Essays
I WILL SCRAP MY BEGGING BOWL
WILL YOU?
By Sergei Borglum Hoff
[grandnephew of Gutzon Borglum, renowned patriot and sculptor of Mount Rushmore National Memorial]
This writing will provide support for the patriots who are determined to restore our fundamental rights. For the well-meaning Americans who are fearful and clearly misinformed, significant attention is also directed towards their patriotic struggles. As for the pseudo-patriots who express contentment with the social engineering of their lives by an oppressive nanny-state, they will not benefit from reading further. Because of an inability to accept responsibility for their lives, these nationally exalted paragons of docility have by now, bleated their way into the flock, shepherded towards the precipice. Until their grazing meadows of sweet-grass wither, they will not stray.
My next statement is one of sincere admiration for the politically enlightened men and women who are further trustworthy and liberty-committed. Contrary to the commonly held notion, acts of bravery are not limited to those Americans within the public safety professions. While their efforts are meritorious and command nationwide gratitude, other heroes live and work in our midst, with the noble purpose of restoring integrity to our Constitutional Republic. Such individuals are well aware of the message that I am about to deliver. These honorable people are confident and courageous enough to present the truth without prompting from anyone. Their voices will never be stilled or patriotic endeavors defeated. Yet, their sincerity of purpose and words of wisdom are seldom remembered and at no time applauded. Unlike the submissive majority, these genuine patriots are representative of our founding intent, sovereign dignity, and national strength. For them, enslavement by our government will never be an acceptable condition of life. They will remain free, or perish. If we are truly concerned Americans with national pride and clear conscience, then how can we not appreciate the value of their courageous efforts, and further honor such commitments to freedom and human rights? Ashamedly, we do not!
"I have sworn upon the altar of God, eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind of man."--Thomas Jefferson
Seldom are there more disturbing patriotic obligations than challenging acts of betrayal by our leaders and other public servants. This is particularly true when such perfidious and life threatening deeds draw unnatural responses of either praise or timidity from the injured citizenry. Given the sweeping abnormality of the people's behavior and magnitude of federal interference within our daily lives, concerned yet lesser persistent defenders of our founding principles will despairingly and wrongly conclude that it is time to surrender their freedoms. As for my response, I refuse to fearfully sit in this stinking puddle of national humiliation, and be browbeaten by bureaucratic hoodlums with titles that suggest honorable intent. As a sovereign American citizen my stance was foreordained; I shall not yield.
The very real dangers now facing our children demand that I put forth the following challenge:
Upon reading the next several lines, many individuals, not giving the personal and national ramifications of our constitutional crisis adequate thought, will label me un-American or unpatriotic for publicly expressing my unpopular views. A number of loyal, resolute, and knowledgeable Americans that speak in a similar vein are now under condemnation by the unenlightened masses, and two masterful weavers of disinformation--government propagandists and the mainstream news media. They have indeed spun a lengthy mythical yarn.
"The idea is quite unfounded that on entering into society we give up any natural right."--Thomas Jefferson to Francis Gilmer, [1816]
For the past forty years, I have witnessed a federal invasion of fifty sovereign states and the dismantling of our Bill of Rights by politicians and judges behaving in an unconstitutional and rebellious manner. Enough! I will scrap my begging bowl, and refuse to humbly ask that my unalienable rights be honored. Never again will I ignore my guiding principles or surrender my liberties, and be governed by officials with ambitions unworthy of defense, not one virtue to share with the people, and no shame for their betrayals. Their game of totalitarian chess has continued far too long, and it is time for the people of courage and independence to checkmate these elitist scoundrels.
Having rejected our intellectual capacity for reason and wisdom, we are insanely committing national suicide by following this out of control government, propelled by tyrannical public servants. Indeed, expressing blind faith in our politicians is certainly no indication of intellectual brilliance. Nor will such trust in federal agencies ever soar to the heights of commonsense.
Be always mindful that American politicians are excessively compensated public servants; not ennobled dandies from the Royal court. Scrap the begging bowl! Never kneel or stand in awe while instructing these servants on their duties. Our attitudes towards politicians must immediately change. Never request that the Constitution be obeyed. Demand, they are our servants! How much more illumination does this fact need before it can be readily grasped by the people? We are not subjects of a kingdom, and our attitude of subservience is repulsive to liberty-committed-patriots.
As citizens and constitutional overseers of governmental powers, we must authoritatively voice our constitutionally supported warnings to these servants of the people. We should never tolerate their broken campaign promises or lack of constitutional compliance. We would not retain the services of any other incompetent, uncooperative, or arrogant employee. Therefore, it is absurd for us to accept saboteurs, oath-breakers, and betrayers of the public confidence.
Our Founding Fathers did not endure the abuses of a tyrannical government, and learn nothing. Their constitutional creation is not a document of government sanctioned privileges, to be allotted out by contemporary miscreants in office. Ingeniously, they provided us with the Bill of Rights, which protects our Creator's gift of liberty.
"You have rights antecedent to all earthly governments; rights that cannot be repealed or restrained by human laws; rights derived from the Great Legislator of the Universe."--John Adams
The Constitution was conceived by the people and for the people, placing literal and enforceable limitations upon government. Additionally: Our Constitution is not symbolic of reluctant submission to individual liberties. To the contrary, our Founding Fathers heartedly endorsed the attributes of self-responsibility and individualism. Nor was the Constitution ever intended to be--as Socialist activism so absurdly argues--"a living, breathing document," with the potential of transforming unalienable rights into privileges. Enforcement of constitutional principles is our defense against tyranny.
In accordance with my understanding of their intent and doctrines, the spirits of our founders are troubled, as this formerly brave populace now lives in fear and under the yoke of an oppressive Socialist government, where our national and individual sovereignty flutters precariously in the wind. They behold our government as wasteful, incompetent, corrupt, and obscene.
Our Fathers grieve, as they further see this once noble nation of pioneering and patriotic citizens now betrayed by oath-breaking politicians, intrusive federal bureaucrats, and a warmongering president whose designedly false accusations are responsible for the maiming and slaughter of thousands. Not only does our Attorney General publicly advocate the use of detention camps for U. S. citizens suspected as having terrorist associations, but the humiliation and torture of helpless war prisoners is the expedient directive of the day. Tragically for our children and theirs, we the people have become blind to the corrupting leaders of our "Homeland."
The establishment of our Constitution demanded the display of courage and vigilance by a well-armed citizenry; its continued integrity will always necessitate the same. Look around you. Be observant! Question all actions of government and propaganda from the unethical news media. Fear, denials, and escapism will never reward us with liberty; every gain demands a sacrifice. The original patriotic spirit of revolutionary America must be revived both within our hearts and national consciousness.
"I have said that the Declaration of Independence is the ring-bolt to the chain of your nation's destiny; so, indeed, I regard it. The principles contained in that instrument are saving principles. Stand by those principles, be true to them on all occasions, in all places, against all foes, and at whatever cost."--Frederick Douglass
Declaration of Independence: "WE hold these Truths to be self-evident, that all Men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness--That to secure these Rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness."
If not already aware that the Declaration of Independence was directed towards King George the Third, I would be convinced that the signers were addressing our own suffocating government. Our government, in its oppression of the people that formed it, has far exceeded the tyranny of Britain. As a citizen of this misused nation, my duty requires that I ask if it is now time for "the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute new Government"? Do we the people need a second Declaration of Independence?
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable."--John F. Kennedy, White House speech [1962]
Our nation--intended as a Constitutional Republic--is in distress. And, not surprisingly, two paramount questions persist; requiring wisdom followed by courage, resolve, and strength. As did King George the Third, have our elected and appointed servants become so arrogant, and moved beyond the realm of reason, thereby compelling the formation of a new government by the people? If a new government is not called for, can we optimistically anticipate that restoration will be achieved through principled congressional intervention?
Regarding either potential, a large segment of the population shares similar anxieties yet remains ostensibly tranquil. For these patient but also determined individualists, the demoralizing and debilitating influences of Socialism will soon become unbearable. For the security of our nation, politicians must no longer ridicule such concerns as being irrelevant, nor be permitted to place their self-serving interests above the rights of the people and the Constitution. For a servant to mock his master's anger is damn unwise.
Millions of honorable Americans fear and mistrust our government for numerous valid reasons. Such nationwide anxieties were never intended by our Founding Fathers. As a mass consciousness, this environment is preposterous, unhealthy, and intolerable. We the people have foolishly nurtured this parasitic bureaucracy; it is now our duty to starve it. If we fail to acquire the necessary courage and fall short of this defensive responsibility, it will surely suck life's freedoms from our children and theirs.
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily lives, and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom."--John F. Kennedy
To say that I hate government would be inaccurate; it is a machine. For the efficient performance of any society government is necessary, but its power and interference with the owner/operator must be constrained. I have never authorized bureaucrats and politicians to exercise a power of attorney over my professional or personal affairs. Nor have I ever relinquished my unalienable rights to the same in order to ensure my safety or for any other reason. All self-governing patriotic Americans are duty-bound to resist, and publicly condemn unconstitutional intrusions. As a beginning, the deceptively labeled "USA Patriot Act" must be repealed. It is unconstitutional and an insult to genuine American patriots.
"I have little interest in streamlining government or in making it more efficient, for I mean to reduce its size. I do not undertake to promote welfare, for I propose to extend freedom. My aim is not to pass laws, but to repeal them. It is not to inaugurate new programs, but to cancel old ones that do violence to the Constitution, or that have failed in their purpose, or that impose on the people an unwarranted financial burden. I will not attempt to discover whether legislation is 'needed' before I have first determined whether it is constitutionally permissible. And if I should later be attacked for neglecting my constituents' interests, I shall reply that I was informed their main interest is liberty and that in that cause I am doing the very best I can."--Arizona Republican Sen. Barry Goldwater, from his book "The Conscience of a Conservative."
There is nothing moral in our government forcibly taking from the earners and builders of this nation and then doling out the booty to the undeserving. This practice is socialistic, but properly called extortion. The United States Constitution does not recognize a Socialist form of government. Liberty has no correspondence with Socialism! Any suggestions or attempts to make changes in the direction of Socialism quell the "American Dream." Such behavior is nothing other than treason.
This nation belongs to the sovereign people; not the government. And government becomes the oppressor when we the people, supported by constitutional law, judge it to be so. Given the Republican and Democrat stranglehold on our government, I now judge it to be a subverter of constitutional law, a despoiler of morality, and a menace to my children.
An authority to enact and enforce unconstitutional laws does not legitimately or morally exist. Congress lacks the authority to enact laws that run contrary to the principles of our Constitution (Supreme Law of the Land). Such laws are a product of outlaw legislation, yet sustained by a corrupted U. S. Supreme Court and enforced with federal guns.
"[No] degree of power in the hands of government [will] prevent insurrections."--Thomas Jefferson to James Madison [1787]
I shall further refuse to conceal my contempt for subjugators of a sovereign people. When they are not enslaving us through taxation, they are busily forging our chains of enfeebling and imprisoning Socialist legislation. They have disgraced and sold us into a lifetime of servitude to Bully-Brother. Their fraudulent conduct has become the rule rather than the exception. It must stop!
