You are ascribing to me views I don't hold, of course; and yr statements are rather near the wind of being ad hominem - let alone suggesting I'm not familiar with Adam Smith, wh is really a bit much, don't you think.
I am not, of course, a Randian, come to that.
As for yr suggestion in the succeeding reply that I 'probably have more enemies' than do you, well, I suppose that's possible. In my experience, those who choose to be my enemies are the sort of persons whose enmity is a credit to one. They tend to be driven by political ideals, wh, although idealism is to be appluaded, they have conflated w their own self-identities. They commonly behave by indulging in ad hominem attack, reckless or knowing misrepresentation of my views and position, and an unseemly rejection of relations that were previously congenial, collegial, sometimes positively amicable, and in some instances materially supportive. I make certain you shd not wish to be that sort of person, naturally.
My point, such as it was, was that you shd have fewer enemies and more hearers were you to adopt a different mode: in homelier and more proverbial terms, honey rather than vinegar. But you must do as you will to do; you're under no obligation to accept the suggestion. You are obliged, I shd think, to treat it less as an affront deserving this sort of response, but that' yr pigeon, old boy.
Well, if you'll not be said, you'll not be said.
I am not, of course, a Randian, come to that.
As for yr suggestion in the succeeding reply that I 'probably have more enemies' than do you, well, I suppose that's possible. In my experience, those who choose to be my enemies are the sort of persons whose enmity is a credit to one. They tend to be driven by political ideals, wh, although idealism is to be appluaded, they have conflated w their own self-identities. They commonly behave by indulging in ad hominem attack, reckless or knowing misrepresentation of my views and position, and an unseemly rejection of relations that were previously congenial, collegial, sometimes positively amicable, and in some instances materially supportive. I make certain you shd not wish to be that sort of person, naturally.
My point, such as it was, was that you shd have fewer enemies and more hearers were you to adopt a different mode: in homelier and more proverbial terms, honey rather than vinegar. But you must do as you will to do; you're under no obligation to accept the suggestion. You are obliged, I shd think, to treat it less as an affront deserving this sort of response, but that' yr pigeon, old boy.