August 13, 2005
Altruistic Military Service
JohnGalt said some nice things about me in comments last week. Before this comity gets out of hand, I thought I'd better pick a fight!
I'll join you in denouncing altruism when it is some crackpot gub'mint coercion wealth redistribution scheme. This morning I was thinking that military service was the highest mark of altruism.
I know that you also value military service highly. Surely it is not in the best interest of a single person or that person's family to risk life for a nation. Yet, thankfully, they do.
I'm sure you've thought of this -- is this the altruism loophole?
UPDATE: I should be clearer. This question was inspired by the concept of service to country. I just finished Walter Stahr's excellent biography of John Jay. Jay, like so many of the founding fathers, gave his adult life in service to American liberty. Indeed while Jefferson took time off to build Monticello, and Washington retired early to Mount Vernon, Jay went from Chief Justice to diplomat to Governor. When he finally retired to spend time with his wife, Sarah Livingston Jay died.
Was it not altruistic to give so much to a cause?
Altruism is the moral code of self-sacrifice and sacrifice is giving up a greater value for a lesser one or a non-value. Given these basic definitions, in what way was John Jay behaving according to the altruistic code of morality?
There are those of us who prefer death to living without freedom. Living without freedom is simply unending misery, hardly a value.
I can't say for certain this is how John Jay viewed his situation, but given how much all the Founding Fathers risked, their lives, their fortunes and their sacred honor, in order to establish a free society, I suspect it was.
Posted by: Russell Shurts at August 19, 2005 9:10 AMI've read one whole book on Mr. Jay, so I better be careful about passing myself off as an expert.
But Jay's service to the inchoate nation included several assignments he didn't want and that took him overseas and away from his beloved wife.
Some of these were necessary for liberty but like today's marine deployed in Iraq, it is beyond the call of personal liberty. It is, umm, altruism and I applaud it.
Posted by: jk at August 19, 2005 10:39 AMNo, it is not altruism.
From what you've told us of John Jay I discern that he apparently believed the assignments were important and necessary, and that he was the right man to take them. Regardless, he had a CHOICE in the matter. He traded one value, that of individual personal happiness derived from time with his wife, for another, that of individual personal happiness derived from his invaluable efforts in creating a nation founded in liberty. John Jay was one of the men who, with Benjamin Franklin, gave us a Republic, if we could keep it.
This brings us to the marines in Iraq. (And soldiers, and sailors and airmen.) Each man's value is derived from defending that Republic. When his buddy is killed by a roadside bomb, a lucky shot, or some nutjob wannabe martyr at the wheel of a bombmobile, he is devastated. But he goes on. He continues the fight. Don't demean his effort, dedication and patriotism by arguing that he is "obligated" or "bound by contract" or "only following orders." The greatest threat of these restrictions is a few years behind bars at Fort Leavenworth. No, the American soldier is not a human automaton. He fights for a value. He holds that value higher than his own life, if need be. That value is liberty.
Toby Keith wrote-
"I’m just tryin’ to be a father, raise a daughter and a son
Be a lover to their mother, everythin’ to everyone
Up and at ‘em bright and early, I’m all business in my suit
Yeah I’m dressed up for success, from my head down to my boots
I don’t do it for the money, 'cause there’s bills I that I can’t pay
I don’t do it for the glory, I just do it anyway
Providing for our future’s, my responsibility
Yeah I’m real good under pressure, being all that I can be
I can’t call in sick on Mondays when the weekend's been too strong
I just work straight through the holidays, and sometimes all night long
You can bet that I stand ready, when the wolf growls at the door
Hey I’m solid, hey I’m steady, hey I’m true down to the core.
And I will always do my duty no matter what the price
I’ve counted up the cost, I know the sacrifice
Oh and I don’t want to die for you, but if dyin’s asked of me
I’ll bear that cross with honor, cause freedom don’t come free.
I’m an American Soldier, an American
Beside my brothers and my sisters, I will proudly take a stand
When liberty’s in jeopardy, I will always do what’s right
I’m out here on the front lines, sleep in peace tonight
American Soldier, I’m an American, Soldier."
Yes there is a sacrifice, but it is not of a greater value for a lesser one, as altruism describes. It is of a great value for something greater - not just liberty, but the honor of defending it. Fighting to defend your values is, in reality, a selfish act.
Posted by: johngalt at August 19, 2005 3:28 PMAs for Mr. Jay, you hit the nail on the head. He thought all of his tasks important for the country and thought himself the best man for them.
I'm about to cry "Uncle" but I still don't get something. You say that free choice disproves altruism. So if I choose to quit my job and work for a soup kitchen, that's not altruism?
Posted by: jk at August 19, 2005 7:56 PMNot exactly. One can choose altruism, but if he does so he has no one but himself and those who taught him to blame.
If you choose to work for a soup kitchen and endure a reduction in material compensation for doing so, you have chosen to act altruistically. But this is not a FREE choice. It is made not by a free mind, but one held captive by a code of altruism that has been taught to it.
It is the code that, taken to its extreme application, allows suicide bombers to act as they do. It is a poison to human life, and therefore to human minds. A tiny amount of this poison is no more beneficial than a lethal dose.
In Islamic societies altruism is taught in the name of God. In western societies altruism is taught in the name of God and of "society" or "the state." In all the world, the effect is the same. The only difference is degree.
The antithesis of altruism is individualism. Instead of teaching our children that their entry to heaven will be judged, after death, by their sacrifices in life, we must teach them to "live, as if the Earth was a heaven." (Because if everyone lived that way, it WOULD be a heaven!)
Posted by: johngalt at August 20, 2005 1:00 PM | What do you think? [5]