Self-preservation demands that these unstable mentalities be removed from office. Today, most politicians and bureaucrats are either unscrupulous or incompetent and should step down from their gilded pedestals. If they refuse, we the people must strive to constitutionally expel them through impeachment or the ballot box.
Our liberty-committed Fathers were slanderously labeled and prosecuted by the British Empire as traitors and terrorists. Many lost their property or were put to death as a result. The Republicans and Democrats, spurred by the "New World Order" policies of the current and past two administrations, will do no less in order to halt resistance to their unconstitutional behavior, and destroy our present-day defenders of freedom.
Do not permit this government and media to divert your attention elsewhere. Shun these bureaucrats and their Socialist media conspirators when they identify your next friend or foe. Consult your conscience before condemning genuine American patriots who are prepared to sacrifice, fight, and possibly die for freedom and the preservation of our nation's founding principles. Indeed, they stand between us and total enslavement. Many have already forfeited their upright reputations, basic comforts, and property; some have lost their lives. We must honor and support these brave patriots; they are our fathers and mothers, brothers and sisters, sons and daughters.
Government is the master of prevarication, and can easily deceive the unwitting. It is doing so now in regards to pre-knowledge of the September 11th terrorist attacks. Do not accept my words as fact, but I beseech all honorable Americans to seek and demand the truth regarding government deception. Use your own intelligence to discover these facts. You take responsibility! You investigate! You be the judge! If we are sincere in our efforts to restore constitutional government, then we must be scrupulously informed, consistent, and thorough in every action.
The Republican and Democrat loyalists are destroying our nation. The November elections will provide us with the opportunity to topple George Bush from his imperial throne, oust all cowardly Representatives, and hold one-third of the Senators accountable for their un-American deeds. By reelecting over and over again, politicians with unchanging impoverished values, we cannot logically entertain thoughts of justice, freedom, or the constitutional restoration of government. Such expectations are childish at best. At the worst, they are insane.
Not one campaign trail that we have followed thus far has led us to a constitutional destination. If we expect positive change then it is essential that only genuine patriots with constitutionalist principles be elected. Neither George Bush nor John Kerry will ever honor the Presidential Oath of Office or the founding principles that many thousands of loyal Americans have died for since the year 1776.
Government is ponderous, and our constitutional foundation is now crumbling; unless we the people quickly downsize government, the rubble that it sits upon will be our children's future.
If I ignore my guiding principles, they are of no benefit to me, my children, or our nation. Yes! I will scrap my begging bowl, and support Libertarian Party candidates. Will you?
How soon we forget history... Government is not reason. Government is not eloquence. It is force. And, like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master.
-- George Washington
What is the proper role of Government in a Free Society?
To answer this question, we must first understand what is meant by "government".
Government is the use of force. To govern means to control. The use of force is implicit in the definition of control. Otherwise, it would be "influence" rather than control. Even the good things that governments do involve the use of force somewhere, somehow. Sometimes government uses force directly to control behavior. Other times, government uses money taken by force to fund activities which would otherwise not involve the use of force.
Understanding that government is the use of force, the question then becomes:
What is the proper use of force in a free society?
To answer this question, we look at three types of force:
1. Initial Force. In any group of people, from 2 to 20 billion, there is no use of force until someone uses it first. Initial force is aggression or coercion.
2. Defensive Force. Defensive force is the use of force to defend your safety, rights, or property. You have the right to defend yourself, and the right to authorize others, such as those in government, to use defensive force in your behalf. Defensive force is survival.
3. Retaliatory Force. Retaliatory force is punishment of someone who has initiated force. If someone assaults you, you have the right to authorize government to punish those responsible in your behalf. Retaliatory force is justice.
Some people have suggested a fourth category of preemptive force but most examples of preemptive force, upon analysis, can be placed in one of the other three categories.
Libertarians, by definition, oppose the initiation of force. Some Libertarians are also pacifists and decline the use of any force. Libertarianism is broad enough to encompass pacifists. All oppose the initiation of force.
Some Libertarians are militants and have no qualms about defensive and/or retaliatory force. Libertarianism is broad enough to encompass militants. The common factor is the opposition to the initiation of force. Opposition to the initiation of force (the Non-Coercion Principle) is the essence of libertarian philosophy. Freedom is the absence of the initiation of force.
A robber cannot be "free" to steal your property, nor can a bully be "free" to strike you. The robber and bully have initiated force. The condition of freedom doesn't exist unless there is an absence of the initiation of force.
Consequently, a "right" cannot be something which must be had at the expense of others. You have the right to earn a living, but not to compel others to provide your living.
Libertarians apply the Non-Coercion Principle to ALL human behavior. It doesn't matter if the initiators of force are in or out of government. Government doesn't confer some mystical right on some to violate the rights of others. If it is wrong for a person to commit rape as an individual, it must be equally wrong for a person to commit rape as an agent of government. If somebody takes your property without your permission, it is theft (an initiation of force). It's theft regardless of whether the loot is used to buy drugs or to feed the poor. It is theft regardless of whether there is one thief or 200 million thieves. It is theft regardless of whether the gang calls itself "The Bloods" the "Cryps" or "The Internal Revenue Service".
Where government exists in a free society, its role should be limited to defending and/or retaliating against those who initiate force. Government in a free society should not be the initiator of force. Some laws, such as those prohibiting murder, rape, robbery and fraud, are laws against the initiation of force. Enforcement of such laws is the application of defensive and/or retaliatory force, and is appropriate for government in a free society.
Other laws constitute an initiation of force. Government should not initiate force to seize the property of individuals. Government should not initiate force to compel service to the state. Government should not initiate force to impose lifestyles or moral codes.
Government should not initiate force even when "it's for your own good".
In a free society, you have property rights. You can use honestly acquired property in any way that does not constitute initiation of force or fraud, trespass on the property of others, or violate agreements you have voluntarily entered into. You decide which charities to support, and don't have to sacrifice your property against your will for purposes that others decide on rather than you.
In a free society, you have personal rights. You can live however you want to, so long as you don't initiate force or fraud against others or their property. You decide what risks to take, what to believe in, and how to entertain yourself.
Property rights and personal rights are really the same. Personal rights are based on property rights because you own your own life, your body, and your mind.
Ownership and use of honestly acquired property is not, in and of itself, an initiation of force and therefore does not violate the rights of others. If someone owns an AK-47 and uses it to murder school children, it is the murder that is the initiation of force, not the ownership of the AK-47. Murder should be prohibited and punished regardless of the weapons used.
If someone owns and uses drugs, and steals to buy more drugs, it is the theft that is the initiation of force. Theft should be prohibited regardless of what the loot is spent on. The use of drugs is not the initiation of force.
If you own or rent a sexually explicit video and commit a sexual assault after viewing it, it is the sexual assault that is the initiation of force, not the viewing of the video. Rape should be prohibited whether "obscenity" is involved or not. Most people who view sexually explicit films do not commit sexual assaults.
In the old days, people sometimes had to answer to the church for their crimes. Some thought they could lessen the gravity of their offenses by claiming possession. "Your Holiness, the devil made me do it." What we often hear today is "Your Honor, the drugs made me do it" or "Your Honor, the pornography made me do it" or "Your Honor, my unhappy childhood made me do it."
With freedom comes responsibility. If you initiate force, you should be held fully accountable. No cop-outs, no devils, no shifting the blame to others or to inanimate objects. If you do not initiate force or fraud (a subtle form of force), you should be left alone and force should not be initiated against you by government or anybody else.
It's that simple.
from "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand
"For twelve years, you have been asking: Who is John Galt? This is John
Galt speaking. I am the man who loves his life. I am the man who does not
sacrifice his love or his values. I am the man who has deprived you of victims
and thus has destroyed your world, and if you wish to know why you are
perishing—you who dread knowledge—I am the man who will now tell you."
The chief engineer was the only one able to move; he ran to a television set and
struggled frantically with its dials. But the screen remained empty; the speaker
had not chosen to be seen. Only his voice filled the airways of the country—of
the world, thought the chief engineer—sounding as if he were speaking here, in
this room, not to a group, but to one man; it was not the tone of addressing a
meeting, but the tone of addressing a mind.
"You have heard it said that this is an age of moral crisis. You have
said it yourself, half in fear, half in hope that the words had no meaning. You
have cried that man's sins are destroying the world and you have cursed human
nature for its unwillingness to practice the virtues you demanded. Since virtue,
to you, consists of sacrifice, you have demanded more sacrifices at every
successive disaster. In the name of a return to morality, you have sacrificed
all those evils which you held as the cause of your plight. You have sacrificed
justice to mercy. You have sacrificed independence to unity. You have sacrificed
reason to faith. You have sacrificed wealth to need. You have sacrificed
self-esteem to self-denial. You have sacrificed happiness to duty.
"You have destroyed all that which you held to be evil and achieved all
that which you held to be good. Why, then, do you shrink in horror from the sight
of the world around you? That world is not the product of your sins, it is the
product and the image of your virtues. It is your moral ideal brought into
reality in its full and final perfection. You have fought for it, you have
dreamed of it, and you have wished it, and I—I am the man who has granted you
your wish.
"Your ideal had an implacable enemy, which your code of morality was
designed to destroy. I have withdrawn that enemy. I have taken it out of your
way and out of your reach. I have removed the source of all those evils you were
sacrificing one by one. I have ended your battle. I have stopped your motor. I
have deprived your world of man's mind.
"Men do not live by the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those who do.
The mind is impotent, you say? I have withdrawn those whose mind isn't. There
are values higher than the mind, you say? I have withdrawn those for whom there
aren't.
"While you were dragging to your sacrificial altars the men of justice,
of independence, of reason, of wealth, of self-esteem—I beat you to it, I
reached them first. I told them the nature of the game you were playing and the
nature of that moral code of yours, which they had been too innocently generous
to grasp. I showed them the way to live by another morality—mine. It is mine
that they chose to follow.
"All the men who have vanished, the men you hated, yet dreaded to lose,
it is I who have taken them away from you. Do not attempt to find us. We do not
choose to be found. Do not cry that it is our duty to serve you. We do not
recognize such duty. Do not cry that you need us. We do not consider need a
claim. Do not cry that you own us. You don't. Do not beg us to return. We are on
strike, we, the men of the mind.
"We are on strike against self-immolation. We are on strike against the
creed of unearned rewards and unrewarded duties. We are on strike against the
dogma that the pursuit of one's happiness is evil. We are on strike against the
doctrine that life is guilt.
"There is a difference between our strike and all those you've practiced
for centuries: our strike consists, not of making demands, but of granting them.
We are evil, according to your morality. We have chosen not to harm you any
longer. We are useless, according to your economics. We have chosen not to
exploit you any longer. We are dangerous and to be shackled, according to your
politics. We have chosen not to endanger you, nor to wear the shackles any
longer. We are only an illusion, according to your philosophy. We have chosen
not to blind you any longer and have left you free to face reality—the reality
you wanted, the world as you see it now, a world without mind.
p010
"We have granted you everything you demanded of us, we who had always
been the givers, but have only now understood it. We have no demands to present
to you, no terms to bargain about, no compromise to reach. You have nothing to
offer us. We do not need you.
"Are you now crying: No, this was not what you wanted? A mindless world
of ruins was not your goal? You did not want us to leave you? You moral
cannibals, I know that you've always known what it was that you wanted. But your
game is up, because now we know it, too.
