The Objectivist[Capitalists-Libertarian]- Economics is:

Unrealistic,

Dogmatic, and

Essentially religious

I.         Utopianism. 

A.     Miss Rand (1966b): “A system of pure, unregulated laissez-faire capitalism has never yet existed anywhere... (1964) uncontrolled unregulated laissez-faire capi­talism—with a separation of state and economics”

B.     Considerable reason and data: humans cannot live on a purely selfish basis.

1.                  Man is usually better off when he considers:

a)                 himself first and

b)                 the mem­bers of his community as a close second [since he/she depends on that community for his/her life/lifestyle.]

2.                  Purely selfish needlessly harms others.

a)                 In the 1920’s the utilities operated under very little constraint. Their

(1)               rates were high and
(2)               service poor.
(3)               Communities had to take over, or at least regulate to provide a decent level of service.

b)                 The majority of people, economists and citizens, of every government have always found that capitalism is to some degree inimical to the public welfare.

C.    Essentially a religious view since only an unalloyed, completely orthodox version would work.

D.    Confuses capitalism with freedom. Miss Rand (1966b) states: “If one upholds freedom, one must uphold man’s individual rights: to his own life, ..liberty, ...pursuit of ... happiness —which means: ...capitalism.” Invalid for several reasons:

1.                  Human beings are never really totally free.

a)                 Biological heredity sets distinct limits.

b)                 Need a social group to survive and/or live well and therefore must suffer some restrictions to get along.

c)                  Have to eat:

(1)               Must give up a considerable amount of freedom to eat regularly in wild; or
(2)               Capitalism forces them to work in order to eat.
(3)               Only under social welfare system were everyone was guaranteed a mini­mum income whether or not he worked would they have maximum freedom in this respect. 

2.                  Ignores the powerful forces which capitalism exerts [see below].

3.                  Capitalism does not necessarily protect “rights” to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness:

a)                 A person can be left to starve to death (his particular skills are not wanted),

b)                 Deprived of his liberty (forced to engage in some kind of work he does not enjoy), and

c)                  Restrained from pursuing his vision of happiness (not able to make sufficient money to happily spend on himself).

d)                 Offers very little protection to many individuals or society as a whole.

e)                 People fixated with making a maximum amount of money might take it and leave or dumb enough to destroy it.

f)                    Since [it seems to capitalists to be in] the capitalist’s best interest to keep costs low, capitalists would not hesitate

(1)               To drive wages below the subsistence level.
(2)               Replace men with ma­chines if they can do a job at a lower cost, without concern for worker’s welfare.

4.                  Collectivist economies can and have protected the individual’s pursuit of life, liberty, and happiness to some degree.

a)                 In former Soviet Russia

(1)               people seem to live about as long,
(2)               in many ways to be as free as, and
(3)               for the most part to be as happy as people in capitalist America.

b)                 In today’s Russia, many long for the communist days

c)                   A collectivist system that included real safeguards for human life, liberty, and happiness could be worked out

d)                 To assert that political despotism must accompany collectivism is non­sense:

(1)               There are rea­sonably collectivist and state controlled economy in
(a)               The United States
(b)               Europe,
(c)               Asia
(2)                That have a large measure of political freedom (as objectivists again point out in the US).

E.     The capitalism that the objectivists advocate has contradictory aspects.

1.                  Entirely selfish:

a)                 would lead to the annihilation of many weak

b)                 individuals and

c)                  would result in continual uncompromising struggles on the part of strong persons.

2.                  Requires ideal rationality. Branden (1965)  “capitalism implied and required a system of ethics that did not yet exist..”:

a)                 long-range instead of short-range hedonism;

b)                 some considerable de­gree of social as well as of individual interest; and

c)                  more cooperation, collaboration, and compromise [than has ever been demonstrated].

d)                 If every capitalists were guided by this kind of rational self-interest, might well choose not

(1)               to be capitalistic!
(2)               deplete the land of irreplaceable natural resources,
(3)               pollute the atmosphere with all kinds of noxious chemicals,
(4)               make many of the waterways unfit for hu­man enjoyment or animal life,
(5)               market harmful drugs, etc., etc.

e)                 The vast majority of men and women are not rationally moral and are not likely to be in the near future.

F.     One-sided, producer view of capi­talism that ignores other facets.

1.                  consumerism aspects of contemporary capitalist society.

a)                 Ayn Rand (l966b) “... capitalism grants economic recognition to only one kind of consumer: the producer... production is the pre-condition of consumption.”

b)                 Actually, is two-sided or multifaceted. So is consumption the precondition of production. No capitalist would think of producing anything that would not have a good market. Serving others just happens to be profitable in many instances.

2.                  Miss Rand emphasizes only manufacturing.

a)                 Services (such as adver­tising, teaching, medicine, psychology, research, etc.) are a large and integral part of capitalism.

b)                 Even with sufficient production, no proof that reason and justice will prevail!

G.    Objectivism on Monopoly

1.                  Stoutly favors capitalistic monopolies and

2.                  Is violently opposed to antitrust laws.

3.                  Anathemizes “coercive monopoly”.

a)                 An economy dominated by such monopolies would be rigid and stagnant” (Greenspan, 1 966a).

b)                 It insists that such a coercive monopoly can only be accomplished by an act of government.

4.                  This objectivist view does not make very much sense for several reasons:

5.                  The essence of capitalism is profitmaking.

6.                  A real-life capitalist will think nothing of abrogating various laws, including supply and demand by:

a)                 Lobbying,

b)                 Bribing,

c)                  Propagandizing and

d)                 Otherwise pressuring government into granting it special privileges.

H.     Their “capitalist” never does anything wrong or stupid—because, by tautological definition, he is an all-beneficent god who can do no wrong.

I.         Today, pure capitalism impossible because many essential industries require:

1.                  Large investments,

2.                  Guarantee that parts of the government will purchase large numbers of the finished product,

3.                  Are just too big for any ordinary-size business.

4.                  Must be regulated to a considerable extent by government agencies.

J.      Capitalism would presumably have to occur on a worldwide basis and not merely in one or a few countries of the earth because otherwise there would be government intervention in markets by:

1.                  many “capitalist” states con­cerned with succeeding regardless of “free” markets and

2.                  Noncapitalist nations which are aggressively anti-capitalist.

II.       Unrealism. Objectivism is unrealistic and anti-empirical:

A.     Ayn Rand (1964) “without property rights, no other rights are possible.”

1.                  Tautological

2.                  Empirically unverifiable. Contradicted in many societies.

a)                 Many enslaved peoples, serfs, prisoners, and citizens of communist nations do not own prop­erty yet they have rights, some of which are not provided by capitalist economies:

(1)               Protection from:
(a)               Theft of their personal posses­sions,
(b)               Rape,
(c)               Assault,
(d)               Libel,
(e)               Murder,
(2)               To Free
(a)               Health services
(b)               Education
(c)               Housing
(d)               Food
(e)               Clothing
(f)                 Water
(g)               Heat
(h)               Transportation
(i)                  

B.     Inevitable voluntary and coercive tie-ups between the state and economics. Under Capitalism the state:

1.                  Is part of the economic system:

a)                 producer,

b)                 seller,

c)                  consumer,

d)                 financer, etc.

2.                  Must provide for national defense

3.                  Is not a community of free traders so some of its interactions with capitalists will inevitably be coercive.

C.    Objectivist credo

1.                  (Rand, 1961b), “Capitalism

a)                 Demands:

(1)               The best of every man—his rationality—and
(2)               rewards him accord­ingly.

b)                 Leaves every man free to

(1)               choose the work he likes,
(2)               trade his product for the products of others, and
(3)               Go as far on the road to achievement as his ability and ambition will carry him.

c)                  Success depends on the

(1)               Objective value of his work and
(2)               The rationality of those who recog­nize that value.”

2.                  If men truly used “reason and reality as their only arbiter,” they could easily devise many different kinds of economic systems which would work better than either capitalism or col­lectivism has worked so far.

3.                  Men do not use reason and reality as their only arbiter; Under the capitalist system, in spite of their ability and ambition:

a)                 Most people

(1)               End up in work that they hardly like,
(2)               Are Little trained for what they enjoy, and
(3)               Seriously blocked from achieving what they desire to achieve.

b)                 The “organization man” replaces the true entrepreneur and

c)                  The real individualist  becomes “Drop-out” and may end up as an

(1)               Alcoholic,
(2)               Drug addict,
(3)               Jailbird,
(4)               Hippie, or
(5)               Miscellaneous misfit.

d)                 Individualism wanes.

D.    “The fundamental issue . . . is a controlled economy versus an uncontrolled economy—that is, slavery versus freedom” (Branden, 1965b). Several errors are stated and implied in this position:

1.                  A controlled economy—such as we have in the United States today—hardly means complete slavery. It

a)                 Has disad­vantages, but

b)                 It also frees people from

(1)               Great price fluctuations,
(2)               Uninsured unemployment,
(3)               Facing poverty in old age,
(4)               Purchasing unlabeled patent medi­cine,
(5)               Etc.

2.                  Freedom, as objectivism defines it, narrowly means

a)                 Freedom from physical coercion;

b)                 Not freedom from other forms of coercion which may well be more pernicious.

3.                  The real issue is what kind of economic controls a modern government enforces and on whose behalf.

E.     The objectivist position is that govern­ment controls exist entirely in themselves.

1.                  Actually, almost all governments these days are voted in and kept in office by those who live under the government’s regulations and demand economic controls:

a)                 The citizens and

b)                 Businessmen.

2.                  The question is who has the control of the economic system:

a)                 the majority of the people, or

b)                 Businessmen.

3.                  Ignores a sensibly planned economy.

F.     The objectivists assertions on Good

1.                  Three theories of good:

a)                 Intrinsic theory: inherent in certain things or actions as such, regardless of their context and consequences;

b)                 Subjectivist theory, bears no relationship to the facts of reality,  is a product of man’s consciousness, created by his feelings, desires, or whims; and

c)                  Objective theory, neither an attribute of things in themselves nor of man’s emo­tional states, but an evaluation of the facts of reality by man’s consciousness according to a rational standard of value.

