The "Irrational Delusions Blog" is a sight dedicated to laughing at the utter nonsense spewed by the Objectivist/Libertarian blogger known as Lester Nation, but whose real name is "Les Carpenter". Although his blogger ID is rAtional nAtion uSA (and some refer to him as "RN").
For the record, "Lester" (or alternately "Less") are two variations that will, if you use them, cause Mr. Nation to fly into an insane rage. In regards to these rages, use of "Less"... that I can understand. But "Lester" is just the not-abbreviated version of "Les". It's like a dude whose name is "Jonathan" getting angry if someone calls him "John". Perhaps they might prefer "Jonathan", but being called "John" is hardly a reason to Hulk out on someone. In my humble opinion, at least.
In any case, back to my reason for starting this blog, which is because I thought it would be a hoot to (have a place to) point out some extremely absurd comments I've noticed from this blogger who calls himself a fan of the founder of an evil ideology known as Objectivism. This is an individual who describes himself as a "fiscal conservative".
Hence his subscription to Libertarianism, as that ideology is often thought of as being for people who are fiscally Conservative but socially liberal. Meaning they are generally for a woman's right to choose (although Libertarian Randal Paul is not. In fact he supports the totally nuts idea of giving Constitutional Rights to human eggs as soon as they are fertilized. Likely because the fundy Republican base would reject him completely if he had some other view... like supporting a woman's right to choose).
But this is something, I would guess, most Libertarians, including Lester, reject. Libertarians also generally favor marriage equality, although I've run into some Libertarians who SAY they support equality for gay people, but then say it's OK if business owners decide they want to discriminate based on sexual orientation.
Again, this is an idea that the supposed Libertarian Randal Paul supports (in regards to gay people as well as African Americans). As for Lester Nation, I couldn't tell you where he stands on this issue. If I had to guess, I would say that he stands with business owners. Why? Because this is the standard Libertarian position. Businesses belong to their owners, and owners (not government) should decide how those businesses are run (we're talking about private property, after all).
Nevermind the fact that businesses licenses are granted by the State and that, as a condition of such a license being granted, the owners must agree to operate in a non-discriminatory fashion. Or we can (and should) ask them to, at least. Because we live in a democracy and We The People set the rules for business (and non-discrimination SHOULD be a priority in a democracy).
But Libertarians are generally distrustful of democracy and want it minimized. Business licenses should be done away with. Want a business? You should be able to start one without going begging to the government. Or being taxed on your profits. Because these costs (Libertarians say) will simply be passed on to the consumer.
Not that I, as a Progressive Democrat leaning toward Democratic Socialism, agree with that. I do not. I think it is absurd nonsense. But that was not the absurd nonsense of Lester's I was referring to earlier.
Specifically I was referring to comments in which Lester says he supports things of a more Socialistic nature. And his support for these policies/laws/whatever of a more Socialistic nature are, given that he says he's a "fiscally conservative" Libertarian who admires Ayn Rand, make absolutely no sense.
These absurdities are what is going to be the primary focus of this blog. Or one of its focuses at least. It was one of the reasons I decided to start this blog. That, and the fact that Lester accused me of having an "agenda" regarding him.
| rAtional nAtion: It has been increasingly obvious you do indeed have an agenda with respect to Will, dmarks, and me. And, it is again getting tiring as well as distracting. Your point has been made, you know Will is not going to change his views on the issue, and by continuing any further on this post you certainly are not going to force agreement. (6/8/2015 AT 07:38:00 PM EDT). |
This issue I was trying to "force" concerned Willis Hart's climate change denialism and his continual reference to temperature readings of the troposphere by "luminaries" John Christy and Roy Spencer that they messed up. By "messed up" I mean their research was invalidated. But the climate change denying blogger still cites this research anyway.
I was attempting to get a response from him, but he chose to ignore me. Likely because the cognitive dissonance this caused (Christy and Spencer being wrong) was too much for this brain to handle. It made his head hurt so he chose instead to scurry back to his echo chamber (his blog) and compose another angry commentary concerning the conspiracy of (a majority of) climatologists who are deceiving us with their "alarmist" "warmist" agenda. Although that there is majority consensus is a part of the conspiracy. Other scientists (the handful not in on the conspiracy) were tricked into agreeing that climate change is real. (See SWTD #288 for my full commentary on this matter).
But, enough on that. Back to the comment from Lester. A comment in which he claims that it's "obvious" I have an "agenda".
This caused me to think... if I have an anti-Les "agenda", then shouldn't I have a blog to support this agenda? This might not sound logical at first, but I also have an agenda against Willis Hart as well as Dennis Marks (or dmarks as he prefers, because this is his Blogger ID).
And for these two fellows, my agenda against both of them is supported by a blog dedicated to refuting the nonsense spewing from each of them (one blog for each nut for a total of TWO blogs). But I have no blog specifically dedicated to refuting Mr. nAtion's nonsense. Yes, I have written some commentaries on my primary blog that specifically addressed things Mr. nAtion has written, but only on my primary blog (where I primarily cover other, non-Les related topics).
That is why I decided to start this blog. If I do have an agenda against Les as I have one against these other fellows, surely it is an agenda deserving of a blog dedicated to him solely? So... that is why this blog exists. As for how much activity might be seen here (in terms of commentaries posted), right now I'm expecting not much. Why? Because I would prefer to focus most of my attention on my primary blog. And I already have two other "agenda" blogs.
There is only so much time in the day and therefore only so much time for blogging. That said, I do intend to update this blog at least once in awhile and do not intend to let it die. Probably with shorter commentaries, as they will take less time.
By the way, I may often spell certain words incorrectly. Like "site" (as in website) as "sight". Or "guilty" as "quilty". This is in tribute to Lester, an individual who frequently tosses a mean word salad, which is something else that makes me laugh... and remember, laughing at Les is another reason I gave for starting this blog.
So, there you have it. The reason why this blog exists, that is. And why the subtitle for this blog is "An Anti-Les Agenda Blog" (he he). Because if I do indeed have an agenda, the agenda DESERVES a blog to support it.
I hope Lester appreciates my validating his accusation with the creation of this blog (should he visit it and read this post). I surely would not want him to feel slighted because Willis and Dennis each have blogs supporting my agenda against them while he does not. Now he does. So, hopefully (if he discovers this blog) it causes him happiness instead of irrational anger.
IDB #1