"Through centuries of scourges and disasters, brought about by your code
of morality, you have cried that your code had been broken, that the scourges
were punishment for breaking it, that men were too weak and too selfish to spill
all the blood it required. You damned man, you damned existence, you damned this
earth, but never dared to question your code. Your victims took the blame and
struggled on, with your curses as reward for their martyrdom—while you went on
crying that your code was noble, but human nature was not good enough to
practice it. And no one rose to ask the question: Good?—by what standard?
"You wanted to know John Galt's identity. I am the man who has asked
that question.
"Yes, this is an age of moral crisis. Yes, you are bearing
punishment for your evil. But it is not man who is now on trial and it is not
human nature that will take the blame. It is your moral code that's through,
this time. Your moral code has reached its climax, the blind alley at the end of
its course. And if you wish to go on living, what you now need is not to return
to morality—you who have never known any—but to discover it.
"You have heard no concepts of morality but the mystical or the social.
You have been taught that morality is a code of behavior imposed on you by whim,
the whim of a supernatural power or the whim of society, to serve God's purpose
or your neighbor's welfare, to please an authority beyond the grave or else next
door—but not to serve your life or pleasure. Your pleasure, you have
been taught, is to be found in immorality, your interests would best be served
by evil, and any moral code must be designed not for you, but against
you, not to further your life, but to drain it.
"For centuries, the battle of morality was fought between those who
claimed that your life belongs to God and those who claimed that it belongs to
your neighbors—between those who preached that the good is self-sacrifice for
the sake of ghosts in heaven and those who preached that the good is
self-sacrifice for the sake of incompetents on earth. And no one came to say
that your life belongs to you and that the good is to live it.
"Both sides agreed that morality demands the surrender of your
self-interest and of your mind, that the moral and the practical are opposites,
that morality is not the province of reason, but the province of faith and
force. Both sides agreed that no rational morality is possible, that there is no
right or wrong in reason—that in reason there's no reason to be moral.
"Whatever else they fought about, it was against man's mind that all
your moralists have stood united. It was man's mind that all their schemes and
systems were intended to despoil and destroy. Now choose to perish or to learn
that the anti-mind is the anti-life.
"Man's mind is his basic tool of survival. Life is given to him,
survival is not. His body is given to him, its sustenance is not. His mind is
given to him, its content is not. To remain alive, he must act, and before he
can act he must know the nature and purpose of his action. He cannot obtain his
food without a knowledge of food and of the way to obtain it. He cannot dig a
ditch-or build a cyclotron—without a knowledge of his aim and of the means to
achieve it. To remain alive, he must think.
p020
"But to think is an act of choice. The key to what you so recklessly
call 'human nature,' the open secret you live with, yet dread to name, is the
fact that man is a being of volitional consciousness. Reason does not
work automatically; thinking is not a mechanical process; the connections of
logic are not made by instinct. The function of your stomach, lungs or heart is
automatic; the function of your mind is not. In any hour and issue of your life,
you are free to think or to evade that effort. But you are not free to escape
from your nature, from the fact that reason is your means of
survival—so that for you, who are a human being, the question 'to be or
not to be' is the question 'to' think or not to think.'
"A being of
volitional consciousness has no automatic course of behavior. He needs a code of
values to guide his actions. 'Value' is that which one acts to gain and keep,
'virtue' is the action by which one gains and keeps it. 'Value' presupposes an
answer to the question: of value to whom and for what? 'Value' presupposes a
standard, a purpose and the necessity of action in the face of an alternative.
Where there are no alternatives, no values are possible.
"There is only one fundamental alternative in the universe: existence or
non-existence—and it pertains to a single class of entities: to living
organisms. The existence of inanimate matter is unconditional, the existence of
life is not; it depends on a specific course of action. Matter is
indestructible, it changes its forms, but it cannot cease to exist. It is only a
living organism that faces a constant alternative: the issue of life or death.
Life is a process of self-sustaining and-self-generated action. If an organism
fails in that action, it does; its chemical elements remain, but its life goes
out of existence. It is only the concept of 'Life' that makes the concept of
'Value' possible. It is only to a living entity that things can be good or evil.
"A plant must feed itself in order to live; the sunlight, the water, the
chemicals it needs are the values its nature has set it to pursue; its life is
the standard of value directing its actions. But a plant has no choice of
action; there are alternatives in the conditions it encounters, but there is no
alternative in its function: it acts automatically to further its life, it
cannot act for its own destruction.
"An animal is equipped for sustaining its life; its senses provide it
with an automatic code of action, an automatic knowledge of what is good for it
or evil. It has no power to extend its knowledge or to evade it. In conditions
where its knowledge proves inadequate, it dies. But so long as it lives, it acts
on its knowledge, with automatic safety and no power of choice, it is unable to
ignore its own good, unable to decide to choose the evil and act as its own
destroyer.
"Man has no automatic code of survival. His particular distinction from
all other living species is the necessity to act in the face of alternatives by
means of volitional choice. He has no automatic knowledge of what is good
for him or evil, what values his life depends on, what course of action it
requires. Are you prattling about an instinct of self-preservation? An instinct
of self-preservation is precisely what man does not possess. An 'instinct' is an
unerring and automatic form of knowledge. A desire is not an instinct. A desire
to live does not give you the knowledge required for living. And even man's
desire to live is not automatic: your secret evil today is that that is
the desire you do not hold. Your fear of death is not a love of life and will
not give you the knowledge needed to keep it. Man must obtain his knowledge and
choose his actions by a process of thinking, which nature will not force him t9
perform. Man has the power to act as his own destroyer—and that is the way he
has acted through most of his history.
"A living entity that regarded its means of survival as evil, would not
survive. A plant that struggled to mangle its roots, a bird that fought to break
its wings would not remain for long in the existence they affronted. But the
history of man has been a struggle to deny and to destroy his mind.
"Man has been called a rational being, but rationality is a matter of
choice—and the alternative his nature offers him is: rational being or
suicidal animal. Man has to be man—by choice; he has to hold his life as a
value—by choice: he has to learn to sustain it—by choice; he has to discover
the values it requires and practice his virtues—by choice.
"A code of values accepted by choice is a code of morality.
"Whoever you are, you who are hearing me now, I am speaking to whatever
living remnant is left uncorrupted within you, to the remnant of the human, to
your mind, and I say: There is a morality of reason, a morality
proper to man, and Man's Life is its standard of value.
p030
"All that which is proper to the life of a rational being is the good;
all that which destroys it is the evil.
"Man's life, as required by his
nature, is not the life of a mindless brute, of a looting thug or a mooching
mystic, but the life of a thinking being—not life by means of force or fraud,
but life by means of achievement—not survival at any price, since there's only
one price that pays for man's survival: reason.
"Man's life is the standard of morality, but your own life is its
purpose. If existence on earth is your goal, you must choose your actions
and values by the standard of that which is proper to man—for the purpose of
preserving, fulfilling and enjoying the irreplaceable value which is your life.
"Since life requires a specific course of action, any other course will
destroy it. A being who does not hold his own life as the motive and goal of his
actions, is acting on the motive and standard of death. Such a being is a
metaphysical monstrosity, struggling to oppose, negate and contradict the fact
of his own existence, running blindly amuck on a trail of destruction, capable
of nothing but pain.
"Happiness is the successful state of life, pain is an agent of death.
Happiness is that state of consciousness which proceeds from the achievement of
one's values. A morality that dares to tell you to find happiness in the
renunciation of your happiness—to value the failure of your values—is an
insolent negation of morality. A doctrine that gives you, as an ideal, the role
of a sacrificial animal seeking slaughter on the altars of others, is giving you
death as your standard. By the grace of reality and the nature of life,
man—every man—is an end in himself, he exists for his own sake, and the
achievement of his own happiness is his highest moral purpose.
"But neither life nor happiness can be achieved by the pursuit of
irrational whims. Just as man is free to attempt to survive in any random
manner, but will perish unless he lives as his nature requires, so he is free to
seek his happiness in any mindless fraud, but the torture of frustration is all
he will find, unless he seeks the happiness proper to man. The purpose of
morality is to teach you, not to suffer and die, but to enjoy yourself and live.
"Sweep aside those parasites of subsidized classrooms, who live on the
profits of the mind of others and proclaim that man needs no morality, no
values, no code of behavior. They, who pose as scientists and claim that man is
only an animal, do not grant him inclusion in the law of existence they have
granted to the lowest of insects. They recognize that every living species has a
way of survival demanded by its nature, they do not claim that a fish can live
out of water or that a dog can live without its sense of smell—but man, they
claim, the most complex of beings, man can survive in any way whatever, man has
no identity, no nature, and there's no practical reason why he cannot live with
his means of survival destroyed, with his mind throttled and placed at the
disposal of any orders they might care to issue.
"Sweep aside those hatred-eaten mystics, who pose as friends of humanity
and preach that the highest virtue man can practice is to hold his own life as
of no value. Do they tell you that the purpose of morality is to curb man's
instinct of self-preservation? It is for the purpose of self-preservation that
man needs a code of morality. The only man who desires to be moral is the man
who desires to live.
"No, you do not have to live; it is your basic act of choice; but if you
choose to live,. you must live as a man—by the work and the judgment of your
mind.
"No, you do not have to live as a man; it is an act of moral choice. But
you cannot live as anything else—and the alternative is that state of living
death which you now see within you and around you, the state of a thing unfit
for existence, no longer human and less than animal, a thing that knows nothing
but pain and drags itself through its span of years in the agony of unthinking
self-destruction.
p040
"No, you do not have to think; it is an act of moral choice. But someone
had to think to keep you alive; if you choose to default, you default on
existence and you pass the deficit to some moral man, expecting him to sacrifice
his good for the sake of letting you survive by your evil.
"No, you do not have to be a man; but today those who are, are not there
any longer. I have removed your means of survival—your victims.
"If you wish to know how I have done it and what I told them to make
them quit, you are hearing it now. I told them, in essence, the statement I am
making tonight. They were men who had lived by my code, but had not known how
great a virtue it represented. I made them see it. I brought them, not a
re-evaluation, but only an identification of their values.
"We, the men of the mind, are now on strike against you in the name of a
single axiom, which is the root of our moral code, just as the root of yours is
the wish to escape it: the axiom that existence exists.
"Existence exists—and the act of grasping that statement implies two
corollary axioms: that something exists which one perceives and that one exists
possessing consciousness, consciousness being the faculty of perceiving that
which exists.
"If nothing exists, there can be no consciousness: a consciousness with
nothing to be conscious of is a contradiction in terms. A consciousness
conscious of nothing but itself is a contradiction in terms: before it could
identify itself as consciousness, it had to be conscious of something. If that
which you claim to perceive does not exist, what you possess is not
consciousness.
"Whatever the degree of your knowledge, these two—existence and
consciousness—are axioms you cannot escape, these two are the irreducible
primaries implied in any action you undertake, in any part of your knowledge and
in its sum, from the first ray of light you perceive at the start of your life
to the widest erudition you might acquire at its end. Whether you know the shape
of a pebble or the structure of a solar system, the axioms remain the same: that
it exists and that you know it.
