DEATH IS EASY by Russell Madden

FREEDOM,  As If It Mattered by Russell Madden

The Guardian Project by Russell Madden

RaNdoM by Russell Madden

 

As a college instructor, I often get interesting (and sometimes disturbing) snapshots into the current cultural state of our society. Many of the predominantly freshman students I encounter reflect the beliefs and philosophy they have (mostly) subconsciously (mindlessly?) absorbed from their parents, teachers, and friends. A phone conversation I recently had with a student certainly gave me pause.

While grading papers at home, I answered a call from one of the male students in my writing class. He expressed concerned because he had just discovered that the biggest paper of the semester -- worth twenty-percent of the total grade -- had been due the Friday before. He had already missed one subsequent class. If he turned it in when we met next, he would be two classes late in fulfilling the assignment.

"I didn't realize the paper was due on the first," he lamented.

"I've been talking about this paper for the last few weeks," I said matter-of-factly. "Every class period I've asked if anyone had any questions and reminding people when it was due. Plus," I said as patiently as I could, "the due date is in the syllabus. If you turn it in tomorrow, you'll lose four letter grades. Two letter grades for each class the paper is late. That's eighty points."

Silence for a moment.

"But I just learned it was due," he insisted.

"So?" I asked.

"Can't you help me out here? Maybe not take all the points off?"

"Why should I?"

Plaintively -- as though this point trumped all other considerations -- he pleaded, "Because I need it!"

There it was. The motto of modern day America. The mantra designed to crush all opposition. The chant that attempts through sheer incessant repetition to establish its validity.

The student and I went through the same merry-go-round a few more times while he asked again and again for a special favor. Asking him what kind of extenuating circumstances might justify a lesser penalty merely elicited the same response: "Because I need it." I explained I had to treat him like everyone else; that having a late paper didn't make him a bad person; that he simply had to accept the consequences of his mistake and move on.

Eventually he gave up when he realized I did not plan on altering my stance.

"Need."

Need-need-need-need.

"I need money so I won't lose my farm."

"I need grants and guaranteed student loans so I can go to college."

"I need welfare so I can take care of my children."

"We need money to fix up our schools."

"We need subsidies for a new indoor rain forest museum to amuse our kids."

"We need special favors at work to combat racism, sexism, and harassment."

"We need prescription drug coverage for our seniors."

"You need to do as I tell you or I will take all your property and throw you in jail."

Not only do these "polite" (and often not so polite) camouflaged statists and collectivists drone on in self-righteous pleas for "entitlements" to any- and everything they claim to "need," they do violence to the language by (deliberately?) confusing and blurring the differences between "need" and "want."

Yes, all the goods and services one group of citizens extort from another are "nice" to have. Receiving tens of thousands of taxpayer-funded dollars to start a business no self-respecting banker would touch is a positive...for the recipient, at least.

Yes, having others hop to your bidding provides a not-so-subtle sense of your own importance...for the cowardly and the ego-damaged, that is.

Yes, it is always "pleasant" to get what you want for little effort...for the parasites among us, anyway.

But simply switching the terms of the debate and proclaiming ex nihilo that one needs what (any rational person would conclude are what) one wants does not make it so. As basic economics makes clear, people have a semi-infinite supply of desires. Selecting among those wants and deciding how to satisfy them are fundamental aspects of any political and economic system.

However, unless you have previously voluntarily accepted some responsibility or engaged in a behavior that creates an obligation you must fulfill, another person's needs does not -- and cannot -- establish a claim upon your wealth, your time, or your life.

Your life belongs to you.

Your life does not belong to your family, to your friends, to your neighbors, and most assuredly, it does not belong to some arrogant, condescending, and patronizing politician.

Allowing others unjustly to claim ownership to even a penny of your money or a moment of your life; to permit them to demand that their desires, their wants, or their needs take precedence over yours; to surrender any modicum of your life to those who do not deserve it is an example of the most egregious kind of self-abasement possible to a human being.

This issue has exactly zilch to do with compassion, sharing, sympathy, or empathy. The most generous people I know are those who truly understand the full value of who they are. They do not squander their preciously limited life on any beggar or bully. Indiscriminately to toss away their love or their money or any other treasure they have developed and earned would be to betray and diminish the very thing others seek. When they give, they ultimately do so because of their own needs, not another's.

Even when the recipient appears to benefit the most, he does not create a loss for the giver. In rational giving, the giver always emerges with a net "profit." A rational person does not believe in impoverishing himself, either materially, emotionally, or mentally. He gives because he benefits -- even if only indirectly -- from the exchange. He gives because such action flows from his values, his decisions, his judgments, not those of anyone else...and most especially not those of someone proclaiming such assistance to be his due as a "right."

Like "selfishness" (and "need"), the concept of "sacrifice" is misunderstood and misused by far too many people. Some who are sympathetic to increasing freedom in our society suggest that we should pander to the muzzy-headedness of the government-educated masses. "Use the same words the majority of people do," these linguistic "reformers" say. "We have to reach out to those who disagree with us, not alienate them."

But, of course, controlling the language means controlling the culture. Abandoning the truth does not advance the agenda of liberty. We have had a century or more of "accommodation," "appeasement," and "niceness" to those who have absolutely no compunction in enslaving us to their wills. Pundits who chastise those of us who insist that "selfishness" -- properly defined -- is a positive thing and "sacrifice" -- properly defined -- is a negative notion merely thicken the muck that sucks at our legs.

To escape the quagmire of half-truths, Orwellian double-speak, and out-and-out lies that permeate our world and that aids those in power as they manipulate and solidify their control over us, we must not shy from speaking the truth whenever and wherever feasible. Calling a donkey's tail a leg does not somehow miraculously transform that appendage into a limb. Calling a "want" a "need" is no way to prove that someone else is responsible for fulfilling your dreams. Calling a "sacrifice" of all you hold dear to be the height of morality and humanity in no way washes away the filth contaminating that loathsome behavior.

Yes, I could have simply "given in" to my querulous student and provided him with a "break." I'm sure he would have been quite happy and pleased at that result; would have looked upon me much more positively. I could have overlooked his ignorance and lack of attentiveness and acceded to his request. I could have helped him pass the course.

I could have, but I did not.

If we who value individualism, reason, honesty, and integrity do not stand up and announce -- unafraid and proudly -- that the emperor has no clothes, who will?

And why do I oppose sacrifice and selflessness and defend such abstractions as freedom and justice?

Because I need to.