Ayn Rand and Sex 1.2

Ayn Rand has a unique take on love. In “The Fountainhead”, Gail Wynand and his wife, Dominique Falcone, are chatting:

Gail: “… I don’t want anything- but to own you. Without any answer from you. It has to be without any answer…”i

And then,

Dominique: “I don’t love you, Gail.”

Gail: “I can’t even care about that.. …I love you, Dominique. I love you so much that nothing can matter to me, not even you… Only my love- not your answer. Not even your indifference… …it’s not the object that matters, it’s the desire. Not you, but I.”

The woman’s status is that of an owned object. She doesn’t matter, only he does. This kind of love, where the woman’s feelings are irrelevant to the man’s desire, is presented as admirable.ii

iPg 496, The Fountainhead, Signet, Penguin Books, 1952

iiPg 502 The Fountainhead, Signet, Penguin Books, 1952

Ayn Rand and Sex 1.3

Rand describes the type of sexual relation she approves of as the following: “…sex is the most profoundly selfish of all acts, an act which (a man) cannot perform for any other motive but his own enjoyment… He will always be attracted to the woman who reflects his deepest vision of himself… …whose surrender permits him to experience- or fake- a feeling of self esteem… The man who is proudly certain of his own value, will want the highest type of woman he can find, the woman he admires, the strongest, the hardest to conquer- because only the possession of a heroine will give him the sense of an achievement, not the possession of a brainless slut.”i

The woman’s function is not to be of worth in her own right, but to be a reflection of the man. Rand doesn’t say what “The Meaning of Sex” is for women. The above implies it is to be conquered and possessed; and no action other than surrender necessary to achieve an appropriate sexual relationship.

This is in accordance with what Rand writes in “Fountainhead”, where the heroine’s motivation is described, “…the act of a master taking shameful, contemptuous possession of her was the kind of rapture she had wanted.”ii Later, the heroine describes the beginning of the relationship, “He didn’t ask my consent. He raped me. That’s how it began.”iii

The red-flag words Ayn Rand uses to describe her ideal sexual relationships are: selfish, for his own enjoyment, conquer, possess, master, shameful, contemptuous, rapture, he didn’t ask, and rape. Is it any wonder most of Ayn Rand’s fans started as conservative teen-aged boys?

iNew Intellectual pg 99 Quoting her book, Atlas Shrugged.

iiPg 217 The Fountainhead, Signet, Penguin Books, 1952

iiiPg 671 The Fountainhead, Signet, Penguin Books, 1952

Alan Greenspan 1.2B

Alan Greenspan thinks food is a luxury for hungry people. He uses a common economic term incorrectly when explaining commodity based currencies. He displays insensitivity.

Greenspan describes money, “… Durable…In a primitive society of meager wealth, wheat might be sufficiently durable to serve as a medium…”i “More importantly, the commodity… must be a luxury… Wheat is a luxury in underfed civilizations… The term “luxury” implies scarcity and high unit value.”ii

In an underfed nation, desperately hungry people require food for nourishment. Because it is necessary, scarce food has high unit value; but that doesn’t make food a luxury. Greenspan is using an incorrect definition.

In the field of economics, “luxury” is a technical term which refers to goods which are not necessary. “Luxury” does not refer to food staples, such as wheat. In economics, food is a “necessity good”, not a luxury good. If money must be a luxury, food wouldn’t used as money, especially in an underfed nation.

In Greenspan’s example, the institution of a monetary system is a given. The goal is an efficient economic system. The material circumstances are irrelevant except for how they serve the requirements of the economy.  Feeding hungry people is not a factor. If food has high unit value, Greenspan thinks hungry people should not eat the food, but use it as money. Greenspan is insensitive.

iPg 96 Gold and Economic Freedom by Alan Greenspan in Capitalism the Unknown Ideal Signet, New American Library

iiPg 97 Gold and Economic Freedom by Alan Greenspan in Capitalism the Unknown Ideal Signet, New American Library

Ayn Rand contradicts herself 1.9

Ayn Rand published two essays about monetary systems, one written by Alan Greenspan and one written by herself. They both cite events for which there is no objective evidence, which is a violation of Rand’s philosophy.

WHEREAS, Rand’s philosophy says, “… concepts represent classifications of observed existents…i; which means that mental concepts are true only if we saw examples of them in the real world…

AND Alan Greenspan asserts that “The existence of (money) is a precondition of a division of labor economy. If men did not have some commodity of objective value… as money, they would have to resort to primitive barter or be forced to live on self-sufficient farms. If men had no means to store value, i.e., to save, neither long-range planning nor exchange would be possible”ii

BUT, there is no objective evidence for Greenspan’s assertions. The objective evidence is to the contrary. Most people have lived as part of an interdependent group, whether with a monetary system or not. Communities without money have had division of labor and operated non-monetary economic systems, such as communism or gift/obligation. They also remembered who shared what with who, and acted equitably. They made long-range plans and had systems of exchange within the community and with other communities,iii not necessarily using barter…

THEREFORE, Greenspan is in violation of Rand’s philosophy. Because she published Greenspan’s essay as appropriate for her system of thought, Rand contradicts herself.

WHEREAS, Rand’s philosophy says, “… concepts represent classifications of observed existents…iv; which means that mental concepts are true only if we saw examples of them in the real world…

AND Ayn Rand asserts that mediums of exchange and money grew out of barter systems. “… you discover you can trade with other farmers… , and you trade your products by direct barter… You can trade your grains for something that will keep longer, and which you can trade for food when you need it… but which commodity?… You devise a tool of exchange – money”v

BUT, there is no objective evidence for Rand’s assertions regarding barter and monetary systems. There is no evidence or record of barter economies. There is no evidence of monetary systems arising from customs of barter. There is no record of barter practices which did not operate within a larger economic system along with complex financial instruments, such as creditvi. Rand may be repeating Aristotle’s speculationsvii

THEREFORE, Rand’s statements are violations of her philosophy. Because she violated her own philosophy, Rand contradicts herself.

i The Analytic/Synthetic Dichotomy, Pg 131, Leonard Piekoff, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology,

ii Pg 96, Gold and Economic Freedom, Alan Greenspan, Capitalism the Unknown Ideal, Ayn Rand, Signet, New American Library, 1967

iii This paragraph is based on material in https://libcom.org/files/__Debt__The_First_5_000_Years.pdf by David Graeber, Melville House Publishing, 2011

iv The Analytic/Synthetic Dichotomy, Pg 131, Leonard Piekoff, Introduction to Objectivist Epistemology,

v Rand pg 127 Egalitarianism and Inflation, Philosophy: Who Needs It. Signet, Penguin 1984

vi This paragraph is based on material in Debt the First 5000 years. Pg 21 and more, David Graeber, Melville House Publishing, 2011

vii Aristotle, Politics I.9.1257 paraphrased in Debt the First 5000 years. Pg 24, David Graeber, Melville House Publishing, 2011