"To exist is to be something, as distinguished from the nothing of
non-existence, it is to be an entity of a specific nature made of specific
attributes. Centuries ago, the man who was—no matter what his errors—the
greatest of your philosophers, has stated the formula defining the concept of
existence and the rule of all knowledge: A is A. A thing is itself. You
have never grasped the meaning of his statement. I am here to complete it:
Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification.
"Whatever you choose to consider, be it an object, an attribute or an
action, the law of identity remains the same. A leaf cannot be a stone at the
same time, it cannot be all red and all green at the same time, it cannot freeze
and burn at the same time. A is A. Or, if you wish it stated in simpler
language: You cannot have your cake and eat it, too.
"Are you seeking to know what is wrong with the world? All the disasters
that have wrecked your world, came from your leaders' attempt to evade the fact
that A is A. All the secret evil you dread to face within you and all the pain
you have ever endured, came from your own attempt to evade the fact that A is A.
The purpose of those who taught you to evade it, was to make you forget that Man
is Man.
p050
"Man cannot survive except by gaining knowledge, and reason is his only
means to gain it. Reason is the faculty that perceives, identifies and
integrates the material provided by his senses. The task of his senses is to
give him the evidence of existence, but the task of identifying it belongs to
his reason, his senses tell him only that something is, but what
it is must be learned by his mind.
"All thinking is a process of identification and integration. Man
perceives a blob of color; by integrating the evidence of his sight and his
touch, he learns to identify it as a solid object; he learns to identify the
object as a table; he learns that the table is made of wood; he learns that the
wood consists of cells, that the cells consist of molecules, that the molecules
consist of atoms. All through this process, the work of his mind consists of
answers to a single question: What is it? His means to establish the
truth of his answers is logic, and logic rests on the axiom that existence
exists. Logic is the art of non-contradictory identification. A
contradiction cannot exist. An atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither
can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept
man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total
sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in
one's thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one's mind and to
evict oneself from the realm of reality.
"Reality is that which exists; the unreal does not exist; the unreal is
merely that negation of existence which is the content of a human consciousness
when it attempts to abandon reason. Truth is the recognition of reality; reason,
man's only means of knowledge, is his only standard of truth.
"The most depraved sentence you can now utter is to ask: Whose
reason? The answer is: Yours. No matter how vast your knowledge or how
modest, it is your own mind that has to acquire it. It is only with your own
knowledge that you can deal. It is only your own knowledge that you can claim to
possess or ask others to consider. Your mind is your only judge of truth—and
if others dissent from your verdict, reality is the court of final appeal.
Nothing but a man's mind can perform that complex, delicate, crucial process of
identification which is thinking. Nothing can direct the process but his own
judgment. Nothing can direct his judgment but his moral integrity.
"You who speak of a 'moral instinct' as if it were some separate
endowment opposed to reason—man's reason is his moral faculty. A
process of reason is a process of constant choice in answer to the question:
True or False?—Right or Wrong? Is a seed to be planted in soil in order
to grow—right or wrong? Is a man's wound to be disinfected in order to save
his life—right or wrong? Does the nature of atmospheric electricity permit it
to be converted into kinetic power—right or wrong? It is the answers to such
questions that gave you everything you have—and the answers came from a man's
mind, a mind of intransigent devotion to that which is right.
"A rational process is a moral process. You may make an error at
any step of it, with nothing to protect you but your own severity, or you may
try to cheat, to fake the evidence and evade the effort of the quest—but if
devotion to truth is the hallmark of morality, then there is no greater, nobler,
more heroic form of devotion than the act of a man who assumes the
responsibility of thinking.
"That which you call your soul or spirit is your consciousness, and that
which you call 'free will' is your mind's freedom to think or not, the only will
you have, your only freedom, the choice that controls all the choices you make
and determines your life and your character.
"Thinking is man's only basic virtue, from which all the others proceed.
And his basic vice, the source of all his evils, is that nameless act which all
of you practice, but struggle never to admit: the act of blanking out, the
willful suspension of one's consciousness, the refusal to think—not blindness,
but the refusal to see; not ignorance, but the refusal to know. It is the act of
unfocusing your mind and inducing an inner fog to escape the responsibility of
judgment—on the unstated premise that a thing will not exist if only you
refuse to identify it, that A will not be A so long as you do not pronounce the
verdict 'It is.' Non-thinking is an act of annihilation, a wish to negate
existence, an attempt to wipe out reality. But existence exists; reality is not
to be wiped out, it will merely wipe out the wiper. By refusing to say 'It is,'
you are refusing to say 'I am.' By suspending your judgment, you are negating
your person. When a man declares: 'Who am I to know?'—he is declaring: 'Who am
I to live?'
"This, in every hour and every issue, is your basic moral
choice: thinking or non-thinking, existence or non-existence, A or non-A, entity
or zero.
"To the extent to which a man is rational, life is the premise directing
his actions. To the extent to which he is irrational, the premise directing his
actions is death.
p060
"You who prattle that morality is social and that man would need no
morality on a desert island—it is on a desert island that he would need it
most. Let him try to claim, when there are no victims to pay for it, that a rock
is a house, that sand is clothing, that food will drop into his mouth without
cause or effort, that he will collect a harvest tomorrow by devouring his stock
seed today—and reality will wipe him out, as he deserves; reality will show
him that life is a value to be bought and that thinking is the only coin noble
enough to buy it.
"If I were to speak your kind of language, I would say that man's only
moral commandment is: Thou shalt think. But a 'moral commandment' is a
contradiction in terms. The moral is the chosen, not the forced; the understood,
not the obeyed. The moral is the rational, and reason accepts no commandments.
"My morality, the morality of reason, is contained in a single axiom:
existence exists—and in a single choice: to live. The rest proceeds from
these. To live, man must hold three things as the supreme and ruling values of
his life: Reason—Purpose—Self-esteem. Reason, as his only tool of
knowledge—Purpose, as his choice of the happiness which that tool must proceed
to achieve—Self-esteem, as his inviolate certainty that his mind is competent
to think and his person is worthy of happiness, which means: is worthy of
living. These three values imply and require all of man's virtues, and all his
virtues pertain to the relation of existence and consciousness: rationality,
independence, integrity, honesty, justice, productiveness, pride.
"Rationality is the recognition of the fact that existence exists, that
nothing can alter the truth and nothing can take precedence over that act of
perceiving it, which is thinking—that the mind is one's only judge of values
and one's only guide of action—that reason is an absolute that permits no
compromise—that a concession to the irrational invalidates one's consciousness
and turns it from the task of perceiving to the task of faking reality—that
the alleged short-cut to knowledge, which is faith, is only a short-circuit
destroying the mind—that the acceptance of a mystical invention is a wish for
the annihilation of existence and, properly, annihilates one's consciousness.
"Independence is the recognition of the fact that yours is the
responsibility of judgment and nothing can help you escape it—that no
substitute can do your thinking, as no pinch-hitter can live your life—that
the vilest form of self-abasement and self-destruction is the subordination of
your mind to the mind of another, the acceptance of an authority over your
brain, the acceptance of his assertions as facts, his say-so as truth, his
edicts as middle-man between your consciousness and your existence.
"Integrity is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake your
consciousness, just as honesty is the recognition of the fact that you cannot
fake existence—that man is an indivisible entity, an integrated unit of two
attributes: of matter and consciousness, and that he may permit no breach
between body and mind, between action and thought, between his life and his
convictions—that, like a judge impervious to public opinion, he may not
sacrifice his convictions to the wishes of others, be it the whole of mankind
shouting pleas or threats against him—that courage and confidence are
practical necessities, that courage is the practical form of being true to
existence, of being true to one's own consciousness.
"Honesty is the recognition of the fact that the unreal is unreal and
can have no value, that neither love nor fame nor cash is a value if obtained by
fraud—that an attempt to gain a value by deceiving the mind of others is an
act of raising your victims to a position higher than reality, where you become
a pawn of their blindness, a slave of their non-thinking and their evasions,
while their intelligence, their rationality, their perceptiveness become the
enemies you have to dread and flee—that you do not care to live as a
dependent, least of all a dependent on the stupidity of others, or as a fool
whose source of values is the fools he succeeds in fooling—that honesty is not
a social duty, not a sacrifice for the sake of others, but the most profoundly
selfish virtue man can practice: his refusal to sacrifice the reality of his own
existence to the deluded consciousness of others.
"Justice is the recognition of the fact that you cannot fake the
character of men as you cannot fake the character of nature, that you must judge
all men as conscientiously as you judge inanimate objects, with the same respect
for truth, with the same incorruptible vision, by as pure and as rational
a process of identification—that every man must be judged for what he is
and treated accordingly, that just as you do not pay a higher price for a rusty
chunk of scrap than for a piece of shining metal, so you do not value a totter
above a hero—that your moral appraisal is the coin paying men for their
virtues or vices, and this payment demands of you as scrupulous an honor as you
bring to financial transactions—that to withhold your contempt from men's
vices is an act of moral counterfeiting, and to withhold your admiration from
their virtues is an act of moral embezzlement—that to place any other concern
higher than justice is to devaluate your moral currency and defraud the good in
favor of the evil, since only the good can lose by a default of justice and only
the evil can profit—and that the bottom of the pit at the end of that road,
the act of moral bankruptcy, is to punish men for their virtues and reward them
for their vices, that that is the collapse to full depravity, the Black Mass of
the worship of death, the dedication of your consciousness to the destruction of
existence.
"Productiveness is your acceptance of morality, your recognition of the
fact that you choose to live—that productive work is the process by which
man's consciousness controls his existence, a constant process of acquiring
knowledge and shaping matter to fit one's purpose, of translating an idea into
physical form, of remaking the earth in the image of one's values—that all
work is creative work if done by a thinking mind, and no work is creative if
done by a blank who repeats in uncritical stupor a routine he has learned from
others— that your work is yours to choose, and the choice is as wide as your
mind, that nothing more is possible to you and nothing less is human—that to
cheat your way into a job bigger than your mind can handle is to become a
fear-corroded ape on borrowed motions and borrowed time, and to settle down into
a job that requires less than your mind's full capacity is to cut your motor and
sentence yourself to another kind of motion: decay—that your work is the
process of achieving your values, and to lose your ambition for values is to
lose your ambition to live—that your body is a machine, but your mind is its
driver, and you must drive as far as your mind will take you, with achievement
as the goal of your road—that the man who has no purpose is a machine that
coasts downhill at the mercy of any boulder to crash in the first chance ditch,
that the man who stifles his mind is a stalled machine slowly going to rust,
that the man who lets a leader prescribe his course is a wreck being towed to
the scrap heap, and the man who makes another man his goal is a hitchhiker no
driver should ever pick up—that your work is the purpose of your life, and you
must speed past any killer who assumes the right to stop you, that any value you
might find outside your work, any other loyalty or love, can be only travelers
you choose to share your journey and must be travelers going on their own power
in the same direction.