(1)               “Capitalism is the only system based on an objective theory of values.” (Rand, 1966b)
(2)               The objective theory of values is the only moral theory incompatible with rule by force.

2.                  Unrealistic for these reasons:

a)                 Many believers in capitalism also believe in the intrinsic or subjectivist theory of values; and

b)                 Many be­lievers in the objective theory of values are quite anticapitalistic.

c)                  Rule by Force:

(1)               Like collectivism, is opposed by the great majority of social and political thinkers
(2)               A good many of those who oppose rule by force hold the intrinsic or the subjectivist view of good.
(3)               A number of those who uphold rule by force uphold, as well, an objective theory of value — including
(a)               Lenin and
(b)               Trotsky.
(4)               Such believers in force believe in reality and rationality: they see the facts as leading to the logical conclusion that, at least temporarily, forceful political rule is a good thing.

G.    Miss Rand and her cohorts imply there is only one possible evaluation of the facts and capitalism is the only good economic system that can ever be invented by man.

1.                  Their ideas are

a)                 Monolithic,

b)                 Unequivocal

c)                  Do not accord with the multiple facts of reality that actually exist

d)                 Are religious absolutes which have no foundation

e)                 Only sound empirical

f)                    Not logical.

g)                 Implicitly exist in Miss Rand’s head and

h)                  Not unique to capitalism.

2.                  None of the large capitalist corporations behaves the way Miss Rand sug­gests

a)                 Decisions are reached

(1)               Only after committee discussion,
(2)               Usually not unanimous.
(3)               With help of disinterested consultant(s).

b)                 Vir­tually all capitalist enterprises have:

(1)               Col­lectivism,
(2)               Collaboration, and
(3)               Cooperativeness
(4)               Rare “rugged individualism” elements.

H.     Free Market incongruities and assertions:

1.                  Ayn Rand (1966b) “Within every category of goods and services offered on a free market...

a)                 the purveyor [wins with],

(1)               best product
(2)               cheapest price

b)                 Teaches every participant to look for the objective best within the category of his own competence, and

c)                  Penalizes those who act on irrational considerations.”

2.                  Arrogant hogwash because:

a)                 Frequently the greatest financial rewards in a given field are won by the firms which produce

(1)               A shoddy product at a cheap price
(2)               The best product at an inflated price.

b)                 The free market clearly does not teach them to act otherwise since,

(1)               As in the purchase of furniture, which usually lasts for a long period of time even when it is shoddily produced—the free market would rarely be effective in inducing people to change their poor buying habits; and
(2)               as where shoddy toys are purchased and break very quickly—the free market still is not effective enough in teaching most purchasers to buy more rationally next time.
(3)               Human beings wrongly persuade themselves that they can keep getting something for nothing

c)                  Business induces the purchaser to buy products that are not the best or the cheapest in their field; What wins is the best:

(1)               commercial advertising,
(2)               Publicity,
(3)               High pressure selling, and
(4)               Other forms of propaganda

d)                 Where are human beings who behave as this kind of system demands that they behave?

e)                 Today’s is usually quite divorced from producing anything but the one particular kind of material he may work on in his own factory and is not competent to look for the ob­jective best in what he purchases

3.                  In order for there to be a truly free market there must exist (among other conditions):

a)                 many firms,

b)                 No one firm accounts for more than a small percentage of the total production of goods;

c)                  homogeneity—that is, all firms must produce identical products.

4.                  The law of free markets is self-terminating since if a firm makes a better product, it becomes (with limitations) a monopolist.

5.                  Capitalism fosters irrational conspicuous consumption based more on fad than on intrinsic desire for rational or [the best] goods.

a)                 the girl who knows that the dress she is purchasing today will be outmoded next season does not particularly care if it is shoddily made

b)                 The husband and wife who realize that they must refurnish their house or apartment every few years to keep up with the Joneses next door will not be too offended if the furniture they buy when they are marrying starts coming apart a few years later.

c)                  Advertisers, salesmen, and publicists ceaselessly push the indi­vidual into making unnecessary, fashion-impelled purchases, and

d)                 The average customer has such a dire need for social popularity that he cannot too easily resist purchasing many things for the most disturbed reasons,

I.         Myth that quality products win out under capitalism

1.                  Perhaps—if the producer of this product can last that long.

2.                  innumerable instances he goes broke—especially considering the high costs of production these days. Or

3.                  Someone else beats him out with a shoddier product that looks better but soon deteriorates. Or

4.                  Someone puts on a huge sales campaign for a somewhat different product that really isn’t as useful as his, but which takes over so much of the market that he can­not very well survive.

5.                  Unsuccessful useful and quality products under capitalism can be cited endlessly.

J.      If ideal capitalism existed, a single capitalist who produced shoddy goods, used high-powered advertising, and employed other common capitalistic methods, would quickly drive most of his competitors out of business, and the system would become the unideal capi­talism that exists today.

K.     Objectivism nonsense about labor and its value:

1.                   “The economic value of a man’s work is determined, on a free mar­ket, by a single principle: by the voluntary consent of those who are willing to trade him their work or products in return.

2.                  Two “vicious” doctrines is a definitional, tautological proposition that is not related to reality. “It represents the total rejection of two vicious doctrines:

a)                 The tribal premise: man is not the property nor the servant of the tribe and

b)                 Altruism - a man works in order to support his own life; he has to be guided by his rational self-interest; and he cannot expect sacrificial victims, i.e., he cannot expect to receive values without trading commensurate values in return: the free, voluntary, uncoerced judgment of the traders” (Rand, 1966b).

L.      Unrealistic statements:

1.                  The value of a man’s work on the free market would hardly be determined by a single prin­ciple, but his:

a)                 innate abilities,

b)                 willingness to work

c)                  at all,

d)                 well or badly,

e)                 mightily or weakly;

f)                    Ability to convince his employer that he was working well, whether or not he was;

g)                 The number and ability of other men who are available for the jobs he wants;

h)                  the strength of his desires for various necessities and luxuries; etc., etc.

M.    Miss Rand’s simplistic thinking

1.                  The tribal premise and altruism are the same doctrine: that man sometimes puts others, or the members of his tribe, above himself.

2.                  Assumes that they

a)                 Always are taken to great ex­tremes, and

b)                 Those who follow them

(1)               only subjugate them­selves to others and
(2)               Never strive for their self-interest.

3.                  Defines

a)                 Altruism as being wholly self-sacrificial (when it includes pleasure for the al­truist and is therefore partly based on self-interest).

b)                 Rand defines all self-sacrifice as vicious (without empirically proving that it really is)

4.                  Morality

a)                 Objectivists moral meaning of the law of supply and demand is the meaning they choose since they have no logic or fact to support it.

b)                 Per se, Capitalist/economic “laws” have no morality about them—any more than does Gresham’s law of currency or any other economic law which describes reality.

c)                  One can create moral laws after one observes economic facts; but the facts themselves do not manufacture the law.

d)                 If Miss Rand wants to state that the moral meaning of the law of supply and demand should be the total rejection of altruism, she is entitled to her belief, but must prove it to have it accepted as “law”.  This is not its meaning to most people, nor is it (except by her fiat) its one true and only meaning.

(1)               She has not shown why the law of supply and demand should lead to the moral condemnation of altruism.

5.                  Even if a man were the property of his tribe or a collective, the law of supply and demand would to some degree hold true:

a)                 If his tribe had a scarcity of steel, it might order him to work in a steel mill;

b)                 if it had an abundance of steel, it might order him to work at something else.

c)                  If the law of supply and demand is followed on the basis of productive (rational) supply and informed demand, a collectivist society is to that degree capitalistic.

6.                  In reality, all economies are mixed.

7.                  Today, man need not work to support his own life—since if he is handicapped or poor enough, the state may take care of him practically from the cradle to the grave.

8.                  Even when he does not work to support his life, the law of supply and demand still largely operates. If a mother and her child are on relief, their survival will hardly be affected by choosing between many things. They will be more likely to:

a)                 spend one hundred dollars on a television set that will bring them movies every day of the week than spend it on first-run movies at two dollars a showing; and

b)                 be willing to pay more for a bottle of soda than for a glass of water.

N.     The free market is a fiction.

O.    A man can very often give something that means very little to him and get something that means very much—as long as he can find other individuals who have different kinds of consumer values than he has.

1.                  For a few glass beads a savage may give a trader several pounds of gold or ivory. Or

2.                  A pretty girl can give a half hour’s time to a man, enjoy sex with him, and collect a hundred dollars.

3.                  On the other hand, an ugly girl may have to work thirty-five hours or more a week at an onerous job like typing or selling in a five-and-ten-cent store for a wage that enables her barely to keep her body and soul together

P.     Miss Rand’s sole criterion of what is commensurate is the judgment of traders that is:

1.                  Free,

2.                  Volun­tary,

3.                  Uncoerced judgment of the traders.

4.                  This is not the sole criterion of many

a)                 other thinkers, or

b)                 traders themselves.

5.                  Is a girl who dislikes typing really on a “free, voluntary, uncoerced” basis when she has to choose between:

a)                 typing her fingers away thirty-five hours a week for a subsistence wage or

b)                 move into a coldwater flat,

c)                  become a prostitute, or

d)                 marry a man she does not care for

6.                  When a working man is driven to spend considerable amounts of his hard-earned money in order to satisfy the craving for toys which television commercials have deliberately produced in his children

7.                  Similarly, most “free” traders are as hogtied and coerced by their

a)                 Attitudes,

b)                 Abilities,

c)                  Biological drives,

d)                 Social conditioning

e)                 Conditions of the capitalist system itself.

Q.    Capitalism favors businessmen not only monetarily but also in regard to recognition. It clearly encourages various important kinds of unnecessary human inequities such as Elvis Presley’s making more money than Albert Einstein.

