Why Socialism, What is Secular-Humanism, the Activist Misanthrope from Philosophical Misanthropy, and The Light Triad Of Personality, The Four Philosophical-ideological Thoughts That When Combined Lead To Communism
Why Socialism by Einstein
Before reading any Marxism-Leninism reading list. I tell people to read Why Socialism because they need to understand the crossroads they're about to engage on starts with socialism.
Here's the TL;DR on pager summary in 1 paragraph: "Einstein argued that ordinary people, not just experts, have a moral right to judge society, and that capitalism’s private ownership and competition cause isolation, inequality, insecurity, and weakened solidarity. He called for democratic social ownership and planning of production to guarantee work, security, and education that fosters cooperation rather than egoism. I say that such socialism can move toward communism or remain compatible with certain anarchist paths, while warning against both pure centralization and unchecked decentralized opportunism." And now for the full executive summary for those who want to continue.
Einstein asked if only experts in economics and social issues should speak on socialism. I'm sure all the workers who believe people get paid a fair wage or get paid for the full value of their work, and those who think workers should be treated well and have their basic needs provided by society or at least met at an affordable rate, would say yes, unlike democratic party and other global left establishment parties. People are underpaid, overcharged, and not experts on either, but they have a strong moral and ethical sense of right and wrong. Overestimating the role of the average person is one of the biggest flaws in political science.
Economics is harder to establish general laws on because economic events are shaped by many interacting factors that cannot easily be isolated or measured separately. History and society are not shaped by economics alone. Many states began through conquest, where conquerors took land and power, made themselves the ruling class, and used religion and education to preserve class divisions and social values. We still live in a society shaped by humanity's predatory past: competition, exploitation, and domination. Because today's economics describes that system, it cannot reliably explain what a future socialist society beyond it would look like.
Science cannot by itself determine or justify ultimate moral ends, though fields like psychology can be used to influence people toward particular ends. Ethical ideals may originate with individuals or groups and then spread through voluntary persuasion or, sometimes, manipulation and coercion. Einstein ignored psychology. He answers his opening question, saying don't treat social or economic experts as the final authority on social and political questions. Science can inform decisions, but ordinary people also have a legitimate moral and ethical voice in how society is organized.
Society is in crisis, and people have become detached from or hostile toward their communities. Einstein illustrates this with someone so cynical and indifferent that he calmly questions why humanity's extinction would be a bad thing. This is both from experience and material conditions, and Ian James Kidd's four types of misanthropes and Delroy L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams's light and dark triad framework. Indifference to human extinction would have been rare a century earlier. Einstein saw it as a sign of personal despair, loneliness, and disconnection from society, and asked what caused this widespread isolation and whether it can be fixed.
He says human motives and emotions are complicated, often conflicting, and cannot be reduced to simple explanations. People are both individual and social. We pursue our own needs and goals, but also seek connection, approval, and ways to help others. Our personality comes partly from inborn traits but is heavily shaped by environment and society. Even when acting independently, we rely on society for basic necessities, language, knowledge, ideas, and the work of countless people before us.
To make life better, we must recognize limits we cannot easily change, including human biology and modern conditions. Large, densely populated societies require specialized jobs and centralized production, so people and countries are no longer self-sufficient. Humanity already functions as a worldwide system of producing and consuming goods.
The modern crisis is that people depend on society but see that dependence as a threat rather than a support. This encourages selfishness, weakens community, and leaves people insecure and lonely. Humanity is dependent on the collective, like an ant in a hive. Which is why I say capitalist society pushes people toward social darwinism and egoism, typically leaning toward either Kratocracy, Spencerianism, or Stirnerism specifically, and rewards and fosters dark triad personalities. Einstein argues that life gains meaning through contributing to society. Einstein called this economic anarchy but I'm sure libertarian economics also fits.
Capitalism's main problem is its unplanned, competitive economy. Factories, land, machinery, and other productive resources are mostly privately owned, and producers collectively create wealth but compete to claim as much of it as possible within the law. Einstein defines "workers" as people who do not own productive property. Owners hire them, workers produce goods, and the owners keep those goods. Workers' pay is not based on the full value they create; it is set by their basic needs and by how much competition there is for jobs.
Capitalism concentrates wealth and power in a small number of owners who influence political parties, lawmakers, and major sources of information, making democracy less able to represent ordinary or disadvantaged people. It rests on private ownership of productive property and supposedly voluntary work contracts. Real economies include worker protections won through political struggle, but they still largely operate like capitalism underneath.
