More from The Ominous Parallels

From The Ominous Parallels, pp. 93–94, with some minor edits:

On what moral grounds, even in the privacy of his own mind, could a man, accepting the [party’s] ethics, object to or resist any decree, no matter how brutal or monstrous, issued to him by the spokesman and embodiment of the [people]? On the grounds that the decree destroys his personal values—his goals, ambitions, happiness, life? Qua altruist, he has been trained to the view that he must learn to sacrifice for the sake of others. On the grounds that the decree visits suffering, expropriation, and death upon other men, who are innocent? Qua altruist, he has been trained to the view that they must learn must learn to sacrifice for the sake of others. On the grounds that the decree violates his conscience, his independent moral judgment? Qua social subjectivist, he has been trained to the view that moral judgment is not his prerogative but society’s. On the grounds that the decree violates his principles? Qua pragmatist, he has been trained to the view that whatever works, as judged by the [spokesman and embodiment of the people], is right. On the grounds that the decree commands an absolute evil, which must be fought to the end? Qua relativist, he has been trained to the view that there are no absolutes.