The following post is by Charlotte Cushman.
I agree with it.
–Ron Pisaturo
Yaron Brook, chairman of the board of the Ayn Rand Institute, could not be more wrong in his podcast of June 28, 2023, in which he blasts conservatives for boycotting Bud Light. Brook states (23:45),
This boycott by conservatives, right, I mean the passion, the energy, the excitement that they bring to boycotting Bud Light or boycotting Target is just stunning, I mean it really is.
Brook continues,
This is their thing, and as a consequence, they’re willing not to buy their beer. A consequence of that of course is that Budweiser is struggling financially, and struggling to get back people who they’ve lost. As a consequence, Bud Light is now offering $15 rebates for the July 4th weekend. Basically, they’re offering you beer for free. I encourage you, those of you who want some, you know, it’s free!
Moral relativism and rank materialism are not usually considered Randian virtues. But Brook continues,
So, this weekend you can get free beer because Bud Light made a mistake in its marketing by appealing or by recognizing a trans influencer by the name of… Dylan Mulvaney.
It was no “mistake.” The Bud Light Marketing VP was shown on camera to have deliberately planned this campaign. Bud Light issued no direct apology, only brand regret. The most benign possibility is that the company is submitting to the pressure of ESG scoring and compliance. And lastly, just this past weekend, in the midst of the boycott, the company has continued to support Mulvaney and his cohorts by serving as an official sponsor of the Toronto Pride Parade and the Cincinnati Pride Parade. At these events, children were subjected to naked men prancing around, very deliberately showing off their private parts and sexual fetishes. By calling Bud Light’s marketing a mistake, Brook exonerates the irrational and the abusers of children, and he belittles the defenders of reason and the rights of children.
Brook (26:06) says,
There’s no principle here. I mean there is a principle here, but it shows you the shallowness, superficiality, and yeah, just the whole ridiculous nature of the so-called conservative cause these days, if these are the issues that get them excited and thrilled and up in arms and ready to fight, these are the principles they’re willing to go to barricades for as we say, God help us. God help us all.
What issues could be more deeply moral than defending children’s minds? What could be more tactically appropriate than championing an issue that has united rational individuals across the political divide in defense of children against a morally bankrupt Left attempting a Mao Style Marxist Revolution in this country?
Typical of Brook, he doesn’t take a stand one way or the other on Dylan Mulvaney, the trans epidemic, tyrannical Pride, public pornography or sexualizing kids. He only criticizes conservatives. He treats the issue as silly and beneath him and all of us.
Ayn Rand—whose ideas Brook purports to admire and promote—was not unclear in her language and not wishy-washy about issues like pornography, which she called “unspeakably disgusting.” Her reason: “I do not regard sex as evil—I regard it as good, as one of the most important aspects of human life, too important to be made the subject of public anatomical display.” Does Brook think it’s okay to be unspeakably sexually disgusting in front of children? He doesn’t say, but at best he seems to think it’s no big deal; indeed, he seems to support it by denigrating its opponents.
The purpose of coming after children is to corrupt them, confuse them, make them think sex is no big deal, ideally give them a mental illness, alienate them from anything normal around them, and degrade their lives with ugliness, hedonism, and debauchery. And Brook thinks it is shallow, superficial and ridiculous to care about it?
The LGBT activists want to normalize their perversions in the culture with the ultimate goal of turning children into Marxist activists. In Masculine Power, Feminine Beauty, Ronald Pisaturo writes (pp. 113–114),
The general LGBT theory is as follows. Infants are “polymorphously perverse,” to use Freud’s term. That is, an infant will be sexually excited by anyone and anything anywhere. Freud considered this infantile state an early stage of development. Marcuse and many LGBT activists, in contrast, consider this state the ideal end state for adults. According to Marcuse, people leave this ideal state only because they become repressed, limiting the kinds of sexual responses available to them. The repressed energy of such people becomes channeled into economic production. (I’m not kidding; this is the theory, and the psychological professions buy into it.) That is, productive work is the repressed alternative to blissful, indiscriminate sex. Capitalism, of course the system of greatest economic production, is hence also the system of greatest sexual repression. Heterosexual males, who dominate and oppress other groups under capitalism, are the most sexually repressed and therefore the most driven to production and to dominance over everyone else. The sexual repression and economic productiveness perpetrated by heterosexual males is codified in the socially constructed idea of masculinity. The oppression of women, by these men, is codified in the socially constructed idea of femininity, which entails submissive weakness and the oppressive task of raising children. According to the LGBT movement, the feminist movement figured all this out. And now the LGBT movement has figured out that heterosexual males oppress homosexual men as well as heterosexual women, because homosexual men threaten the notion of masculinity. The solution to this whole problem is to eradicate capitalism, masculinity, femininity, and families, with everyone returning to the polymorphous perversity of an infant, and with the community of such adult infants collectively in charge of rearing actual infants.
The reason why LGBT activists want to turn children into Marxist activists is in order to bring down capitalism, the system that Ayn Rand praised and defended as satisfying the requirements for man’s nature and survival.
As a supporter of Ayn Rand’s philosophy of Objectivism, I say thank Galt that conservatives are fighting against perverts who want to corrupt children and destroy wholesome, capitalist culture. What is ridiculous is to belittle that fight.
Brook derides the principles that get the conservatives up in arms. Those principles include reason as a guide to action, the right of children to be protected from abuse, the importance of a child’s reasoning mind, the sacredness of sex, and the virtue of capitalism. These principles are not shallow, nor are they superficial. These are principles I learned from Ayn Rand. Brook should have learned them too.
Charlotte Cushman is a Montessori educator who taught for over 40 years and co-owned and operated two Montessori schools; and authored Montessori: Why It Matters for Your Child’s Success and Happiness, Effective Discipline the Montessori Way, and Your Life Belongs to You. Her book website is Cushmanbooks.com, and her opposition to social justice in Montessori website is authenticmontessorieducation.com.
Also see these articles:
By Charlotte Cushman
“The Real Purpose of Drag Queen Story Hour”
“After drag queens, pedophilia is next”
“Yes, transgender transformation is child abuse“
“Grooming Our Children: We Need to Fight Back“
By Ron Pisaturo
“The Antidote to LGBTQ: Articulate the Good”
“A Closer Look at Evil“
“Transgenderism”