Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Dupin

Weird online TOS article

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

This article recently appeared on the website of The Objective Standard (you might need to use your mouse wheel to scroll below the photograph):
https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2019/07/regarding-carl-barney-and-scientology/
The whole business is weird.  From a purely propaganda point of view maybe they should have just ignored the attack instead of throwing petrol on the fire.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The metaphor should be clear:
Fire <==> disagreement between TOS and the attackers.
Petrol throwing <==> publicizing it.
I doubt if many of TOS's readers had heard of the attack before the article, now they all have.  From a “pragmatic” perspective TOS should have ignored the attack and let it die a natural death.  Instead they infuse more life into it, that is, they unwittingly advertise the attack even as they fight it.  It’s a tar baby.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you render similar comments to his retort? As a subscription based information service, he might be interested in what his subscriber base thinks of how he handled this particular situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, dream_weaver said:

Where's the fire?

Dollars to donuts Dupin is Mark from ARI Watch.  Trying to drum up interest in his piece attacking Carl Barney.  There was some discussion of it recently on OL:

https://www.objectivistliving.com/forums/topic/17234-barney-tells-his-story/

My comment from over there:

In earlier discussions I came out as a Barney defender, since I felt Mark's attacks had a lot of unfairness in them.  But I don't have the time or energy for a rehash.  It's out there on older threads, and it looks like Biddle is covering the rebuttals well enough.  A sample:

First, to criticize a private college for accepting students’ funds that come from government loans and grants is almost as absurd as criticizing a private supermarket for accepting customers’ funds that come from government welfare programs.

https://www.theobjectivestandard.com/2016/05/the-times-smiles-and-sneers-at-carl-barney-ayn-rand-and-private-colleges/

Note to any ARIan readers: think of this as payback for James Valliant.   Think you've got the high ground?  Review The Passion of Ayn Rand's Critics.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
53 minutes ago, Dupin said:

The metaphor should be clear:
Fire <==> disagreement between TOS and the attackers.
Petrol throwing <==> publicizing it.
I doubt if many of TOS's readers had heard of the attack before the article, now they all have.  From a “pragmatic” perspective TOS should have ignored the attack and let it die a natural death.  Instead they infuse more life into it, that is, they unwittingly advertise the attack even as they fight it.  It’s a tar baby.

 

Fire is disagreement? That strikes me as weirder than anything in the TOS link. If it has "life" insofar as a disagreement exists, why shouldn't they publicize their disagreement? People disagree all the time. Are you not supposed to publish disagreements as if they should be hidden "for propaganda purposes"? Why? That's just weird. I don't read TOS or even care about Barney one way or the other. But your post is weird.

Edit: Also, ARI watch are white nationalists, so you probably should disagree with them.

Edited by 2046

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought “fire” was appropriate given the intensity of the debaters on both sides.

The attack Biddle refers to may have been by Richard Ruggiero rather than ARI Watch.  He had posted something about Barney on TOS’s Facebook page and Biddle (I guess it was) quickly deleted it.  Now he attacks from his own Facebook page.  You can find it by searching Facebook for Richard Ruggiero – he’s the first one listed – and scrolling down the timeline.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, Dupin said:

I thought “fire” was appropriate given the intensity of the debaters on both sides.

The attack Biddle refers to may have been by Richard Ruggiero rather than ARI Watch.  He had posted something about Barney on TOS’s Facebook page and Biddle (I guess it was) quickly deleted it.  Now he attacks from his own Facebook page.  You can find it by searching Facebook for Richard Ruggiero – he’s the first one listed – and scrolling down the timeline.

 

I don't see any debaters. I see an article on TOS telling you Biddle's intention to do what he wants, and your intention to complain about it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...