I kindly advise you not cut off previous messages. In this particular case it's allowed you to distort the point of the discussion, and I don't think that you did it inadvertently. The starting message meant that it's Ok when individuals suffer for the sake of common good. This is clear connection point to Lenin/Stalin and it makes Franklin allusion totally ridiculuos.

OK.

Tamar: Or we might say that we disagree with those ideas. The greatest and most important thing individuals can (and ought to) do is strive to make the world a better place for all, even if their own self-interest suffers for it.

You assert that this means it's OK when individuals suffer for sake of common good. It seems more likely that the "even if" clause emphasizes firmness of commitment to "making the world a better place" as the greatest and most important thing a human being can do. It's an obvious reference to and juxtaposition with what went before. You chose to connect this to Lenin rather than to a voluntary disavowment of selfishness, something you might like to justify if you want to accuse others of distortion.

JR: Benjamin Franklin started every day by asking ""What good shall I do this day?" One day he decided to establish the first Public library to which generations of Americans were subsequently "forced" to contribute. He also said this: "As we enjoy great advantages from the inventions of others, we should be glad of an opportunity to serve others by any invention of ours; and this we should do freely and generously."

The first quotation seems consistent with Tamar's view on what people ought to do. Perhaps you will agree that Franklin was not asking "how shall I satisfy my own desires today." As for the second quotation: is "freely and generously" more compatible with Tamar's view including her reference to self interest, or the one to which she responded? Seems perfectly obvious to me- though I have no doubt that some people are capable of producing a contrivance to the contrary.