1.                  Objectivist defend “Because men work in order to ... enjoy their own lives ... are entitled to spend their money on their own pleasure. Presley’s fortune is not taken from those who do not care for his work nor from Einstein—nor does he stand in Einstein’s way—nor does Einstein lack proper recognition and support in a free society, on an appro­priate intellectual level” (Rand, 1 966b).

2.                  Un­realistic on several counts:

a)                 Presley’s fortune is taken from those who do not care for his work. If Presley produces nothing but music making and consumes a great deal of consumers’ goods, those who do not like his work will have less of the world’s earthly goods.

b)                 Presley’s fortune is to some degree taken from Einstein. The more enter­tainers are paid for their work, the less scien­tists and professors such as Einstein are remunerated. Since the Presley’s tend to give visible and imme­diate benefit to mankind than the Einstein’s, the public shortsightedly rewards entertainers more. This certainly a dis­advantage.

c)                  Most scientists and professors are hardly recognized by the public at all, even though their contributions to science and to humankind may be enor­mous.

d)                 Such scientists may get intellectual recognition from  their fellows (a small minority of our populace) but the public, including the intelligent reading public, hardly knows of their existence.

e)                 The Elvis Presley’s and the Henry Fords, however, get enor­mous public acclaim because part of their business is to hire high-priced publicity men to sell their names to the public.

3.                  Noncapitalist systems, such as those existing in the Soviet Union and Communist China,

a)                 have also achieved magnificent progress in a brief span of time

b)                 in some respects, have achieved more progress than has occurred under capitalism.

c)                  [Were capitalist systems that failed]

d)                 Have more equality for women and

e)                 Far better health services for the entire public than exist in most capitalistic nations.

4.                  Capitalism also has considerable human cost.

5.                  On progress,

a)                 Miss Rand wrongly asserts on progress that

(1)               It cannot be achieved by forced privations: by keeping consumer goods from the populace and by producing famine through agricultural mismanagement.
(2)               In the capitalist system, when men become wealthy enough, and have what she calls a “creative over-abundance,” they can then put aside capital while simultaneously engaging in a great deal of personal consumption.

b)                 The “individual surplus” created under capitalism is created by individuals depriving themselves of consumer goods in order that they may accumulate capital to invest or reinvest in their businesses.

c)                  Few capitalists start off this way; and many never get to the point where they continue to retain and add to their capital except by personal deprivation. Some capitalists begin by borrowing capital rather than saving it; but only a few can manage without considerable self-deprivation.

R.     Even in the United States, many workers and their rela­tives have often practically starved during our most pros­perous times. During capitalism’s indigenous periods of depression, extreme poverty and near-starvation have been very high percentages.

S.     American capitalists shortsighted­ness led to an immense amount of soil erosion, stripping of fertile land by poor crop growing practices, the ploughing under of fully ripened eatables, and other aspects of agricultural mismanagement which have at times forced tens of thousands of farmers to leave their land and have resulted in famine conditions for millions of individuals. The main ways this has been halted have been by our government’s use of highly collectivized methods.

T.      ***** [I question this] The industrial revolution in western Europe was largely possible because the unemployment rate created by early capitalism enabled factory owners to pay wages at or below the subsistence level and to provide abominable working conditions and long hours of work. In addition, children and women were tied to the factory ma­chines for seventy to eighty hours a week. These conditions continued for over a hundred years. It was not until the. social legislation of the last half of the nineteenth century, that these subhuman working conditions began to be improved, and this social legislation was probably as important as any other factor in causing the improved conditions.

U.     More recently, in our own country up until the great de­pression in 1929, steel workers had twelve-hour shifts and worked seven days a week for a total of eighty-four hours each week. And until the International Ladies Garment Workers Union became powerful during the early years of this century, sweatshop conditions were rife in New York City and other parts of the country, and led to great evils. Without techno­logical improvement, poor working conditions might still exist; but technological improvement is not unique to capitalism but also is common under collectivism

V.     The contention that progress under capitalism is part of the living present and is achieved as and while men live and enjoy their lives is at best a sorry half-truth.

1.                  The most successful capitalists:

a)                 Live much more for the future than for the present and

b)                 Amass huge paper fortunes which they use in a minor way for personal consumption.

c)                  Lesser capitalists tend to be much more future-oriented and have less time and money to spend on themselves.

2.                  There is no evi­dence that capitalist enjoy life more than non-capitalists. Most capi­talists

a)                 Notoriously joy-deficient,

b)                 Worry inces­santly about their business affairs,

c)                  Work themselves into early heart attacks,

d)                 Abysmally uncultured,

e)                 Consume for purposes of display rather than direct enjoyment,

f)                    Miserable

g)                 Tranquilizer-taking,

h)                  Alcohol-sopping

3.                  The psychology of people under capitalism is completely ignored and a myth is set up in its place that these people really want to:

a)                 work hard for a living,

b)                 discipline themselves to save their money, and

c)                  produce useful products for themselves and their fellow men.

W.   Ayn Rand (1963) “Most people are not moochers who seek the unearned, not even today.” Claptrap! Most capitalists in this country are:

1.                  Engaging in various kinds of gam­bling;

2.                  Cheating on their personal and business taxes;

3.                  Padding their business expense accounts;

4.                  Trying to make a million dollars on the stock market instead of engaging in  productive work;

5.                  Deliberately avoiding employment and living off unemployment insurance

6.                  accepting some form of relief when they could be working;

7.                  Applying for all kinds of government aids, bene­fits, subsidies, and grants;

8.                  Holding featherbedding jobs as a result of union-management contracts;

9.                  Setting up restric­tions which make it very difficult for others to work in their professions;

10.             Selling the shoddiest of merchandise to anyone they can induce to buy it;

11.             Manufacturing or selling foods  and drugs which do more harm than good;

12.             etc.

13.              Indirectly or directly mooching off:

a)                 his ancestors,

b)                 his relatives,

c)                  his friends,

d)                 his employers,

e)                 the government,

f)                    the consumers, or

g)                 Some other person or agency

X.     The objectivists contend that mooching is against the spirit of capitalism and that it exists in spite of entrepreneurism.

1.                  The spirit of capitalism is not productive work, but profit-making.

2.                  Innumerable “middle-man” businesses have grown up—such as advertising, merchandising, financing, lobbying, etc.—and many of these businesses promise the in­dividual much more reward at the risk of less investment than does manufacturing or agriculture.

3.                  Mooching of one kind or another has become the norm in our capitalist society since it is the nature of the real capitalist to

a)                 Seek higher income for

b)                 Minimal risk-taking and

c)                  Use high-pressure selling techniques

d)                 Rather than high-level productivity,

4.                  The kind of capi­talistic ideals which the objectivists preach are very rarely fol­lowed.

Y.      Nathaniel Branden (1966g), “Under capitalism any man or company that can surpass competitors is free to do so.” Half-truth: Only if he can:

1.                  Beg, borrow, or (often!) steal enough capital to work with;

2.                  Sell the product he competently produces;

3.                  Meet innumerable government regulations about manufacturing, selling, hiring employees, paying taxes, etc.;

4.                  Arrange to induce enough legislators to pass the laws he wants and repeal the laws he dislikes;

5.                  have his products wanted in a war or peace economy, whichever happens to exist from time to time;

6.                  Compete with government subsidized foreign firms; and

7.                  avoid many other pitfalls which are largely out of his control.

Z.      Capitalism  is regulated by all kinds of important influences.

1.                  Modern capitalism is

a)                 restricted,

b)                 shortsighted,

c)                  politically hogtied,

d)                 unidealistic,

e)                 cor­rupt, and

f)                    “uncapitalistic.”

AA.           Branden (1966g) “capitalism, by its nature, entails a con­stant process of motion, of growth, of progress; no one has a vested right to a position if others can do better than he can”. Wrong:

1.                  Capitalism often encourages vested interests and economic stasis.

a)                 Large corporate en­tities tend to acquire what Gaibraith (1967) calls a “technostructure,” and have all kinds of vested interests which encourage it to maintain its policies, whether or not these make for economic progress or retro­gression.

2.                  it is doubtful that under capitalism there would be:

a)                 only people who are completely productive, honest, informed rational and physically uncoerced and who  would not encourage privilege or stasis.

b)                 they will long survive under any system which even slightly resembles actual capitalism!

c)                  There may actually be a great deal of state power behind capitalist.

(1)               the president of a large cor­poration who has the ability and influence to wangle govern­ment contracts for his firm may remain president even though others are more capable than he is;
(2)               The owner of a neighborhood bar who bribes the local police may remain in business when more capable proprietors who do not resort to such bribery are unable to keep operating. Perhaps Ayn Rand’s ideal capitalists would never resort to bribery; but virtually all normal capitalists would!

3.                  Vested rights to a position exist under capitalism in literally millions of instances where no governmental control backs them up.

4.                  Highly incompetent men have high positions in a capitalist firms because:

a)                 he is closely related to the boss or president;

b)                 Some high-placed female in the company is sexually attracted to him;

c)                  He is having a homosexual affair with a com­pany official;

d)                 He knows some scandal about execu­tives of the firm;

e)                 He is friendly with important union officials; etc.

BB.           Recessions and depressions.

1.                  Objectivists assert:

a)                 “At worst, the economy may ex­perience a mild recession, i.e., a slight general decline in invest­ment and production....

b)                 Readjust­ments occur quite swiftly.

c)                  Beneficial: process of correcting its errors, of curtailing disease and returning to health” (Branden, 1966g).

2.                  Wrong because:

a)                 No way to check this hypothesis, since no unregulated economy has ever existed;

b)                 On theoretical grounds,  it is clear that severe economic recessions and depressions are inevitable—unless drastic governmental measures are taken to prevent them.

c)                  Overproduction  of consumer goods is a specter.

d)                 Produces so much goods that even well-paid workers are going to have difficulty consuming them;

e)                 As our standard’ of living rises and more and more people want to invest some of their savings in capital, there will probably often be more of this capital available than the system can easily absorb.

f)                    In the old days, threats of serious unemployment and a surplus of investment capital were met by

g)                 Expanding domestic frontiers,

h)                  Foreign investments,

i)                    Major wars.

j)                    Periods of serious recession and depression are inevitable, unless special governmental  controls are employed.

