First, my guiding light, Ayn Rand in Fountainhead [note: replace “Men” to “Women” for closer relevance to the topic @here]
Altruism is the doctrine which demands that man live for others and place others above self.
“No man can live for another. He cannot share his spirit just as he cannot share his body. But the second-hander has used altruism as a weapon of exploitation and reversed the base of mankind’s moral principles. Men have been taught every precept that destroys the creator. Men have been taught dependence as a virtue.
“The man who attempts to live for others is a dependent. He is a parasite in motive and makes parasites of those he serves. The relationship produces nothing but mutual corruption. It is impossible in concept. The nearest approach to it in reality — the man who lives to serve others — is the slave. If physical slavery is repulsive, how much more repulsive is the concept of servility of the spirit? The conquered slave has a vestige of honor. He has the merit of having resisted and of considering his condition evil. But the man who enslaves himself voluntarily in the name of love is the basest of creatures. He degrades the dignity of man and he degrades the conception of love. But this is the essence of altruism. (bold is mine-ETat)
“Men have been taught that the highest virtue is not to achieve, but to give. Yet one cannot give that which has not been created. Creation comes before distribution — or there will be nothing to distribute. The need of the creator comes before the need of any possible beneficiary. Yet we are taught to admire the second-hander who dispenses gifts he has not produced above the man who made the gifts possible. We praise an act of charity. We shrug at an act of achievement.
“Men have been taught that their first concern is to relieve the sufferings of others. But suffering is a disease. Should one come upon it, one tries to give relief and assistance. To make that the highest test of virtue is to make suffering the most important part of life. Then man must wish to see others suffer — in order that he may be virtuous. Such is the nature of altruism. The creator is not concerned with disease, but with life. Yet the work of the creators has eliminated one form of disease after another, in man’s body and spirit, and brought more relief from suffering than any altruist could ever conceive.
“Men have been taught that it is a virtue to agree with others. But the creator is the man who disagrees. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to swim with the current. But the creator is the man who goes against the current. Men have been taught that it is a virtue to stand together. But the creator is the man who stands alone.
“Men have been taught that the ego is the synonym of evil, and selflessness the ideal of virtue. But the creator is the egotist in the absolute sense, and the selfless man is the one who does not think, feel, judge or act. These are functions of the self.[…]
And later in the speech:
“The choice is not self-sacrifice or domination. The choice is independence or dependence. The code of the creator or the code of the second-hander. This is the basic issue. It rests upon the alternative of life or death. The code of the creator is built on the needs of the reasoning mind which allows man to survive. The code of the second-hander is built on the needs of a mind incapable of survival. All that which proceeds from man’s independent ego is good. All that which proceeds from man’s dependence upon men is evil.
The second quote, from a commenter Neoneocon, who in his barbarian naivete verbalized beliefs shared by American Conservative men and women (but conditioned not to express themselves so boldly):
[Feminists] forget that independence is an yoke, and that leadership is even more so, and that voluntary submission can be a very rewarding and fair price to pay for being led, protected and cared for. Here the insane and utopian strife for equality – the scourge of our times – destroys everything it touch. Any society and each societal institution is built on inequality, on hierarhy, on leadership and followship. Men are hierarhycal beings by nature, and every man wants to be master of his own house at the very least. Men are evolutionary hardwired for this. And women are evolutionary hardwired for submission, do they understand this or not. And when this natural order of things is disturbed and undermined, nothing good will follow.
[…] In the most simple terms, in marriage woman sacrifices her selfish ambitions to her husband and children, and for this sacrifice she gets meaning for her life. A fair exchange, in my view. Man, in his turn, sacrifices his sexual freedom and a good part of his independence and his wealth for care and emotional support.
No wonder the alliance between libertarians and conservatives is only within fiscal realm, and temporary at that. We are your enemies, conservative “altruist” tyrants!
The second quote is one of the most powerful emetics ever. *Shudder*
LikeLike
That opinion was applauded @the thread at Neo. One commenter even proposed that guy for President.
LikeLike