Sign in to wowOwow

Enter the email address that you used when registering at wowOwow.
The password field is case sensitive. Click here if you have forgotten your password.

Please register for wowOwow

Newsletter subscriptions
Sign up to receive wowOwow's weekly newsletter and get our best picks delivered right to your inbox. Our newsletter content is hand-picked by the wowOwow editorial team and provides the top features, news, and commentary from our site. Subscribing to our newsletter is free and safe. We will never share your email or other information with a third-party without your direct consent.
By registering, you indicate that you have read and agree
with our privacy policy and terms of service.

The Greatest Depression | 10/24/2008 6:00 am

Greenspan Shrugged? Did Ayn Rand Cause Our Financial Crisis?

By Deborah Jones Barrow, Editor-in-Chief, wowOwow
Photo illustration by wowOwow; Alan Greenspan, AP

"Those of us who have looked to the self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholders’ equity, myself especially, are in a state of shocked disbelief."

So said former Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan in his dramatic testimony before the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, as he was grilled by committee members on the causes of the nation’s financial crisis. Greenspan, whose laissez-faire capitalist leanings led him to reject decades of calls for more robust government oversight of financial markets, was repeatedly interrupted by the lawmakers in a contentious exchange that clearly shows the gloves are off in regard to the former chairman’s legacy.

In his startling admission, the former head of the Federal Reserve reveals that his long-held and controversial notion that enlightened self-interest alone would prevent bankers, mortgage brokers, investment bankers and others from gaming the system for their own personal financial benefit has, as the English say, come a cropper. 

Bankers ruled by anything other than greed?

Where did Greenspan ever get that idea?

Ayn Rand.

To readers of Atlas Shrugged, Ayn Rand’s 1957 magnum opus, Greenspan’s hands-off philosophy of marketplace management sounds very familiar. At its core, the book supports a radically utopian political-economic system called Objectivism, which suggests that the morality of rational self-interest, as opposed to religious or government intervention, should be the foundation of the ideal political structure.

According to a short description of Objectivism given by Ayn Rand in 1962, "The ideal political-economic system is laissez-faire capitalism … In a system of full capitalism, there should be (but, historically, has not yet been) a complete separation of state and economics, in the same way and for the same reasons as the separation of state and church."

In other words,  Ayn Rand’s theory of the "morality of self-interest" exactly parallels Alan Greenspan’s testimony today about his now-shaken belief in the ability of "self-interest of lending institutions to protect shareholder’s equity."

Early in his career, Alan was an avid Rand acolyte, a frequent guest at the Manhattan salon of the novelist and philosopher, and those who gathered to hear the litanies of like-minded notables were loosely known as "The Collective." It was there that the Rand philosophy of Objectivism was discussed in the context of current events, world markets and religion.

Today, 40 years after the heyday of those gatherings, Greenspan surprised many with his "Yes, I found a flaw" response to a grilling from the Committee. Responding to the clear failure of the notion of "enlightened self-interest" to stop the cascade of financial catastrophies that have roiled world markets, he said, "That is precisely the reason I was shocked, because I’d been going for 40 years or more with very considerable evidence that it was working exceptionally well.”

Greenspan’s critics have long charged that his refusal as Fed Chairman to impose greater government regulations on mortgage lenders is one of the causes of the sub-prime mortgage meltdown. 

Committee Chairman Harry Waxman (D-CA), in a heated exchange told the former Fed Chairman that he had "the authority to prevent irresponsible lending practices that led to the subprime mortgage crisis. You were advised to do so by many others, and now our whole economy is paying the price.”

