experience.

Leave a Reply