The role of the individual within a society appears to be often not very clearly defined, with both catchphrases as 'pursuit of personal happiness' and 'for the greater good' being tossed around on a regular basis. On one hand we are being led to believe that we are free to choose our own path in life, while on the other we are being asked to unselfishly sacrifice ourselves for the benefit of all. Where does the border between these two concepts lie, one might ask?
Few words in the English language have such a persistently negative connotation as 'selfishness'. Its definition [1] is essentially that of an intense preoccupation with just oneself, which apparently by definition is an act that occurs at the cost of Others. This could lead one to assume that one's ideal existence in society is by definition one of servitude towards these Others, that one's own goals in life are by definition selfish unless they are completely altruistic, meaning the practice of self-sacrifice, without disregard for one's own state of mind or cost to one's own existence or life.
An often used example used to exalt the glory of altruism is that of a bird which pretends to be hurt while limping away from her nest which contains her eggs or newborn offspring. By risking her own life, she saves the lives of her offspring. Ironically, this ignores both the fact that procreation is a selfish act as at no point was the offspring consulted on its desire to come into existence, as well as that the entire issue with such birds being that they didn't form a society.
The goal of animals living together in flocks, herds, etc. is to provide mutual protection and safety in numbers, significantly raising one's survival chances relative to not knowing whether one will even wake up without other animals performing look-out duty for predators. Birds living in groups can scare away predators and warn each other when threats approach, as well as secure food and water sources much more easily than a lone bird could.
The entire point of human civilisation has been to allow ever larger groups of people to gather in societies capable of building ever better defences against natural threats; not just predators, but also diseases. A society depends on individuals working together, with everybody pitching in to the best of their abilities. Not for the Others, nor for just themselves, but for both.
A society is held together by social contracts, after all, much like any business transaction. As part of the individual's agreement to become a part of the society, they share the fruits of their skills and mind with the rest of society, receiving something of equal value in return. The entirety of this system depends on balance and mutual appreciation. It is thereby each individual's selfish desire to make society better, because it will benefit all. The concept of altruism destroys this as readily as greed would.
One of the primary tenets of humanism is the realisation that everything in society exists only because of the efforts of countless human beings, that everything begins and ends with the actions of humans, which underlines the need for mutual respect and trust. Over the past centuries we as a species have slowly come to terms with the fact that a society based on servitude of any type is not sustainable, with first slavery and then derivations of it being pushed to a place in society where it is less visible. Yet the new forms of these vile attacks on individual freedom are ever more insidious.
Thus we get such horrors as Neo-Liberalism, which forms a de-facto upper ruling class and the lower classes, much like back in the old feudal days and the centuries of aristocracies and monarchies. These are systems where the lower classes are shown the illusion of personal freedom and choice as they are guided into the system of self-sacrifice, while human traffickers bring in victims to be exploited in a manner that disregards any value to human lives. Even when not falling victim to modern slavery, when does one have time for self-development and exploration?
The sole goal of most is to get a job because society's contract defines that only those who work in an officially sanctioned and taxed position are doing their Duty for the Nation. It's the kind of system where the artist or brilliant scientist who had the misfortune of having been born into the wrong societal class has to work a menial job as a clerk at a post office or something like it, because the fact of being employed is valued higher than what fruits their true skills and mind are capable of producing. Those are merely curious happenstance.
The only good thing about this system is probably that it is by definition overflowing with self-sacrifice, self-exploitation and altruism. Of course, that is assuming that these are one's goals. Tragically, it comes at the cost of everything that makes an individual unique and with it their potential contribution to society.
In the end, we find that the new aristocracy is scraping together more and more wealth, while using tax heavens to dodge the only way that they could have contributed anything useful to society. Meanwhile, the lower classes are being asked to sacrifice a bit more every time. Whenever the stock markets take a dive it aren't the bankers or politicians or CEOs who have to deal with the consequences, but instead the lower classes are told to 'show solidarity during these difficult times' as their tax money is funnelled into the pockets of well-tailored suits.
This makes altruism nothing but a tool to be used for the sake of greed, to cynically exploit Others by breaking the social contract of mutual trust.
Maya
[1] https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/selfishness
No comments:
Post a Comment