One of my favourite film scenes is the climax of Amelie.
I shall not spoil it, but suffice to say it expresses the central theme of the
film: a young woman who is a natural altruist learns all so how to take care of
her SELF, and she finds this joy through an other.
The notion is that if all lives matter, as an altruist
understands, then the altruist’s life matters as well. Doing what is good for
YOU is of no issue so long as it does no harm to others, and a naturally
empathic person will all ways be able to pull this off.
The very presence of altruists in society is what makes
it possible to have your needs met without having to compromise any one else’s.
The willingness to give is what makes it permissible to take.
Yet there is an undercurrent of Satanism in our
contemporary culture that portrays altruism as weakness. It vilifies altruists
as having malintent whilst all the while exploiting them. The premise for this
attitude is that to be kind is to be weak and to be weak is to be bad. So it is
unfavourable to risk personal loss even to those who have taken that same risk
and suffered the same loss. Though there’s no justice in denying the less
fortunate, for they are often victims of their own good graces and not random
chance, the Satanic cynic perpetually blames the victim for making the more
innocent choice. At an extreme, the Satanist even exploits the victim further
by insisting that the victim owes some thing unto the Satanist. The Satanist
will ape kindness but only with the expectation of reward. Genuine kindness
needs no reward from its recipients; it only needs to replenish its resources
somewhere else. So debt is an instrument of control by the cynics whilst charity
towards those in need and from those in excess is the way of the altruist. Only
the latter way can end the struggle between individuals for power, for, as
stated in the prior paragraph, only by being willing to sacrifice can one make
possible the receiving without the TAKING, taking being a term used for
exploitative practices that end up in a game of zero sum.
The worldview of the altruist is not one of an endless
struggle of individuals but of a merger that at the same time respects and
enhances the integrity of EACH individual. It is only because this ideal is so
beautiful, especially when put effectively into practice, that so many
intellectuals turn to Marxism. There is no other underlying cause for the
Marxist trend except for the basic logic of human development, both on the
individual level of moral growth and upon the collective level of mutual
prosperity.
So it follows that an altruist like Amelie can enjoy the
fruits of her actions with a clean conscience for she simply treats herself to
the same kindness as she treats others. Yet the Satanic undercurrent seeks to
vilify her, first by leveling with her and aping friendship, and secondly by
blaming her by avenue of this same binding bond.
A true altruist gives to those in need and takes from those
in excess. Yet a false altruist gives to the same people whom he takes from and
demands the same exchange. This is atrocious behaviour. It is exclusive,
binding, controlling, and dubious. It does not assess debt by what is necessary
but by the PREFERENCES of the individual, even if that individual operates in
an environment of self-inflicted privilege.
The Satanist insists that since life is a game of
zero-sum and private debts then the altruist is only entitled to the support of
those she helps. Yet those she helps, to the degree that that same help was
needed, rarely if ever gain the power to re-pay her. If they do, it might be
forgotten that she’d made the contribution to begin with.
The Satanist cannot accommodate a person who does not reciprocate.
Yet this behaviour is all most cruelly laughable. What is there to reciprocate
if the Satanist is but doing his job? The altruist EXPECTS all others to be as
altruistic as she is, for altruism is a good and it is in the nature of a
generous person to perceive the GOOD in all others. Unfortunately, it is
likewise that the confused and arrogant are heir to a projection upon others of
their own self-interest. What renders the altruist the more enlightened of the
two is that the vision is sensible. If all men serve one an other, their way of
life is sustainable. Yet to see ego in an other person is to find little
solidarity; only debt can keep the hostile Other in check. Egoism inevitably
produces a zero-sum game, even in people who are not as egoistic but are simply
suspected (falsely) of ego and malintent.
Malintent its self becomes warped in such a world view
for it becomes relative rather than absolute. This renders the Satanist a
hypocrite, for he will insist that malintent is relative when he is himself
accused of it, yet he will treat it as Absolute in his own accusations. When
cornered with the facts of these contradictions, he pretends that he is less of
a hypocrite than the rest of the world because he admits to it. In fact, we
have even less reason to believe him when he does so, for it is of course in
the NATURE of a hypocrite to accuse others of hypocrisy, and if some one is
unapologetically hypocritical it is a statement of intent to project evil upon
others and to assign false blame for one’s own shortcomings. It does not
vindicate the blame nor establish the guilt of any other.
The altruist is entitled to the fruits of the world; her
journey is to FEEL this sense of self-entitlement, for she has earned it by
virtue not of any one individual debt but rather the very world that she has
helped to create in her own image. Yet Satanists are threatened by this world.
Their lust for power corrupts them, but they are much too insecure to compete
with the altruists, so they begin to seek leveling camaraderie as a Trojan
Horse for their agenda to defile the altruist.
At first the Satanist pretends towards kindness and does
not require payment. Yet at moments of extreme frustration the debt occurs. The
Satanist then performs an insulting pantomime of the victim, pretending towards
a victimhood that never happened but that was the invention of a man who did
not get what he PREFERRED. Preferences are the instruments of the privileged;
to forego the preferring ego one must sacrifice for others. This the Satanist
only PRETENDS to do.
