Altruism and charity are not the same
By James Hall
web
posted September 10, 2001
The core reasoning for intrusive intervention into the affairs of free men is the false notion that altruism is a desired goal for society to implement. The proponents of the use of coercive force to impose their vision of a benevolent society require a moral basis for their demands of conformity. Their attempt to interject a culture of altruistism as the substitute for personal responsibility is central to their model for a compliant society. Belief in their doctrine is a required necessity to coexist in their paradise of social equality. Tolerance exists only for those who accept allegiance to the tenants of multiculturalism.
Communists want total obedience to their dogma. Collectivists demand subornation to the specter of society's goals. Fascists impose loyalty for government decrees. Statists require supremacy of the ruling dominion. Socialists accept incremental surrender to state jurisdiction. Plutocrats rule for the benefit of the few. Monarchists enforce the will of one. And Social Democrats proclaim the emotions of the mob. All have in common the willingness to compel compliance upon individuals.
Justification for the use of power over others is mostly ignored. However, when challenged to provide the foundation of legitimacy for placing constraints on individuals, the best that partisan of power politics can provide is the social theory of altruism. The argument goes that society has a responsibility to establish a safety net for those who are in need of help. Equality of people, cultures, races, gender and ethnic groups are the aim for a just society. Government must take active measures to assure that this model of society is attained. Force is justified to impose state policies if resistance is met. The end goal is so noble that any means is acceptable to reach the prize.
The question for the apologists for state tyranny is simple: Where does society get the legitimate authority to impose and compel homogeneity, when consent from individuals is not given? The central issue is quite clear. People who reject the world view of the Statists, have not willingly placed themselves under the authority of a regime who's ultimate purpose is to destroy the liberty of the individual. Will the lackeys of 'TC' totalitarian collectivism, dare argue this point or will they just ignore the essence of the struggle?
The exercise of Machiavellian power is all they know. Intimidation, extortion, theft, confiscation and compulsion are the tools of their trade. Fairness, parity, balance, equity, sensitivity, compassion and service are their stock rationale for the use of force. But there is never a mention of the source authority that provides justification for compulsion. The reason is clear, because non exists . . .
Altruism is the best that they can offer. But altruism is not defined as an individual and voluntary choice. No it is beheld as a duty; not to yourself, but to society. By some enigmatic leap from supposition to conviction, the providers of compassion become the predators of coercion. Who gave ownership authority to the state of my property? And when was the government empowered to impose enforcement against my will, when I reject any duty to accept a 'TC' view for society? Answer those questions, commissar!
For those of us that retain rational self respect for ourselves, can anyone force us into servitude against our will? That is exactly what the statists demand from you. To transfer your own dignity to society and government and allow them to provide all that is worth having to the people. Where have we all heard that song before?
Charity is an act of an individual. The dictionary states that charity is "The benevolence of God towards man". And within that assertion lies the answer to our clash with the 'TC' enemy. Helping your fellow man is worthy of pursuit and effort. But for it to be sincere, it needs to be intentional and voluntary. Supporters of statism, worship Baal. Their faith is not in the divine but in the temporal act of governing. They accept that man is capable of acts of charity only through the altruism of society. The individual must prostrate and pay homage to their 'deus god' of public order. It does not matter that such devotion has produced a chronicle of human suffering and death that only the prince of darkness delights in and relishes.
Altruism is the road to slavery. Charity is the province of hope. We will always have the poor with us, because our nature; while common, does not guarantee equal results. The actions of each person matters, and every human needs to be held accountable for their deeds. The society that statists seek rewards the immoral, and punishes the virtuous. They embrace Secular Humanism as their value system and condemn religious faith. These archfiends are devoted to the rule from the darkside, while they dismiss the message of the Sermon on the Mount. Is it any wonder that no rapprochement can be made with these serpents of depravity?
No government has ever been the answer to establish a 'Just Society'.
Justice begins in the heart of each person and is achieved when each of
us treats our neighbor as we long to be treated ourselves. Does any government
act in such a manner? If you agree that institutions and bureaucracies
rule with a heavy hand, why would you willingly give your consent to their
governance? Is your duty due them, or is it more properly meant
to adhere to moral behavior? Beware of those who preach love when they
inflict conformity through force. Love is achieved only through a free
act, and will never be found when the state demands that you have an obligation
to adore, and must obey their conception for society. The choice is crystal-clear,
will you follow the moral course and resist statism or will you obey Beelzebub
and mimic his minions? 
James Hall, AKA Sartre, is the driving force behind Breaking all the Rules, a collection of his essays.
 Printer friendly version |
|