Coronavirus

[anthony]

First line of defense.

 

[anthony]

On 12/19/2021 at 9:52 AM, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

Tony,

Altruism is the morality of self-sacrifice.

Self-sacrifice.

Not just sacrifice.

Altruism is not the morality of sacrificing others to oneself. That is more in line with Nietzsche's will to power.

Sacrificing others to oneself is often a result when altruism is practiced by others (while not by oneself), but sacrificing others to oneself is not a part pf the actual morality of altruism.

As a political weapon, altruism is often preached by bullies in order to get people to disarm, to accept sanction of the victim, to surrender their souls on a silver platter, but the bullies themselves don't practice altruism. 

They follow a different code.

The prey practices altruism, not the predator.

 

I get it that you want to believe all predators (in my sense) are unhappy beings who have given up their souls, who will never experience self-esteem, etc. etc. etc., and you want to attribute that to altruism, but even if that were true, the predators do not believe their prey are to be the beneficiaries of their efforts as altruism would demand. On the contrary, they want to eat their prey, either literally or metaphorically.

Granted, there are different meanings for the term altruism (especially biological), but the one Rand followed was the same as that proposed by Auguste Comte. 

Here is a direct quote by Ayn Rand in For The New Intellectual.

That's about as clear as it gets.

Michael

Michael,

It takes two to tango. "Altruism" literally means 'other' ism, as you know.

The "bullies" and predators are *sacrificial* and as altruistic as are the self-sacrificers. The latter consider that others should be the beneficiary of their acts, while the former extort, demand and rely upon their value-sacrifices, if merely to derive psychological pleasure from their power over them to fill their void.

They too, practice "self-abnegation". Since they can't or won't create their own values (as proper to man). That part-definition of Rand's cuts both ways: negating yourself, i.e. selfless.

I think Rand took the base of Comte's doctrine, expanded and extrapolated this crucial corollary from it.

Different sides of the same coin. The takers and the self-sacrificial makers. The predators and their willing victims. Dictators and followers.

Master - or - serf.

FtNI:

"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". AR

 

[william.scherk]

Did former president Trump get a vaccine booster?

 

[william.scherk]

1 hour ago, william.scherk said:

Did former president Trump get a vaccine booster?

Yes, he says he did. He also had more to say about COVID-19 vaccines ...

Three guesses who "They" comprise.

I wonder if Trump is persuaded that there is a stark or notable difference in vaccination rates between Democratic-leaning counties and Republican-leading counties.  Could this be part of his motive for uttering the warning?

[anthony]

So? who claims the vaccines have not saved lives? The elderly, etc.etc. have benefited without doubt. They needed it.

I guess not as many as Trump claims.

But they haven't stopped the spread among the vaxxed, in even the highly vaxxed places, so the mandate thing is already proven corrupt, sacrificial, unscientific and superfluous.

[Marc]

34 minutes ago, anthony said:

So? who claims the vaccines have not saved lives? The elderly, etc.etc. have benefited without doubt. They needed it.

I guess not as many as Trump claims.

But they haven't stopped the spread among the vaxxed, in even the highly vaxxed places, so the mandate thing is already proven corrupt, sacrificial, unscientific and superfluous.

I claim that they have not saved lives.

Check all the flu deaths from the last 10 years or so, how many die of the flu.

Now check the last 2 years where no one has died from the flu but died from Covid.

 

[william.scherk]

7 minutes ago, Marc said:

Now check the last 2 years where no one has died from the flu but died from Covid.

This is from April of this year: 

 

Flu Has Disappeared for More Than a Year

WWW.SCIENTIFICAMERICAN.COM

---

Mask wearing, social distancing and other steps to stop COVID-19 have also curtailed influenza

 

[Marc]

4 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

This is from April of this year: 

 

Flu Has Disappeared for More Than a Year

WWW.SCIENTIFICAMERICAN.COM

---

Mask wearing, social distancing and other steps to stop COVID-19 have also curtailed influenza

 

Youre the fastest and best researcher out there! 

So the flu has disappeared.

Another take would be that the flu is still here and they called it Covid19.

Riddle me this then my Canadian friend, how many folks have died from flu/covid over the past 20 years.