"Pride is the recognition of the fact that you are your own highest
value and, like all of man's values, it has to be earned—that of any
achievements open to you, the one that makes all others possible is the creation
of your own character—that your character, your actions, your desires, your
emotions are the products of the premises held by your mind—that as man must
produce the physical values he needs to sustain his life, so he must acquire the
values of character that make his life worth sustaining—that as man is a being
of self-made wealth, so he is a being of self-made soul—that to live requires
a sense of self-value, but man, who has no automatic values, has no automatic
sense of self-esteem and must earn it by shaping his soul in the image of his
moral ideal, in the image of Man, the rational being he is born able to create,
but must create by choice—that the first precondition of self-esteem is that
radiant selfishness of soul which desires the best in all things, in values of
matter and spirit, a soul that seeks above all else to achieve its own moral
perfection, valuing nothing higher than itself—and that the proof of an
achieved self-esteem is your soul's shudder of contempt and rebellion against
the role of a sacrificial animal, against the vile impertinence of any creed
that proposes to immolate the irreplaceable value which is your consciousness
and the incomparable glory which is your existence to the blind evasions and the
stagnant decay of others.
p070
"Are you beginning to see who is John Galt? I am the man who has earned
the thing you did not fight for, the thing you have renounced, betrayed,
corrupted, yet were unable fully to destroy and are now hiding as your guilty
secret, spending your life in apologies to every professional cannibal, lest it
be discovered that somewhere within you, you still long to say what I am now
saying to the hearing of the whole of mankind: I am proud of my own value and of
the fact that I wish to live.
"This wish—which you share, yet submerge as an evil—is the only
remnant of the good within you, but it is a wish one must learn to deserve. His
own happiness is man's only moral purpose, but only his own virtue can achieve
it. Virtue is not an end in itself. Virtue is not its own reward or sacrificial
fodder for the reward of evil. Life is the reward of virtue—and
happiness is the goal and the reward of life.
"Just as your body has two fundamental sensations, pleasure and pain, as
signs of its welfare or injury, as a barometer of its basic alternative, life or
death, so your consciousness has two fundamental emotions, joy and suffering, in
answer to the same alternative. Your emotions are estimates of that which
furthers your life or threatens it, lightning calculators giving you a sum of
your profit or loss. You have no choice about your capacity to feel that
something is good for you or evil, but what you will consider good or
evil, what will give you joy or pain, what you will love or hate, desire or
fear, depends on your standard of value. Emotions are inherent in your nature,
but their content is dictated by your mind. Your emotional capacity is an empty
motor, and your values are the fuel with which your mind fills it. If you choose
a mix of contradictions, it will clog your motor, corrode your transmission and
wreck you on your first attempt to move with a machine which you, the driver,
have corrupted.
"If you hold the irrational as your standard of value and the impossible
as your concept of the good, if you long for rewards you have not earned, for a
fortune, or a love you don't deserve, for a loophole in the law of causality,
for an A that becomes non-A at your whim, if you desire the opposite of
existence—you will reach it. Do not cry, when you reach it, that life is
frustration and that happiness is impossible to man; check your fuel: it brought
you where you wanted to go.
"Happiness is not to be achieved at the command of emotional whims.
Happiness is not the satisfaction of whatever irrational wishes you might
blindly attempt to indulge. Happiness is a state of non-contradictory joy—a
joy without penalty or guilt, a joy that does not clash with any of your values
and does not work for your own destruction, not the joy of escaping from your
mind, but of using your mind's fullest power, not the joy of faking reality, but
of achieving values that are real, not the joy of a drunkard, but of a producer.
Happiness is possible only to a rational man, the man who desires nothing but
rational goals, seeks nothing but rational values and finds his joy in nothing
but rational actions.
"Just as I support my life, neither by robbery nor alms, but by my own
effort, so I do not seek to derive my happiness from the injury or the favor of
others, but earn it by my own achievement. Just as I do not consider the
pleasure of others as the goal of my life, so I do not consider my pleasure as
the goal of the lives of others. Just as there are no contradictions in my
values and no conflicts among my desires—so there are no victims and no
conflicts of interest among rational men, men who do not desire the unearned and
do not view one another with a cannibal's lust, men who neither make sacrifice
nor accept them.
"The symbol of all relationships among such men, the moral symbol of
respect for human beings, is the trader. We, who live by values, not by
loot, are traders, both in matter and in spirit. A trader is a man who earns
what he gets and does not give or take the undeserved. A trader does not ask to
be paid for his failures, nor does he ask to be loved for his flaws. A trader
does not squander his body as fodder or his soul as alms. Just as he does not
give his work except in trade for material values, so he does not give the
values of his spirit—his love, his friendship, his esteem—except in payment
and in trade for human virtues, in payment for his own selfish pleasure, which
he receives from men he can respect. The mystic parasites who have, throughout
the ages, reviled the traders and held them in contempt, while honoring the
beggars and the looters, have known the secret motive of their sneers: a trader
is the entity they dread—a man of justice.
"Do you ask what moral obligation I owe to my fellow men? None—except
the obligation I owe to myself, to material objects and to all of existence:
rationality. I deal with men as my nature and their demands: by means of reason.
I seek or desire nothing from them except such relations as they care to enter
of their own voluntary choice. It is only with their mind that I can deal and
only for my own self-interest, when they see that my interest coincides with
theirs. When they don't, I enter no relationship; I let dissenters go their way
and I do not swerve from mine. I win by means of nothing but logic and I
surrender to nothing but logic. I do not surrender my reason or deal with men
who surrender theirs. I have nothing to gain from fools or cowards; I have no
benefits to seek from human vices: from stupidity, dishonesty or fear. The only
value men can offer me is the work of their mind. When I disagree with a
rational man, I let reality be our final arbiter; if I am right, he will learn;
if I am wrong, I will; one of us will win, but both will profit.
"Whatever may be open to disagreement, there is one act of evil that may
not, the act that no man may commit against others and no man may sanction or
forgive. So long as men desire to live together, no man may initiate—do
you hear me? no man may start—the use of physical force against others.
"To interpose the threat of physical destruction between a man and his
perception of reality, is to negate and paralyze his means of survival; to
force-him to act against his own judgment, is like forcing him to act against
his own sight. Whoever, to whatever purpose or extent, initiates the use of
force, is a killer acting on the premise of death in a manner wider than murder:
the premise of destroying man's capacity to live.
p080
"Do not open your mouth to tell me that your mind has convinced you of
your right to force my mind. Force and mind are opposites; morality ends where a
gun begins. When you declare that men are irrational animals and propose to
treat them as such, you define thereby your own character and can no longer
claim the sanction of reason—as no advocate of contradictions can claim it.
There can be no 'right' to destroy the source of rights, the only means of
judging right and wrong: the mind.
"To force a man to drop his own mind and to accept your will as a
substitute, with a gun in place of a syllogism, with terror in place of proof,
and death as the final argument—is to attempt to exist in defiance of reality.
Reality demands of man that he act for his own rational interest; your gun
demands of him that he act against it. Reality threatens man with death if he
does not act on his rational judgment: you threaten him with death if he does.
You place him into a world where the price of his life is the surrender of all
the virtues required by life—and death by a process of gradual destruction is
all that you and your system will achieve, when death is made to be the ruling
power, the winning argument in a society of men.
"Be it a highwayman who confronts a traveler with the ultimatum: 'Your
money or your life,' or a politician who confronts a country with the ultimatum:
'Your children's education or your life,' the meaning of that ultimatum is:
'Your mind or your life'—and neither is possible to man without the other.
"If there are degrees of evil, it is hard to say who is the more
contemptible: the brute who assumes the right to force the mind of others or the
moral degenerate who grants to others the right to force his mind. That
is the moral absolute one does not leave open to debate. I do not grant the
terms of reason to men who propose to deprive me of reason. I do not enter
discussions with neighbors who think they can forbid me to think. I do not place
my moral sanction upon a murderer's wish to kill me. When a man attempts to deal
with me by force, I answer him—by force.
"It is only as retaliation that force may be used and only against the
man who starts its use. No, I do not share his evil or sink to his concept of
morality: I merely grant him his choice, destruction, the only destruction he
had the right to choose: his own. He uses force to seize a value; I use it only
to destroy destruction. A holdup man seeks to gain wealth by killing me; I do
not grow richer by killing a holdup man. I seek no values by means of evil, nor
do I surrender my values to evil.
"In the name of all the producers who had kept you alive and received
your death ultimatums in payment, I now answer you with a single ultimatum of
our own: Our work or your guns. You can choose either; you can't have both. We
do not initiate the use of force against others or submit to force at their
hands. If you desire ever again to live in an industrial society, it Will be on our
moral terms. Our terms and our motive power are the antithesis of yours. You
have been using fear as your weapon and have been bringing death to man as his
punishment for rejecting your morality. We offer him life as his reward for
accepting ours.
"You who are worshippers of the zero—you have never discovered that
achieving life is not the equivalent of avoiding death. Joy is not 'the absence
of pain,' intelligence is not 'the absence of stupidity,' light is not 'the
absence of darkness,' an entity is not 'the absence of a nonentity.' Building is
not done by abstaining from demolition; centuries of sitting and waiting in such
abstinence will not raise one single girder for you to abstain from
demolishing—and now you can no longer say to me, the builder: 'Produce, and
feed us in exchange for our not destroying your production.' I am
answering in the name of all your victims: Perish with and in your own void.
Existence is not a negation of negatives. Evil, not value, is an absence and a
negation, evil is impotent and has no power but that which we let it extort from
us. Perish, because we have learned that a zero cannot hold a mortgage over
life.
"You seek escape from pain. We seek the achievement of happiness. You
exist for the sake of avoiding punishment. We exist for the sake of earning
rewards. Threats will not make us function; fear is not our incentive. It is not
death that we wish to avoid, but life that we wish to live.
"You, who have lost the concept of the difference, you who claim that
fear and joy are incentives of equal power—and secretly add that fear is the
more 'practical'—you do not wish to live, and only fear of death still holds
you to the existence you have damned. You dart in panic through the trap of your
days, looking for the exit you have closed, running from a pursuer you dare not
name to a terror you dare not acknowledge, and the greater your terror the
greater your dread of the only act that could save you: thinking. The purpose of
your struggle is not to know, not to grasp or name or hear the thing. I shall
now state to your hearing: that yours is the Morality of Death.
"Death is the standard of your values, death is your chosen goal, and
you have to keep running, since there is no escape from the pursuer who is out
to destroy you or from the knowledge that that pursuer is yourself. Stop
running, for once—there is no place to run—stand naked, as you dread to
stand, but as I see you, and take a look at what you dared to call a moral code.
p090
"Damnation is the start of your morality, destruction is its purpose,
means and end. Your code begins by damning man as evil, then demands that he
practice a good which it defines as impossible for him to practice. It demands,
as his first proof of virtue, that he accept his own depravity without proof. It
demands that he start, not with a standard of value, but with a standard of
evil, which is himself, by means of which he is then to define the good: the
good is that which he is not.
"It does not matter who then becomes the profiteer on his renounced
glory and tormented soul, a mystic God with some incomprehensible design or any
passer-by whose rotting sores are held as some inexplicable claim upon him—it
does not matter, the good is not for him to understand, his duty is to crawl
through years of penance, atoning for the guilt of his existence to any stray
collector of unintelligible debts, his only concept of a value is a zero: the
good is that which is non-man.
"The name of this monstrous absurdity is Original Sin.
