Christine Smith's Blog

Libertarian Dialogue – On Charity

A comment I received from a reader of my blog, Steve Gresh, poses an interesting question:

Christine,

I agree with your statement:

“Give of yourself, but force not others to give.”
- Christine Smith [from blog entry "Thoughts"]

I also agree with Ayn Rand’s statement:

“I swear, by my life and my love of it, that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor ask another man to live for mine.”
- Ayn Rand

There appears to be a contradiction between both statements, though. Both of you agree that it’s wrong to force others to sacrifice themselves. I wonder what Rand meant by “I will never live for the sake of another man.” I don’t think she meant to never “give of yourself.” Perhaps she meant give of yourself only if you believe that you will receive something that you value in exchange for what you give… -Steve Gresh

Your speculation, Steve, as to what Rand meant by that quotation is just that – speculation – as is mine which follows.

Personally, I interpret that quote from Rand’s Atlas Shrugged character John Galt, as meaning that as an individual, I will choose how I live my life – and you will choose how you live your life. I will provide and am responsible for myself; you will provide and are responsible for yourself. In other words, a man is an end to himself. He is not obligated to live for the sake of others nor does he seek others to do so for his existence.

I concur with you, that both she and I would agree “it’s wrong to force others to sacrifice themselves.” Forcing another to provide anything for another is a violation of his fundamental rights as a human being.

But her position on the importance or validity of charity or any form of voluntary giving, coming from objectivism and based also on interviews with her, likely differed from mine. I have always placed a strong importance on giving and helping in my life. In fact, I would say I place a very high value on helping others and those things I believe in and that is something Rand would probably have considered irrational, but which to me is a part of life dearly important to me to do. I don’t help other people or causes for any reason except that I wish to from my heart.

In my view, there is nothing inconsistent with loving oneself, and also loving others. I give to alleviate the suffering or enhance the well being of another, or to assist and help strengthen those who are doing work I believe in. When I choose to help, it’s a personal decision free from social obligation or government coercion. Thus, when I wrote “Give of yourself, but force not others to give,” it is a statement sharing of my personal commitment and spiritual belief.

There is nothing irrational about voluntarily helping others, but there is most certainly everything irrational and immoral about forcing people to help others.

But I take the emphasis of the quote itself to be on the freedom of the individual to be enslaved to none. I also interpret it to mean that one not place a sense of obligation for another above first their own provision. I think the emphasis in Galt’s quote is the freedom from any obligation but to oneself.

Without development of an individual’s character and values, there will not be be good relationships with others, nor much benevolence toward strangers, nor commitment to principle.

The Galt (Rand) quote you mentioned is also consistent with the realization I am able to more fully express love to others when I have first chosen to love myself (something few actually choose to do in life.)

Digressing slightly, but pertaining to this point: I feel it is similar to my long-held belief that one cannot truly love another if they do not first love themselves. I define this as becoming a whole person mentally, spiritually, emotionally and physically. One can be happy and fulfilled when they are passionate in what they do and believe.

A whole person is focused on their life, fulfilling themselves in whatever activities, work & beliefs important to them and pursuing which they want to achieve. They seek not to complete themselves with another person, they are already complete. But they may be receptive to another whole person with whom to joyfully share; in other words, they can be receptive to another complementing their life. Such a true experience of love between two persons (whether love in the romantic sense or love as between friends and family) takes place only between those who have been true to themselves first, then they have something to share. Thus, their choice of focusing on their own lives, happiness, values and character, has made them individuals capable of sharing with another who has done the same. It is the development of oneself which makes a meaningful relationship with another possible.

And on the contrary, I believe it doesn’t happen between those live always seeking the approval of other people rather than fulfilling themselves in life. Development of oneself as an individual must come first. After all, how can you effectively give or share with another, if you, yourself, are unhappy, empty and void of purpose?

There’s a great line in Rand’s The Fountainhead from protagonist Howard Roark, “To say ‘I love you’ one must first know how to say the ‘I’.”

I think that prerequisite applies as much between individuals as it does to the love we express through private charitable giving. At least, that’s how I view it and how I live.

Thus, should an individual wish to contribute money, time, or even sacrifice their life for a cause, that decision when done in freedom is entirely consistent with our liberty as individuals. We must live for that which we believe, and in some cases that may mean choosing to die for it. Such willing sacrifice for that which one values highly, appreciates, or loves, just as charitable giving, is in no way inconsistent with the message of liberty and personal responsibility. It is an expression emanating from the free will of an individual to use one’s life and resources which they have earned and developed as they so choose.

Voluntary giving to help others is the only true charity. Government taxation, rationalized to help the poor through various welfare programs, is legal thievery because it takes by force one’s income in order to give it to another. No one should be forced to help others. Nothing altruistic there, nothing charitable, nothing compassionate, nothing loving…but it is extreme exploitation of both the poor as well as those from whom the money is taken.

In a truly free society, in a libertarian society, philanthropy would be accomplished solely by individuals, charities, and churches who voluntarily choose to assist others.

You may find an article in the Ayn Rand Institute newsletter Impact, entitled “Discovering Ayn Rand’s Philosophy – Charity” of interest (page 3 on the pdf). Her views on charity as expressed there differs from my own, as I do not evaluate whether the person, organization, or cause to which I may give of my time, work, or money will benefit me directly. (Semantics may also cause differences in interpretation, as I get the feeling Rand’s usage and definition of the words “rational” and “altruism” differ from my own.)

I give because I view all others as my brothers and sisters, and to help even a stranger whom I may never see, is happiness in itself. Likewise, helping those who are doing good work (perhaps in areas I am unable or perhaps I feel they are being very effective for a cause I believe in) is important to me. I do not view the world in terms of scarcity, but in abundance. I do not feel I’ve “lost” anything when I give.

One’s own happiness comes first, but in that, or shall I say even as part of that for some, we may be happy when we also help others to have happiness or provision as well. Sometimes our help can assist them in beginning to create and realize a different, more rewarding life for themselves, or it may further a venture they’ve begun, educational or spiritual growth, or a dream which may prove not only a blessing to that individual -but sometimes in its achievement- a blessing to others as well.  So, I believe it is rational to help people and causes if you are led to do so.

Thank you, Steve, for writing with your comments upon my quote and Rand’s. I appreciated the opportunity to address your question and and share it and my answer with my readers.