FUCK Ayn Rand.

>triggered libtard

If you wanted to talk about books with other people like you, you would've gone to reddit or tumblr, but you ended up here.

Were you not a decent enough person to fit in with people who agree with you, and had to go to right-wing sites, just so you could excuse any insults as "reactionary trash".

Or are you simply a fool who has wandered over here, and fallen for some memes of people who never even read her work?

Those two seem to be the most common. Tell me why you came here of all places.

>>8258069
man i might dislike objectivism as much as the next guy but what a stupid fucking topic for a thread.

>>8258081
more like ayn bad lmao

File: 1467219678083.jpg (35KB, 633x758px) Image search: [Google]

35KB, 633x758px

>>8258081
lol trigred

>>8258081
But she's a shit boring, dry writer
I'm not even talking about her philosophy. This is coming from a libertard
>Right wing website
(you)

File: gold_sides.jpg (3KB, 125x112px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 125x112px

>>8258101

>he thinks 4chan isn't right-wing

>>8258090
>>8258096

not an argument

>>8258106
(You)

File: (you).jpg (1MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 3840x2160px

>>8258113

Thank you my shitposting friend.
I have a gift for you.

>>8258106
>not an argument
kys

>>8258106
Molyneux's entire audience is a gaggle of slovenly goons

File: argument-man.jpg (40KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 400x400px

>>8258192
>>8258128

>more interested in their mental masturbation than even talking to people who disagree

Yep. That's a leftist pseudo-intellectual for you.

>>8258069
>FUCK Ayn Rand.
I would if I could

>>8258196
Leftists are at a disadvantage when talking to opponents because all of their positions are emotion-based rather than fact-based.

Resorting to ad hominems and refusing to debate is the only way for them to keep their credibility.

>>8258232
>ad hominems

ENOUGH

>>8258244
that right there is an ad hominem

>>8258256
even if it was (which it isn't), anyone who whines about "logical fallacies" is a massive faggot.

>>8258282
>anyone who whines about "logical fallacies" is a massive faggot
yes, that's what he was saying, and that is an ad hominem.

>>8258069
Fuck man I wish I could have.

>>8258232
Your argument is valid, but you spelled "consevatives" wrong.

>>8258197
You know i would too... Bet she'd s been good lay back in her day