"A sin without volition is a slap at morality and an insolent
contradiction in terms: that which is outside the possibility of choice is
outside the province of morality. If man is evil by birth, he has no will, no
power to change it; if he has no will, he can be neither good nor evil; a robot
is amoral. To hold, as man's sin, a fact not open to his choice is a mockery of
morality. To hold man's nature as his sin is a mockery of nature. To punish him
for a crime he committed before he was born is a mockery of justice. To hold him
guilty in a matter where no innocence exists is a mockery of reason. To destroy
morality, nature, justice and reason by means of a single concept is a feat of
evil hardly to be matched. Yet that is the root of your code.
"Do not hide behind the cowardly evasion that man is born with free
will, but with a 'tendency' to evil. A free will saddled with a tendency is like
a game with loaded dice. It forces man to struggle through the effort of
playing, to bear responsibility and pay for the game, but the decision is
weighted in favor of a tendency that he had no power to escape. If the tendency
is of his choice, he cannot possess it at birth; if it is not of his choice, his
will is not free.
"What is the nature of the guilt that your teachers call his Original
Sin? What are the evils man acquired when he fell from a state they consider
perfection? Their myth declares that he ate the fruit of the tree of
knowledge—he acquired a mind and became a rational being. It was the knowledge
of good and evil-he became a mortal being. He was sentenced to earn his bread by
his labor—he became a productive being. He was sentenced to experience
desire—he acquired the capacity of sexual enjoyment. The evils for which they
damn him are reason, morality, creativeness; joy—all the cardinal values of
his existence. It is not his vices that their myth of man's fall is designed to
explain and condemn, it is not his errors that they hold as his guilt, but the
essence of his nature as man. Whatever he was—that robot in the Garden of
Eden, who existed without mind, without values, without labor, without love—he
was not man.
"Man's fall, according to your teachers, was that he gained the virtues
required to live. These virtues, by their standard, are his Sin. His evil, they
charge, is that he's man. His guilt, they charge, is that he lives.
"They call it a morality of mercy and a doctrine of love for man. No,
they say, they do not preach that man is evil, the evil is only that alien
object: his body. No, they say, they do not wish to kill him, they only wish to
make him lose his body. They seek to help him, they say, against his pain—and
they point at the torture rack to which they've tied him, the rack with two
wheels that pull him in opposite directions, the rack of the doctrine that
splits his soul and body.
"They have cut man in two, setting one half against the other. They have
taught him that his body and his consciousness are two enemies engaged in deadly
conflict, two antagonists of opposite natures, contradictory claims,
incompatible needs, that to benefit one is to injure the other, that his soul
belongs to a supernatural realm, but his body is an evil prison holding it in
bondage to this earth—and that the good is to defeat his body, to undermine it
by years of patient struggle, digging his way to that gorgeous jail-break which
leads into the freedom of the grave.
"They have taught man that he is a hopeless misfit made of two elements,
both symbols of death. A body without a soul is a corpse, a soul without a body
is a ghost—yet such is their image of man's nature: the battleground of a
struggle between a corpse and a ghost, a corpse endowed with some evil volition
of its own and a ghost endowed with the knowledge that everything known to man
is nonexistent, that only the unknowable exists.
p100
"Do you observe what human faculty that' doctrine was designed to
ignore? It was man's mind that had to be negated in order to make him fall
apart. Once he surrendered reason, he was left at the mercy of two monsters whom
he could not fathom or control: of a body moved by unaccountable instincts and
of a soul moved by mystic revelations-he was left as the passively ravaged
victim of a battle between a robot and a dictaphone.
"And as he now crawls through the wreckage, groping blindly for a way to
live, your teachers offer him the help of a morality that proclaims that he'll
find no solution and must seek no fulfillment on earth. Real existence, they
tell him, is that which he cannot perceive, true consciousness is the faculty of
perceiving the non-existent—and if he is unable to understand it, that
is the proof that his existence is evil and his consciousness impotent.
"As products of the split between man's soul and body, there are two
kinds of teachers of the Morality of Death: the mystics of spirit and the
mystics of muscle, whom you call the spiritualists and the materialists, those
who believe in consciousness without existence and those who believe in
existence without consciousness. Both demand the surrender of your mind, one to
their revelation, the other to their reflexes. No matter how loudly they posture
in the roles of irreconcilable antagonists, their moral codes are alike, and so
are their aims: in matter—the enslavement of man's body, in spirit—the
destruction of his mind.
"The good, say the mystics of spirit, is God, a being whose only
definition is that he is beyond man's power to conceive—a definition that
invalidates man's consciousness and nullifies his concepts of existence. The
good, say the mystics of muscle, is Society—a thing which they define as an
organism that possesses no physical form, a super-being embodied in no one in
particular and everyone in general except yourself. Man's mind, say the mystics
of spirit, must be subordinated to the will of God. Man's mind, say the mystics
of muscle, must be subordinated to the will of Society. Man's standard of value
say the mystics of spirit, is the pleasure 0f God, whose standards are beyond
man's power of comprehension and must be accepted on faith. Man's standard of
value, say the mystics of muscle, is the pleasure of Society, whose standards
are beyond man's right of judgment and must be obeyed as a primary absolute. The
purpose of man's life, say both, is to become an abject zombie who serves a
purpose he does not know, for reasons he is not to question. His reward, say the
mystics of spirit, will be given to him beyond the grave. His reward, say the
mystics of muscle, will be given on earth—to his great-grandchildren.
"Selfishness—say both—is man's evil. Man's good—say
both—is to give up his personal desires, to deny himself, renounce himself,
surrender; man's good is to negate the life he lives. Sacrifice—cry
both—is the essence of morality, the highest virtue within man's reach.
"Whoever is now within reach of my voice, whoever is man the victim, not
man the killer, I am speaking at the deathbed of your mind, at the brink of that
darkness in which you're drowning, and if there still remains within you the
power to struggle to hold on to those fading sparks which had been
yourself—use it now. The word that has destroyed you is 'sacrifice.'
Use the last of your strength to understand its meaning. You're still alive. You
have a chance.
"'Sacrifice' does not mean the rejection of the worthless, but of the
precious. 'Sacrifice' does not mean the rejection of the evil for the sake of
the good, but of the good for the sake of the evil. 'Sacrifice' is the surrender
of that which you value in favor of that which you don't.
"If you exchange a penny for a dollar, it is not a sacrifice; if
you exchange a dollar for a penny, it is. If you achieve the career you
wanted, after years of struggle, it is not a sacrifice; if you then
renounce it for the sake of a rival, it is. If you own a bottle of milk
and gave it to your starving child, it is not a sacrifice; if you give it
to your neighbor's child and let your own die, it is.
"If you give money to help a friend, it is not a sacrifice; if
you give it to a worthless stranger, it is. If you give your friend a sum
you can afford, it is not a sacrifice; if you give him money at the cost
of your own discomfort, it is only a partial virtue, according to this sort of
moral standard; if you give him money at the cost of disaster to yourself that
is the virtue of sacrifice in full.
"If you renounce all personal desire and dedicate your life to those you
love, you do not achieve full virtue: you still retain a value of your own,
which is your love. If you devote your life to random strangers, it is an act of
greater virtue. If you devote your life to serving men you hate—that is
the greatest of the virtues you can practice.
p110
"A sacrifice is the surrender of a value. Full sacrifice is full
surrender of all values. If you wish to achieve full virtue, you must seek no
gratitude in return for your sacrifice, no praise, no love, no admiration, no
self-esteem, not even the pride of being virtuous; the faintest trace of any
gain dilutes your virtue. If you pursue a course of action that does not taint
your life by any joy, that brings you no value in matter, no value in spirit, no
gain, no profit, no reward—if you achieve this state of total zero, you have
achieved the ideal of moral perfection.
"You are told that moral perfection is impossible to man—and, by this
standard, it is. You cannot achieve it so long as you live, but the value of
your life and of your person is gauged by how closely you succeed in approaching
that ideal zero which is death.
"If you start, however, as a passionless blank, as a vegetable seeking to be
eaten, with no values to reject and no wishes to renounce, you will not win the
crown of sacrifice. It is not a sacrifice to renounce the unwanted. It is not a
sacrifice. It is not a sacrifice to give your life for others, if death is your
personal desire. To achieve the virtue of sacrifice, you must want to live, you
must love it, you must burn with passion for this earth and for all the splendor
it can give you—you must feel the twist of every knife as it slashes your
desires away from your reach and drains your love out of your body, It is not
mere death that the morality of sacrifice holds out to you as an ideal, but
death by slow torture.
"Do not remind me that it pertains only to this life on earth. I am
concerned with no other. Neither are you.
"If you wish to save the last of your dignity, do not call your best
actions a 'sacrifice': that term brands you as immoral. If a mother buys food
for her hungry child rather than a hat for herself, it is not a
sacrifice: she values the child higher than the hat; but it is a sacrifice to
the kind of mother whose higher value is the hat, who would prefer her child to
starve and feeds him only from a sense of duty. If a man dies fighting for his
own freedom, it is not a sacrifice: he is not willing to live as a slave;
but it is a sacrifice to the kind of man who's willing. If a man refuses
to sell his convictions, it is not a sacrifice, unless he is the sort of
man who has no convictions.
"Sacrifice could be proper only for those who have nothing to
sacrifice—no values, no standards, no judgment—those whose desires are
irrational whims, blindly conceived and lightly surrendered. For a man of moral
stature, whose desires are born of rational values, sacrifice is the surrender
of the right to the wrong, of the good to the evil.
"The creed of sacrifice is a morality for the immoral—a morality that
declares its own bankruptcy by confessing that it can't impart to men any
personal stake in virtues or value, and that their souls are sewers of
depravity, which they must be taught to sacrifice. By his own confession, it is
impotent to teach men to be good and can only subject them to constant
punishment.
"Are you thinking, in some foggy stupor, that it's only material
values that your morality requires you to sacrifice? And what do you
think are material values? Matter has no value except as a means for the
satisfaction of human desires. Matter is only a tool of human values. To what
service are you asked to give the material tools your virtue has produced? To
the service of that which you regard as evil: to a principle you do not
share, to a person you do not respect, to the achievement of a purpose opposed
to your own—else your gift is not a sacrifice.
"Your morality tells you to renounce the material world and to divorce
your values from matter. A man whose values are given no expression in material
form, whose existence is unrelated to his ideals, whose actions contradict his
convictions, is a cheap little hypocrite—yet that is the man who obeys
your morality and divorces his values from matter. The man who loves one woman,
but sleeps with another—the man who admires the talent of a worker, but hires
another—the man who considers one cause to be just, but donates his money to
the support of another—the man who holds high standards of craftsmanship, but
devotes his effort to the production of trash—these are the men who
have renounced matter, the men who believe that the values of their spirit
cannot be brought into material reality.
"Do you say it is the spirit that such men have renounced? Yes, of
course. You cannot have one without the other. You are an indivisible entity of
matter and consciousness. Renounce your consciousness and you become a brute.
Renounce your body and you become a fake. Renounce the material world and you
surrender it to evil.
p120
"And that is precisely the goal of your morality, the duty that
your code demands of you. Give to that which you do not enjoy, serve that which
you do not admire, submit to that which you consider evil—surrender the world
to the values of others, deny, reject, renounce your self. Your self is
your mind; renounce it and you become a chunk of meat ready for any
cannibal to swallow.
