Toohey's 5 Strategies of Altruism
“It’s only a matter of discovering the lever. If you learn how to rule one single man’s soul, you can get the rest of mankind. It’s the soul, Peter, the soul. Not whips or swords or fire or guns. That’s why the Caesars, the Attilas, the Napoleons were fools and did not last. We will. The soul, Peter, is that which can’t be ruled. It must be broken” (4:14).
"Guilty individuals are weakened and much easier to manipulate and rule."
Keeping them confused helps also....difficult to have strong convictions that you'll fight for when you're weak and confused... and just want to 'belong'.. blaht.
So... number 6, "do not notice, do not question, do not judge."
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wgN1sLcA...
But Robert Stadler illustrates the flip side of that. He grew to hate people and sought dominion over them by brute force. His only real quarrel with Project X was that he didn't build it, and he didn't think far-enough ahead to sieze it. Someone else did, and we know how that worked out.
But about the soul: even Rand resisted any attempt to reduce soul or mind to material chemistry only. That left her with a dilemma she never resolved.
Of course it did. But she never considered the alternative.
I think you want to make a religious point here, which you are not making directly.
We cannot discuss the soul unless we are willing to define it and understand how it got there...very slippery ground for evolutionists. Also, if the evolutionist says, "well the soul is the term by which we use to describe that part of man we do not understand," then you cannot conclude that evolution is fact...it remains a theory and a untenable one at that.
Have you read The Fountainhead? If so, you have taken her out of context. Every word has a context and in this context, it is not a Judeo-Christian, mystical, metaphysical "soul." It represents a person's motivation, drive, their reason for wanting to exist-pointedly not mystical. Toohey, as presented, had an interesting take on religion. He saw it as manipulative. But after reflection, he decided socialism was a far better way of manipulating people. But that is not the subject of the post.
"You cannot even discuss what is behind altruism without understanding this.."
Actually the term was first defined by Comte, and is the antonym for "egoism." "vivre pour autrui" ("live for others")-this is the origin of the word "altruism." I completely understand the concept and its origin. It was actually accepted by secular humanists of the 19th century who were inspired by the publication of "Origins of Species" and formed groups. Basically he worked to divorce the mysticism from religion, and in my opinion, his definition does a better job of getting down to the point than religion.
I will conceded your further points since we are redefining terms based on the immediate contextual philosophical doctrine in play.
My definitions, for the sake of philosophic argument...
Soul = one's id. One's mental identity. I believe it is the sum of one's memories, experiences...sense of self. It does define one's character. It need be nothing more. No mysticism required
Altruism: Putting other's needs above self in their hierarchy making one's self subservient... a slave.
One should give freely to others because it pleases, provides return, good will, or even if it is just a good feeling; not out of compulsion, a sense of less worth, self diminution, or guilt, resulting in self deprivation. This is not equality. It is undeserved self immolation.
The article refers to the concept of altruism as a strategy and/or a tactic of and/or by the weak. I’m debating whether an argument that altruism cannot be “utilized” independently of the consent of the strong shows that it is actually a tactic/strategy of the strong.
Police Arrest 90-Year-Old and Two Pastors for Feeding Homeless People:
http://nationofchange.us8.list-manage.co...
When does voluntary charity morph into mandatory self-sacrifice? Where does self-interested contribution to the wider societal welfare become legislated (involuntary) expropriation? This is a fascinating case of concept and context evolution when government steps in. He is not to feed the homeless "in public". He does it in civil disobedience and gets repeatedly arrested. He also runs a culinary school to teach some of these homeless skills so they can get jobs. I would amend the definition of "altruism" as being involuntary subservience. Of course, there are subtle psychological techniques to shame, cajole and influence people voluntarily to accept self-denial and subservience. Stephen Hicks describes several, and Toohey is a master practitioner.
People seem to have trouble with the idea of meeting in the middle: neither sacrificing themselves for others nor sacrificing others to themselves.
This really resonated with me today. So many of a christian background that I deal with on a daily basis have the hardest time with this concept. It's refreshing to see others see the danger of sacrifice as I do. In explaining this to one man in particular, (when almost reciting the oath verbatum...) He asked me, 'how can we divy resources or maintain community if we do not sacrifice something of ourselves to the benefit of another?' It was beyond him to see how mutual self-interest is the motor which can drive joint ventures, encourage fairness in our dealings and promote the most loyal and respectful types of relationships.. all the while, never damaging one another in the process. Once you experience such a just way of living, it changes your perspective, permanently.
That altruism meme dies hard; it is both pernicious and tenacious.
and Cloward/Piven strategies, which they complement,
to call these the set of Progressive strategies at work
right now in the U.S. -- j
Gail Wynand had the same behavior, but he overcame it.