Communism and the Left

[Taem]

The existence of charities in itself practically disproves the notion that people are inherently selfish, though charities themselves wouldn't be necessary if we had a system that actually provided everything people need to survive instead of one that only seeks more profit.

When I look up altruistic, this is the definition I get, “Showing unselfish concern for the welfare of others”, and selfless gives me, “Disregarding your own advantages and welfare over those of others.” When I look up selfish, I get this, “Concerned chiefly or only with yourself and your advantage to the exclusion of others”. When one observes and examines the very act of giving itself, it becomes clear that charities are nothing more than acts of selfishness.

Let’s start with presents; in regards to birthdays and Christmas, we only (directly) give presents to those whom we want to see benefit from them in some way. This is most likely a survival tactic, to help ensure our friendship or improve our loved ones lives however, we expect the receiver to show some appreciation for said gift because it is this acknowledgement that sends endorphins to our brains tricking us into believing we did something worthwhile, and as humans, we enjoy that feeling. When someone shows us indifference or uncaring towards a present we’ve given, we often feel a sense of rejection which causes us to desire giving less of a present to that individual the following year. If the present were to a second cousin you’ve only met once, or as part of a gift program at work, it’d be rightfully small instead of that $2k laptop you bought your son or daughter. So, the two selfish reasons we give at all is for survival, and more importantly to see someone else enjoyment, which makes us feel good. We give according to our own selfish urges.

Read this very short article if you will: https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-se...to-charity

In summary, behavioural science identifies a range of factors that influence our donations, and can help us to keep giving in the longer term. […]. Research has revealed that spending money on others actually makes us happier than spending it on ourselves, and giving to others can actually make us healthier.

If we give our hard-earned car to some random person on the street we didn’t know, we would feel like we made a terrible decision because we don’t know that persons situation in life or if they even needed a car which only proves we are NOT altruistic creatures by nature, but selfish ones whose sole purpose in this lifetime is survival. Ironically, this is the very reason why our capitalist society does so well, because that’s the natural order of things. If we were truly altruistic, the person’s financial status wouldn’t matter to us at all because we wouldn’t need a reason to selflessly give; having a reason to give automatically relegates our decision on the matter to which charity we think is most deserving or would have the most impact on the world (us), another question of survival… Tell me, would you give $500 to a millionaire because of your altruism? Of course not, because your logic would tell you the millionaire doesn’t need or deserve that money, but then your very actions stop becoming selfless the moment you realize this, because when you give to someone down on their luck, your only doing it to help the weaker of your species survive (ones that don’t threaten your position in life) and because it makes you feel good inside thinking of how your generosity has helped these downtrodden. On top of that, you pick and chose a charity you feel would benefit the world most. Think about that for a second and let it sink in… you’re donating because it makes YOU feel good inside; an act of pure selfishness.

You are right about one thing however, that by nature, humans desire to give and are hardwired to do so because it makes us feel better about ourselves. But you are wrong about it being a selfless act.