Dear internets,
Why does anyone read Megan McArdle? The debunking of her silliness is clogging my RSS reader, and I’d like you all to just stop reading her already.
I tuned her out way back when she went by the name “Jane Galt.” I consider it entirely fair to treat Ayn Rand fandom as an automatic disqualifier from rational discourse, and McArdle’s use of a Randian pseudonym told me all I needed to know about what I’d get by reading her. So whenever someone links to her, I ignore it.
If everyone else did the same thing, my blog-reading would be much nicer.
And honestly, what would you be missing? Is there some deep insight she gives you into the way things work?
It isn’t like she’s a peek into the conservative id even. Objectivists are annoying in part because they are so doctrinaire, while run-of-the-mill wingnuts are fun to watch in part because they must vacillate between their small-government tendencies and their design to use power to impose their fundamentalist/misogynist/racist/whatever agenda on the atheists/gays/women/blacks/immigrants/Mexicans/Catholics/Jews/children, all the while trying to dress up their fundamentalist/misogynist/racist/whatever agenda as something that sensible people might actually support (something, that is, not racist, misogynist, fundamentalist, or whatever). Objectivists aren’t as much fun to mock.
Joshua Rosenau spends his days defending the teaching of evolution at the