Bet you that the last 2 years are not at the top of that list.

[william.scherk]

2 hours ago, Marc said:

I claim that they have not saved lives.

Check all the flu deaths from the last 10 years or so, how many die of the flu.

Now check the last 2 years where no one has died from the flu but died from Covid.

If I make a claim, I try to support the claim with some kind of warrant.  If I claim that COVID-19 vaccines (of which there are currently 7 in use worldwide) have not saved lives, I'd try to fetch up some materials that supported my claim.  Uttering a claim is only the first step.

2 hours ago, Marc said:

So the flu has disappeared.

Another take would be that the flu is still here and they called it Covid19.

That 'take' is unwarranted so far, Marc.  If you don't accept that there is a difference between influenza and SARS-CoV-2, let me ask you:  what kinds or type of information would you want me to dig up if I claimed Influenza and SARS-CoV-2 were the same thing?

Would it be fair that you ask of me to provide support for that claim if it were me who made it?

2 hours ago, Marc said:

Riddle me this then my Canadian friend, how many folks have died from flu/covid over the past 20 years.

It's not quite a riddle. It's not yet a claim. If you want to put numbers to your musing, your best bet is probably to do the plod work on your own -- as any numbers provided could likely be dismissed as unreliable, over/under-reported or otherwise suspect ...

Maybe another way of looking at the underlying question: could vaccination for COVID-19 disease prevent or reduce heavy demands on the health care systems? Or better, perhaps -- is there an appreciable difference in death-per-capita (or other measure you want to test) between highly-vaccinated, public-health-order-observing populations and populations in places of the same general polity where vaccinations rates are substantially lower?

"Bet you that the last 2 years are not at the top of that list [of flu/covid deaths]."

If you want to place a bet, tell us what would be a winning hand. 

Edited December 20, 2021 by william.scherk
Grammaire, flow, added final response to dropped quote

[anthony]

8 hours ago, anthony said:

 The predators and their willing victims. Dictators and followers.

 

 

Another angle and wrinkle on altruism, there are also the UNwilling victims. Who are not "self"-sacrificial, but are forcefully sacrificed by altruists in power - for the sake of other people.

Some aging Israeli intellectual I read early last year when lockdowns were enforced, pronounced

"How wonderful is it that the world's economy should be brought to its knees in order to protect us and save lives!!"

That is an altruist speaking, extolling human sacrifice.

I didn't see anything wonderful, it was painful; I could see the many men and women who were closing businesses, laying off staff, losing one central purpose of living, and of course their profits (some loyally tried to keep on paying employees out of pocket for as long as possible with no turnover). Their lives and resources for many, are damaged past repair. A few I know of and more heard of committed suicide. That's one piece of the "collateral damage", the rational experts have been warning of.

One can try to imagine the billion more sacrificed across the world (still, in every little way) but not take in the scope of destruction to human beings and it's only a hard-hearted altruist who cannot feel for their spiritual and material losses -- and find it 'good'.

What's most terrible, some business owners I knew had the sense this was wrong, but such is the grip of altruism, they believed it was necessary and right that they suffered for the sake of the potentially or actually ill. "Because of Covid, I lost this or that" - they said. NO, because of the cruel interventions, a disease doesn't do that.

The mass lockdowns were an altruistic policy: Govt's allied with other altruist players, like the science-bureaucrats, media and intellectuals - sacrificing the functioning and healthy at small risk from Covid, to the unable, vulnerable, unhealthy, old, etc.etc. who were.

Now, the mass vaccine mandates continue the altruist policy, sacrificial of that same young, vigorous and productive group, the middle and blue collar classes, the medium and small independent businessmen and their workers -- to 'Society'.

 

 

 

[ThatGuy]

9 minutes ago, anthony said:

Another angle and wrinkle on altruism, there are also the UNwilling victims. Who are not self-sacrificial, but are forcefully sacrificed by altruists in power - to other people.

Some aging Israeli intellectual I read early last year when lockdowns were enforced, pronounced

"How wonderful is it that the world's economy should be brought to its knees in order to protect us and save lives!!"

That is an altruist speaking, extolling human sacrifice.