The virtuous man is known by his fruits. His acts of
self-interest are totally harmless. Yet since they threaten the Satanic agenda
the Satanist is obligated to resort to manipulation, pretending that in fact
objective harm was done. This is a long-held grudge that the Satanist
ultimately uses to ROB the altruist of the altruist’s most dear treasure. This
treasure is usually non-material (though not immaterial), so its value as
property cannot be traced. Yet the treachery is objective. The Satanist
delivers the last stroke by insisting that this was part and parcel with the
altruist’s debt. The Satanist apes the victim one last time, insisting that he
only wanted to be happy for once after all the sacrifices he had made for the
altruist. He then reminds cunningly the altruist of all the times the altruist
had acted out and all the harm the altruist had done. Yet in fact no harm was
ever done by the altruist that was not self-inflicted by his envious witnesses.
The altruist simply acted in accord with Nature. He wanted only to participate
in a common human life, and this did no harm. The voice of the Satanist must
not be rendered as equal to that of an altruist. He is not entitled to pretend
towards victimhood. His guilt is written in his manifesto. One man occupies a
world of mutual compassion that must be protected from greed and competition.
The other man occupies a tormented and fragmented world of fear and
manipulation. The altruist all ways acts in such a way that only one person
could be excluded: the parasite. Any one can follow an altruist’s path, and
even if the altruist receives a special personal reward it is due unto him for
his valour. The parasite uses no valour in taking that same reward from the
altruist as payment; if that valour were not working in his favour, the
Satanist would condemn it. In fact, it was that very valour that the Satanist
had blamed for the initial offense that would now seem to justify this new one.
Yet all this evidences is that the Satanist uses others’ valour to his
purposes, and when he cannot do so he condemns it for it was of no benefit to
his own plot. The Satanist HAS no valour or courage of his own; he is the
weaker of the two by any objective evaluation.
When confronted with the objectivities of his treachery,
the Satanist says what the altruist was much too generous to say before of the
Satanist: that the offense is the result of simply not getting what one wanted.
In fact, it was the SATANIST who ever acted out of such a sense of
self-entitlement. The altruist who is accused of this same sin is only “guilty”
of wanting his due, for he had all ways meant well towards others and was
entitled to the same kindness in expectation; he too is an object in his own
world, and as object he deserves like treatment. Yet the Satanist cannot afford
this. For the Satanist the self-as-object is all ways an enemy to other
objects. This is a function of the Satanist’s self-as-subject, which
subjectifies the world as a zero-sum war game. To the altruist, the
self-as-subject is no different from the Other-as-Object or the self-as-object;
it may not even be distinct from the Other-as-subject. All subjects are to be
treated with respect as objects, up until their subjectivity becomes
destructive towards other objects.
The ultimate give-away that the altruist is in the
objective Right is the very absurdity of his conflict with the Satanist. The
Satanist proves his point by being a narcissist, yet he all so by so doing
proves the LIMIT of his point. In the Satanist’s company, the altruist all ways
suffers the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune, and these are none other
than the WILL of his oppressor who pretends to be his friend.
Once the altruist has the courage to take a leap of
faith, he might find that he is an end in and of himself. Less cynical people,
even if they seem jaded by demeanour, accommodate his needs, and he can see the
world of mutual altruism for once from the subjectivity of a self-as-object. So
it is that subject and object are finally married, the martyr becomes a
saviour, and the Knight of Infinite Resignation becomes the Knight of Pure Faith,
a la Kierkegaard. The world is no longer a futile attempt, but a working
system. The future caves in before the present, for the false fears upholding
this delusion are torn down.
The Satanist proves by betraying the altruist that life
CAN be a zero-sum game, but not that it HAS to be. It is not THE world that is
cruel, but HIS world. Once the altruist makes one change – to stop accommodating
the parasite – it becomes clear who the parasite ever was. And this is not of
course to be misconstrued as a formula for any one to use. To dismiss people as
parasitic does not prove you to be right; this reading of my logic is a fallacy
of reduction and of manipulation. It is rather that one who possesses the
VIRTUE of altruism will OBJECTIVELY find a better world with people who
ACTUALLY reciprocate his kindness rather than merely PRETENDING to. So it
becomes obvious that the world-view of the Satanist was just a private rung of
Hell that the Satanist himself was responsible for. By necessity, the Satanist
must all ways win those small battles, for he strikes the unsuspecting. Yet by
his victories he loses the larger WAR, which he had until this point drawn the
altruist away from by compelling him by vice of false debt to focus upon the
Satanist’s needs exclusively. The Satanist judges of the altruist for what the
altruist does outside of the friendship, but not when it is actually of value
to others, for the Satanist only regards others to the degree that they can be
used to encriminate the altruist and to thus keep the altruist in false debt
and away from this key transformation that comes about when the altruist DARES,
for ONCE, to be selfish. Only when the altruist turns selfish can the World be
seen for what it is: just. Yet a man who pretends towards altruism only with
the INTENT of being selfish fails from the very start.
Dm.A.A.
No comments:
Post a Comment