3.                  Like saying that a fever is good because it helps rid the body of disease. Perhaps, but the problem would be far more efficaciously solved if

a)                 we could eliminate the disease com­pletely or

b)                 build the body’s resources so that it was not liable to serious infection.

c)                  Instead of retaining tendency to overproduce goods and have too much capital available for investment, it would be far more effective to redesign the system in which overproduction and overinvestment do not occur in the first place

4.                  During a recession both the employers and the employees are harmed:

a)                 Unemployment rises

b)                 Manufacturers operate below capacity.

c)                  Workers do not have  purchasing power

d)                 Business firms do not make all they can because of insufficient demand.

5.                  General economic planning has to be so limited that serious:

a)                 Overproduction

b)                 Lack of investment opportunity occur.

c)                  Many recessions

d)                 Occasional serious depressions

6.                  Actual Capitalism has enormous disadvantages and there is no reason to believe that ideal capitalism

a)                 will ever exist or

b)                 that it will not have its own disadvantages.

7.                  Men will be fallible. Fallible people build and run fallible economies.

CC.          Branden (1966g) “in a free economy, when an in­dividual businessman makes an error of economic judgment, he (and perhaps those who immediately deal with him) suffers the consequences; in a controlled economy, when a central planner makes an error of economic judgment, the whole country suffers the consequences.”

1.                  Objectivism takes an unrealistic attitude toward:

a)                 Hazards of economic planning and

b)                 Supposedly enormous ease and automatically of the free market.

(1)               If the president of a large corporation
(a)               makes an error of economic judgment,

(i)                 Produces the wrong product, or

(ii)               Uses an ineffective type of sales promotion, or

(iii)             Moves his factory to a region where it cannot operate well, or

(iv)              Commits some other business error,

(2)               he may
(a)               throw thousands of people out of work,
(b)               upset the economy of an entire city,
(c)               Precipitate a serious recession or depression in his entire country,
(d)               Upset the economic balance in a huge industry, and
(e)               Cause all kinds of other economic, political, and social repercussions.

2.                  Implies that

a)                 Free market works automatically

b)                 requiring much less work

c)                  Is more rational and

d)                 Results in fewer human errors

e)                 Economic planners have to work very consciously to make good plans;

DD.          Free market

a)                 Does not work at all automatically

b)                 Requires more work and worry than any other system of economics. Example:

(1)               When business person first goes into business,
(a)               he knows that there is a great demand for his product and can hardly produce enough.
(b)               Sells them at the prevailing rate or a little higher and makes a profit.
(c)               Increases his pro­duction.
(2)               Later
(a)               Several other manu­facturers start making a similar product and
(b)               Some of the older manufacturers keep increasing their production, too.
(c)               The number of customers for nuts and bolts increases, but not quite as rapidly as the facilities for making them.
(d)               A plethora of nuts and bolts exists and businesses find more than enough product on hand.
(e)               Choices:

(i)                 Manufacture fewer nuts and bolts (even though his overhead will remain the same

(ii)               Sell his product for a lower price (even though his manufacturing costs do not decrease)?

(iii)             Forget about nuts and bolts and manu­facture some other product instead

(3)               Best answer them by getting information
(a)               Competitors
(b)               Inventories
(c)               Likelihood of their going out of business,
(d)               Prices will they be charging next season,
(e)               General pros­pects for the sales of nuts and bolts in the country, etc.
(4)               Information is unavailable or hard to get,
(a)               Will not:

(i)                 Have a manufacturers’ association to give him very much help,

(ii)               Be able to get together with other producers and h prices,

(iii)             Be able to rely on governmental loans or sub­sidies,

(iv)              Have any national tariffs to protect him from cheap imports

(b)               He will have to

(i)                 be continually checking his competitors’ prices, changing his own prices

(ii)               Entering into voluminous correspondence with his customers,

(iii)             Exploring the raw materials market to see where he can pos­sibly buy more cheaply,

(iv)              Canvassing the labor market etc.

(5)               Free market only works at all because
(a)               millions of entrepreneurs work and
(b)               a [lucky] few make the right guesses, month to month, week to week, and day to day.
(c)               [Gambling Seed]
(6)               At best, capitalist is continually  harassed and fearful; and it is unlikely that he is going to enjoy this kind of harried existence.

c)                  It is no wonder that he almost always shows great enthusiasm when some plan is devised for curtailing or stop­ping the operations of this kind of pure capitalism! That is doubtless one of the main reasons why

(1)               The free market has never really worked for any length of time, and
(2)               pure capitalism is a myth.

2.                  A planned economy

a)                 Has great dangers. The central planning board may err; it may

(1)               Work with the wrong information;
(2)               Consist of corrupt individuals;
(3)               Not work well with other key central planning boards;
(4)               Come up with decisions which are misguided and costly to the nation’s economy; and
(5)               Get into many other difficulties.

b)                 Has many advantages: it can:

(1)               More easily obtain relevant data than can an individual manufacturer;
(2)               Often correct its own mistakes fairly quickly;
(3)               Make decisions which are beneficial to many people rather than to a favored few;
(4)               See that valuable natural resources are preserved;
(5)               etc.

3.                  Objectivists refuse to see is

a)                 Capitalists work­ing as free agents under the free market that would exist in a pure capitalism, have many benefits and many handicaps; and

b)                 The same can be said for any more central planning boards, whether they be run by

(1)               trade associations,
(2)               local govern­ments,
(3)               national states, or
(4)               world federations.

c)                  Capitalists are not

(1)               Heroes or
(2)               Villains

d)                 A national planning board is not

(1)               a villain; nor
(2)               heroic

4.                  Economic management is

a)                 always done by human beings.

b)                 They, and not the “free market” of the “collective” or any other en­tity, do the actual work

c)                  People who use a free market work according to some kind of profit system

(1)               may possibly help them make more rational decisions than those who work according to some other kind of economic system.
(2)               But there is no reason why this has to be so.
(a)               When one fool loses money under capitalism another luckier fool may make it;
(b)               Neither of their decisions may be made along very rational lines.

5.                  A truly rational system of economics concerns itself with

a)                 Goodness of the decisions that are made;

b)                 the human cost of making such decisions.

6.                  Even if capitalists are able to “automatically” make better decisions, is it efficient and worthwhile for the society:

a)                 For so many capitalists rather than so few committee members to be spend­ing their time deciding such matters? And

b)                 To have all the uncertainty and anxiety imposed on capitalists during the course of the decision making,

c)                  To have all the loses by failed business.

7.                  Capitalists may

a)                 Actually enjoy this kind of activity and consider it a creative endeavor. Or

b)                 Feel that, if he lets a central planning committee make his economic decisions, planners will start regulating the rest of his life as well.

8.                  There are also enormous drawbacks.

9.                  There are serious drawbacks to allowing a nation’s economy to be run by civil servants, who can easily become

a)                 Bureaucratic,

b)                 Self-seeking,

c)                  Corrupt,

d)                 Unresponsive to consumer desires, and

e)                 Otherwise inefficient; for there certainly are such disadvantages of collectivism.

EE.           Let us be realistic and admit both sides positives and negatives.

FF. Objectivism is also opposed to collective bargaining on the part of labor.

GG.          Marxist philosophy insists

1.                  All productivity and all economic value stems from labor power, and

2.                  Profit is merely the surplus value that the employer extracts from his laborers

HH.           Objectivists take the opposing view:

1.                  Labor itself is

a)                 worth relatively little but gains most of its value through the creative in­genuity of individual capitalists, who help it achieve its best ends. Nathaniel Branden (1966g): “A country’s standard of living, including the wages of its workers, depends on

(1)               the productivity of labor;
(2)               high productivity depends on
(a)                machines,
(b)               inventions, and
(c)               capital investment;
(d)                which depend on the creative ingenuity of individual men;

(i)                 which re­quires a politico-economic system that pro­tects the individual’s rights and freedom.”

2.                  Both the Marxist view and the objectivist view are myopi­cally one-sided. Both the capitalist and the worker are interdependent.

a)                 Worker productivity depends on machines, inventions, and Capital investment; but

b)                 Capitalist would obviously not pro­duce at all without:

(1)               various kinds of employees and
(2)               workers who had a notable part in producing the
(a)               machines,
(b)               inventions and
(c)               capital investment.

II.       The capitalist

1.                  Is, in many respects, a worker.

2.                  Is a person who works steadily at building his enterprise,

3.                  A person who deprives himself of all kinds of goods and pleasures in the process, and

4.                  Keeps plodding away to earn and to save money and more money and still more money.

5.                  Usually has a minimum of creative imagination and clear-cut ideation.

6.                  Often an imitator,

7.                  A buyer and stealer of others’ ideas,

8.                  A grubby trader who makes excellent use of others’ inventions but who rarely thinks up any of hi own.

9.                  An organizer,

10.              Director

11.              Financial risk taker

12.              Works and works and works.

JJ.  Very frequently the inventor, the innovator, and the capitalist are three different people.

1.                  The inventor creates a new commodity or technique or improves on existing goods and services.

2.                  The innovator finds  way to produce and market a commodity so that there is demand for it.

3.                  The capitalist mainly provides the financial backing for the entire set of transactions that includes invention, innovation, production, and distribution.

4.                  Miss Rand’s continual use the term “capitalist” as if it were synonymous with creator, inventor, or innovator is therefore not legitimate. It refuses to acknowledge the highly uncreative, workaday activity perform most of the time.

KK.           There is no evidence that the creative ingenuity of in­dividual men requires, for its exercise, a politico-economic system that protects the individual’s rights and freedom.

