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.