Now is Not the Time to Smooth Over Differences

This Post is a compilation of quotes and posts made by me about the events of the riots, burnings and murders of innocent cops and citizens during June of 2020. 

"To live automatically and uncritically is to be assured of at least a minimum share of the programmed cultural heroics." - Ernest Becker, The Denial of Death

Whether it is Black Lives Matter, who want to enslave through the lie of racism or Donald Trump who wants to write you checks, somewhere is out to enslave you. They know the rule book for doing it and they know how to keep you ignorant of their efforts to manipulate you. 

These people are, to the man, pragmatists. They believe the tenets of pragmatism and they are part of a centuries old scheme to keep you under control, to domesticate you for obedience and to exploit your work and product. They are following a strategy, almost without knowing it, that panders to you, that placates you and, most importantly, that indoctrinates you into an ideology that will make you a slave. That ideology could be a social construct of worship of the state or a religious construct based upon a theological society; but one thing is sure, your mind is being molded, your individuality is being destroyed and your life is being played. You are the target of their quest for power and it is time you took back your mind and engaged in resistance and disobedience.

"Ideology - that is what gives evil doing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination. That is the social theory which helps to make his acts seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes, so that he won't hear reproaches and curses but will receive praise and honors...Thanks to ideology, the 20th century was fated to experience evildoing on a scale calculated in the millions. This cannot be denied, nor passed over, nor suppressed."[1]

Consider that the ideology used to murder the Kulaks by Stalin (during the last century) is the same ideology that allows for the burning of shops and the theft of property in America today. It is the idea that capitalism and profit are evil and that the state must get rid of property owners in order to create the new state. Don't think this doesn't apply now. It does and it will. Winter is coming, the Winter of our society and the brutality will be done in the name of "good", of ridding our society of "evil". That's why kids today laugh when they see a policeman beaten in the streets. It is done in the name of good. But is it really in the name of good or is it merely justified by an ideology that has a reverse sense of right and wrong?

"Many people are unaware that they are complicit in acts of evildoing because dogmatic adherence to an ideology provides them with justifications and excuses for their actions." - Solzhentsyn

Almost every atrocity ever done on this planet, every mass murder, every genocide, every building burning or attack on honest and good people was done in the name of "the good" and for the purpose of creating a better society. So be wary of people who claim to be working for the sake of "society" or "the common good". If they are not evil, in themselves, they likely support some evil somewhere, safe in the thought that they are several levels removed. They will try to convince you of their love for humanity and how they want to do everything possible to make things better, but, make no mistake about it, they are using stolen money which means that somewhere, someone is suffering in order to provide for the "good" being done. In fact, the money being donated by huge corporations comes out of profits (tax deductible) which means if you buy from them, you could be supporting groups seeking to destroy society.

Kulakization in Russia:

"If a man had a brick house in a row of log cabins, or two stories in a row of one-story houses - there was your kulak: Get ready, you bastard, you got sixty minutes! There aren't supposed to be any brick houses in the Russian village, there aren't supposed to be two-story houses! Back to the cave! You don't need a chimney for your fire! This is our great plan for transforming the country; history has never seen the like of it."[2]

No man shall rise above others - that's communism. That is the life they are indoctrinating you for.

Get to know your Business Roundtable Members. This organization of some of the biggest corporations in the country has declared they are no longer focused on shareholder value but on "stakeholder value". This is a code for social justice. These corporations are developing programs to spend lots of money on helping disadvantaged groups of all varieties by supporting "social justice" organizations like BLM and others. Don't be surprised if these organizations are almost ALL Democratic and Socialist in nature. Don't be surprised if some of those organizations include anti-capitalist groups and, in some cases, BLM. Almost every CEO on the Business Roundtable has sent out an email to shareholders and customers about their dedication, not to production and value, but to helping people who have suffered under the yoke of capitalism. It is these corporations who are likely funding only leftist groups and avoiding any conservative or pro-capitalist groups. Most of the emails they are sending out are mushy protestations about the personal journeys of these executives and how they learned to be more caring and empathetic to the plight of those suffering; with a pledge to do more in the future. If you want to know why freedom is dying in America and why the left is winning, these people are the biggest funders of our destruction. Don’t they know that most Americans don’t suffer anymore?

All destruction is done in the name of the good. This is how ‘good’ people become the agents of destruction. Collectivism is the idea that the group is good and any destruction done in the name of the group cleanses society of an invented ‘evil’. Psychological nihilism is the subconscious urge to destroy values most often done by the most ‘loving’ of people. People do it most fervently. The Nazis were psychological nihilists and so are many Americans today - eager to destroy the freedom and property of some for the sake of cleansing society. Once the ‘people’ give their approval, the open nihilists that the people have ‘justified’ will cleanse society of the good. Very often the good people who allowed the destruction are caught in the crossfire because the sanction of destruction will catch them up. They forgot that once they justified the destruction, there was no one there to protect them and the nihilist destroyer had only used them to justify his destruction of them.

"Many people have no interest in handing over their property to the "collective" and therefore, as occurred in Russia, force must be used against any who resist the great societal transformation."[3]

"For us in Russia, communism is a dead dog, while, for many people in the West, it is still a living lion."[4]

“The Communist system is a disease, a plague that has been spreading across the earth for many years already, and it is impossible to predict what peoples will yet be forced to experience this disease firsthand. My people, the Russians, have been suffering from it for 60 years already; they long to be healed."[5]

"And the lie has, in fact, led us so far away from a normal society that you cannot even orient yourself any longer; in its dense, gray fog not even one pillar can be seen"[6]

I don't have anything against people who suffer but, prior to the current suffering brought onto our society by groups funded by the Business Roundtable, the only suffering experienced was done at the hands of "social justice" warriors who claim to be "righting wrongs". What I object to is that these corporations are trying to buy your business by proclaiming an adherence to socialism. They even declared their conviction that all members of society must be "indoctrinated" into serving their fellow man. This is not capitalism, it is capitulation. Why do they do this? Do they believe in socialism? Sure they do, but more to the point, they think it will get them big government contracts if they spout the leftist line. If you look at the list, check to see if any of the companies you invest in are there. I was surprised to learn that I had invested in some of them. And I won’t patronize them if I can avoid it.

