No, service is not incontrovertible, indubitable, unimpeachable goodness. The Nazis and Soviets extolled service. Energetic, anxious, efficient service was emphasized by these totalitarians. They insisted on action, on intervention for 'good', unhampered by thought or conscience. Their focus was on results--quantifiable, measurable, efficient, timely results. Service enabled their control of the populace: it channeled all human endeavor into strictly sanctioned activities; it overcame centrifugal forces with centripetal exertions controlled from the center; it coerced individuals to cast off their conscience in favor of communal conformity.
Under totalitarianism, divisions of service emanate from authorities and experts--not from one's individual conscience. Authorities enunciate what is best for the individual, for the people, for the party, for the economy, for the environment, for God. Of course, in this simplistic state, these superlatives always harmonize, however oppressively. And service and sacrifice are always enjoined in the most superlative terms.
Hannah Arendt compared totalitarianism to an onion. Totalitarian societies have layers, she argued. The onion skin is representative of the populace that is marginalized because their ideas and exertions are peripheral to those of the party (ie. dissidents, intellectuals, those who entertain alternate ideologies). Intermediate layers are characterized by an increasing commitment to the party paradigm. At the center of the onion are its most zealous, insulated, and isolated servants who look with severity, cynicism, and contempt upon all of those outside this inner circle. To eliminate the threat of competing ideas and individuals, they use all of the technology and treasure derived from the unthinking devotion of their adherents.
Under totalitarianism, service isn't good or even neutral. It is political compulsion only. In fact, nothing is neutral and everything, including service and sport, becomes political as the Nazis explained: "Non-political sport, so-called neutral sport, is unthinkable." At their acme, party politics subvert and supplant even religion.
Compulsion is the contrary of morality because it destroys individual conscience. To be pure and pristine, service must issue from the individual. It must be an act of free will. It has as many forms as there are persons. Doing well is good--especially if one means well. But only if one is not compelled to do well. What derives from a demand or a dictum cannot be altruism. Charity isn't charitable when it offers others capital it has confiscated. Alms-giving from appropriations isn't altruistic. Service, unhampered by thought, conscience, or humility, can be worse than benign. Notably, Hitler considered himself an "instrument of Providence."
Persons who exclaim "we are God's hands" must be made to see the limitations of their proxy for God in the lives of others. He is not our dependent; we are His. Beneficence is matter of duty to God. And duty is no platform for plaudits. Unrestrained intercession for God is predicated on a tenuous, presumptive, condescending, and corruptible surrogacy. Altruism can be blind to its own hypocrisy. Benevolence may be deaf to the true interests of the people. Sometimes, philanthropy intervenes when it ought to abstain--enforcing dependency when it ought to encourage independence. Perversely, it may condition charity on servile complaisance--keeping a brother in bondage to his keeper. Often, the social conscience expresses only affirmation and amity when it ought to express outrage. Frequently, when service is bulk it acts only on stereotypes--eclipsing identity and individuality. Collective charity, charity incorporated, lacks the integrity of individual conscience (see Arrow's impossibility theorem). Sometimes, service would put the intents of men above the interests of God and the second commandment ahead of the first. Babel would have us correct God's work--would have us make straight what He made crooked (Ecclesiastes 7:13)--would have us offer salvation on simpler, more mortal terms. The compulsion, deceit, and violence we observe today do not emanate from God's hands.
Beware of demagogues who presume to effect the welfare of others--to their own advancement and accolades. Beware of those who corrupt charity, taking credit for activities capitalized by confiscations from others.
Saturation in service is no good substitute for individual conscience. Thoreau once asked, as we should, "why has every man a conscience"?
While some may begrudge it, intellectuals and dissidents render an invaluable service to free society: they defend the ideals that keep service pure--even if by purgative. Sometimes, discretion is the better part of valiance.
No comments:
Post a Comment