>For your version to hold, Tamar would have had to say
>
>Tamar: 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 somebody else's self-interest suffers for it.
>
>But she didn't say that.
>
>She said:
>
>Tamar: 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.
>
>She is describing voluntary disavowal of selfishness in pursuit of a life aspiration- just as Franklin did. Your attempted connection to "russian history" is irrelevant. I know you "get" it because you also said this:
>
>There is a big difference between voluntary donation and generosity (Franklin) and societal necessity to sacrifice self-interest (Lenin) though this difference can get blurred in some minds
>
>As happened here, for example.

I guess there are too many things that are irrelevant to you and relevant to me. I think that I discussed very serious issues in my previous reply, that you habitually cut off, preferring habitual embarkment to sophistics, Franklin, who said what, etc. Obviously (though seemingly not for you), Tamar was not accused in being second Lenin or even Stalin. It was pointed, though, that her phrase (I can gladly concede that she could wrote it in hurry, esp. 'ought to' words) has relation to certain political teachings.This argument still stands even if Tamar meant totally different things than Lenin, because we don't discuss personal issues here (though you stubbornly try).We talk about real political issues. After all, it is well known that many liberals in America support socialist ideas, and it is also well known that Lenin was a socialist. It was written openly, through all Lenin's works that building new, better world is the main goal and the best people should sacrifice their self-interest to reach the goal, so at the final destination everyone will become the best and self-interest will just disappear. Why is it so difficult for you to see the obvious? Do you want to build new, better society?
I am very sorry, but I consider this topic too important and accordingly I don't think that you would be able to make valuable input to the issue that in my opinion (you are not required to agree) was settled by history, unless the latter is proclaimed irrelevant. Bye.