“Most animals display a natural instinct to be free. When an attempt is made to capture an animal it flees in terror or else reacts with fierce aggression. When taken from its natural habitat and placed in captivity, its innate vigor atrophies and is replaced by lethargy and despondency. The successful domestication of a species therefore usually requires numerous generations of selective breeding in order to eradicate the animal’s instinct to roam and live free. 

“La Boetie observed that in human beings this instinct for freedom is especially pronounced. Various social factors, however, have atrophied this natural instinct over time to the point where now the very love of liberty no longer seems natural. One of these factors, according to La Boetie, is the powerful influence of custom, in other words, our tendency to become habituated to the social and political conditions we were born into. 

Conformity and Nonconformity

Conformity is a form of fear. It is fear of being nothing and being empty; without substance. Conformity comes to the mind that has not fully formed and does not know how to be formed. So, the form it takes is the form of others. The conformist seeks the comfort of others, the blanket laid down by others and the pretense that it all came from others. Others are the "form" in con(form)ity. One becomes like others in order to find a "form"; any form. 

The nonconformist cringes every time he sees someone conforming, and he is especially sickened when he notices that others want him to follow their “form”. In a sense, he hates the form of others because he sees it as false and a lie. The nonconformist forms himself out of the resources of his mind. He doesn't do things because others are doing them. When he sees what others are doing, he automatically does something else. If he sees them playing checkers, he will play chess. If he sees them playing football, he will play soccer and so on and so forth. 

Conformity breeds "likeness" and artificiality while nonconformity breeds the love of the real, the form of the nature-made rather than the man-made, existence rather than non-existence, substance rather than nothingness. When the nonconformist sees a vacuum, he will seek to fill it. When he sees the emptiness of conformity, he will try to change it and make it into something meaningful. He is the poet, the thinker, the doer, the maker, the creator and, at some point, he will become what the conformists want to become. By then he has moved on to something new.

“Just as an animal born into captivity knows nothing of the freedom it lacks, and hence does not resist its chains, so those born into state slavery lack the knowledge of what it means to be free, and thus tend to accept their servitude as if it were natural. When one spends their formative years observing those around them, not resisting their oppressors, but accepting them and even adoring them, the effect of custom tends to override the natural instincts of freedom and submission becomes habitual. 

“"...we learn to swallow, and not to find bitter, the venom of servitude." "It is true that in the beginning men submit under constraint and by force; but those who come after them obey without regret and perform willingly what their predecessors had done because they had to. This is why men born under the yoke and then nourished and reared in slavery are content, without further effort, to live in their native circumstance, unaware of any other state or right, and considering as quite natural the conditions in which they were born."[7]

What happens to the “conforming” mind, after years of having its liberties destroyed and its desire to live atrophied? Like a long-caged animal, they must strike out at any creature that is innocent and vulnerable. Violence is the desire to inflict pain over a perceived wrong. Nihilism is the desire to destroy values, so it is a special kind of violence, the deepest and most evil violence of all. It is the violence of hatred of everything without object, without purpose, without goal; it is destruction for the sake of destruction; a statement of self-hate derived from a feeling of nonexistence. Nihilism is the fulfillment of the “promise” of living under slavery and the nothingness it provokes within the individual. Nihilism is hatred of self because, deep inside, the mind and the body know that it should have fought and did not. Despair breeds hatred of values and hatred of life and living. Try sitting in a cage for a few days and then observe what you have become.

We think that what we see today on the streets is new. But it has been done before. It was done by the Romans and they wrote the rules about how to dominate and rule over men. In order to rule, they had to establish the basis of man's character and they had to mold it carefully and make sure he worked for them without resistance. This is how they did it:

·       Collectivism (group-think) was how they divided men into warring groups.

·       Moral dualism (good versus evil) was how they created men's hated enemies.

·       Altruism (charity, taxes and self-sacrifice) was how they stole man's substance and robbed him of his desire for the good. 

·       Anti-reason/Faith/Irrationality/Emotionalism was how they kept men confused, docile and obedient. 

·       If men rebelled, they killed them and erased their history, their books and their identities - then they gave the survivors new books to replace their own.

·       They gave men religion and Roman gods in order to wipe out their own gods.

This is how they plan on controlling you right now. Today's Romans think they are smarter than you and they think they can control history. But they can't. As with the Romans, today's dictators are inept and incompetent and they can't rule free men if those men choose to resist. The question is: Are you going to stand up for truth or give in to their lies, extortions and tyranny?

"A people enslaves itself, cuts its own throat, when, having a choice between being vassals and being free men, it deserts its liberties and takes on the yoke, gives consent to its own misery, or, rather, apparently welcomes it."[8]

“"Let the will of the state act, then, instead of that of the individual. Let an institution be created which shall have for its object to keep correct doctrines before the attention of the people, to reiterate them perpetually, and to teach them to the young; having at the same time power to prevent contrary doctrines from being taught, advocated, or expressed. Let all possible causes of a change of mind be removed from men's apprehensions. Let them be kept ignorant, lest they should learn of some reason to think otherwise than they do. Let their passions be enlisted so that they may regard private and unusual opinions with hatred and horror."[9]

"In our dream...the people yield themselves with perfect docility to our molding hand...We shall not try to make these people or any of their children into philosophers or men of learning or of science. We are not to raise up from among them authors, orators, poets, or men of letters. We shall not search for embryo great artists, painters, musicians. Nor will we cherish even the humbler ambition to raise up from among them lawyers, doctors, preachers, politicians, statesmen, of whom we now have ample supply...For the task that we set before ourselves is a very simple as well as a very beautiful one: to train these people as we find them for a perfectly ideal life just where they are...an idyllic life under the skies and within the horizon, however narrow, where they first open their eyes."[10]

“Another tactic for engineering consent used by ancient tyrants was analogous to what we call the welfare-state today. La Boetie notes that on selective days of the year, ruling classes used to distribute bread and wine and a little money to their subjects. And soon after those who were content and satiated would cry out, "Long live the King." "The fools did not realize that they were merely recovering a portion of their own property and that their ruler could not give them what they were receiving without having first taken it from them."[11]

Recall the "Cares Act" and the checks sent to us by our government

“"The most erroneous assumption is to the effect that the aim of public education is to fill the young of the species with knowledge and awaken their intelligence...Nothing could be further from the truth. The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at all; it is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed and train a standardized citizenry, to put down dissent and originality. That is its aim in the United States, whatever the pretensions of politicians...and that is its aim everywhere else."[12]