1.                  Men of outstanding creative ingenuity—including composers, artists, inventors, statesmen, generals, writers, and professionals— have done marvelous work under the worst kind of despotic monarchies and dictatorial governments.

a)                 Men of genius, like Mozart and Leonardo, for example, worked for royal patrons.

b)                 Modern rocketry was developed to outstanding heights (no pun intended!) under, first, the Nazi and then the Soviet dic­tatorships.

2.                   It is quite probable that creative ingenuity, in the long run, tends to develop better under conditions of politico-economic freedom than under authoritarian regimes. But it certainly can flourish quite well under politico-economic sys­tems that the objectivists do not tolerate.

LL. It is clear that a government can aid the growth process by doing more than merely protecting the individual’s rights and freedom.

1.                  It can spend money on research de­velopment that may pay off handsomely. In our own country, for example, about twenty-three billion dollars a year is spent on research development, most of it put up by the government through

a)                 grants,

b)                 subsidies,

c)                  tax incen­tives.

2.                  Almost all the research development money available is used by private industry; and

3.                  A large part of America’s recent economic growth seems to be directly and indirectly at­tributable to this kind of government spending.

MM.         Objectivism takes the unrealistic attitudes that

1.                  Human beings can only be coerced by the threat of physical violence and

2.                  Economic coercion itself never leads to such violence.

3.                  Branden (1966g) “In a free, unregulated economy, in a market from which coercion is barred, no economic group can acquire the power so to victimize the rest of the population.”

4.                  This is simply not true, because:

a)                 A free, unregulated economy does not bar coercion; it sanctions it.

b)                 Coercion

(1)               Does not mean only physical force, compulsion, restraint, or constraint,
(2)               also means the use of any kind of power or control to force, compel, restrain, or constrain an individual to do something that he does not want to do. Thus, a child is coerced into being mannerly or going to school not, mainly, because his parents whale the hell out of him if he refuses, but because they level various other sanc­tions—including loss of his allowance—against him if he does not do these things.

c)                  In a free economy, capitalists have the right

(1)                to purchase the local water reservoir and then to force everyone to pay almost any price I ask. T
(2)               To accumulate money and to use it to monopolize the town’s real estate, grocery stores, bars, or anything else, and then “force” you to obey virtually any rules I set up in regard to living quarters, food purchases, or drinking liquor.
(3)               To set up huge factories in town,
(a)               to poison the air with their polluted byproducts, and
(b)               to maim or kill you and your family mem­bers with this kind of pollution.

5.                  Economic coercion is so pervasive and subtle that it is probably far worse than most coercion by physical violence.

a)                 If you threaten physical violence,

(1)               I can at least see that you are my enemy, know what you are going to do to coerce me, and
(2)               Prepare some kind of counterattack against you if I wish to do so.
(3)               Even if you rule my entire community by threat of physical force,
(a)               I can eventually probably incite a rebellion against you, and
(b)               Get enough of my fellow townsmen to subdue you and your hired thugs.

NN.           Great economic power subtly rules in a variety of ways.

1.                  Directly and indirectly buy political votes.

2.                  bribe me directly with money or indirectly by inviting me to your high-class social affairs and other functions.

3.                  Lord over me economically and make me seem like a fool in front of others unless I go along with you on various issues.

4.                  See that I do not get or keep the kind of job I want until I do your socio-political bidding.

5.                  Encourage others to ostracize me by the economic power that you wield over them.

6.                  Get me to think your way, and really to believe that I naturally think the way you do, by exerting socio­economic pressure on me to conform to your way of thinking and behaving. And

7.                  Use a hundred other social, re­ligious, political, and economic influences to get me to do what you want me to do.

OO.          Physical constraint generally

1.                  starts and is made possible by economic power.

2.                  Foolish to believe free market would prevent.

3.                  The main reason gangsters survive is using ill-gotten gains to

a)                 bribe the police force,

b)                 buy out businesses that might unfairly compete

c)                  win social influence so that I and my family may be socially ostracized in our com­munity, etc.

4.                  A police chief or mayor may physically coerce me into paying you or voting for you is usually that you have economic tie-ups with

a)                 Industry,

b)                 Gangsters, and

c)                  Other individuals.

5.                  Capitalism, almost by its very nature, leads to concentrated economic power. Some bright or miserly indi­viduals tend to save enough capital to start limited monopolies, which then become larger and larger.

PP.           Myth that capitalism, by its nature, must lead to honest dealings and quality products

1.                  .Alan Greenspan (1966b): “What collectivists refuse to recognize is that it is in the self-interest of every businessman to have a reputation for honest dealings and a quality product. Since the market value of a going business is measured by its money­making potential, reputation or ‘good will’ is as much an asset as its physical plant and equipment.” Several major flaws”:

a)                 It is hardly in the interest of every businessman to have this kind of reputation.

(1)               Individual businessman is hardly known to the public,
(2)               Personal reputation is not much at stake if  corporation practices skullduggery.
(3)               Nothing succeeds like success; most people admire the successful person even when he is obviously dishonest. Old John D. Rockefeller, Sr., engaged in all kinds of dishonest and disreputable business methods; but the public seems to have admired him despite knowl­edge of his dishonesty.
(4)               If a man makes enough money by skullduggeries doings, he can live quite happily in spite of his poor reputation.

b)                 Thousands of capitalists turn out shoddy goods instead of quality products and manage to keep in business. Many of them, in fact, only make huge profits because of the shoddy products while many quality manufacturers go bankrupt.

c)                  The existing capitalist system virtually forces some individuals to produce shoddy goods if they are to stay in business—partly because the consuming public is so easily misled that it will choose almost any product that is cheaper.

QQ.          Ideal capitalism—some magical process where

1.                   both producers and consumers would be

a)                  Fully informed and

b)                 Completely rational long-range hedonists

c)                  Present-day capitalists would fight it tooth and nail,

d)                 Need radically different kinds of human beings to stock it.

e)                 Have to make certain that they stayed forever uncorruptible.

RR.           Alan Greenspan is naïve if he believes ‘good will” determines value of business

1.                  Greenspan’s words, “the market value of a going business is measured by its money­making potential,”

a)                 Too often, this potential is only related in a minor way to the reputation of its owner or to the quality of its product.

b)                 Even if a management is dishonest and if the business turns out shoddy goods, as long as it makes big profits, its “good will” will be high.

c)                  “Good will” often directly depends on its “bad will” toward its customers and toward the public!

d)                 Not always true. For, as Greenspan later points out, a drug company may lose reputation and acquire very bad will if it turns out a shoddy or dangerous product. But many another company may not!

SS.           Objectivists claim because an individual applies knowledge and effort, he has an absolute right to own the thing he applies it to.

1.                   Ayn Rand (1966b): “Any ma­terial element or resource which, in order to become of use or value to men, requires the application of human knowledge and effort, should be private property—by the rights of those who apply the knowledge and effort.” Crummy thinking, for these reasons:

a)                 Virtually any material element or resource which re­quires the application of human knowledge and effort to make it useful

(1)               Requires many people’s application. Thus, although Marconi invented the wireless, many other inventors had to add to it before it became the modern radio and TV system; and many other no inventors had to work at producing wires, condensers, coils, TV tubes, etc., before these inventors’ imaginings could be actualized.
(2)               Even the knowledge that Marconi and other inventors of radio-TV systems employed to create their ideas and conceptions had to be worked on, refined, and taught to them by others.

2.                   Just because individual inventor applies human knowledge and effort, he does not have a full right to his in­vention. He has a partial right, and even a large one, to his “property” in the invention;

3.                  Other people have a partial right, including

a)                  His entire culture

b)                  His teachers,

c)                  The authors of the books he has read,

d)                 The people that raised and protected him,

e)                 The soldiers that died and fought so his country exists

f)                    The civil servants like policemen, firemen, doctors, etc that protected and helped him

g)                 Etc,

4.                  All property “rights,” in other words, are somewhat arbi­trarily given the owner, by some definition—by some agreement among men.  It is true that what exists in nature is only the potential, there are many alternatives to who owns it:

a)                 First Individual who discovers it.

b)                 First Individual who settles on the discovered land;

c)                  First individual develops it properly; or who first finds some outstanding use for it—he should be the one who owns it.”

d)                 Fifth owner should own it forever and be able to will it to his heirs; while the first to fourth owners should only temporarily own it.

5.                  Ownership may be related to

a)                 The application of human knowl­edge and effort by a single individual; or

b)                 other criteria.

c)                  no private ownership of property.

(1)               may prove to be inefficient for many or most purposes; but
(2)               That does not prove that it is an illegitimate system of property ownership.

d)                 Objectivists see only one possible method of “justly” or “rightly” assigning property rights is,

(1)               monolithic,
(2)               abso­lutistic-oriented views.

6.                  Objectivists insist that “patents and copyrights are the legal implementation of the base of all property rights: a man’s right to the product of his mind” (Rand, 1966b).

a)                 The man whose mind works out a patented or copyrighted idea invariably leans on innumerable other men

b)                 Even if he com­pletely got it out of his own head—which is incon­ceivable—his society would still have the “right” to insist that part or all of the property rights in this idea belong to the community.

c)                  In fact, under capitalism, an individual who works for a large company invents a ma­chine or a process, and the firm he works for insists that, be­cause he is paid a salary by it, all or some of the property rights in this invention should go to it

d)                 By the same token, society could insist—and, mind you, I am not saying that it should—that just because it nurtures a human being for the first decades of his life, and then enables him to exist and work in that society, he owes all or part of the property rights in his inventions to it.

7.                  The objectivist absolute that a man has a complete right to the product of his mind is only an assertion without logic or fact to back it up.

8.                  May be possible to prove that both the individual and society will benefit more by awarding inventors property rights in their inventions than by awarding such rights to some­one else.

9.                  But even if this were proved a community of men could still pass laws (though perhaps not too sanely) that property rights in inventions are to be shared rather than solely given to the inventor.

