Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!genrad!decvax!harpo!floyd!vax135!ariel!houti!trc
From: trc@houti.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.politics
Subject: Altruism vs morality
Message-ID: <330@houti.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 29-Jun-83 18:20:33 EDT
Article-I.D.: houti.330
Posted: Wed Jun 29 18:20:33 1983
Date-Received: Thu, 30-Jun-83 03:27:33 EDT
Lines: 46

Response to F. Fite on individual rights and morality:

Perhaps some of my notes have not gotten through to your site.  I have
posted a number of notes describing the objective basis for individual
rights.  Practically every other note has at least mentioned that the 
basis of individual rights is the individual human life.

Perhaps what I have left out is a denunciation of altruism.
To make it clear - altruism (along with mysticism) is one of the
ideas that is rotting our civilization from within.  Altruism
is the idea that individuals should sacrifice their own interests
for others, with no desire or hope of any benefit for themselves.
The basis given for altruism is either mysticism (do it because God 
or Allah (etc) says it is the thing to do), or "power to the people".
Either way, it boils down to arbitrary power of some over others' lives.  
There is no way to derive individual rights from altruism - they are 
incompatible.

Some might argue that people could be benevolent,  under altruism, and 
*act* as if they were respecting rights.  But the very fact that it is
considered as an act of benevolence, rather than an obligation one accepts
by claiming to be human, contradicts the idea of "rights".  A right is
that which one should have regardless whether one does in fact get it.
If one's rights are respected by others, it is not benevolence by the others, 
but simply doing what is correct.  If those rights are violated by others,
the rights still exist, and the violators have acted immorally.

	Altruism would claim as a right the ability of some group (the 
priests or the masses) to demand anything of any individual.  That is, 
it would not only be all right for them to do so, but the individual would 
be evil if he resisted.  (Note:  an obligation to respect rights is not 
the same as a Duty.  Duty implies something must be done without any reason 
other than that some superior entity demands it.  "Duty to" can often be 
replaced by "Obey all whims of" - "Duty to the nation" becomes "Obey all 
whims of the nation".  An obligation is based upon a personal choice.)

If you truly WANT to find a basis for a valid government, you have only 
to read the work of Ayn Rand.  She takes practically every common argument, 
claim, and idea of the altruist brand and exposes them for what they are - 
Anti-human life.  If you are bored by philosophy, try "Atlas Shrugged",
a novel which is interesting simply as a novel - though it also has several
speeches by characters, in which they effectively summarize the ideas that 
have been presented.  

	Tom Craver
	houti!trc