💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › john-beverley-robinson-egoism.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 11:04:39. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

View Raw

More Information

➡️ Next capture (2024-06-20)

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Egoism
Author: John Beverley Robinson
Date: 2005
Language: en
Topics: egoist
Source: Retrieved on October 1, 2009 from http://www.greenanarchy.org/index.php?action=viewwritingdetail&writingId=184
Notes: Published in Green Anarchy issue #20

John Beverley Robinson

Egoism

There is no word more generally misinterpreted than the word egoism, in

its modern sense. In the first place, it is supposed to mean devotion to

self interest, without regard to the interest of others. It is thus

opposed to altruism — devotion to others and sacrifice of self. This

interpretation is due to the use of the word thus antithetically by

Herbert Spencer.

Again, it is identified with hedonism or eudaimonism, or epicureanism,

philosophies that teach that the attainment of pleasure or happiness or

advantage, whichever you may choose to phrase it, is the rule of life.

Modern egoism, as propounded by Stirner and Nietzsche, and expounded by

Ibsen, Shaw and others, is all these; but it is more. It is the

realization by the individual that they are an individual; that, as far

as they are concerned, they are the only individual.

For each one of us stands alone in the midst of a universe. We are

surrounded by sights and sounds which we interpret as exterior to

ourselves, although all we know of them are the impressions on our

retina and ear drums and other organs of sense. The universe for the

individual is measured by these sensations; they are, for him/her, the

universe. Some of them they interpret as denoting other individuals,

whom they conceive as more or less like themselves. But none of these is

his/ herself. He/she stands apart. His/her consciousness, and the

desires and gratifications that enter into it, is a thing unique; no

other can enter into it.

However near and dear to you may be your spouse, children, friends, they

are not you; they are outside of you. You are forever alone. Your

thoughts and emotions are yours alone. There is no other who experiences

your thoughts or your feelings.

No doubt it gives you pleasure when others think as you do, and inform

you of it through language; or when others enjoy the same things that

you do. Moreover, quite apart from their enjoying the same things that

you enjoy, it gives you pleasure to see them enjoy themselves in any

way. Such gratification to the individual is the pleasure of sympathy,

one of the most acute pleasures possible for most people.

According to your sympathy, you will take pleasure in your own happiness

or in the happiness of other people; but it is always your own happiness

you seek. The most profound egoist may be the most complete altruist;

but he knows that her altruism is, at the bottom, nothing but

self-indulgence.

But egoism is more than this.

It is the realization by the individual that she/he is above all

institutions and all formulas; that they exist only so far as he chooses

to make them her own by accepting them. When you see clearly that you

are the measure of the universe, that everything that exists exists for

you only so far as it is reflected in your own consciousness, you become

a new person; you see everything by a new light: you stand on a height

and feel the fresh air blowing on your face; and find new strength and

glory in it.

Whatever gods you worship, you realize that they are your gods, the

product of your own mind, terrible or amiable, as you may choose to

depict them. You hold them in your hand, and play with them, as a child

with its paper dolls; for you have learned not to fear them, that they

are but the “imaginations of your heart.”

All the ideals which people generally think are realities, you have

learned to see through; you have learned that they are your ideals.

Whether you have originated them, which is unlikely, or have accepted

somebody else’s ideals, makes no difference. They are your ideals just

so far as you accept them. The priest is reverend only so far as you

reverence him. If you cease to reverence him, he is no longer reverend

for you. You have power to make and unmake priests as easily as you can

make and unmake gods. You are the one of whom the poet tells, who stands

unmoved, though the universe falls in fragments about you.

And all the other ideals by which people are moved, to which people are

enslaved, for which humyns afflict themselves, have no power over you;

you are no longer afraid of them, for you know them to be your own

ideals, made in your own mind, for your own pleasure, to be changed or

ignored, just as you choose to change or ignore them. They are your own

little pets, to be played with, not to be feared.