“The urge to save humanity is almost always only a false-face for the urge to rule it. Power is what all messiahs really seek: not the chance to serve. This is true even of the pious brethren who carry the gospel to foreign parts.”

― H.L. Mencken

[william.scherk]

2 minutes ago, anthony said:

Govt's allied with other altruist players, like the media and intellectuals - sacrificing the functioning and healthy at small risk from Covid, to the unable, vulnerable, unhealthy, old, etc.etc. 

This reminds me of the sort of bonds one can achieve between electronic-acquaintances. Your life is more real to me here Tony, as are the lives of others like Michael, Ellen, Peter, and so on. I hope that each person here achieves what they consider selfish, rational avoidance of infection, however they achieve that.

That can come from strict personal protocols of ventilation to hard-eyed risk-assessment of particular gatherings (like public transport). Some have grudgingly or willingly awaited and booked and got "the jabs" recommended by public health authorities -- whether from personal calculation or in response to a measure of coercion.

The Monster State of altruists is always on trial in your posts, Tony, and that's a good thing for the forum!

I think the present monster states reach the apex of their toothy powers when they declare public health emergencies.  It's close to the heft of War Powers. Which can make for some dramatic conflicts with the liberty-loving cohort.

In the end, I care more that Ellen, say, and  Michael avoid getting infected, by whatever means they find works.  They, like you, like Peter, like me, like my sibling, like our old-timer, like my other sibling and my other sibling, my other aging real-life friends and colleagues -- these are the people I think about in a framework of 'the unable, vulnerable, unhealthy, old' etceteras. More vulnerable than youth, at least.

When they come to our general OL "household" and say "bring out your dead," I want to say, Nope, none to bring, fuck off.

[anthony]

3 hours ago, Marc said:

I claim that they have not saved lives.

Check all the flu deaths from the last 10 years or so, how many die of the flu.

Now check the last 2 years where no one has died from the flu but died from Covid.

 

I think there is some crossover, but mostly you're incorrect.  It's tiring trying to make sense of the deluge of figures and graphs so I won't try to correlate these.

What looks inarguable is that very shortly after first vax roll-outs, mortality rates dropped and have stayed low.

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

7 hours ago, anthony said:

The "bullies" and predators are *sacrificial* and as altruistic as are the self-sacrificers.

Tony,

I feel you and I have made my own goofs with Rand's ideas. (The difference between concept and abstraction, the four categories in the beginning of ITOE, etc.)

But the truth is that one cannot evaluate something correctly until one identifies it correctly. That's reality and words cannot change that.

You have your theory that dictators and their victims are both practicing altruism. Fine. That's your theory and you are entitled to think for yourself.

But that is not Ayn Rand's theory of altruism. She was very clear on that.

When I, myself, came across information that contradicted what I had believed Rand meant, I did everything you can imagine to try to justify my error. But in the end, nothing justified it except to recognize I goofed.

Once I did that, the world did not end, I did not lose my self-image, I was not pilloried by my peers, I was still loved by the people who love me, I still had my lot of accumulated wisdom (barring the goof up to that point), and life got a hell of a lot easier.

 

In fact, my self-image got stronger. It's great to tell others they need to correct their errors--especially serious ones--and point to myself as an example. The more serious the error has been and the longer I have committed it, the more it has stung, but I can think of nothing more rational. So in the end, it feels great (after feeling awful).  

I might write a book about this: The Virtue of Doofusness.

 

Here's a hint that might help you get over this hump. I'm not being snarky.

Collectivism.

Try using collectivism as a replacement for altruism when you are arguing for commonalities between groups, especially in the psychological stuff.

It fits a hell of a lot better than trying to force altruism to be its opposite and attributing that to Rand.

A collectivist soul can be a dictator. An unhappy one at that. Even a seriously deranged one.

Michael

[anthony]

44 minutes ago, william.scherk said:

When they come to our general OL "household" and say "bring out your dead," I want to say, Nope, none to bring, fuck off.

William this was and is a bad disease but only people can make it worse for others. (Than it had to be).

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

On 12/20/2021 at 12:21 PM, william.scherk said:

I wonder if Trump is persuaded that there is a stark or notable difference in vaccination rates between Democratic-leaning counties and Republican-leading counties.  Could this be part of his motive for uttering the warning?