“"...what shocks is that we should so eagerly have adopted one of the very worst aspects of Prussian culture: an educational system deliberately designed to produce mediocre intellects, to hamstring the inner life, to deny students appreciable leadership skills, and to ensure docile and incomplete citizens - all in order to render the populace "manageable".[13]

We must be willing to question everything we are taught. I have long fought to understand history and have noticed over the last two or so decades that our children are now being taught revised history that has a political agenda. Teachers today must be willing to challenge bad ideas and realize they have a major responsibility to preserve the principles that made our country just, free and prosperous. If we succumb to lies, we are lost, and the responsibility will fall squarely on our teachers. If they do not question collectivism and the effort to bring about group thinking and conformity, they will be destroying the principle of independent thinking and the independent mind. We must not accept what the group is trying to do - we must challenge the group regardless of which group it is. All group thinking is dangerous. We can see the devastation caused by it in our streets today.

"We have to condemn publicly the very idea that some people have the right to repress others. In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousandfold in the future."[14]

“You have heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis. You have said it yourself, half in fear, half in hope that the words had no meaning. You have cried that man’s sins are destroying the world and you have cursed human nature for its unwillingness to practice the virtues you demanded. Since virtue, to you, consists of sacrifice, you have demanded more sacrifices at every successive disaster. In the name of a return to morality, you have sacrificed all those evils which you held as the cause of your plight. You have sacrificed justice to mercy. You have sacrificed independence to unity. You have sacrificed reason to faith. You have sacrificed wealth to need. You have sacrificed self-esteem to self-denial. You have sacrificed happiness to duty.

“You have destroyed all that which you held to be evil and achieved all that which you held to be good. Why, then, do you shrink in horror from the sight of the world around you? That world is not the product of your sins, it is the product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I-I am the man who has granted you your wish.[15]

"Let your credo be this: Let the lie come into the world, let it even triumph. But not through me."[16]

"Resist much, obey little; Once unquestioning obedience, once fully enslaved; Once fully enslaved, no nation, state, city, of this earth, ever afterward resumes its liberty.[17]

Let the liar come into the light. Let him have the platform. Let's see him so we can judge him. He will show who he is and what he wants. Then we can decide..."when in the course of human events."

Now is not the time to smooth over differences. Now is the time to take a stand. Here are the choices: Individual rights, constitutional protections and limited government versus re-distribution, altruism (exploitation) and collectivism (slavery to the group). Take your choice.

---

[1] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

[2] Ibid

[3] Ibid

[4] Ibid

[5] Ibid

[6] Ibid

[7] Etienne del Boetie, The Discourse on Voluntary Servitude. Taken from youtube video, "How We Enslave Ourselves"

[8] Etienne de La Boetie

[9] The Fixation of Belief, Charles Sanders Peirce (one of the fathers of pragmatism and also a father of modern education)

[10] The Country School of Tomorrow, Frederick Taylor Gates (General Education Board - 1903)

[11] Taken from the youtube video "How we Enslave Ourselves"

[12] H. L. Mencken

[13] John Taylor Gatto, Weapons of Mass Instruction

[14] - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago

[15] Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged, This is John Galt Speaking

[16] Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

[17] Walt Whitman, Leaves of Grass

The Cause of the Riots - Collectivism

To the 2020 Rioters,

Your skin color is one of the least important things about you. Red, brown, white or green, you have done very little to have that shade. It did not determine your character or your pride. It did not determine your intellect, whether you decided to educate yourself or whether you chose the easy way of blaming failure on a color.

Your skin doesn’t think or choose; your mind does. Your mind chooses your friends, your habits and your manner and these determine whether people respect or avoid you. Color didn’t make you. You did. This is because, at base, you are an individual. You choose, with your own mind, what you value. You are not connected to others and you can't give up your mind and expect that those others will take care of you. They won't. They will use you to advance their agenda of destroying capitalism which happens to be the greatest and fairest system ever invented by man. You have been duped by Marx and Engels and soon you will be a murderous automaton who destroys lives. That is what you are making of yourself.

The root cause of riots and looting is not the killing of one individual. The root cause is seeing everything as an issue of groups. This is called collectivism and it is the most virulent and evil idea in history. It has caused countless numbers of deaths. It is the philosophy of Antifa and Black Lives Matter and the sundry socialist and communist groups who gravitate around the idea of self-sacrifice, class warfare and group hatred. 

In fact, lots of people die unfairly of all colors and people don’t riot over their deaths. In fact, many people died in the riots and looting in which you have participated. I don't see you demanding justice for those people. 

The root cause of rioting and looting is the idea of group grievance; the very collectivism I mentioned above. People have been taught that one group has oppressed their group and they feel justified in lashing out against society. But groups are made up of individuals, some guilty and many innocent. Individuals often do wrong and our society is designed to punish injustice imposed by one individual over another. It seeks to find the individual who has done wrong, prove his crime and then punish him as an individual. All justice should be of, by, and for individuals. That’s the only way to find fairness in society. That’s the only way to avoid riots that punish the wrong individual.

Collectivism creates misunderstanding and death. Collectivism calls for special treatment for one group and persecution of other groups. It has always done this. Look at the collectivism of the Nazis and communists and the haters of groups in other societies. It is the haters of groups who do the damage we see in our streets. The culprit is collectivism. Collectivism killed 6 million Jews in Germany, 20 million people in the Soviet Union and some estimates say 200 million people in communist China. Is that what you want to bring back into the world?

Those of you who think constantly of groups and seek to divide people by groups; you are bringing evil to society. You may start by telling people you want to save them against capitalism, but make no mistake about it; you are bringing death and destruction. You know, deep down inside you that you must kill or silence anyone who disagrees with you. Make no mistake about it, you are evil and I know you sense it within you. 

I think you should take a step back and ask yourself what kind of person you are making of yourself. I think you should re-think your values and decide upon actions that bring values into society. Values such as reason, purpose and self-respect are a good start. Individualism is the answer to collectivism. Think again about what you do.

Should You Be Selfish?

