Loser's Guide to Life
I don't think you can just blame libertarianism as an idea for the patent idiocy of most libertarians, because it's a symptom rather than the thing itself. Lots of mentally ill people, for example, espouse all kinds of conspiracy theories, but it's not the theories that made them nuts, it's the other way around: their mental illness causes them to obsess over those things.
I can no longer keep track of how many incredibly stupid things “Jane Galt” has delivered herself of, but I think this is the most idiotic yet:
Moreover, as a class, the old and sick have some culpability in their ill health. They didn't eat right or excercise; they smoked; they didn't go to the doctor as often as they ought; they drank to much, or took drugs, or sped, or engaged in dangerous sports. Again, in individual cases this will not be true; but as a class, the old and sick bear some of the responsibility for their own ill health, while younger, healthier people have almost no causal role in the ill-health of others.
Perhaps they deserve it by virtue of suffering? But again, most of them are suffering because they have gotten old, often in high style...
(At her fantastically idiotic blog, via Alicublog and Eschaton.)
I can't understand how someone can go to the trouble of making no point in such a gloriously feeble-minded way—that's what I can't understand. I don't understand how someone that stupid can be employed anywhere, or even get through life thinking they ought to be employed anywhere, or even get through life in general.
I detect that she has rewritten this several times to make it seem less stupid. Hence all the “arguendo”, “a priori”, and so on. It's camouflage. Underneath it is a fairly commonplace dumb idea that looks stupid as soon as it's stated in normal English, but in this case, her “arguendo” cleverness only succeeds in making her look more insane. Per impossibile, I might add. As they stand now, her words imply that people age through choice, which she can't possibly mean.
I wonder if it's her own fault that she's that stupid? No, no, that's a low, uncharitable thought.