"Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for mankind and ends with a sea of blood." - Howard Roark
"Actors change, but the course of the tragedy remains the same. A humanitarian who starts with declarations of love for mankind and ends with a sea of blood." - Howard Roark
At our demise Oedipus won't need to tear his eyes out. Those who lead us and those who vote for them are all already flying blind.
While in the more mundane scenes, it doesn't end in blood, but always a negative result, with the people who were supposed to benefit the most, wind up benefitting the least.
This leads me to the possibility of a discussion. Who do you or did you know who was most like Howard Roark? What about him or her, that makes you think of Roark?What was their profession, how did their attitude manifest?
humanitarian. . say, objectivist. -- j
.
That counts me out of his fan club.
It is like when someone is 95% great and 5% bad its a deal breaker when the 5% is unforgiveable. Its like saying Ted Bundy was ( I'm fictionalizing for illustrative purposes here) a terrific guy because he recycled and was a gourmet chef and volunteered at a soup kitchen so his little serial killing thing should be overlooked.
Please let me illustrate this error. Go back a few hundred years. The Pope says the sun revolves around the earth. Galileo Galilei says the earth revolves around the sun and the Pope declares him a heretic. I then say, “I’m a Catholic, so Galilei being a heretic is a deal breaker for me. The sun revolves around earth. Case closed.” I trust you can see the error here without consulting a basic book about thinking such as de Bono or David Kelley. How you were raised is not relevant here and is a logical error.
Your analogy with Bundy is also flawed because we were not discussing Mencken as a person, but you were discussing Bundy. If Bundy said the world revolves around the sun, I hope you would not discount the statement because you think (properly) Bundy is a monster. His being a monster has no relevance to the statement. The issue in this thread was a statement, not a person.
As a completely irrelevant aside to the current discussion of Rand’s words via Roark, I did not know (or at least did not remember) Mencken opposed US involvement in WWII. I will have to go see why. I, too, after reading a number of books on war and politics (see, for example, “War is a Lie”) changed my opinion from believing US involvement in WWII was proper to believing the US should not have been involved. My conclusion is the citizens of the US were lied to in order to get us into that war as well as most, if not all, of the other wars in which the US has engaged.