"There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first.” – Margaret Thatcher

When a word is being used incorrectly to convey the opposite of its real meaning, the solution is not to create a new word but to reclaim the word and teach people to use it properly. For instance, the statement, “You’re just being selfish,” is commonly heard today. It is often uttered when one person seeks to “guilt” another into doing something he does not want to do (such as pay higher taxes or give to charity). Most often, the accused gives in because he or she wants to be liked. In fact, most people bend over backwards to convince others that they never think of themselves first.

In fact, it is commonly thought that selflessness[1] (as opposed to selfishness) is the preferred moral ideal. This leads to the conclusion that self-sacrifice is the road to moral perfection. Altruists[2] promise the so-called joy of giving while ignoring the fact that today what is given to some is taken from others. They also preach that selfish action and laissez faire societies create poverty. They warn people that selfish behavior means hating people, stealing from them and letting them starve on the streets. Selfish people, according to this view, disregard all moral injunctions and become exploitative, back stabbing and war-like.

The truth is that, throughout history, the most moral, prosperous and successful societies have liberated people to pursue their own happiness without the demand for charity – and such societies are the most productive, the wealthiest, the safest to live in, have the highest standard of living and are the most giving to those in trouble. So much for the anarchy of laissez faire.

So why is self-sacrifice considered to be virtuous? The cause is the philosophy of anti-self which holds that the concept of selfishness is an evil idea. This philosophy is made up of a set of falsehoods that create a sort of anti-self-social movement. Some of these falsehoods are:

·         That proper moral action should never benefit the actor

·         That the world is zero-sum – every transaction has a winner and a loser (the winner is bad and the loser is a victim)

·         That success of any kind is always at the expense of others

·         That selfishness and self-interested action are by nature evil

·         That all actions for the benefit of others are by nature good

On the other hand, I argue that the opposites of the above are correct:

·         That proper moral action should only benefit to the actor

·         That the world is not zero-sum – moral transactions are win/win

·         That the success of one individual does not cause the failure of others

·         That altruism and self-sacrifice are by nature evil

The first set of attitudes above betrays a view that man is a natural predator whose survival “instinct” is to eat his fellow men. Toward this purpose, the proponents of such attitudes tell us that people like Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin and other criminals are examples of selfishness. This group of evil doers, according to the altruists, includes businessmen who are presumably predatory and profit-seeking.

To avoid the “evil eye” of disapproval, most individuals strive to convince people that they never have a personal motive. The result: businessmen, even the creators of real value, must tell customers that their purpose is to give away their profits. Instead of spending money on research and development, they pay taxes and contribute to charities. Husbands must believe that taking care of their families is a sacrifice and they do it only because they must. Soldiers believe that their job is to die for others, etc. Even in foreign affairs, the American government tells the world that military action should only help those who suffer. We would never pursue a low selfish motive like defending the nation’s economic interests.

It is a rare event when a businessperson declares that he is working for his own sake. To say such a thing is like sentencing oneself to the rack. Selfishness is considered to be crass and arrogant. How could any business make a profit, it is thought, when everyone knows that according to the labor theory of value each penny of revenue came from the workers? It is, for them, a zero-sum world.[3]

Yet, in reality, being consistently self-sacrificial is impractical and fruitless. In the name of helping people, one must not be able to live. And who is to decide what is selfish? By what authority? Who can possibly answer this question? No one.

Many people say, “Well, I don’t have a problem with a person seeking his self-interest as long as he doesn’t hurt anyone. It is wrong to gain at the expense of others. And what is the point of making all that money and not using it to help others?” Yet, this view reveals the essence, and the danger, of the philosophy of anti-self. Arguments shift from zero-sum to hypocrisy. People claim selfishness is evil but have no problem with it when it improves their own lives. And, they will put up with it if rich people give everything away. How nice of them; but don’t expect them to give up their iPhones.

I submit that selfishness is not evil. No one has the right or authority to tell an honest person that he is benefiting himself too much. No one has the right to decide when it is time to start sacrificing. And no one has the right to decide what you should do with a single penny of your money. Along with others, I consider the word “selfish” to be wrongly conceived. In fact, because of the general disregard for selfishness, we no longer have a word that refers to living rationally and using one’s mind to positively affect one’s life. As a result, due to all the negativity surrounding the word, we do not acknowledge positive traits that make life and living possible.

Predatory behavior and benefiting at the expense of others are not selfish. They are short-term in nature and bring about long-term damage to the actor. Altruists somehow assume that cheating and stealing are practical actions. I submit that these actions are not practical at all. Further, society has too often vilified people who were acting rationally and punished them unjustly.

To clarify this, I’m going to list a few commonly held virtues and then ask a question:

·         Honesty
·         Justice
·         Productiveness
·         Integrity
·         Rationality

If you were to practice these virtues, which ones would not be in your self-interest? Which would benefit you to violate? Would being dishonest really make you rich and respected? Ask a robber spending time in prison. Would being unjust help you keep your job? Ask a frivolous judge who is resented by plaintiffs and impeached. Would being productive make you poor? Ask the factory worker who has a nice home and plenty of vacation time. Would having integrity make you unhappy? Ask the person who can’t decide right from wrong. Would being irrational make you competent and efficacious? Ask anybody.

The truth is that rational living, selfish living, is necessary for survival. Virtuous living can only require the ultimate in rational thinking and nothing can happen until you have selfishly secured the tools (knowledge) and conditions that make good living possible. The Greeks held that there was an important difference between the good person who sought to live a life of virtue and the lower type who sought short-term advantage at the expense of moral living. They even had two gods named Eros, one who represented virtuous love and another for lower, animalistic pleasures.

I’ve known many young people who had a strong desire to succeed in a particular sport. These people spent many hours practicing and training during their youth. Many of them went on to become college standouts and professional greats because they worked hard to hone their skills. They exploited no one and achieved much. Wouldn’t these young people be considered selfish by the anti-self mob? Shouldn’t they instead be spending their time as missionaries in the jungle? If this is true, what is the point of working so hard to be excellent in sports, or singing or anything?

If you want to live a moral life, the first question to ask is not “How can I avoid being selfish?” or “How can I make people like me?” or “How can I advance the welfare of others?” The first question is “Who should be the beneficiary of my actions?”

“I am the one ultimately responsible for my life.”[4]

You can’t think through another mind nor can you live anyone else’s life for them. Only you have the responsibility of living your life – no one else. Within the quiet repose of your own mind, you will discover that for you, there is only you; no one else. And since reality, this universe, is one interconnected whole, only a mind focused on reality, not on the switching ideas of others, is capable of success in life. The key issue is to decide what is in your self-interest.

