Walter Block: Slanderers in the NYT

[Christian Liberty]

http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/01/walter-e-block/scurrilous-libelous-venomous/

OK, I'm sure there's a lot that could be discussed here, but one section in particular caught my attention:


What is to be done, then? Why, defame Rand directly of course, but also besmirch him not for anything he has done, but line up a bunch of people who could in any way be associated with him, attack them, and imply that Rand is somehow responsible for their actions. The not so hidden agenda here is that, really, Rand agrees with all of them, although he is too sneaky to come out and say this. The candidates for this operation? Ludwig von Mises, Murray Rothbard, Lysander Spooner, Hans Sennholz, Ayn Rand, Karl Hess, Ron Paul, Lew Rockwell, Tom Woods, Jack Hunter, Gary North, Alex Jones, and me. My only surprise is that Tanenhaus and Rutenberg, the authors of this disgraceful hit piece did not dig deeper. I am sure that if they had, they could have come up with some dirt on Rand’s plumber, or baby sitter, or gardener, or grocer, etc. Surely, one of them, or a family member or a friend of theirs, did something reprehensible that can be pinned on Rand, with just a little body English, for which the New York Times is justly famous.



Is Walter saying that Rand secretly agrees with these people? Or is the NYT? I'm curious because if Block is confident that Rand is "playing the game", that would increase my confidence level that that is what he's doing. Walter Block doesn't usually go easy on people.

[gwax23]

Interesting post. Your correct in Blocks stringent views. Ive read/seen him in the past say he is skeptical of Rand, maybe he knows more than we do and has come around.

Ill read the article now, Im hopeful.

Good Post regardless!

[Christian Liberty]

I think Block is kind of like me in this regard, likes Rand better thn the others but doesn't unconditionally support him.

[July]

Is Walter saying that Rand secretly agrees with these people? Or is the NYT? I'm curious because if Block is confident that Rand is "playing the game", that would increase my confidence level that that is what he's doing. Walter Block doesn't usually go easy on people.

No, I think he is saying that this was the obvious agenda of the NYT, to imply that.

[angelatc]

And of course, they did not do any of that with Obama.

[Occam's Banana]

Is Walter saying that Rand secretly agrees with these people? Or is the NYT?

He is NOT saying that Rand "secretly agrees with these people."

He is saying that the New York Times is trying to make it look like "Rand secretly agrees with these [horrible, awful, disgusting] people."

Block's preceding paragraph makes things crystal clear:

[Rand-haters on the left, such as the author of the NYT hit-piece] greatly fear a Rand versus Hillary confrontation in 2015. The former could “out-left” the latter on war, imperialism, victimless crimes, and “out-right” her on economic liberty, the second amendment and private property rights. Rand has a better shot at beating Hillary than any other plausible Republican candidate, and, it would appear, the time to grease the skids is now upon us.

Therefore (Block goes on to say) ...

What is to be done [by those Rand-haters], then? Why, [those Rand-haters must] defame Rand directly of course, but also besmirch him not for anything he has done, but line up a bunch of people who could in any way be associated with him, attack them, and imply that Rand is somehow responsible for their actions. The not so hidden agenda [of those Rand-haters] is that, really, Rand agrees with all of them, although he is too sneaky to come out and say this.


I'm curious because if Block is confident that Rand is "playing the game", that would increase my confidence level that that is what he's doing. Walter Block doesn't usually go easy on people.

Block says absolutely nothing whatsoever about whether he thinks Rand "really" agrees (or disagrees) with anyone at all about anything.