“The State” or “The Government” is idealized by the many as a thing

above them, to be reverenced and feared. They call it “My Country,” and

if you utter the magic words, they will rush to kill their friends, whom

they would not injure by so much as a pin scratch, if they were not

intoxicated and blinded by their ideal. Most people are deprived of

their reason under the influence of their ideals. Moved by the ideal of

“religion” or “patriotism” or “morality,” they fly at each others’

throats — they, who are otherwise often the gentlest of neighbors! But

their ideals are for them like the “fixed ideas” of lunatics. They

become irrational and irresponsible under the influence of their ideals.

They will not only destroy others, but they will quite often sink their

own interests, and rush madly to destroy themselves as a sacrifice to

the all-devouring ideal. Curious, is it not, to one who looks on with a

philosophical mind?

But the egoist has no ideals, for the knowledge that his ideals are only

his ideals, frees her from their domination. She acts for his own

interest, not for the interest of ideals. She will neither hang a person

nor whip a child in the interest of “morality,” if it is disagreeable to

her to do so. He/she has no reverence for “The State.” She knows that

“The Government” is but a set of men, mostly as big fools as he is

himself, many of them bigger. If the State does things that benefit her,

he will support it; if it attacks her and encroaches on his liberty, she

will evade it by any means in his power, if she is not strong enough to

withstand it. He/she is a person without a country.

“The Flag,” that most people adore, as people always adore symbols,

worshipping the symbol more than the principle it is supposed to set

forth, is for the egoist but a rather inharmonious piece of patch-work;

and anybody may walk on it or spit on it if they will, without exciting

their emotion any more than if it were a tarpaulin that they walked upon

— or spat upon. The principles that it symbolizes, they will maintain as

far as it seems to their advantage to maintain them; but if the

principles require them to kill people or be killed themselves, you will

have to demonstrate to them just what benefit they will gain by killing

or being killed, before you can persuade them to uphold them.

When the judge enters court in his toggery, (judges and ministers and

professors know the value of toggery in impressing the populace) the

egoist is unterrified. She/he has not even any respect for “The Law.” If

the law happens to be to his advantage, she will avail himself of it; if

it invades her liberty she will transgress it as far as he thinks it

wise to do so. But she has no regard for it as a thing supernal. It is

to her the clumsy creation of them who still “sit in darkness.”

Nor does he bow the knee to Morality — Sacred Morality! Some of its

precepts she may accept, if he chooses to do so; but you cannot scare

her off by telling him it is not “right.” He usually prefers not to kill

or steal; but if she must kill or steal to save herself, he will do it

with a good heart, and without any qualms of “conscience.”

And “morality” will never persuade her to injure others when it is of no

advantage to himself. She will not be found among a band of “white

caps,” flogging and burning poor devils, because their actions do not

conform to the dictates of “morality,” though they have injured none by

such actions; nor will he have any hand in persecuting helpless girls,

and throwing them out into the street, when she has received no ill at

their hands.

To her friends — to those who deserve the truth from him, — she will

tell the truth; but you cannot force the truth from him because she is

“afraid to tell a lie.” He has no fear, not even of perjury, for she

knows that oaths are but devices to enslave the mind by an appeal to

supernatural fears.

And for all the other small, tenuous ideals, with which we have fettered

our minds and to which we have shrunk our petty lives; they are for the

egoist as though they were not.

“Filial love and respect” he will give to his parents if they have

earned it by deserving it. If they have beaten her in infancy, and

scorned her in childhood, and domineered over him in maturity, he may

possibly love them in spite of maltreatment; but if they have alienated

her affection, they will not reawaken it by an appeal to “duty”.

In brief, egoism in its modern interpretation, is the antithesis, not of

altruism, but of idealism. The ordinary person — the idealist —

subordinates their interests to the interests of their ideals, and

usually suffers for it. The egoist is fooled by no ideals: she/he

discards them or uses them, as may suit his own interest. If he/she

likes to be altruistic, they will sacrifice themselves for others; but

only because they like to do so; they demand no gratitude nor glory in

return