Capitalist Solutions

Promoting capitalism as the only moral and practical social system for man!

ALTRUISM'S BLOODY LEGACY

By Simon Patkin

Selfishness not altruism allows men to be generous to their fellow men

Despite’s capitalism’s practicality, many normal people today still implicitly or explicitly endorse the idea of selflessness over and above that of rational selfishness. Let’s look at what it means to be truly selfless by recalling a recent series of commercials put out by a Hong Kong insurance company. In one ad, a progression of boys is seen falling off bikes and a man administering first aid. He quickly becomes overwhelmed. In another ad, person after person loses their wallet and the man feels compelled to find ways to give that wallet back without the owners knowing.

I believe these advertisements illustrate a false dichotomy put forward by the philosophy of altruism, which now pervades our society today. Indeed altruism tries to project a world where misfortune is the norm and someone must constantly be helping others in order to be judged good. This philosophy has convinced many that man’s choice is to mindlessly help others or act like pigs toward our fellow beings. Some have even implied that businessmen left free would not help those affected by the recent tsunami.

However, altruism does not mean benevolence. It’s meaning is far more sinister and actually translates as otherism or always putting the interests of others first. As the father of this philosophy, Immanuel Kant explained that to be moral man must get absolutely no value from his actions whatsoever, not even heaven. He MUST do his duty to others for no reason than for doing that duty, even if this makes him miserable. This is an impossible goal and if someone does not want to be selfless like the insurance guy, they should, according to Kant be forced to do so.

In his book, The Ominous Parallels, Leonard Peikoff suggests this idea pushed further by Hegel and Marx gave rise to socialist and other totalitarian regimes which banned free enterprise and profit. The bloodstained models for altruism today include North Korea where the trees have no bark and the birds do not sing because the starving millions have eaten both. Previous examples include the Soviets under communism and Cambodia’s Pol Pot – all involved human sacrifice to a so-called “greater good”. Altruism in its pure form has been responsible for hundreds of millions of deaths with survivors forced to endure wretched poverty and back breaking labour.

In contrast, selfishness just means being concerned with one’s own interests with capitalism as the system that allows people to pursue their own happiness. However, humans are not autonomous objects without feelings. When the recent tsunami hit, many felt genuine compassion towards the victims. This kind of disaster is not a normal part of life and millions have given freely to help alleviate the suffering caused because they value human life. Hong Kong, measured first on the Heritage Foundation’s Index of Economic Freedom has given the highest per capita donations and this was done without compulsion. As to the money from taxpayers, this was not the government's to give. However this is a systemized structure that takes time to change and it is still preferable to use taxpayer money to help the tsunami victims rather than financing dictatorial regimes such as North Korea, Zimbabwe or Cuba.

Some apologists for altruism reject its politics but keep its morality. Their good capitalist builds a fortune and then gave it away. For example, Andrew Carnegie was a great businessman who advocated lousy philosophy. If he had seen that his own life was the proper standard of value he would have realized his real virtue was not in giving his fortune away, but rather in using his brilliant mind to produce something that would make his life better. As a side result, he produced many jobs and a lot of steel. (Of course this does not mean government should give special favours to business either.)

Isn’t it better to protect the rights of people like Carnegie so they can be free to bring more benefits to us? Shouldn’t we have more capitalism and less socialism or to put it differently - more rational self-interest and less altruism?

Email us to learn more about Capitalist Solutions

info@capitalist-solutions.com