Ayn Rand tells us:

“The term "interests" is a wide abstraction that covers the entire field of ethics. It includes the issues of: man's values, his desires, his goals and their actual achievement in reality. A man's "interests" depend on the kind of goals he chooses to pursue, his choice of goals depends on his desires, his desires depend on his values—and, for a rational man, his values depend on the judgment of his mind.”[5]

The judgment of your mind involves knowing that values are achieved by means of clear thinking and effective action. This requires an understanding of causality (cause and effect) which helps you know which actions achieve the desired value. Notice that, by necessity, there should be no consideration here of the thoughts or needs of other people. To insert such a consideration at this point is to subvert the process of ethical decision-making because you can never be sure that another person is right in his judgments; and more importantly, you lose the ability to evaluate reality with your own mind.

Imagine what would happen if, at the stage of identifying reality with your own mind, you decided to consider what society would like for you to do. This would invalidate your mind because the so-called needs of society are never based on your needs and values. Further, since the thinking of your mind “programs” your desires (emotions), not thinking clearly about your self-interest subverts your emotional capacity and negatively influences your ability to feel. This impacts your “desire” to be happy, your need of love and sets you on a track toward confusion and self-doubt.

On the other hand, once you have established your own moral foundation, you will be able to integrate your values into your life. These values, as Rand indicates, must be yours alone. They can include a broad range of interests and desires and they can include other people and their values. But you must never subordinate your interests and values to others nor should it be expected of you – and this is the key: no one should demand that you sacrifice your values, goals, interests and desires for the sake of someone else. This is the clear line that altruists throughout history have wanted to breach.

Altruism may be thought by many to be the moral system that would make men “be good” but, in reality, it is the moral system that demands obedience, uniformity of ideas and self-destruction. Morality should not be about sacrifice; but about right action and how to determine it. No amount of mystic insight, or reading the minds of others, will enable you to solve the problems of survival. For that, you need your mind and its efficient use.

In fact, altruism is not a moral system but a system of anti-concepts that are intended to destroy virtue, values and reason. When you sacrifice according to altruism’s values, you must give up the kinds of things needed for success in life. For instance, you must give up money that you might have invested in a business. You must give up time that you could have used educating yourself. You must eat a less expensive meal or not eat at all. You might have to delay purchasing something that would improve your life or make you safer. If you were to respond to every request for money and time, you will certainly become impoverished. But most importantly, you will have a diminished ability to affect your wellbeing.

Many people today never learn about the value of human achievement, reason and self-interested action. This is due to the philosophy of anti-self and its prevalence in society. The result is that people never experience their own true wonderful natures as human beings. They never learn that they have a right to advance their lives, their goals and aspirations without guilt and criticism. They never learn that there is nothing evil about thinking intelligently, ascertaining reality, gaining knowledge and developing viable principles of action.

Aristotle tells us:

“The question is also debated, whether a man should love himself most, or some one else. People criticize those who love themselves most, and call them self-lovers, using this as an epithet of disgrace…”

“Perhaps we ought to mark off such arguments from each other and determine how far and in what respects each view is right. Now if we grasp the sense in which each school uses the phrase ‘lover of self’, the truth may become evident. Those who use the term as one of reproach ascribe self-love to people who assign to themselves the greater share of wealth, honours, and bodily pleasures; for these are what most people desire, and busy themselves about as though they were the best of all things, which is the reason, too, why they become objects of competition. So those who are grasping with regard to these things gratify their appetites and in general their feeling and the irrational element of the soul; and most men are of this nature (which is the reason why the epithet has come to be used as it is—it takes its meaning from the prevailing type of self-love, which is a bad one); … That it is those who give themselves the preference in regard to objects of this sort that most people usually call lovers of self is plain; for if a man were always anxious that he himself, above all things, should act justly, temperately, or in accordance with any other of the virtues, and in general were always to try to secure for himself the honourable course, no one will call such a man a lover of self or blame him.

“But such a man would seem more than the other a lover of self; at all events he assigns to himself the things that are noblest and best, and gratifies the most authoritative element in himself and in all things obeys this; and just as a city or any other systematic whole is most properly identified with the most authoritative element in it, so is a man; and therefore the man who loves this and gratifies it is most of all a lover of self. Besides, a man is said to have or not to have self-control according as his reason has or has not the control, on the assumption that this is the man himself; and the things men have done on a rational principle are thought most properly their own acts and voluntary acts…” “Therefore, the good man should be a lover of self…”[6]

Over much of the last several centuries, a constant stream of voices tells us that the man who loves reason, self-regulation and freedom is evil. They tell us that reason isn't everything, that it really can't make a difference in life, that it makes a person into a robot and self-centered and unfeeling. Such voices insist that the poor are trod asunder by this person and that he is the cause of their suffering. Other voices tell us that a free person will gravitate toward immoral actions, that anything goes and nothing matters to him. These anti-self ideas, if repeated often enough, do not become truth. Work and chosen activities are the cornerstone of the individual life and centuries of “opinions” cannot change this fact.

We must develop a clear understanding of the immorality made possible by the anti-self philosophy. Sacrifice is about destruction of the good. It is good people who must give up their values for others, not evil villains. Certainly, not every altruist has evil motives; he may or may not understand the evil inherent in altruism and may, more or less, be a dupe of the moralizing of others. He may merely be acting out of a mistaken desire to do some good. This is why it is important for all men to understand the source of altruism. 

Altruism, as a transfer of values from one person to another, involves a major dropping of the context of what is required for ethical action. First of all, altruism drops the very existence of the individual who must sacrifice by considering none of his needs. It literally ignores any damage done to the honest individual who must pay for the collective banquet. It tells him to think of himself less and of others more. Further, altruism drops the context of the essence of trade by requiring that one party in the transaction gives up his values while another gains them. It drops the context of the issue of property rights by taking what one person owns and disposing of it. Altruism drops the context of “the good” by requiring that the productive person lose his values to someone who did not produce them. Altruism drops the context of justice by demanding that some men be treated unjustly. Altruism drops the context of what is required for survival in life, not only production, but reason and individual initiative in favor of unreason and passivity. Finally, altruism drops the context of what a proper government does; which is to protect the honest and hardworking citizen from confiscation of his property.

