Fore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.com

More oxford books @ www.OxfordeBook.comFore more urdu books visit www.4Urdu.comLOVE IS EXCEPTION MAKING 243Concern,” Rand attacked both Brandens. Rand’s statement was ramblingand vague, accusing Nathan of financial misdeeds, unspecified deceptionand manipulation, and failing to live up to Objectivist principles. Heroverarching message, however, was clear: “I have permanently brokenall personal, professional and business associations with [Nathaniel andBarbara Branden]. . . . I repudiate both of them, totally and permanently,as spokesmen for me or Objectivism.” 66 The letter was signed by LeonardPeikoff, Alan Greenspan, Allan Blumenthal, and Mary Ann Sures.His name was mud where before he had been an admired leader,Nathan fought back with “In Answer to Ayn Rand,” a letter sent toall Objectivist subscribers, appended with a postscript from Barbara.Nathan’s letter refuted Rand’s allegations point by point, detailed hisdedication to Objectivism, and quoted from earlier statements she hadmade praising both Brandens. He concluded with a final, breathtakingparagraph in which he explained the true reason for their break:“[I attempted] to make clear to her why I felt that an age distancebetween us of twenty-five years constituted an insuperable barrier, forme, to a romantic relationship.” 67 Even at the end, his Objectivist careerruined and his separation from Rand complete, Nathan skirted theissue, hinting that sexual jealously played a role in the break but failingto acknowledge the full extent of his actions or the relations betweenhim and Rand. Sent out in tandem with Barbara’s statement, his lettersuggested that it was Rand alone who had acted inappropriately.The scandal did much to tarnish Rand’s reputation. George Walsh,then a professor at Hobart College, was organizing an Ayn Rand Caucuswithin the American Philosophical Association when the breach happened.He explained, “The people that I was gathering together to formthe discussion group all fell away. They simply disappeared! They didn’tanswer my further letters or they explained that this was too much forthem, that it seemed to be something other than it appeared to be, andthat personal matters were apparently mixed up in it and they didn’t wantto touch it with a 10 foot pole.” 68 To Rand’s critics the dramatic collapseof NBI vindicated all they had been saying over the years: her philosophywas fundamentally flawed and morally corrupt. Her longtime antagonistson left and right were delighted. In National Review William F. Buckleycrowed, “Remember, these were the people who were telling the rest ofthe world how to reach nirvana. By being like them.” 69