TT.  Objectivists, when they face the fact that laissez-faire or pure capitalism does not exist and possibly never will, refuse to face the true reasons for its failure to flourish.

1.                  They rationalize as follows:

a)                 (Rand, 1966b) “The answer lies in the fact that the lifeline feeding any social system IS a culture’s dominant philosophy and that capitalism never had a philosophical base.

(1)               It was the last and (theoretically) incomplete product of an Aristotelian influence.
(2)               As a resurgent tide of mysticism engulfed philosophy in the 19th century, capitalism was left in an intellectual vacuum
(3)               Neither its moral nature nor even its political principles had ever been fully understood or defined.
(4)               Its alleged defenders re­garded it as compatible with government controls (i.e., govern­ment interference into the economy), ignoring the meaning and implications of ‘laissez-faire.’
(5)               Thus, what existed in practice, in the 19th century, was not pure capitalism, but variously mixed economies. Since controls necessitate and breed further controls, it was the statist element of the mixtures that wrecked them: it was the free, capitalist element that took the blame”. This statement is misleading in several re­spects:

b)                 The capitalism that Miss Rand says was destroyed in spite of its beneficent record apparently really never existed.

c)                  Even early capitalism was far from laissez-faire; and, as we noted previously in this chapter, the objectivists themselves freely admit that pure capitalism never existed.

d)                 [Therefore, they have no idea of what ideal capitalism would be like and no track record.]

2.                  The “incomparably beneficent record” of early capitalism is another myth.

a)                 It did have a reasonably good record in some respects;

b)                 But, as Karl Marx and many other critics, including procapitalist critics, have shown, early capitalism had many, many abuses, in terms of its exploitation of labor, its turning out of poor products, its unethical practices, etc.

3.                  There is no evidence that capitalism never had a philo­sophical base

4.                  Virtually any system of economics or politics has a philosophical base:

a)                 People make certain rulings because they believe, on some basis, that x is good and y is bad.

b)                 Capitalism arose, fairly obviously, because people believed that an individual was capable of

(1)                running a business himself,
(2)                determining whether he would make a profit or loss,
(3)               taking risks,
(4)               helping the general system through helping himself, etc.

c)                  If everyone had believed that man was incapable of doing anything on his own and that he had to make collective judg­ments about everything, it is hard to imagine capitalism arising.

5.                  Actually the turn of the twentieth century saw

a)                  the rise of logical positivism, empiricism, pragmatism, and other highly nonmystical (or less mystical) philosophies than had pre­viously existed.

b)                 Only the objectivists see these views as “mysticism.”

6.                  Assuming that the moral nature and political principles of capitalism had never been fully understood or defined,

a)                  there is no evidence that it therefore declined.

b)                  It is much more likely that the philosophy of capitalism—that the individual, through a laissez-faire kind of economy, could make maximum profit and help humanity most—was found wanting in practice; that it did not work; and that consequently a freer kind of capitalism declined into a more controlled kind.

UU.           Government Controls

1.                  Miss Rand insists that government controls “necessitate and breed further controls,”

a)                 She fails to see that “pure” capitalism soon will probably become so chaotic and one-sided that it will breed controls, including government controls; and

b)                 that this seems to be an almost in­evitable consequence of just about any kind of capitalism.

c)                  It was not necessarily, as she alleges, “the statist element” of the past mixed economies that wrecked them and the free, capitalist element that took the blame.

d)                 Rather, it was probably the free, capitalist element that led to the statist element, and in itself eventually caused what she considers to be the holocaust of the mixed economies.

III.      Contradictions.

A.     Values

1.                  Ayn Rand (1966b)

a)                  “since values are estab­lished contextually, every man must judge for himself, in the context of his own knowledge, goals and interests.

b)                 Since values are determined by the nature of reality, it is reality that serves as men’s ultimate arbiter: if a man’s judgment is right, the rewards are his; if it is wrong, he is his only victim.”

2.                   Contradictory:

a)                 Human values are established contextually: the individual relating with his environment and reacting to it.

b)                 The context, therefore, is not merely “his own knowledge, goals and interests,”

c)                  but his knowledge, goals, and interests as partly determined by the culture in which he lives,

d)                 by his biological inheritance, and

e)                 by various other factors.

f)                    He is not a thing-in-itself,

(1)               as this passage implies that he is—and which contradicts the rest of the objectivist philosophy,
(a)               that reality is and that there is no thing-in-itself.

g)                 It may be reality that serves as men’s ultimate arbiter; but reality includes the individual himself. It is an interaction between the individual and the reality in which he lives that serves as his ultimate arbiter. Interactions and transactions seem a little foreign to Ayn Rand’s entire mode of thinking.

h)                  If a man’s judgment is right, the rewards are not only his, they may be his community’s as well. And if it is wrong, he is not necessarily the only victim; many others may also suffer.

B.     Objectivists two con­tradictory creeds:

1.                  man is the only creator of his own values;

2.                  systems, such as capitalism and collectivism, create values which impose themselves on man.

3.                  Actually, when one understands the dualistic or pluralistic nature of things, both these propositions may have truth to them.

4.                  But objectivism does not appear to uphold a dualistic view; and yet it cannot sustain a monolithic, uncontradictory view either.

5.                  Nathaniel Branden (1965b)  “The essence of the social system Ayn Rand advocates… is contained in a single principle: No man—or group of men—may seek to gain values from others by the use of physical force.”

a)                 However, the capitalist system does give one man enormous power, both physical and propagandistic, over other men, and

b)                 Clearly encourages the use of several kinds of physical force to enable an individual to gain and to keep eco­nomic power.

C.    Free capitalism

1.                  They insist that capitalism, in their sense of the term, is only an ideal that has never existed;

2.                  But then they take existing capitalism,

a)                 which they presumably abhor, and

b)                 insist that it, with all its horrors, is much better than statism or collectivism, and presumably even good in its own right. Ayn Rand (1964) “as far as superior productivity and speed of economic progress are con­cerned, the question of any comparisons between capitalism and socialism has been answered once and for all—for any honest person—by the present difference between West and East Berlin.”

c)                  This kind of thinking is poor for these reasons:

(1)               Both present-day capitalism and socialism are really forms of state capitalism and state socialism, and are hardly entirely different from each other.
(2)               Even if contemporary socialism in East Berlin did not match the output of contemporary capitalism in West Berlin, that would hardly answer the question of any comparisons be­tween capitalism and socialism “once and for all.” At most, it would answer the question temporarily.
(3)               Since this passage was published,
(a)                productivity and speed of economic progress have made great gains in East Berlin; and,
(b)               Recent reports tend to show that the building of the brick and mortar and steel wall between the two sections of the city by the East Berliners has been one of the main factors in the economic progress of the eastern half of the city.
(c)               Physical force, in other words, has paid off—in spite of the objectivist theory that, economically, at least, it never does!
(4)               There are many other reasons why one part of Berlin may be economically superior to another part of Berlin
(a)                A capitalist city, state, or country, for example, in a time of poor climatic conditions and consequent famine, could be much worse off than a collectivist city, state, or country in a time of fine climatic conditions. This would hardly tell us very much about the intrinsic virtues of either capitalism or collectivism.

D.    If the objectivist position in regard to capitalism were half as sound as objectivists insist that it is, we would presumably tend to have

1.                  Universal capitalism and

2.                  Pure laissez-faire.

3.                  Nathaniel Branden (1964a) “the great merit of capitalism is its unique appropriateness to the requirements of human survival and to man’s need to grow. Leaving men free to think, to act, to produce, to attempt the untried and the new, its principles operate in a way that rewards effort and achievement, and penalizes passivity.”

4.                  This statement leads one to ask—

a)                 If capitalism is so uniquely appropriate to the require­ments of human survival, it should win out completely on its own accord.

b)                 Isn’t it odd  and that the collectivist part of the world manages to survive?

c)                  Why, if capitalism is so beneficial, do even capitalist nations such as the United States modify the system and become less and less, capitalistic?

d)                 Why do capitalists try to get away from its pure state and why do they passively go along with the intrusion of so much govern­mental control over the capitalist system?

(1)               Can it be that man is naturally more passive than active, that therefore he does not get along too well under capitalism, and that
(2)               consequently he adopts noncapitalist goals such as the welfare state, govern­ment subsidies for industry, agreements between management and labor unions?

IV.   Irrelevant arguments.

A.     John Galt, in Ayn Rand’s Atlas Shrugged (1957): “…What determines the material value of your work? Nothing but the productive effort of your mind—if you lived on a desert island. The less efficient the thinking of your brain, the less your physical labor would bring you—and you could spend your life on a single routine, collecting a precarious harvest or hunting with bow and arrows, unable to think any further. But when you live in a rational society, where men are free to trade, you receive an incalculable bonus: the material value of your work is determined not only by your effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the world around you.”

B.     This is a great argument in support [collectivism]—for, as Ayn Rand notes, you will then benefit from the productivity of others.

C.    This fact, however, is true in a col­lectivist society.

D.    Even a highly efficient worker in the Soviet Union benefits more from working for the government than from working entirely for himself.

E.     As Miss Rand says, the material value of his work is determined not only by his effort, but by the effort of the best productive minds who exist in the nation around him.

F.     Nathaniel Branden (1965b), in his vehement arguments against socialized medicine, forgets this point.

1.                   It may indeed be somewhat unfair for a good physi­cian to be remunerated in exactly the same way as is a poor physician when medicine is socialized.

2.                  But if there were no socialization of medicine whatever, from medical school to hospital and clinic work, probably no physician would be very competent

3.                  nor perhaps would he have many patients left to pay him!

G.    Ayn Rand (1963): “The gigantic achievements of American medicine . . were created by men who were individualists and egoists…—that is, men of

1.                  unusual ability,

2.                  independent judgment,

3.                  enormous ambition and

4.                  courage, the courage to be innovators.”

