I was asked, "Objectivsm is basically common sense. Why do you think so many people fail to use it, or understand it? Why is it not taught more? What would be the state of our country, if more people realized that their happiness is their obligation, and not mine?"
Objectivism is basically what it takes most people all their lives to figure out: that the only person you can rely on in life is yourself. Being successful, or winning, feels good because it is right. There is nothing to be ashamed of if you are better than someone else. If you fail there is nothing to be ashamed of as long as you learned something. People fail to use it, or understand it for several reasons; the first being that most people are lazy and stupid. The second reason is that our public schools are run by the government, and the government desires citizens who are lazy and stupid. If the population is lazy and stupid, then the government has free reign to tax, pass laws, etc. No Child Left Behind was designed to make every child as dumb as the dumbest student. The third reason is religion. Christianity states, "Love your neighbor as you love yourself." The Bahá'í Faith states, "Blessed is he who preferreth his brother before himself." Judaism, "The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as one of your citizens; you shall love him as yourself." Taoism, "Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." As you can see, the them of putting other people's interests before your own is a common theme in religion.
Some people claim that these religious edicts are alterations of the golden rule. The golden rule is to treat others as you want to be treated. Nowhere in there does it say put others before yourself. Objectivism takes that one step further and brings in a component of value. Only items or services that have a value for you are to be sought, and something of value will be given in exchange. People who aren't fair or valuable need not be dealt with. An object's value derives from within you. A certain book may not be worth much to others, but it might be worth over $100 to me. If you don't like the book, you are under no obligation to buy it. This is where the government and religion take the counterpoint role to Objectivism.
According to the government and religion, poor people are the responsibility of the wealthy. According to Objectivism, the poor are their own responsibility just as the wealthy are only responsible for themselves. Now, if you receive a value from helping poor people, be it monetary or pride, then it is a noble cause. To pass a law or preach a doctrine that if you don't help poor people you are the scum of society, is completely wrong. Objectivism is about doing what you want for reasons that you understand. Slavery is about doing what other people want for reasons you do not understand. The government, the schools, and the religious institutions want slaves. No, they're not going to break out the whips and chains. They do not want physical slaves, they want mental slaves. They want control of our brains, our thoughts, and our feelings. This is why more people do not see the value of Objectivism. From birth they are told to love others more than they love themselves, that being selfish is evil, and that if you trust in God, the government, or any authority figure, you need or want will be provided.
Entitlement is for the weak, the lazy, the uninformed, the selfless. If everyone realized their happiness was their own responsibility, we would live in a completely different society. All this would take is for everyone to realize that their actions lead to consequences. These consequences could be good or bad, but every action leads to some other action. If you steal, you might be arrested. If you work hard, you may be rewarded. If people took responsibility for their own lives, there would be less whining, and I would have to buy less Advil. Under the current system, this will never happen.
Right now I work for money and you work for money. However, we are not being paid money. We are being paid with fancy pieces of paper that are backed by nothing other than the word of the goverment. The government tells us, "These pieces of paper are worth something, we promise." The truth is they are worth nothing. Our money is not backed by gold, silver, bronze, stainless steel, aluminum, rubies, diamonds, or even sand. Our money is backed by the word of our government. The International Monetary Fund ensured that no other currency would be backed by gold, forcing countries wanting to join the IMF to sell their gold and silver.
If our government collapsed, everyone would be broke. If our money was backed by gold, our money would still have a value even without the government, as we could trade our dollars in for gold, which we could use to trade for goods and services from anybody in the world. If we were an objectivist nation, we would have currency backed by gold (or something else of value), we would not have government run programs (other than the military, the police, and the court system), we would have low taxes (more like a annual membership fee), we would be allowed to succeed on our own, and we would be responsible only for ourselves. Sure there would still be lazy people, but they would not be in a position of power, they would be destitute.
We are a nation of non-earners. Those who earn are forced to give their earnings to the government. Non-earners receive money, from the government, for the sole reason that they earn nothing. Objectivism does not reward anyone, rather, those who are earners earn rewards and those who are non-earners do not earn anything. Objectivism's rule of gold is, "Those with value receive value, those without value receive no value." Note that value is not defined. Value is anything that the individual places worth upon. It could be money, gold, pride, friendship, or any number of other items.
The first step to creating an Objectivist country is to understand that the only person you should love as yourself, is yourself. Nobody else even comes close.
© 2010 Nate Phillipps
Objectivism defined beautifully. I am sharing this with everyone I value. Thank you.
ReplyDeleteReligion does in fact tell you to put others before yourself. First and foremost it places the ideal 'God' before self and thereby negates self. If you explore this deeply enough, especially in light of what most religions teach about the fallibility of man, the responsibility of man and that the role of ability of man is only made valid through, for or at the behest of God then you can only come to one conclusion: religion is not only false, it is insidiously evil!
ReplyDeleteReligion teaches that it is a sin to judge. Judgment is the dominion of God.
Religion teaches that it is a sin to desire. The only proper desire is to do the will of God.
Religion teaches that pride is a sin. The only pride is fulfilling the rules of God.
Yet the only gauge you have of God's judgment upon you, God's appraisal of your desire or God's acknowledgment of your pride must necessarily come either from a faith based perception of divine influence alleged to be direct revelation or through faith in an agent (priest/rabbi/etc) that alleges the same source for the appraisal and acknowledgment.
And the notion of 'blind faith' necessarily denies the existent and real. Including existence of self.
Faith and belief therefore also necessarily place the only legitimate means to self esteem through an unattainable (at least in the form of real, objective evidence) approval of the unprovable, unreachable, unknowable ideal.
This principle is made all the worse when the means to achieving approval is listed as sacrifice to the worthy-less. To sacrifice for the worthy assumes judgment entails desire and requires pride.
This is no different by the way for other forms of faith such as statism where the 'common good' exists as the object and sacrifice for others is the method of the ideal. The same can be said for modern forms of Gaianism through animal "rights" and preservational environmentalism.
As far as the golden rule, I don't think it's a bad rule but I think it's incomplete for an objective pursuer of reason. My version is:
"It is only rational to do unto others as you would have them do unto you - until they give you cause to do otherwise"
Oh and by the way, the reason so many fail to use it is not only based on the motives of some to use notions of faith and placing an unobtainable object above man's self esteem as a means to gain power over them, but those methods have become refined in the same manner other ideas go through an evolution.
ReplyDeleteAs long as men seek power over other men, such ideas will improve in effectiveness.
They are now so engrained within society that even the men seeking the power believe them to an extent. But consider one thing...
If your entire self esteem is wound up in an unattainable, unreachable, undefinable and unknowable ideal - would not denying the ideal is real be a negation of self and akin to suicide of one's soul? The belief is entirely necessary to their entire concept of self-worth! When you realize that, it's no wonder they cling so blindly to them!