# Sleestak, would you just calm down? **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 8, 2002, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893 "2002-11-08T15:37:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 3:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/1 "2002-11-08T15:37:30Z")
In [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=142295&perpage=50&pagenumber=1) thread, **JThunder** counters an argument in favor of Ayn Rand by pointing out that just because she had a large influence or impact doesn’t mean it was a GOOD thing-after all, communism, racism, etc also had a large impact, but that doesn’t make them good. Several people pointed out that was probably a bad way to make the point, but most of them got it. However, our pal **sleestak** keeps hijacking the thread by screaming about how Rand is being slandered and how DARE she be included with such horrors! > [@](#): > > You tried to use guilt by association to make Rand look bad. I called you on it and you tried to duck it by making up some BS arguement. > > JT, why do you only meantion Communism, Fascism and Slavery when you bring up Rand’s philosophy? Why don’t you compare her philosophy to other ideals like Democracy, freedom and liberty? > > I know why. It’s because you’d rather slander Rand than discuss real issues. No one was slandering Rand. (Although, there are plenty of ways to do so, and if you want to fight against “slander”, I could give you some examples, but they’re really not relevant.) Maybe this is a weak rant, but for crying out loud, get a freaking grip already! Here is one point by **JThunder** , > [@](#): > > Sigh. Okay, let’s go over this once more. Step. By. Step. > > 1. The claim was made that Ayn Rand deserves credit because her philosophy “has been and still is a major influence in political thought.” (For the sake of argument, let us assume this claim to be true.) > > 2. Communism, fascism and slavery have also been major influences in political thought, yet they are rightfully despised by civilized people everyone. > > 3. Ergo, having had major influence in political thought is not something which automatically deserves merit. > > Note that this is NOT, by any stretch of the imagination, the same as saying that Rand was a communist, a fascist or a racist. The error lies with those who choose to read this bizarre interpretation into my remark. So would you please stop hijacking the thread, **sleestak**? Rand was not a saint, and people have the right to criticize her. I would use examples of her own BEHAVIOR to do THAT! :smack ---
**Author:** ![Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/50afbb/32.png) [@Duck\_Duck\_Goose](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Duck_Duck_Goose)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/2 "2002-11-08T21:19:15Z")
Wow. Never seen a Pit rant about Ayn Rand before. First time for everything, I guess. ---
**Author:** ![Maeglin](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/8baadc/32.png) [@Maeglin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Maeglin)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/3 "2002-11-08T21:54:33Z")
> [@](#): > > Never seen a Pit rant about Ayn Rand before. Probably cause she’s dead. [sub]Could not resist…[/sub] ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/4 "2002-11-08T21:57:11Z")
Well, we had one about prime numbers or something, so why not? ---
**Author:** ![Tars\_Tarkas](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tars\_Tarkas](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tars_Tarkas)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/5 "2002-11-08T22:23:10Z")
> [@](#): > > Well, we had one about prime numbers or something, so why not? damn "17"s… ---
**Author:** ![JonScribe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/3be4f8/32.png) [@JonScribe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JonScribe)\ **Post date:** [November 8, 2002, 11:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/6 "2002-11-08T23:48:14Z")
I hope you’re not equating Ayn Rand with prime numbers, because that would just be beyond the pale, slander of the highest order. Against prime numbers. ---
**Author:** ![Starbury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/f04885/32.png) [@Starbury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Starbury)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2002, 3:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/7 "2002-11-09T03:10:17Z")
Its possible I’ve been “whooshed,” but I would love to read a Pit Thread that arose over a discussion of Prime Numbers. If anyone has a link, I’ll thank you in advance for posting it here… ---
**Author:** ![Biggirl](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/biggirl/32/3294_2.png) [@Biggirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Biggirl)\ **Post date:** [November 9, 2002, 4:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/8 "2002-11-09T04:07:47Z")
[Prime Numbers (Math rant. You have been warned.)](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=104400) I’ve been here too long and have read waaaay too much. ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 8:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/9 "2002-11-10T08:28:12Z")
I’ll admit that I was over the top in making my point. At the same time JT did a drive by with his post. His first post in the thread did not include any arguements, just linking her philosphy to some of the nastiest ones around. Note, I wasn’t the only one who felt that JT’s post was out of line. Also, he did the original hi-jack. If you look at my first post you will see that I a) answered another posters question, b) told the OP that he should finish the book himself instead of relying on others to do his thinking for him , which is on point, and c) told the Rand haters to give it a break because, while she wasn’t the best writer ever, she wasn’t the worst either. I admit when I am wrong. I was pissed about some other things and let that bleed into my posts. I should have had more tact in my posts. But JT claiming that his drive by post was justified as a rational arguement is just BS. (How many people have died due to Objectivest philosophy? None. How many have died due to communism, fascism and slavery? Millions. Probably 30 + million in the last hundred years. Is that really a valid comparison?) Slee ---
**Author:** ![Justhink](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/edb3f5/32.png) [@Justhink](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Justhink)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 9:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/10 "2002-11-10T09:09:13Z")
“”""""""""(How many people have died due to Objectivest philosophy? None. How many have died due to communism, fascism and slavery? Millions. Probably 30 + million in the last hundred years. Is that really a valid comparison?)""""""""""" Nobody has died from the hands of one communist to another. Communism could be argued as having had killed the population because they were too peaceful and trusting. I would suggest that objectivist philosophy (i.e. RAND corp. next to UCLA etc…) has calculated and ordered far more deaths since its inception than totalitarianism as a historical phenomenon combined. Part of this is attributed to the fact that half the worlds human historical population is here right now. Objectivist philosophy ignores virtue as a value. I believe part of the advantage is that viruous people are easy to abuse for personal happiness; and that objectivism considers this to be the prime truth of what ones goal should be. -Justhink ---