William,

I disagree with Trump's evaluation of what the vax did, but that is not a totally informed disagreement. And most important, there are some other things missing from the context when Trump's opinion is treated as a gotcha.

1. The mRNA technology used as a vax is neither good nor bad. How it is used is good or bad. The mRNA technology is like nuclear power, which you can use to light up a city or blow it up.

In that sense, I admit the possibility that the jab could have stopped the lethal version of COVID-19 from decimating humanity, but that is only speculation. I don't trust any sources for stats or even correct information about the jab. They keep lying so fuck all of them.

2. No matter how many times Trump says it, his critics ignore it. Trump says it's your right and your choice to take the jab or not.

To me, that is the real issue and it takes priority over his opinion on the jab. For an easy example, we would definitely not be arguing about the damage to children if it were not coerced like the current politicians are trying to do. Most parents would simply not use this technology on their kids. Boom. Done. The issue goes away.

In other words, I'm fine with my choice and I'm fine with disagreeing with Trump's evaluation of how great the jab is. I'm not fine with being forced to take the jab or not to take it. That's my choice and my right. Ditto for parents regarding their kids.

 

I hate it that this issue gets discussed all the time and coercion gets left out when gotcha time comes (on all sides). Coercion is the main problem and the vax only becomes a main problem when coercion is involved.

Also, exempting Big Pharma from liability for damage to patients is right alongside with coercion for the reason this thing has turned into the mess it is today.

Michael

[anthony]

Ministry of Health in Israel attempting to discredit Malone. Noticeable, they did not once mention child vaccinations. However, his statement directed to parents at the bottom -only- concerns kids. He has taken the vaccine himself he openly acknowledges.

 

Israel Ministry of Health Afraid of Dr. Robert Malone's Impact on Israeli Parents

AVIPNADEL37659.LT.ACEMLNB.COM

---

Dr. Robert Malone is noted as being one of the creators of the mRNA vaccine technology upon which some of the covid-19 vaccines are...

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

3 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

In other words, I'm fine with my choice and I'm fine with disagreeing with Trump's evaluation of how great the jab is.

Even me being fine, though, Trump better be careful with his base.

Lots of people are not amused. Politics is not about what a person really believes. It's about what people perceive that person believes.

I am pretty sure Trump is smart enough to navigate this, but I do have one caveat. He is awfully proud of the achievement of developing a vaccine in a short amount of time. And his ego could make him dig in on this.

If he digs in, he will lose a lot of credibility with people who are 100% behind him right now. For instance, this guy (but stuff like this is starting to pop up elsewhere).

Crowd Boos Trump As He Tells Them to Take Credit For Vaccines

WWW.BITCHUTE.COM

---

article - https://nationalfile.com/video-trump-gets-upset-crowd-boos-taking-covid-booster-shouts-dont-dont-dont-audience/ Website: https://saltmustflow.com OTHER PLATFORMS: Odysee:...

I agree with Salty. Whoever is telling Trump it is OK to dig in on this should be fired.

Actually, I suspect one of the people telling him that is Bill O'Reilly himself. I heard O'Reilly praising the vax a while back.

So am I now worried? No. I'm not worried about Trump getting reelected and maybe even reinstated. To me that's a given.

But I am starting to get pre-worried that this vax thing will become a face-off between Trump and his base. I see nothing good coming from that.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Robert Kennedy Jr. once again, this time with Steve Bannon. It is an interview of about 50 minutes.

The mainstream media is boycotting his book, The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, but according to Steve Bannon, it has sold about 400,000 copies so far. One of the reasons is that it is so well documented.

(btw - That link goes to the Kindle copy which is only $2.99. It's a referral link so if you get it, I get a dime or so commission. Yay me!  The hardback and audiobook are far more expensive,)

Both Steve and Robert noticed that when critics talk against this book, they never say what they consider to be a lie. The only do ad hominem attacks against Robert and talk about conspiracy theories. Also, Robert himself acknowledged that a great deal of information in his book can be grounds for libel suits. Yet he does not get sued by such people. The reason is when he says Fauci killed xx number of children and things like that, he shows the proof. I doubt the bad guys want that information validated in court in addition to Robert's sources.

sigh... Another video I believe deserves a transcription. I will see what I can do.