The failure by our intellectuals to identify the wide scope of altruism’s evil has created havoc in our society. Altruism is not just about the preacher’s or the teacher’s insistence that you “be good” or “help people”. Altruism is a wide principle that is at the foundation of a large number of very negative human institutions. Most religions are not just about faith, believing in God, but about sacrifice as a moral ideal. We are encouraged to be like Christ and sacrifice everything for the poor (and they mean "everything"). Throughout history, religion has been a cornerstone of monarchy which is a form of dictatorship. If you don’t believe as the King believes, you could lose your employment or your head. It meant nothing for people like the leaders of the Inquisition to sacrifice anyone who departed from the canon (they were punishing the devil).  When philosophy started taking a secular turn, one principle that wasn’t challenged was the propriety of sacrifice for the collective. This failure spawned what have come to be known as “total” governments that preached sacrifice to the race (Nazism), sacrifice to the group or collective (fascism and socialism), sacrifice to the state (communism). Today, we are mired in a system which is a cross between fascism, corporatism and communism. Our leaders, the progressives, originate intellectually from among a wide scope of altruists, church, fascism, corporatism, communism, welfare-statism and more). They repeatedly speak about the need for sacrifice.

Today, many young people don’t even know about the evil of altruism because their teachers never connect for them the relationships between the idea of altruism and the various “isms” that it has seeded. If you are trying to decide which “ism” you favor, let me give you some facts to help you decide.

Monarchy – rule by one man, death to dissenters. The American Revolution was fought against the violations of King George who was also the leader of the state religion. The history of England is littered with the bodies of men that the King did not like who spent their time in prison or were beheaded. Religious persecution was rampant in Europe at the time of the Revolution and was one of the reasons that the concept of religious freedom was invented by our Founders. Many people in Europe came to America to avoid this persecution.

Nazi Germany – 6 million murders[7]

The Soviet Union – 60 million murders[8]

Communist China – 110 million murders[9]

If you think that altruism is not responsible for these murders, then ask yourself, what is the common denominator of all totalitarian societies? What idea justifies the slaughters of millions of people, the confiscation of property, the persecution of political opponents, income re-distribution, slave labor camps and the destruction of businesses? It could only be that the state takes upon itself the “responsibility” for making the world a better place through the sacrifice of productive citizens. Anyone who “refuses” to go along with the state’s goals – that means anyone who is perceived as not being willing to sacrifice, will be discarded. That means business people, educated people, people who have opposing views and anyone who would dare criticize the state for any reason whatsoever. Kors explains:

“Shot dead by deliberate exposure, starved, worked to death, murdered in camps meant to extract every last fiber of labor and then kill them. And widows and widowers and orphans. No cause ever in the history of all mankind has produced more slaughtered innocents and more orphans than socialism with power. It surpassed exponentially all other systems of production in turning out the dead. They are all around us. No one talks about them. No one honors them. No one does penance for them. No one has committed suicide for having been an apologist for those who did this to them. No one pays for them. No one is hunted down to account for them.”[10]

It is time to stop hiding our head in the sand. Our leaders advocate the very same philosophy that was advocated by some of history’s most successful altruists. You can’t only measure President Obama’s success by the amounts of money he has been able to re-distribute, by the time he has been able to extort or by the values that the regulated economy prohibits; altruism is murder in all respects. Not only does this philosophy and its adherents murder values, they also murder the ultimate value, human life. Don’t think it isn’t possible for comparable murders to be done here. When you hear the attacks on selfishness by today’s altruists, you are hearing the same attacks made by Hitler against the Jews, by Marx, Stalin, Mao, Ho Chi Minh, Castro, Guevarra and Chavez against the bourgeoisie or by Pol Pot against the educated; what you are hearing is the philosophy of anti-self. If you think that the critics of capitalism have anything else in mind than the destruction of the good, you don’t understand altruism.

When we ignore important facts regarding proper human relationships, we are engaged in a process of self-destruction. We contradict reality and the principles that are necessary for life and good living. This contradiction creates discord and conflict and harms all men who seek to live in a proper society. There is a reason why altruism does not work and why altruist societies not only collapse economically but kill millions of “selfish” people in the process. They do not work because altruism contradicts the very principles necessary for successful living. It makes them impossible.

To illustrate why altruism is wrong, let’s see an example. Let’s consider what your best friend might do and compare that to what an altruist would do under the same circumstances. Your best friend has a high regard for you, he likes you (or even loves you) and he cares about your happiness. He enjoys sharing your life because of the values the two of you share. As Aristotle says, a friend is another you. Now ask yourself, does your friend want you to accomplish only part of your values or does he want you to accomplish all of them fully and as soon as possible?

If you tell your friend that you want to do something that affects your life and future, your friend will most likely evaluate that action in terms of what he thinks is in your self-interest. He may tell you that the action is not well-advised and give reasons. After all, he is your friend. That is what friends do.

For instance, if you tell him that are taking the next two years to feed the villagers in Nicaragua, he may question the wisdom of such an action because it might jeopardize your goal of becoming a doctor. He will tell you of the time you will lose toward the achievement of your career goals. He will ask, “Which is more important to you?” He may tell you of the income you will lose and of the patients who will suffer if you put off your goal. He may even tell you that you might be harmed by violent revolutionaries in the jungle who might hold you hostage. You might never return.

Of course, your friend is openly on your side. He wants you to consistently pursue what is most important to you. He sees you as a value and he wants you to be happy. Contrast this with the altruist who wants you to sacrifice for others. This person would approve of your going to the jungle. He wants you to live, not according your selfish desires, but according to self-sacrificial service. In fact, to the altruist, your desire to be a doctor should never be accomplished because, to him, there are too many people suffering in Nicaragua. You are, after all, the cause of the suffering of those jungle people; you are an American who is responsible for the imperialistic policies of the US government. You must do all you can to relieve those people of the suffering you have caused them.

The altruist is not your friend.

Imagine then, that you had an enemy who detested you. What would he want for you? He certainly would not want you to accomplish your goal either. He would want you to fail. What would be the end result of the desires of the altruist and of your enemy? Essentially, they would be the same. Both the altruist and your enemy see you in the same light, as evil, and as responsible for much harm and misery. Both would want you to fail in every way possible. The very same failure on your part would please your enemy and the altruist – but it would not please your friend.