**Author:** ![Liberal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/848f3c/32.png) [@Liberal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Liberal)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 11:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/11 "2002-11-10T11:06:41Z")
Justhink brayed: > [@](#): > > Objectivist philosophy ignores virtue as a value. No, it doesn’t. Recommended reading: _The Virtue of Selfishness_. ---
**Author:** ![LouisB](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/dfb087/32.png) [@LouisB](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LouisB)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 11:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/12 "2002-11-10T11:48:20Z")
> [@](#): > > Nobody has died from the hands of one communist to another. Does this have some meaning? If so, please explain it to a tired, old man. Thanks. ---
**Author:** ![sleestak](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/919ad9/32.png) [@sleestak](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sleestak)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 12:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/13 "2002-11-10T12:07:50Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Justhink \* > \*\*""""""""""(How many people have died due to Objectivest philosophy? None. How many have died due to communism, fascism and slavery? Millions. Probably 30 + million in the last hundred years. Is that really a valid comparison?)""""""""""" > > Nobody has died from the hands of one communist to another. > Communism could be argued as having had killed the population because they were too peaceful and trusting. > > I would suggest that objectivist philosophy (i.e. RAND corp. next to UCLA etc…) has calculated and ordered far more deaths since its inception than totalitarianism as a historical phenomenon combined. Part of this is attributed to the fact that half the worlds human historical population is here right now. > > -Justhink \*\* BWahahaha, you are joking right **Justhink**? You are claiming that no one died at the hands of a communists right? How about the 20 million that died in the USSR? How about Mao killing thousands, if not millions, in China? Pol Pot? **Justhink** , So killing millions of people is ok because, and I quote: “Communism could be argued as having had killed the population because they were too peaceful and trusting” is fine in your mind? The US didn’t kill those people, the communist governments killed those people. Also, a little FYI, the RAND corp has nothing to do with Ayn Rand. There is a thing called google which you can use to search for information. The RAND corp name came from a contraction of the words ‘research and development’. You can find the info [here](http://www.rand.org/about/) If you really believe what you posted give me cites. I doubt you can. Slee ---
**Author:** ![Stratocaster](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stratocaster/32/16393_2.png) [@Stratocaster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stratocaster)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 1:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/14 "2002-11-10T13:07:30Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by sleestak \* > \*\*I admit when I am wrong. I was pissed about some other things and let that bleed into my posts. I should have had more tact in my posts. But JThunder claiming that his drive by post was justified as a rational arguement is just BS. \*\* Doesn’t your first sentence here contradict your last sentence? If you were wrong, then you misunderstood JThunder’s point. If you still hold he was incorrect, then you weren’t wrong. The following makes it quite clear… > [@](#): > > \*\*(How many people have died due to Objectivest philosophy? None. How many have died due to communism, fascism and slavery? Millions. Probably 30 + million in the last hundred years. Is that really a valid comparison?) \*\*…that you still do not understand JT’s analogy. Period. ---
**Author:** ![andros](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/e480ec/32.png) [@andros](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/andros)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/15 "2002-11-10T16:36:46Z")
**Just hink** , please just think. > [@](#): > > Nobody has died from the hands of one communist to another. That’s demonstrably false, unless you’re being deliberately obfuscatory. > [@](#): > > Communism could be argued as having had killed the population because they were too peaceful and trusting. Sure, it could be argued. By a delusional, blind zealot, perhaps. And it’d be a vapid, pointless argument based in no fact and inane speculation, with a great deal of inveigled redefinitions thrown in to boot. But it _could_ be argued, I suppose. ---
**Author:** ![tiny\_ham](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a183cd/32.png) [@tiny\_ham](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tiny_ham)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 7:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/16 "2002-11-10T19:55:12Z")
[Ayn Rants](http://www.geocities.com/jarbabyj/aynrants.html) ---
**Author:** ![Francesca](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9fc348/32.png) [@Francesca](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francesca)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/17 "2002-11-10T20:01:04Z")
We once had a pit thread that arose from an argument in GD about caribou mating habits. I swear I’m not kidding. ---
**Author:** ![Francesca](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/9fc348/32.png) [@Francesca](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Francesca)\ **Post date:** [November 10, 2002, 8:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/18 "2002-11-10T20:07:47Z")
We once had a pit thread that arose from an argument in GD about caribou mating habits. I swear I’m not kidding. ---
**Author:** ![Jurhael](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/cab0a1/32.png) [@Jurhael](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jurhael)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 1:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/19 "2002-11-11T01:49:50Z")
“No, it doesn’t. Recommended reading: The Virtue of Selfishness.” Selfishness is NOT a virtue. No matter how hard little miss Rand can remotely attempt to convince people otherwise with her blather, it simply IS NOT a virtue. All it does is prove JustThink’s point. ---
**Author:** ![Fred](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/db5fbb/32.png) [@Fred](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fred)\ **Post date:** [November 11, 2002, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893/20 "2002-11-11T02:22:42Z")
Actually, you’re missing the point. Whether Rand is correct in referring to selfishness as a virtue or not is irrelevent. The point is that objectivism does not ignore virtue. Whether you agree with what objectivism considers virtue or not, the idea is still addressed. This is the opposite of Justhink’s point. Unless I’m misinterpreting his point. More than likely, considering the poster in question. [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/sleestak-would-you-just-calm-down/135893.md?page=2)