In the meantime, enjoy.

Episode 1,496 - Fauci on Trial - with Robert F. Kennedy Jr.

RUMBLE.COM

---

We talk about vaccines, Fauci, and medical tyranny with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Our guests are: Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Stay ahead of the censors – Join us warroom.org/join Aired On: 12/17/2021 Watch: On

Michael

[anthony]

16 hours ago, Michael Stuart Kelly said:

I might write a book about this: The Virtue of Doofusness.

 

Here's a hint that might help you get over this hump. I'm not being snarky.

Collectivism.

Try using collectivism as a replacement for altruism when you are arguing for commonalities between groups, especially in the psychological stuff.

It fits a hell of a lot better than trying to force altruism to be its opposite and attributing that to Rand.

A collectivist soul can be a dictator. An unhappy one at that. Even a seriously deranged one.

Michael

Michael, collectivism is certainly in play as well. The combination altruism-collectivism is constantly present. The selfless anti-individualists run in crowds and identify themselves and others by a collective grouping. 

One worst feature of this pandemic+ responses has been the amount of individuals in positions of trusted expertise who've sold out. Physicians who announce that the unvaccinated should not be treated in hospitals, pediatricians (child carers!) who publicly promote mass vaxxes for kids, full-well knowing the data that contradicts that - and scientists who've done likewise to jump onto the bandwagon. The list goes on.

Selling-out = self-sacrifice. I think they've renounced their professions, medical knowledge and medical ethics (First, do no harm) humanity and independence - for what? To move into the "in-group" - at one material level, those who can grab some of the influx of money, and get majority approval/acclaim and be part of the authoritative elite. The allure of power, entering the public limelight and your name being dropped and given interviews on mainstream media - ultimately to be presented a position of influence over the public's minds. Scientists too, may adore the chance of being celebrities! It's a lonely profession working in the labs.

"It's your minds they want".

As we see, the vaxx propaganda machine is operating overtime to control mass minds. Get power over the minds through guilt, fear, hatred of others (from that 'other group')  ... and bodies must follow (to be repeatedly jabbed en masse, individually needed or not). Propaganda, known by Goebbels and effective in every totalitarian regime.

That 'sell-out' is the self-sacrificer who turns himself into a sacrificer of others.  

Only the most independent individualists refuse to be either a 'sacrificee' or a sacrificer". They have too much respect for reality and self-value to do otherwise. The stand-out doctors and scientists who brave attacks on their reputations to report unpopular facts and opinions are in there.

The only options altruism offers: One may be "a serf" or be "a master".

That is essential Rand.

The "master", the predator upon others' minds and bodies - or - remain the predated-upon for life. The master-authoritarian-tyrant-dictator had to start somewhere, he originally abnegated his independent mind as much as has the willing serf.

Not much distinguishes the two, except gaining the possession of power over others.

Better to be on top than be underneath...

 

 

[ThatGuy]

1 hour ago, anthony said:

Michael, collectivism is certainly in there as well. The combination altruism-collectivism is always present. The self-less run in crowds and identify themselves and others collectively. 

The one feature of this pandemic+ responses is the amount of individuals in positions of expertise who've sold out. Physicians who announced that the unvaccinated should not be treated in hospitals, pediatricians (child carers!) who promote mass vaxxes for kids - and scientists who've done likewise to jump onto the bandwagon.

Selling-out = self-sacrifice. They've renounced their professions, medical knowledge and medical ethics (First, do no harm) and independence - for what? To move into the "in-group" - those, at one material level who can grab some of the influx of money, and get majority approval and be part of the authoritative elite. That's the allure of power, entering the public limelight and your name being constantly dropped and given interviews on mainstream media - being given a position of influence over the public's minds. Even scientists may adore the chance of being celebrities! It's a lonely life working in their labs.

"It's your minds they want".

As we see, the vaxx propaganda machine is working overtime to control mass minds. Get power over the minds through fear and guilt ... and the bodies must follow. Propaganda works, known by Goebbels and been in operation in every totalitarian regime.

The above individual is the self-sacrificer who turns into a sacrificer of others.  