"It is your mind that they want you to surrender—all those who
preach the creed of sacrifice, whatever their tags or their motives, whether
they demand it for the sake of your soul or of your body, whether they promise
you another life in heaven or a full stomach on this earth. Those who start by
saying: 'It is selfish to pursue your own wishes, you must sacrifice them to the
wishes of others'—end up by saying: 'It is selfish to uphold your convictions,
you must sacrifice them to the convictions of others.
"This much is true: the most selfish of all things is the
independent mind that recognizes no authority higher than its own and no value
higher than its judgment of truth. You are asked to sacrifice your intellectual
integrity, your logic, your reason, your standard of truth—in favor of
becoming a prostitute whose standard is the greatest good for the greatest
number.
"If you search your code for guidance, for an answer to the question:
'What is the good?'—the only answer you will find is 'The good of
others.' The good is whatever others wish, whatever you feel they feel they
wish, or whatever you feel they ought to feel. 'The good of others' is a magic
formula that transforms anything into gold, a formula to be recited as a
guarantee of moral glory and as a fumigator for any action, even the slaughter
of a continent. Your standard of virtue is not an object, not an act, not a
principle, but an intention. You need no proof, no reasons, no success,
you need not achieve in fact the good of others—all you need to know is
that your motive was the good of others, not your own. Your only
definition of the good is a negation: the good is the 'non-good for me.'
"Your code—which boasts that it upholds eternal, absolute, objective
moral values and scorns the conditional, the relative and the subjective—your
code hands out, as its version of the absolute, the following rule of moral
conduct: If you wish it, it's evil; if others wish it, it's good; if the
motive of your action is your welfare, don't do it; if the motive is the
welfare of others, then anything goes.
"As this double-jointed, double-standard morality splits you in half, so
it splits mankind into two enemy camps: one is you, the other is all the
rest of humanity. You are the only outcast who has no right to wish to
live. You are the only servant, the rest are the masters, you are
the only giver, the rest are the takers, you are the eternal debtor, the
rest are the creditors never to be paid off. You must not question their right
to your sacrifice, or the nature of their wishes and their needs: their right is
conferred upon them by a negative, by the fact that they are 'non-you.'
"For those of you who might ask questions, your code provides a consolation
prize and booby-trap: it is for your own happiness, it says, that you must serve
the happiness of others, the only way to achieve your joy is to give it up to
others, the only way to achieve your prosperity is to surrender your wealth to
others, the only way to protect your life is to protect all men except
yourself—and if you find no joy in this procedure, it is your own fault and
the proof of your evil; if you were good, you would find your happiness in
providing a banquet for others, and your dignity in existing on such crumbs as they
might care to toss you.
"You who have no standard of self-esteem, accept the guilt and dare not
ask the questions. But you know the unadmitted answer, refusing to acknowledge
what you see, what hidden premise moves your world. You know it, not in honest
statement, but as a dark uneasiness within you, while you flounder between
guilty cheating and grudgingly practicing a principle too vicious to name.
"I, who do not accept the unearned, neither in values nor in guilt,
am here to ask the questions you evaded. Why is it moral to serve the happiness
of others, but not your own? If enjoyment is a value, why is it moral when
experienced by others, but immoral when experienced by you? If the sensation of
eating a cake is a value, why is it an immoral indulgence in your stomach, but a
moral goal for you to achieve in the stomach of others? Why is it immoral for
you to desire, but moral for others to do so? Why is it immoral to produce a
value and keep it, but moral to give it away? And if it is not moral for you to
keep a value, why is it moral for others to accept it? If you are selfless and
virtuous when you give it, are they not selfish and vicious when they take it?
Does virtue consist of serving vice? Is the moral purpose of those who are good,
self-immolation for the sake of those who are evil?
"The answer you evade, the monstrous answer is: No, the takers are not
evil, provided they did not earn the value you gave them. It is not
immoral for them to accept it, provided they are unable to produce it, unable to
deserve it, unable to give you any value in return. It is not immoral for them
to enjoy it, provided they do not obtain it by right.
p130
"Such is the secret core of your creed, the other half of your double
standard: it is immoral to live by your own effort, but moral to live by the
effort of others—it is immoral to consume your own product, but moral to
consume the products of others—it is immoral to earn, but moral to mooch—it
is the parasites who are the moral justification for the existence of the
producers, but the existence of the parasites is an end in itself—it is evil
to profit by achievement, but good to profit by sacrifice—it is evil to create
your own happiness, but good to enjoy it at the price of the blood of others.
"Your code divides mankind into two castes and commands them to live by
opposite rules: those who may desire anything and those who may desire nothing,
the chosen and the demand, the riders and the carriers, the eaters and the
eaten. What standard determines your caste? What passkey admits you to the moral
elite? The passkey is lack of value.
"Whatever the value involved, it is your lack of it that gives you a
claim upon those who don't lack it. It is your need that gives you a
claim to rewards. If you are able to satisfy your need, your ability annuls your
right to satisfy it. But a need you are unable to satisfy gives you first
right to the lives of mankind.
"If you succeed, any man who fails is your master; if you fail, any man
who succeeds is your serf. Whether your failure is just or not, whether your
wishes are rational or not, whether your misfortune is undeserved or the result
of your vices, it is misfortune that gives you a right to rewards. It is pain,
regardless of its nature or cause, pain as a primary absolute, that gives you a
mortgage on all of existence.
"If you heal your pain by your own effort, you receive no moral credit:
your code regards it scornfully as an act of self-interest. Whatever value you
seek to acquire, be it wealth or food or love or rights, if you acquire it by
means of your Virtue, your code does not regard it as a moral acquisition: you
occasion no loss to anyone, it is a trade, not alms; a payment, not a sacrifice.
The deserved belongs in the selfish, commercial realm of mutual profit;
it is only the undeserved that calls for that moral transaction which
consists of profit to one at the price of disaster to the other. To demand
rewards for your virtue is selfish and immoral; it is your lack of virtue
that transforms your demand into a moral right.
"A morality that holds need as a claim, holds
emptiness—non-existence—as its standard of value; it rewards an absence,
a defeat: weakness, inability, incompetence, suffering, disease, disaster, the
lack, the fault, the flaw—the zero.
"Who provides the account to pay these claims? Those who are cursed for
being non-zeros, each to the extent of his distance from that ideal. Since all
values are the product of virtues, the degree of your virtue is used as the
measure of your penalty; the degree of your faults is used as the measure of
your gain. Your code declares that the rational man must sacrifice himself to
the irrational, the independent man to parasites, the honest man to the
dishonest, the man of justice to the unjust, the productive man to thieving
loafers, the man of integrity to compromising knaves, the man of self-esteem to
sniveling neurotics. Do you wonder at the meanness of soul in those you see
around you? The man who achieves these virtues will not accept your moral code;
the man who accepts your moral code will not achieve these virtues.
"Under a morality of sacrifice, the first value you sacrifice is
morality; the next is self-esteem. When need is the standard, every man is both
victim and parasite. As a victim, he must labor to fill the needs of others,
leaving himself in the position of a parasite whose needs must be filled by
others. He cannot approach his fellow men except in one of two disgraceful
roles: he is both a beggar and a sucker.
"You fear the man who has a dollar less than you, that dollar is
rightfully his, he makes you feel like a moral defrauder. You hate the man who
has a dollar more than you, that dollar is rightfully yours, he makes you feel
that you are morally defrauded. The man below is a source of, your guilt, the
man above is a source of your frustration. You do not know what to surrender or
demand, when to give and when to grab, what pleasure in life is rightfully yours
and what debt is still unpaid to others—you struggle to evade, as 'theory,'
the knowledge that by the moral standard you've accepted you are guilty every
moment of your life, there is no mouthful of food you swallow that is not needed
by someone somewhere on earth—and you give up the problem in blind resentment,
you conclude that moral perfection is not to be achieved or desired, that
you will muddle through by snatching as snatch can and by avoiding the eyes of
the young, of those who look at you as if self-esteem were possible and they
expected you to have it. Guilt is all that you retain within your soul—and so
does every other man, as he goes past, avoiding your eyes. Do you wonder
why your morality has not achieved brotherhood on earth or the good will of man
to man?
"The justification of sacrifice, that your morality propounds, is more
corrupt than the corruption it purports to justify. The motive of your
sacrifice, it tells you, should be love—the love you ought to feel for
every man. A morality that professes the belief that the values of the spirit
are more precious than matter, a morality that teaches you to scorn a whore who
gives her body indiscriminately to all men—this same morality demands that you
surrender your soul to promiscuous love for all comers.
p140
"As there can be no causeless wealth, so there can be no causeless love
or any sort of causeless emotion. An emotion is a response to a face of reality,
an estimate dictated by your standards. To love is to value. The man who
tells you that it is possible to value without values, to love those whom you
appraise as worthless, is the man who tells you that it is possible to grow rich
by consuming without producing and that paper money is as valuable as gold.
"Observe that he does not expect you to feel a causeless fear. When his
kind get into power, they are expert at contriving means of terror, at giving
you ample cause to feel the fear by which they desire to rule you. But when it
comes to love, the highest of emotions, you permit them to shriek at you
accusingly that you are a moral delinquent if you're incapable of feeling
causeless love. When a man feels fear without reason, you call him to the
attention of a psychiatrist; you are not so careful to protect the meaning, the
nature and the dignity of love.
"Love is the expression of one's values, the greatest reward you can
earn for the moral qualities you have achieved in your character and person, the
emotional price paid by one man for the joy he receives from the virtues of
another. Your morality demands that you divorce your love from values and hand
it down to any vagrant, not as response to his worth, but as response to his need,
not as reward, but as alms, not as a payment for virtues, but as a blank check
on vices. Your morality tells you that the purpose of love is to set you free of
the bonds of morality, that love is superior to moral judgment, that true love
transcends, forgives and survives every manner of evil in its object, and the
greater the love the greater the depravity it permits to the loved. To love a
man for his virtues is paltry and human, it tells you; to love him for his flaws
is divine. To love those who are worthy of it is self-interest; to love the
unworthy is sacrifice. You owe your love to those who don't deserve it, and the
less they deserve it, the more love you owe them—the more loathsome the
object, the nobler your love—the more unfastidious your love, the greater the
virtue—and if you can bring your soul to the state of a dump heap that
welcomes anything on equal terms, if you can cease to value moral values, you
have achieved the state of moral perfection.
"Such is your morality of sacrifice and such are the twin ideals it
offers: to refashion the life of your body in the image of a human stockyard,
and the life of your spirit in the image of a dump.
"Such was your goal—and you've reached it. Why do you now moan
complaints about man's impotence and the futility of human aspirations? Because
you were unable to prosper by seeking destruction? Because you were unable to
find joy by worshipping pain? Because you were unable to live by holding death
as your standard of value?
"The degree of your ability to live was the degree to which you broke
your moral code, yet you believe that those who preach it are friends of
humanity, you damn yourself and dare not question their motives or their goals.
Take a look at them now, when you face your last choice—and if you choose to
perish, do so with full knowledge of how cheaply so small an enemy has claimed
your life.
"The mystics of both schools, who preach the creed of sacrifice, are
germs that attack you through a single sore: your fear of relying on your mind.
