Craig and Sarah Biddle would like you to believe that I gave them $9 million to spend on whatever they desired. Their claim is comically illogical, preposterous, and requires a colossal abandonment of reason and judgment. The Biddles now must be the most anti-objectivist Objectivists ever to have pretended to be Objectivists.
Of course, I did not simply give Craig and Sarah a personal fortune. I did not suddenly make them multimillionaires. I did not give them a blank check to spend my money however they pleased.
The $9 million in question is the result of funds I placed in an investment account because, unfortunately, I trusted Craig and Sarah. These funds were to be held separately, protected, and used only for charitable purposes approved by me. A written agreement between myself, Craig, Sarah, and my accountant laid out the terms under which these funds could be used and was signed by all parties. The funds were never intended to be a “reserve account” for OSI to draw upon if needed to keep itself in business. And they certainly were not intended, for instance, to fund litigation against me; to finance OSI’s conferences; to finance post-conference vacations for OSI’s staff; to increase the Biddles’ own compensation; or to buy the loyalty of Objectivist youth through grants, scholarships, and paid travel.
After years of continually failing to meet their promises and budgets—Prometheus Foundation sought to hold the Biddles accountable for lackluster performance before giving them more grant funds. When Prometheus reached out to OSI with our concerns, rather than answer our questions and demonstrate that OSI deserved continued funding, the Biddles served me and my organizations with a lawsuit. According to them, by seeking accountability for their organization’s performance, I have somehow breached a contract. More incredibly, this has justified them to spend money placed in the investment account, without my permission.
In effect, the Biddles declared themselves multimillionaires overnight.
Did they earn it?
Did they deserve it?
Did their prior performance at OSI justify such a windfall?
The trader principle is central to Objectivist justice: value for value, earned rewards, deserved benefits. One should not give or receive the unearned. And one certainly should not seize a value just because one “needs” it.
Yet with respect to the money I earned Craig and Sarah’s position is: “We need it, so we’ll grab it.”
There is a grotesque inversion here: Craig and Sarah publicly proclaim allegiance to Objectivist principles while acting in flagrant violation of them.
Perhaps most concerning of all is that young people are being drawn into the Biddles’ corrupt enterprise. They are being offered scholarships, conferences, travel, speaking opportunities, and other benefits paid for by the money that Craig and Sarah are effectively looting from me. What sort of example does this set? What quality of intellectual will be attracted to Objectivism under such circumstances? What short- and long-term effect will this have on the public’s perception of Objectivism and our ability to promote the philosophy?
In closing, please consider this: Craig and Sarah Biddle want you to believe that I gave them $9 million to use however they wished. Does that seem plausible to you?
Carl B. Barney
June 22, 2026