5.                  The implication here is that

a)                 [collectivist] medicine demonstrates no gi­gantic achievements; and

b)                 In [collectivist societies] there are no physicians of unusual ability, of independent judgment, of enor­mous ambition and courage, including the courage to be in­novators. This, of course, is absurd.

(1)               Possible that collectivized system will produce
(a)                fewer fine physicians and
(b)               fewer medical achievements
(c)               But there is no [long term] evidence that this is true.

H.     Nathaniel Branden (1966g) insists that “economic prog­ress, like every other form of progress, has only one ultimate source: man’s mind—and can exist only to the extent that man is free to translate his thought into action.”

1.                  The implication, once again, is that only under capitalism can economic pio­neers, creators, and inventors exist.

2.                  Obviously, economic pio­neers, creators, and inventors existed in

a)                 slave states,

b)                 under feudalism, and

c)                  in collectivized communities.

d)                 Quite probably[/possibly], political freedom

(1)               aids inventiveness; and
(2)               capi­talism (or some reasonable facsimile) aids political freedom.

e)                 But it is very difficult to down human creativity under any kind of economic system; and

f)                    It is presumptuous to contend that it can only flower under ideal capitalism.

I.         Sayeth Ayn Rand (1966b): “So long as a government holds the power of economic control, it will

1.                  necessarily create a special ‘elite,’ an ‘aristocracy of pull.’

2.                  attract the cor­rupt type of politician into the legislature,

3.                  work to the advantage of the dishonest businessman,

4.                  penalize and, eventually, destroy the honest and the able.”

5.                  While this statement may be partly true, there is every reason to believe that it applies just about as much to “free capitalism” as to state capitalism or to collectivism. For special “elites” can easily arise in almost any kind of society; and it is probably more likely that they will arise under “free capitalism” than under government controlled economies, where there are likely to be restrictions on them.

J.      Miss Rand’s point that, when the government holds the power of economic control, honest and able individuals will eventually be completely destroyed is a gross exaggeration.

1.                  Honest people may well be handicapped when a corrupt politico-economic system exists; but

2.                  Able individuals, instead of being destroyed, usually end up by running the system.

V.     Strawmanism: Claiming that their opponents believe in things they really do not believe, and then enthusiastically knocking down these [fantasies].

A.     Rand: John Galt in Atlas Shrugged (1957): “What was it we were supposed to want to work for? For the love of our brothers What brothers?

1.                  bums,

2.                  loafers,

3.                  moochers

B.     This statement has at least two major strawmen [plus it is unscientific in that it assumes that this is some sort of genetic defect rather than the result of conditioning] it:

1.                  It assumes, under collectivism, all men work only for the love of their brothers. Nonsense. Collectiv­ists

a)                 work mainly for themselves;

b)                 believe… that they will help themselves [more] by working cooperatively and collectively rather than by working indi­vidually [as Rand points out above – see para ?].

c)                  They are by no means pure altruists [nor is anyone pure anything as shown about Rand above]—except in the distorting eyes of Ayn Rand!

2.                  Certainly, many people shirk under collectivism—as, of course, they do under capi­talism and any other economic system that has yet been devised. Some shirk because they are:

a)                 “lazy” [lazy why? Lazy is a vague, pejorative word without considering conditioning –  ref: Skinner];

b)                 emo­tionally disturbed;

c)                  relatively unintelligent and are afraid [conditioned not] to compete with more competent individuals; and

d)                 have different reasons for their indolence and escapism.

e)                 But the objectivists [un-rationally and] pejoratively label [and dehumanize] all of these shirkers as “bums,” “loafers,” and “moochers”—implying that they are:

f)                    only out to exploit the industrious workers and producers, and
g)                 that they should be condemned [or left to die] as human beings for being what they are.

C.    Injustice

1.                  Rand (1966b): “Every ugly, brutal aspect of injustice toward racial or religious minorities is being practiced toward businessmen.

a)                 “For instance, consider the evil [“evil” is a superstitious, religious word] of condemning some men and absolving others, without a hearing, regardless of the facts [as Rand does – see throughout].

b)                 Today’s ‘liberals’ consider a businessman guilty in any conflict with a labor union, regard­less of the facts or issues involved, and boast that they will not cross a picket line ‘right or wrong.’

c)                  ... denying to some the rights granted to others.

(1)               ‘liberals’ recognize the workers’ (the majority’s) right to their livelihood (their wages), but
(2)               deny the businessmen’s (the minority’s) right to their livelihood (their profits) [profits are not necessarily and not usually “livelihood” in regard to businessmen – Oxford: Means of living, maintenance, sustenance; esp. in to earn, gain, get, make, seek a livelihood.].

2.                  Exaggerated accusations:

a)                 It is assumed that

(1)               a class of “liberals” exists today, and
(2)                that all individuals who think of themselves as “liberal” are one hundred per cent opposed to businessmen and
(3)               are cease­lessly condemning and persecuting [businessmen]

3.                  Ironically enough, most of the “liberals” are

a)                 or aspire to be businessmen (i.e., proprietors, doctors, lawyers, psychologists, professors who consult with industry, etc.).  and

b)                 opposed to some, but hardly all, the practices of businessmen.

4.                  [This “injustice” is being done to collectivists.]

5.                  Businessmen are not being persecuted in exactly the same ways as:

a)                 Negroes in the deep South,

b)                 Jews in Nazi Germany, and

c)                  businessmen dur­ing the early years of Soviet Union [and China].

6.                  No evidence that many American “liberals” are incessantly condemning businessmen and upholding workers regardless of facts.

(1)               “Liberal” [not liberal today at all] media upholds labor unions in one dispute and management in another—or change from one side to the other in the course of a single dispute. And

7.                  “liberals” frequently

a)                 condemn labor unions for their

(1)               racketeer­ing,
(2)               ultra-conservative policies,
(3)               inefficiency,
(4)               political tie-ups, and
(5)               many of the other things that they do.

b)                 give both businessmen and labor a hear­ing and weigh the facts. This, largely, is why we call them “liberals”: because they do:

(1)               consider the issues involved in a dispute,
(2)               change their minds frequently [as the facts and logic dictate]
(3)               engage in all kinds of compromising in their views.

8.                  The monolithic, bigoted “liberals” Miss Rand writes about are largely fig­ments of her romantic imagination [a small proportion of the left].

D.    Nathaniel Branden (1965b) insists that all collectivists or socialists are pure altruists who only put the collective good above individual good; Joseph Goebbels: “To be a socialist is to submit the I to the thou; socialism is sacrificing the individual to the whole.”

1.                  In their ultimate goals, Most collectivists are

a)                 rather individualistic, and

b)                 even nihilistic.

2.                  Marx and Engels believed that the dictatorship of the proletariat would be only temporary; and

3.                  Lenin wrote that, once socialism was well established, there would be no need for the state at all, that it would wither away.

4.                  Collectivists believe that as a result of this socialization the individual will have more

a)                 economic gains and

b)                 political rights

5.                  Although by no means been realized yet in collectivism, under capitalism the individual has often had exceptionally little real

a)                 economic individualism or

b)                 political freedom.

6.                  In some instances socialistic communities have preserved  to a considerable degree the:

a)                 I-thou relationship and

b)                 rights of the indi­vidual.

7.                  Col­lectivist inclined people tend to believe a blend of

a)                 socialism and

b)                 individualism,

c)                  enlightened self­-interest and

d)                 community spirit

8.                  In the middle of the 19th century, several communistic societies, where economic collectivism and rampant in­dividualism blended such as

a)                 Brook Farm and

b)                 Fourier-inspired communities,

E.     Campaign against socialized medicine,

1.                  objectivists

a)                 accuse opponents of all kinds of trickery and

b)                 predict disaster in case any vestige of socialized medicine

(1)               Leonard Peikoff (1962): No one who values his life—or his freedom—should remain silent.”
(2)               Lead to a “totalitarian dictatorship”;
(3)               result in the demise of countless Americans;
(4)               blot out individual freedom.

2.                  [Half a century] after passage

a)                 a good many American states, including New York, have set up their own medicaid plans which go far beyond

b)                 no totalitarian dictatorship in this country;

c)                  our lives are not in great jeopardy (indeed, because of better medical care for the indigent, some of this jeopardy has been removed!); and

d)                 we seem to have just about the same amount of individual freedom as we had when President Kennedy was still alive.

3.                  Socialized medicine

a)                 would appear to have definite drawbacks, but

b)                 Objectivists fail to point out that unregulated, capitalist inspired medicine also has its distinct disadvantages American Medical Association

(1)               has restricted the output of new doctors in this country by opposing plans for new medical schools, limiting the number of physicians per capita in the nation,
(2)               has encouraged the setting of medical fees at an artificially high level.
(3)               “free” medicine in the United States has
(a)               provided excellent care for

(i)                 lower income groups (who are large­ly “charity” cases) and

(ii)               upper income groups, but

(b)               fees have been semi-prohibitive for many middle-class people.

VI.   Tautological [Definitions not based on reality] premises.

A.     Pure defini­tions [assertions may be better word?]. - Not so un­usual, since most isms [and religions] are.

B.     Objectivism claims it is

1.                  rational, that its tenets are true because they ultimately relate to reality [rational would mean logical, not necessarily reality – that is factual or empiric, the following], and

2.                  empiric, observably connected with the facts of human behavior and of the world.

C.    Rights

1.                  Ayn Rand (1964) asserts:

a)                 Yes: Free Trade: to:

(1)               take a job if another man chooses to hire him
(2)               Home:
(a)               build or
(b)               buy it
(3)               Manufacture whatever
(4)               Of Man [? Not listed except free trade]:possessed by
(a)               every indi­vidual man and
(b)               all men as individuals.

b)                 No

(1)               Job,
(2)               Home,
(3)               “fair” wage,
(4)               “fair” price’
(5)               milk,
(6)               shoes,
(7)               movies
(8)               champagne
(9)               special groups,
(a)               farmers,
(b)               workers,
(c)               businessmen,
(d)               employees,
(e)               employers,
(f)                 old,
(g)               young,
(h)               unborn.”