98 Reader Comments (so far…) Sign In or Register to comment

Mommy Dearest
Frank dahling. Are you an economist? From whence do you draw your vast reservoir of knowledge that allows you to know so very much about everything, my dear?
By Mommy Dearest on 10/24/2008 11:06 am
f p
Reading and research mommy, rearing and research and 3 degrees—-econ ain’t that difficult nor is Ayn Rand’s so-called philosophy. Get the pic???
By f p on 10/24/2008 11:12 am
Diana T
Hi, Frank. You are spot on. Research for goodness sakes! Paul Krugman and Robert Reich certainly put part of the blame on Greenspan. I think the notion that Rand caused any of this is just silly. It would behoove Mommy Dearest and lots of others to simply pick up the last 3 issues of The Economist Magazine, watch the 2 conversations between Paul Volcker and Charlie Rose, and they would have a much better idea of what happened. It’s a shallow question in the first place.
By Diana T on 10/24/2008 11:21 am
f p
Thanks Di :-) Her books are basically blueprints for how to be greedy in 1 simple lesson—gussying them up with a lot of pseudo—philosophical BS still doesn’t hide the underlying intent and lessons of greed at any cost. And the fact that Greenspan fell for it is more than amazing; it’s ridiculous. If I could see her intent as an older college student, he should have for all his education. But he didn’t and he is as culpable as the CEO’s that reaped all the big bucks. He belongs in the slam with the rest of those bastards.
By f p on 10/24/2008 11:31 am
Diana T
Well, the thing is, Frank, there has been an awfully lot of water that has gone over the dam since the books were written. For instance, she would never have conceived the idea of a technologically and globally integrated economy. If people are really serious as to why all of this is going on now, they should read from 1994 forward. Oh, and watch Paul Krugman on Charlie Rose from last night. I am getting to read The Prince(Machiavelli) again, and The Art of War, simply because they are good insights into our basic human nature. And, if a human being is greedy by nature, add a little power without rules, and the inevitable will happen, now matter what one reads.
By Diana T on 10/24/2008 12:28 pm
f p
Good choices ofr reading—esp Sun Tzu—we may be acquisitive by nature alright but without societal controls we enter into the downspin we’re in now. It’s a question of inevitability.
By f p on 10/24/2008 12:44 pm
Maschine think
She didn’t have to concede anything, her point of view isn’t based on anything but the supreme her notion. On the other hand , Greenspan and his staff should have been well rounded on technology and the global economy. It was their duty to model every contingency possible. What , you don’t think thats possible. Sure is when you have millions at your disposal and a staff of how many you needed. If Greenspan was confused by what was happening in technology, he should have resigned. There is no one who can tell me when and for how much i should buy a stock for….its not their business if i am irrational and exuberant. If he was scared of that , he should have resigned.m The Fed had no business involving itself in the market and further, to attack the market because the speed of events is overwhelming your dusty brain cells. Greenspan completely ignored a well educated workforce to the North and slave labor to the South. There was never a shortage of labor, nor would there have been. Inflation was not a risk, but deregulating was. Even I saw that Alan, give me a break, this isn’t rocket science.
By Maschine think on 10/25/2008 11:32 pm
Mommy Dearest
Of COURSE I get the pic, Frank, dahling, and wait with breathless anticipation for the Nobel committee to award your tireless economic research with their next prize. Ahahahahahaha!
By Mommy Dearest on 10/24/2008 2:14 pm
Diana T
Are we supposed to be breathless with your “sense of humor”, or do you do it just to amuse your biggest fan…yourself?
By Diana T on 10/24/2008 3:01 pm
Hines Hammond
There’s a deep Karst waiting for the awner of these words: “Of COURSE I get the pic, Frank, dahling, and wait with breathless anticipation for the Nobel committee to award your tireless economic research with their next prize. Ahahahahahaha!” Check out Vectorborne Journal - they’ve named a disease after you. I’d have helped the researchers myself but they said it’s a slimy anaeorbic contagion and warned all tostay away. Good medicine - their advice. DMWM
By Hines Hammond on 10/28/2008 3:47 pm
Hines Hammond
Venture a guess, do! Reading-discuss-reading. Staying current, not just the rags but seeking out experts’ views -professors- over time, staying grounded individually, giving a r*t’s a*s about people, coming to the understanding that if a model democracy with checks and balances working that a nation of peoples will have a roof over their heads and a pot to pee in. Necessity provides impetus for solid prosperity -U.S.young people will come to embrace this. Tell me how you are bringing these young folks along. We have the memories. And the resources- our minds, our stories, and the examples we can set! Caring in such an individual way that you’ll put your energies into being part of the solution rather than A. drowning your sorrows, B. getting grit in your eyes under the sand, and C. feeling a victim of the falling sky. To understand “how” is first to visualize “why”. Do that! It becomes a solid tandem of critical thinking. As for these economic times taking in all levels of lessons learned from the experts of the time, oral histories of those impacted to those viewing societal collapses -Example: in that less-connected pre-, during and post-crash histories. Unaltered documentation on the Pre-Depression economics; studying the information readily available now online or via the loan system of your library system to learn economic lessons that come from other countries plus circumstances of the ruling power, anthropological background, abundance of/or lack of available resources, understanding of a fragile or robust physical environment- examples: tje settling of Island or Southwestern Greenland versus Nippon of several hundred years ago. When individuals look their own expenses & lifestyles squarely in the eyes, mock up a budget, and use pencil and paper methodology these individuals have learned how to stay “in the black”. The recipe of Awareness, to Knowledge to Skills; then add the study of languages, cultures, belief systems- interesting: Chief Seattle’s evolving insights in 1800s. I recognise that individuals, me and you, are hard-wired to some extent: 1. to be altruistic, 2.) conversely to worship at the alter of moi. Now I’m just taking a stab at figuring out how each of us can be effective, or “know so much”. People need help to be smart in this world and it ain’t gonna come from the back of a Post Toasties box. Information can expand the noggin, the “liver”, and the dedication to 20/20 insight. The truth “must dazzle gradually” -but it must dazzle. I’m not f p, but we were born to the same human race. Dazzled :)
By Hines Hammond on 10/27/2008 5:46 am
Amelie Poulain
Nice one Frank.
By Amelie Poulain on 10/27/2008 5:40 pm
Andy C
Not only are they not paying the price (we are), but they’re still reaping benefits. Wasn’t it fun playing with our money. Regarding the lending institutions, as much as I hold banks responsible for their lending practices, I hold people responsible as well. It’s fine to point fingers and place blame, blame that’s justly deserved. However, the people who were blithely contracting for these loans knew full well they could never pay them off at those rates. They couldn’t even afford the monthly payment. They gambled their family’s security on creative accounting practices and now, we’re all paying.
By Andy C on 10/24/2008 7:43 am
Marjorie C.
Andrea, I agree. I further believe all the investigatiions are for show. Everyone in congress has to look rattled so they can get elected next year. The kick backs and sweetheart deals will eventually be forgotten, a few regulatory laws will be put in place, we’ll suck up our losses and start a new game. New people, same game.
By Marjorie C. on 10/24/2008 7:59 am
Maschine think
Agree Marjorie/Andrea These buffoons for the most part , went along for the ride, they even had time to impeach a President for having some backroom sex. What a stupid country.
By Maschine think on 10/25/2008 11:36 pm