They tell you that they possess a means of knowledge higher than the mind, a
mode of consciousness superior to reason—like a special pull with some
bureaucrat of the universe who gives them secret tips withheld from others. The
mystics of spirit declare that they possess an extra sense you lack: this
special sixth sense consists of contradicting the whole of the knowledge of your
five. The mystics of muscle do not bother to assert any claim to extrasensory
perception: they merely declare that your senses are not valid, and that their
wisdom consists of perceiving your blindness by some manner of unspecified
means. Both kinds demand that you invalidate your own consciousness and
surrender yourself into their power. They offer you, as proof of their superior
knowledge, the fact that they assert the opposite of everything you know, and as
proof of their superior ability to deal with existence, the fact that they lead
you to misery, self-sacrifice, starvation, destruction.
"They claim that they perceive a mode of being superior to your
existence on this earth. The mystics of spirit call it 'another dimension,'
which consists of denying dimensions. The mystics of muscle call it 'the
future,' which consists of denying the present. To exist is to possess identity.
What identity are they able to give to their superior realm? They keep telling
you what it is not, but never tell you what it is. All their
identifications consist of negating: God is that which no human mind can know,
they say—and proceed to demand that you consider it knowledge—God is
non-man, heaven is non-earth, soul is non-body, virtue 'is non-profit, A is
non-A, perception is non-sensory, knowledge is non-reason. Their definitions are
not acts of defining, but of wiping out.
"It is only the metaphysics of a leech that would cling to the idea of a
universe where a zero is a standard of identification. A leech would want to
seek escape from the necessity to name its own nature—escape from the
necessity to know that the substance on which it builds its private universe is
blood.
"What is the nature of that superior world to which they sacrifice the
world that exists? The mystics of spirit curse matter, the mystics of muscle
curse profit the first wish men to profit by renouncing the earth, the second
wish men to inherit the earth by renouncing all profit. Their non-material,
non-profit worlds are realms where rivers run with milk and coffee, where wine
spurts from rocks at their command, where pastry drops on them from clouds at
the price of opening their mouth. On this material, profit-chasing earth, an
enormous investment of virtue—of intelligence, integrity, energy, skill—is
required to construct a railroad to carry them the distance of one mile; in
their non-material, non-profit world, they travel from planet to planet at the
cost of a wish. If an honest person asks them: 'How?'—they answer with
righteous scorn that a 'how' is the concept of vulgar realists; the concept of
superior spirits is 'Somehow.' On this earth restricted by matter and profit,
rewards are achieved by thought; in a world set free of such restrictions,
rewards are achieved by wishing.
p150
"And that is the whole of their shabby secret. The secret of all
their esoteric philosophies, of all their dialectics and super-senses, of their
evasive eyes and snarling words, the secret for which they destroy civilization,
language, industries and lives, the secret for which they pierce their own eyes
and eardrums, grind out their senses, blank out their minds, the purpose for
which they dissolve the absolutes of reason, logic, matter, existence,
reality—is to erect upon that plastic fog a single holy absolute: their Wish.
"The restriction they seek to escape is the law of identity. The freedom
they seek is freedom from the fact that an A will remain an A, no matter what
their tears or tantrums—that a river will not bring them milk, no matter what
their hunger—that water will not run uphill, no matter what comforts they
could gain if it did, and if they want to lift it to the roof of a skyscraper,
they must do it by a process of thought and labor, in which the nature of an
inch of pipe line counts, but their feelings do not—that their feelings are
impotent to alter the course of a single speck of dust in space or the nature of
any action they have committed.
"Those who tell you that man is unable to perceive a reality undistorted
by his senses, mean that they are unwilling to perceive a reality undistorted by
their feelings. 'Things as they are' are things as perceived by your mind;
divorce them from reason and they become 'things as perceived by your wishes.'
"There is no honest revolt against reason—and when you accept any part of
their creed, your motive is to get away with something your reason would not
permit you to attempt. The freedom you seek is freedom from the fact that if you
stole your wealth, you are a scoundrel, no matter how much you give to charity
or how many prayers you recite—that if you sleep with sluts, you're not a
worthy husband, no matter how anxiously you feel that you love our wife next
morning—that you are an entity, not a series of random pieces scattered
through a universe where nothing sticks and nothing commits you to anything, the
universe of a child's nightmare where identities switch and swim, where the
rotter and the hero are interchangeable parts arbitrarily assumed at will—that
you are a man—that you are an entity—that you are.
"No matter how eagerly you claim that the goal of your mystic wishing is
a higher mode of life, the rebellion against identity is the wish for
non-existence. The desire not to be anything is the desire not to be.
"Your teachers, the mystics of both schools, have reversed causality in
their consciousness, then strive to reverse it in existence. They take their
emotions as a cause, and their mind as a passive effect. They make their
emotions their tool for perceiving reality. They hold their desires as an
irreducible primary, as a fact superseding all facts. An honest man does not
desire until he has identified the object of his desire. He says: 'It is,
therefore I want it.' They say: 'I want it, therefore it is.'
"They want to
cheat the axiom of existence and consciousness, they want their consciousness to
be an instrument not of perceiving but of creating existence, and
existence to be not the object but the subject of their
consciousness—they want to be that God they created in their image and
likeness, who creates a universe out of a void by means of an arbitrary whim.
But reality is not to be cheated. What they achieve is the opposite of their
desire. They want an omnipotent power over existence; instead, they lose the
power of the consciousness. By refusing to know, they condemn themselves to the
horror of a perpetual unknown.
"Those irrational wishes that draw you to their creed, those emotions
you worship as an idol, on whose altar you sacrifice the earth, that dark,
incoherent passion within you, which you take as the voice of God or of your
glands, is nothing more than the corpse of your mind. An emotion that clashes
with your reason, an emotion that you cannot explain or control, is only the
carcass of that stale thinking which you forbade your mind to revise.
"Whenever you committed the evil of refusing to think and to see, of
exempting from the absolute of reality some one small wish of yours, whenever
you chose to say: Let me withdraw from the judgment of reason the cookies I
stole, or the existence of God, let me have my one irrational whim and I will be
a man of reason about all else—that was the act of subverting your
consciousness, the act of corrupting your mind. Your mind then became a fixed
jury who takes orders from a secret underworld, whose verdict distorts the
evidence to fit an absolute it dares not touch—and a censored reality is the
result, a splintered reality where the bits you chose to see are floating among
the chasms of those you didn't, held together by that embalming fluid of the
mind which is an emotion exempted from thought.
"The links you strive to drown are casual connections. The enemy you
seek to defeat is the law of causality: it permits you no miracles. The law of
causality is the law of identity applied to action. All actions are caused by
entities. The nature of an action is caused and determined by the nature of the
entities that act; a thing cannot act in contradiction to its nature. An action
not caused by an entity would be caused by a zero, which would mean a zero
controlling a thing, a non-entity controlling an entity, the non-existent
ruling the existent—which is the universe of your teachers' desire, the cause
of their doctrines of causeless action, the reason of their revolt
against reason, the goal of their morality, their politics, their economics, the
ideal they strive for: the reign of the zero.
p160
"The law of identity does not permit you to have your cake and eat it,
too. The law of causality does not permit you to eat your cake before you
have it. But if you drown both laws in the blanks of your mind, if you pretend
to yourself and to others that you don't see—then you can try to proclaim your
right to eat your cake today and mine tomorrow, you can preach that the way to
have a cake is to eat it first, before you bake it, that the way to produce is
to start by consuming, that all wishers have an equal claim to all things, since
nothing is caused by anything. The corollary of the causeless in matter
is the unearned in spirit.
"Whenever you rebel against causality, your motive is the fraudulent
desire, not to escape it, but worse: to reverse it. You want unearned love, as
if love, the effect, could give you personal value, the cause—you want
unearned admiration, as if admiration, the effect, could give you virtue, the
cause—you want unearned wealth, as if wealth, the effect, could give you
ability, the cause—you plead for mercy, mercy, not justice, as if an
unearned forgiveness could wipe out the cause of your plea. And to
indulge your ugly little shams, you support the doctrines of your teachers,
while they run hog-wild proclaiming that spending, the effect, creates riches,
the cause, that machinery, the effect, creates intelligence, the cause, that
your sexual desires, the effect, create your philosophical values, the cause.
"Who pays for the orgy? Who causes the causeless? Who are the victims,
condemned to remain unacknowledged and to perish in silence, lest their agony
disturb your pretense that they do not exist? We are, we, the men of the
mind.
"We are the cause of all the values that you covet, we who
perform the process of thinking, which is the process of defining identity
and discovering causal connections. We taught you to know, to speak, to
produce, to desire, to love. You who abandon reason—were it not for us who
preserve it, you would not be able to fulfill or even to conceive your wishes.
You would not be able to desire the clothes that had not been made, the
automobile that had not been invented, the money that had not been devised, as
exchange for goods that did not exist, the admiration that had not been
experienced for men who had achieved nothing, the love that belongs and pertains
only to those who preserve their capacity to think, to choose, to value.
"You—who leap like a savage out of the jungle of your feelings to the
Fifth Avenue of our New York and proclaim that you want to keep the
electric lights, but to destroy the generators—it is our wealth that
you use while destroying us, it is our values that you use while damning
us, it is our language that you use while denying the mind.
"Just as your mystics of spirit invented their heaven in the image of
our earth, omitting our existence, and promised you rewards created by miracle
out of non-matter—so your modern mystics of muscle omit our existence and
promise you a heaven where matter shapes itself of its own causeless will into
all the rewards desired by your non-mind.
"For centuries, the mystics of spirit had existed by running a
protection racket—by making life on earth unbearable, then charging you for
consolation and relief, by forbidding all the virtues that make existence
possible, then riding on the shoulders of your guilt, by declaring production
and joy to be sins, then collecting blackmail from the sinners. We, the men of
the mind, were the unnamed victims of their creed, we who were willing to break
their moral code and to bear damnation for the sin of reason—we who thought
and acted, while they wished and prayed—we who were moral outcasts, we who
were bootleggers of life when life was held to be a crime—while they basked in
moral glory for the virtue of surpassing material greed and of distributing in
selfless charity the material goods produced by—blank-out.
"Now we are chained and commanded to produce by savages who do
not grant us even the identification of sinners—by savages who proclaim that
we do not exist, then threaten to deprive us of the life we don't possess, if we
fail to provide them with the goods we don't produce. Now we are expected to
continue running railroads and to know the minute when a train will arrive after
crossing the span of a continent, we are expected to continue running steel
mills and to know the molecular structure of every drop of metal in the cables
of your bridges and in the body of the airplanes that support you in
mid-air—while the tribes of your grotesque little mystics of muscle fight over
the carcass of our world, gibbering in sounds of non-language that there are no
principles, no absolutes, no knowledge, no mind.
"Dropping below the level of a savage, who believes that the magic words
he utters have the power to alter reality, they believe that reality can be
altered by the power of the words they do not utter—and their magic
tool is the blank-out, the pretense that nothing can come into existence past
the voodoo of their refusal to identify it.
"As they feed on stolen wealth in body, so they feed on stolen concepts
in mind, and proclaim that honesty consists of refusing to know that one is
stealing. As they use effects while denying causes, so they use our concepts
while denying the roots and the existence o

Home