This moral contradiction between your friend and the altruist/enemy can now be turned toward your regard for yourself. Replace your steadfast friend with yourself and you’ll see that your regard for values must come from the selfishly clear logic of what is in your self-interest. Likewise, if, instead, you replace the altruist with yourself, you have only the desire to serve others and no regard for any possible damage to yourself. And, as is clear, your failure to achieve your values is fine with your enemy.

In this society, dominated by altruism, you, the individual, and your goals will always be opposed by the advocates of altruistic self-sacrifice. Politicians, community leaders, intellectuals (universities and schools) will be seen as not doing their jobs if you are dedicated to your own personal wants and likes.

Teachers, especially, have an important role in society. Today, many teachers think their purpose is to teach children to sacrifice for others – and, once accomplished, they think they have done their job. The long-term result of this educational philosophy is adults with no productive skills. Even those who find a productive job have no idea they are being eaten alive by society. Every tax imposed, every regulation passed, every obstacle put in front of them is just one more thing they have to overcome. Who can survive in such an environment? Only someone who disregards everything he or she was taught in school.

Altruism starts with the demand that people give up their values for others. However, before that demand can be uttered, something else must happen. The avowed altruist must decide that he is justified in making the demand. He must ignore the suffering of those he cajoles into servitude – and he only considers the suffering of the “needy” as relevant. When the money runs out, or when the concern is spent, the altruist moves on to a new set of “needy” and a new set of sacrificial victims.

Altruism is an attack on the good – any good and all good. Few realize this because they are told only that altruism itself is good. However, as we have shown, altruism goes deeper. The avowed altruist does not merely hate producers and the “rich”, he also hates mankind – especially himself.  Let’s make a list of common statements made by altruists toward those they consider to be selfish people:

·         Who do you think you are?

·         You think you’re good, don’t you?

·         You’re nothing but a pretentious worm.

·         Do you think you are better than everyone else?

·         How can you be so selfish?

·         What gives you the right to put yourself on a pedestal?

·         Don’t you care about the poor?

·         Don’t you care about the people harmed by capitalism?

·         Pride is evil.

·         So you love yourself, do you?

·         You are nothing but an ant.

·         You’re just a lowly, brutish animal.

·         What makes you think you are so good?

·         You didn’t build that.

·         You didn’t make it.

·         Other people are better than you.

·         Society is your master and it can do whatever it chooses.

·         Service to the collective is good.

·         Service to yourself is evil.

Every time an altruist says these things to you, he is not only expressing his disdain for mankind, but he is also talking to himself. If you give in, the altruist receives the superficial satisfaction, not of having helped someone, but of having made you doubt yourself. This helps him deal with his own doubts and gives him the satisfaction of having ridiculed “bad” people. Yet, all of these criticisms are designed to bring good people down. This puts the altruist, by implication, in a self-imposed trap. The only possible escape for him is to realize that his view of man is wrong and that altruism is evil.

Many young people who are confronted with the demands of altruism, do not realize that they too are walking into a trap of self-hate. Their confusions, self-doubts and self-flagellation are all caused by attacks like those listed above and, for the rest of their lives, they feel compelled to “act out” their self-hatred by making the lives of others miserable. If you’ve ever lived with a person who was constantly criticizing people for being selfish, you know what I mean. This is why I say that altruists do not have the moral high ground. As critics of mankind, they are simply busy bodies too concerned about what others do while avoiding their own responsibilities to themselves.

The following Venn diagram will give you a sense of the relationship between rational selfishness and other ethical and political principles:

 

As you can see, the principles that represents a zero, altruism, include self-hate and service. The individualist set of concepts include self-love, reason and goals while the extreme of irrationalism includes narcissism, whim worship and fear. It is interesting to note that irrationalism is made up of the concepts that are usually considered by altruists to represent selfishness. Yet, what the altruists seek to defeat is not irrationalism and its associated principles but individualism and its associated principles.

The double arrows are designed to convey the fact that the anti-principles of altruism and the anti-principles of irrationalism are traded back and forth between the two philosophies. Irrationalism, because it creates intellectual confusion, openly borrows anti-reason, anti-self and anti-man attitudes in order to “validate” itself[11]. This analysis exposes the corruption of altruism and irrationalism and shows them to be destructive of reason and values.

Finally, the philosophical principles of rationalism and skepticism serve as barriers to an individual who is trying to understand. These principles shed only doubt and confusion – and that is there intent. Their goal is to keep you from ever realizing your value, the value of your mind and any love you might have for your values. Rationalism, essentially, is the idea that reason can only be achieved by deduction from Platonic essences that are disconnected from reality and skepticism holds that doubt is the source of truth or that knowledge of the real world is impossible.

If you really want to live a good life; if you have a genuine love for yourself and for the promise that being human offers; you should not only seek to integrate reason and positive virtues into your life but also advocate the establishment of a social system that benefits humanity. That social system is capitalism in which men are free to pursue their happiness, free to celebrate their minds and love life. If you want a great society, advocate selfish living, both morally and politically. 

To get an idea of what life might be like today without the incessant demand for sacrifice, let’s imagine a world in which there are no restrictions on production, the pursuit of values, the acquisition of knowledge and wealth, the expression of one’s opinions and the development of ideas and philosophy. In this world, no one would demand that you give up anything you value.

The use of considerably more money for research and development (since companies will not be taxed) might mean significantly greater entertainment options. We could have gone beyond 3D HDTV to home theaters that are even better than today’s public theaters – all for a few pennies per movie. In fact, home theaters would not even require flat screens. We could watch a movie from within the story, with events taking place around us. We could feel the ground shake and smell the flowers and feel the warm sun on our faces. Public theaters would be even more spectacular and include seats that move with the action. The theater might include smells, tastes, ultra-stereo sound and other wonders not even known to be possible today. Self-help television shows could put you in the middle of a scene, interact with you, let you make your own choices and see how they work out. You could debate important topics with Aristotle and other great thinkers.

Travel would not involve having to drive and you could arrive at a destination within a few minutes. For instance, a trip across town or across the country might take only minutes and cost mere pennies using vehicles that drive themselves without accidents. You could fly to Hawaii and be on the beach within an hour or you could be walking the halls of the British Museum or at a civil war battlefield just as fast. You might even be able to vacation on the moon or Mars – perhaps even Jupiter or Saturn.