2.                  Ellis:

a)                 How can there be such universal rights except by definition? [or law? better to jump to real definition and/or root – “[L. jus civile.] The law of Roman citizens; thence, the Roman law as a whole, esp. as received in Western Christendom in and after the Middle Ages. In early times, specially distinguished from the canon law, in later times from the common law of England.”]

b)                 The one “inalienable” right [definitional also; perhaps better to say ‘universal among societies’] that a man would seem to have is the right to live.

(1)               But even that can be legitimately abrogated as when:
(a)               [Ayn Rand in Atlas Shrugged] John kills Jim because Jim is attacking him and may possibly kill John; or
(b)               a group of individuals band together to protect its homes and lands from outside invaders; or
(c)               a govern­ment’s army fights against the army of another government.
(d)               [Governments decide to kill people for certain “crimes”]
(2)               So the human right to live is hardly completely:
(a)               unconditional and
(b)               inalienable.

c)                  For every single human to have exactly the same basic rights [again, away from real definition – better to address that rights are legal effort to level playing field (so everyone will try and therefore work) or other social purposes.]

(1)               would mean everyone equal in
(a)               ability,
(b)               age,
(c)               strength,
(d)               moneymaking propensity,
(e)               etc.
(2)               [Otherwise] Is the equality of this “right” really meaningful? Be­cause of your superiority over me, invariably:
(a)               you have the “right” to put me out of business while
(b)               I have little “right” to out produce and outsell you?
(3)               What happens as soon as some gain friends and allies and some do not?
(a)               If Jones, because he has blue eyes and blond hair, or because he was born into a friendly [or powerful] family, gains many friends during the course of his life, and Smith somehow or other gains very few, is Smith’s “right” to compete with Jones for the socio-economic favors of others going to do him much good?

3.                  …People, in a given community, agree upon this right. [Rights are laws passed by governments for its citizens; the root of the word “right” is the merely a “law” - see above]

a)                 There is no reason why anybody should, ought, or must be entitled to work when he is able-bodied [There are reasons: individual psychological health! – People do need to do something they find worthwhile];

b)                 but if the rules of any community state that all able-bodied men are entitled to work and that none of them should be discrimi­nated against (because they are stupid, incompetent, or any­thing else) then these rules give the individual the right.

c)                  it is clearly man [community perhaps better word?]-given.

d)                 The “right of free trade” is man-given, too!

(1)               There is no essence of nature [in fact, in nature, outside of mankind, nothing is traded, only given from parent to child] or humanity [many tribes/cultures hold all surplus in common] for the right of free trade
(2)               not simply because
(a)               he is human,
(b)               he is alive, or
(c)               free trade is a good thing.

4.                  Rand’s moral right is only a definition. A man has

a)                 no right to a job, etc.,  but

b)                 has “the Rights of man”—what­ever they are.

5.                  All human “rights,” are conditional and limited—as long as men live in social groups [in fact, it is the group that defines them].

6.                  For the objectivists to set up as “true” and inalienable the one particular “right” which [they] call the “right of free trade” is patently definitional [and/or metaphysical or religious].

7.                  Ayn Rand: “You, because you are a human be­ing, possess the unassailable right of free trade.” She really means, “You, because I, Ayn Rand, said so, possess the un­assailable right of free trade.” She:

a)                 musters no empirical reasons

b)                 may present some evidence that it would be desirable if you did have it.

c)                  tautologically [circularly] stating [asserting]: “You have the right of free trade because you have the right of free trade.”

d)                 All the basic economic “rights” which objec­tivists insist that man has have no basis in objective reality.

D.    Objectivism defines [asserts without proof] all the disadvantages of capitalism as being caused by noncapitalistic government controls. Ayn Rand (1961b): “… the historical facts … that all the evils popularly ascribed to capi­talism were caused… only by government controls… remember that what ultimately failed was a ‘mixed’ economy.” This is a ridiculous [does not fit together and/or with the facts] statement for several reasons.

1.                  from any empiric standpoint, fiction. More justifiably be said that Rand’s nonfictional writings read like [are] romantic fiction!

2.                  Claims all the evils in this “mixed” economy were caused only by the noncapitalistic parts of the mixture. [“evil” itself is a metaphysical/religious word– “it’s an ill wind that blows no good” – no pure evil or anything – from Oxford’s etymology “ME. uvel (ü), OE. yfel = OS. u_il, OFris., MDu. evel (Du. euvel), OHG. ubil, upil (Ger. übel), Goth. ubils:---OTeut. *u_ilo-z; usually referred to the root of up, over; on this view the primary sense would be either _exceeding due measure' or _overstepping proper limits'.”]

3.                  does not even consider the possibility that

a)                 capitalism itself causes evils, and

b)                 noncapitalist controls may ameliorate these evils.

4.                  she presents no facts.

E.     Money

1.                  The objectivist view of money is

a)                 quite definitional and

b)                 almost entirely divorced from reality.

2.                  Rand:

a)                 Ayn Rand’s hero, Francisco d’Anconia, in Atlas Shrugged (1957):  “To trade by means of money is the code of the men of good will.

b)                 “rests on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort.”

c)                  Allows

(1)               no power to prescribe the value of your effort
(2)               except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return.
(3)               you to obtain for your goods and your labor that which they are worth [supply and demand are not measures of the worth to them, but how little they can or how much they must pay to get them] to the men who buy them, but no more.
(4)               no deals except those
(a)               to mutual benefit
(b)               by the unforced judgment of the traders.”

3.                  Men of good will may or may not trade by means of money,

4.                  Ayn Rand posits [asserts without proof] that:

a)                 if you trade by money you are, by that very fact, a man of good will.

b)                 Money

(1)                does not rest on the axiom that every man is the owner of his mind and his effort.
(2)               rests on the observation that it is easier to trade by means of money than by means of barter
(3)               allows no power to prescribe the value of your effort
(4)                except the voluntary choice of the man who is willing to trade you his effort in return.

c)                  Perhaps in a free market of an­gelic traders, Every man is the owner of his mind and his effort.

d)                 Purely definitional and unrelated to reality. Actually, largely through the collaborative and cultural help of others every human being seems to

(1)               learn to think and
(2)               to gain from his work.

e)                 But under real capi­talism you can use money for barter purposes and still

(1)               coerce another into trading with you, and
(2)               doing so to the other’s disadvan­tage,
(3)               because you
(a)               threaten him physically,
(b)               blackmail him,
(c)               re­fuse to approve of him, or
(d)               otherwise constrain him.

5.                  Almost any con­ceivable system of real capitalism

a)                 includes all kinds of threats and blackmail; and

b)                 if you want to lie, cheat, coerce, and use other means of “persuasion,” the system enables you

c)                  you can also prevaricate and steal under collectivism.

d)                 But capitalism, above perhaps all other economic systems which have widely prevailed in human his­tory, encourages various kinds of cheating and coercion;

(1)               you can easily obtain for your goods and your labor more than they are worth to the men who buy them. [They are only worth the hours of labor it would have taken the men to make them

e)                 [you are cheating them

(1)               If for the same amount of time, you give them less
(2)               or Prohibit them from working due to land and natural resources “ownership”,]

6.                   To think that money permits no deals except those lead­ing to mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders is [fantasy].

a)                 exists in noncapitalist economies

b)                 in all economies permits deals which are not

(1)               mutually beneficial or
(2)               made according to the unforced judgment of the traders.

c)                  merely allows mutual benefit by the unforced judgment of the traders; hardly necessitates it.

7.                  If I acquire a monopoly on, say, the taxicab industry in a given town, I can

a)                 easily force you to give me more money than you think fair for various goods and services that I offer you;

b)                 definitely trade with you much more to my advantage than to yours.

8.                  The only way to ensure dealing with each other is fair and mutually beneficial manner is to grant traders saint­hood. Miss Rand grants them sainthood in the system which she calls, “Capitalism, the unknown ideal.”

9.                  [time and difficulty for new businesses to enter marketplace

10.             [then big firms can predatorily, temporaitly drop prices]

F.     Honor Tracy (1966):

1.                  “A type [at Hyde Park’s speaker’ corner] there was yet nuttier than the rest, namely, he who knew what was wrong with mankind and, alone of his fellows, was able to put it right. The tone of Miss Rand’s book, with its monomaniac vehemence, is much like that of the thinkers in Hyde Park.”

2.                  “Where businessmen are con­cerned, her notions are romantic indeed. [entirely]

a)                 rational,

b)                 creative,

c)                  inviolate (at this point, for some reason, she hauls in Galileo),

d)                 stand for

(1)               freedom,
(2)               civilization,
(3)               progress,
(4)               joy:

e)                 form the elite of a society, if not—as Valery said that Europe did—’la partie précieuse du monde.’

G.    The Nathaniel Branden Institute established a nonprofit corporation Foundation for the New Intellectual; clearly taking advantage of “welfare state” tactics,

1.                  an ironic example of how capitalism inevitably corrupts itself because human beings are

a)                 much more interested in profit

b)                 than they are in productive effort

2.                  If even NBI must look to donations and altruism for support, is pure capitalism really a feasible ideal?

VII.  Summary: Objectivist economic theory is

A.     unverified (and often unverifiable) axiom after another.

B.     a system of religious economics or economic religiosity.

C.    presents some sophomoric [simplistic better word, not as pejorative?] arguments favoring capitalism.

D.    no advantage to capi­talism which [like everything,]

1.                  have distinct disadvantages but

2.                  may be a superior kind of economy.

3.                  [pure never is best for all cases]

E.     Great solace and aid to rabid collectivists,

1.                  who may easily undermine objectivism’s creeds

2.                  may falsely convert some individuals to their own religious [like] tenets that collectivism:

a)                 has few failings and

b)                 innumerable virtues.

F.     Essentially, objectivist economics is an

1.                  intellectual word game; and

2.                  an unexciting one at that!