Only the most independent individuals retort "I am not a 'sacrificee' nor a sacrificer". The doctors and scientists who brave attacks on their reputations to report unpopular facts and opinions are in there.

The only option altruism offers: one may be "a serf" or be "a master". That's essential Rand. The master, a predator upon others' minds and bodies - or the predated upon. The master-authoritarian-dictator had to start somewhere, he first abnegated his independent mind as much as the willing serf.

 

 

In other words, "a leash is a rope with a noose at both ends"?

(Just cuttin' to the chase...)

[edit: meant to pose that as a question]

[tmj]

The vast majority of those in the medical profession are victims of the same system they work 'in or for'. The institution of 'medicine' has been captured by the government and the corporations that shape the government control. While not blameless, I suspect the aggregate motivation is self preservation.

[ThatGuy]

21 minutes ago, tmj said:

The vast majority of those in the medical profession are victims of the same system they work 'in or for'. The institution of 'medicine' has been captured by the government and the corporations that shape the government control. While not blameless, I suspect the aggregate motivation is self preservation.

Funny you mention that, as I was about to make a post about just that...came across this insider medical bulletin calling for a "miracle" to save the "Build Back Better" plan from that "evil Grinch", Manchin...the medical profession is practically "begging for the whip"...and I'm sure this dovetails with the "predator class" observations, as well...they obviously didn't read Peikoff's "How Not to Fight Against Socialized Medicine"...

With Manchin defection, will it take a Christmas miracle to save Build Back Better?

"Home care and aging services advocates are clinging to hope that Senate Democrats can salvage the Build Back Better bill, after Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV) said over the weekend he wouldn’t vote for the $2 trillion reconciliation package.

"Mary Kay Henry, president of Service Employees International Union, promised to keep pushing for the plan that would funnel $150 billion to home-and-community-based services and benefit 740,000 direct care workers represented by the union nationwide."

With Manchin defection, will it take a Christmas miracle to save Build Back Better? - News - McKnights Home Care

WWW.MCKNIGHTSHOMECARE.COM

---

Home care and aging services advocates are clinging to hope that Senate Democrats can salvage the Build Back Better bill, after Sen...

 

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, anthony said:

Selling-out = self-sacrifice.

Tony,

I don't agree with this.

Selling out is a trade, not a sacrifice.

Not all self-betrayal (or betrayal of values) is self-sacrifice.

Who is the intended collector of the sacrifice?

In altruism it is "others."

And who is the collector in selling out? Oneself, of course, in addition to the party sold to. Both parties are receiving their share of the trade. 

A person who betrays his principles might be able to do so in order to benefit others, but by no means does he have to be convinced he is serving a "greater good" or others. Often he just wants the goodies for himself. In that case he is swapping his integrity for, say, money.

He himself is a collector of the result of his betrayal.

That's just not self-sacrifice. That's not altruism. It doesn't matter if he is making a bad trade. It's still a trade, not a sacrifice.

Or let me put it this way. You are the only person I know in the entire world for all of human history that I am aware of who calls this altruism. 

If that is your intent, like I said, I'm fine with it. But even then, I disagree that this is a legitimate meaning of altruism as used everywhere else, including by Ayn Rand.

I can call my left foot my right foot and insist on it, but I can't expect the world to adopt my new meaning for right and left feet.

Not all betrayals are sacrifices. Not all destruction is a sacrifice. Not all evil is a sacrifice. Not even all theft is a sacrifice. And none of it innately has to be self-sacrifice by the same self. 

A sacrifice implies a loser and a beneficiary, especially self-sacrifice. I can give case after case where there is only a loser and no beneficiary. Loss for the sake of loss. Unhappiness for the sake of unhappiness. Destruction for the sake of destruction. That is not even bullying, much less altruism, which is predicated on raising the other above oneself as the rightful beneficiary of one's actions and efforts.

Michael

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

1 hour ago, ThatGuy said:

In other words, "a leash is a rope with a noose at both ends."

(Just cuttin' to the chase...)

TG,

Kinda.

Unless you want to call the leash altruism.

To me the leash is a power relationship with slave and master. And I agree slaves constrain masters in certain areas of activity (not all).

But even so, that is not the same thing as one side prioritizing the other as more important as in altruism.

Michael