Because your wealth was not wasted in poverty programs, you would be able to educate yourself and become a doctor or a specialist in a field you love. Your level of knowledge could be so extensive that you are more secure in your career and have a far better understanding of life and principles. You can choose the education you want for your children, rather than have it dictated by the state. Your children would be considerably smarter than is possible today because the options would be many and the best schools would rise to the top. Your children would have more self-confidence, more certainty and they would be looking forward to a long life of accomplishment without guilt and self-denial.

Because money could be spent on medical research rather than squandered by government, you would have available to you the best medical procedures and cures for mere dollars. Cancer could have been eradicated decades ago and today you might live well past 120 years or even more.  Plus your later years would be engaged in healthy activity rather than pain and slow movement. You could extend your sexual pleasures well-beyond your 80s and be looking forward to a second, third or fourth productive career. Because you keep all your money, you could easily become a millionaire or billionaire if you invest it well. This would give you the freedom to start companies, fund worthy projects and even help people who are having a difficult time.

Because there are no insurance regulations, insurance programs for medical care could be inexpensive and come to you with a wide range of choices or cover only one potential disease. More knowledge would be available about which diseases could be in your future due to quick and painless genetic analysis of your body. You could head off those diseases by means of forward-looking procedures and pay for operations years in advance. Private group plans could be created and employers would be free to provide medical coverage that actually covered procedures you need. Your health could be put into the hands of competent professionals with a passion for their careers. These professionals would provide advanced procedures that would save your life years before you became sick.

We wouldn’t have to worry about being threatened by terrorism because our defenses against nihilism and hatred would be both philosophical and practical. The wonders of modern life would speak for themselves. People who might otherwise have accepted the anti-life views of religious radicals might see the magnificence possible through reason and freedom and choose a life of individual growth rather than early self-sacrificial death.

Above all, if you had not been saddled with self-sacrifice as a moral principle throughout your entire life, no one would have demanded that you give up your values for others. More people would have seen the utter corruption of the idea of sacrifice and avowed altruists would be considered an affront to humanity. People who advocate such ideas would be shamed and seen as bad people and virtual thieves. 

The environment would be cleaner and more land will be available for wildlife and recreation. Industrial concerns would have developed manufacturing processes that produced no pollution. In fact, products and industries might have developed that would heat an entire city during cold weather while cooling it during hot weather – and not only clean the environment but eradicate infectious diseases through cleaner sewage and waste removal procedures.

How would the poor fare in such a society? Would they be devastated by the rich? No, they would be rich too and benefit greatly from companies seeking to provide them with new products that save time and money. And they need not fear being criticized for trying to start a company or get an education. Prices of all essentials would be reduced to pennies and be available to all who want them. They would have access to low-cost energy, inexpensive communications via phone and Internet; and they would be able to take vacations to any part of the world. Even food would be fresher, more nutritious and inexpensive. There would be so many inducements to thinking and developing skills that anyone could get an advanced education if he or she decided to pursue it. And workers could be more productive as they operate and maintain production-enhancing machines and computers that help people earn more money in less time. The poor would be five times better educated and healthier than people today and their schooling would make available to them the essential skills necessary for success in life. The only thing they would need to do is make the choice to think.

But more importantly, new products that can only be afforded by the rich, would mean that other excellent products on the market would find lower prices and never become obsolete. The abundance of products, the new developments and enhanced efficiencies would mean the poor could have endless options easily within their budgets. Even health insurance would be less expensive and made available by a variety of companies and organizations. Modern-day private companies (such as a non-government-affiliated AARP) would provide group services, low-cost prescriptions and inexpensive medical procedures. Doctors, freed of the need to fill out forms for the government, would have more time to develop their skills and procedures.

Overall, the entire society would be constantly improving because each person who seeks to work is constantly striving to improve his skills, his production and his living standard. The future would be bright, people would be happy and they would know that truly, “the sky’s the limit”.

Unfortunately, we don’t have that kind of world today. We are struggling with the remnants of a history dominated by mysticism, hatred of reason and the demand for collective sacrifice. These evil ideas are the sources of our sorry state today. They have eaten our substance and left us with little money with which to advance our lives. Those people who claim that only sacrifice can improve life have gotten it all wrong.

Yet, the decision to be selfish and let other people be selfish is not just a “common sense” choice. As we have seen, being selfish requires thought and work. Deciding on the right action takes effort and clear thinking. It is a decision about the moral code you will live, how you will define what is in your interest and how to express your virtues. It requires well-defined principles and a long-range purpose. Along the way, there will be obstacles, setbacks and challenges. It won’t just come to you from out of the blue. Nothing ever does.

Yet, a good start is to understand that being fully, rationally selfish is not evil; it harms no one. As we’ve seen, it is merely a matter of being your own best friend. Such an attitude helps to create a world of traders who inspire others to be their best. It creates parents who love their children and know what they need in terms of nurturing, education and values. It brings about educated professionals who understand their fields and self-confidently assert their desires. These people are not stabbing each other in the back, stepping over dead bodies or stealing from the poor.

Should you be more selfish? Yes, it is your right to achieve your happiness. In fact, in today’s world of anti-self, you should be proudly selfish, even defiantly so.

---

[1] Selflessness, having little or no concern for oneself, especially with regard to fame, position, money, etc.; unselfish. Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/selflessness

[2] Altruist, a person unselfishly concerned for or devoted to the welfare of others (opposed to egoist). Source: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/altruist

[3] Zero-sum mentality is the term used in community psychology to describe a way of thinking that hinges on the notion that "there must be one winner and one loser; for every gain there is a loss." Differing schools of thought believe that social justice is best attained through cooperative negotiation. Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero-sum_mentality

[4] Dr. Ben Carson with Cecil Murphy, Gifted Hands, The Ben Carson Story, quoted by Don Watkins in RooseveltCare

[5] The Virtue of Selfishness by Ayn Rand, “The Conflict of Men’s Interests”

[6] Nichomachean Ethics, Aristotle, Chapter 8, McKeon

[7] Generally accepted number

[8] A History of Violence in Soviet Russia, Alexander Yakovlef, quoted by Allen Charles Kors in his speech Socialism’s Legacy

[9] Mao, the Unknown Story, Jung Chang and Jon Halliday

[10] Allen Charles Kors, Socialism’s Legacy

[11] See Kant