Capitalism produces for profit rather than human need. It leaves some people unemployed, makes workers fear job loss, and can turn technological progress into layoffs instead of less work for everyone. Competition and profit-seeking create waste, economic instability, and recurring depressions, while teaching people to compete and chase wealth and status, weakening their sense of social responsibility.
Society should own and plan production, guarantee everyone work and basic security, and educate people to care about others rather than glorify power and personal success. Simply planning an economy does not guarantee freedom or true socialism. A planned economy without ethics can be dangerous for humanity. Centralized power could create problems if not managed properly but the same is true for decentralized power, which makes democratic centralism idea for socialism, and Einstein said it should be democratic but that doesn't mean he was a passive pushover for the opposition, resistance, and opportunists relating to socialism.
For everyone still stuck on the indoctrination and programming you were raised with, that your community still fosters, that made you fear socialism; socialism can but isn't required to lead people to anarchism, which is why both Anarcho-Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism exist: socialism is an optional addition to anarchist and libertarian thought, which is heavily voluntarist and quid-pro-quo, decentralized specifically to prevent reining in power, allowing opportunists to run a muck. Socialism, however, is required to lead us away from fascism and toward an equitable-egalitarian communist economy and society, remember that. I'm not saying you have to move forward towards communism or backwards towards anarchism, I just hope if you choose socialism, you don't choose to stay stagnant where it's at in between the two.
What Is Secular Humanism by Phil Zuckerman Ph.D.
Religion has shaped human culture for millennia, influencing how people understand nature, morality, life, and death through belief in supernatural forces or gods. Before scientific knowledge was available, people relied on religion and magic to explain natural events, illness, fear, and existence. Those in power also used religious claims to justify their authority.
Religion can offer comfort, hope, moral guidance, and community. But religious belief and participation are declining. More people identify as atheist, agnostic, or secular, and in some countries nonbelievers now outnumber believers.
Zuckerman argues that secular humanism is a meaningful, positive alternative for those who no longer believe in religion or the supernatural. It questions supernatural claims while focusing on people's capacity for compassion, justice, problem-solving, and improving the world. It holds that people are generally capable of kindness, cooperation, fairness, and peace, despite their capacity for harm, and it values reason, science (including dialectical materialism and psychology), education, democracy, human rights, and open debate.
Rather than relying on prayer or wishful thinking, secular humanists rely on human ability, evidence, science, medicine, effective social policy, and democracy to solve social problems through ethical research and informed decision-making. Morality, in this view, means reducing harm, helping the vulnerable, and promoting well-being, fairness, honesty, empathy, and compassion, treating others as you'd want to be treated.
Secular humanists believe life is finite and that people create their own meaning. Rather than dwell on unanswerable questions about existence, they focus on living well, helping others, protecting nature, and defending human rights. Secular humanism promises no afterlife, no miracles, no simple rulebook. It offers a realistic approach to life, grounded in human experience and care for others.
While socialism flirts with secular humanism, reading communist theory, especially Marxist-Leninist theory, makes clear that communism is secular humanism.
Philosophical Misanthropy by Ian James Kidd
Environmental, political, economic, and moral crises, meaning material conditions and lived experience, have led many people to criticize humanity. Some advocate ending human reproduction; others call for radically smaller, simpler, more sustainable ways of living.
Misanthropy is the moral condemnation of humanity, human civilization, or dominant human ways of life. It's commonly associated with hatred, disgust, isolation, or violence toward people, which can make life unhappy and destructive. Kidd argues philosophical misanthropy doesn't have to mean any of that. It can instead involve anger, bitterness, disappointment, sadness, resignation, or hope for humanity to improve. People can acknowledge humanity's serious flaws without becoming hateful, violent, or hopeless. From a dialectical-materialist and psychological perspective, a particular variant of misanthropy is compatible with communism, since human behavior is shaped by material conditions and social institutions, both of which can be changed.
Philosophers rarely discuss misanthropy directly, and it's often confused with pessimism or nihilism. Pessimism sees life or the world as fundamentally bleak because of suffering, absurdity, or meaninglessness; misanthropy focuses specifically on humanity's moral flaws. A person can believe life is meaningless without believing humans are morally terrible.
Philosopher David E. Cooper points to humanity's widespread mistreatment of animals as evidence for a misanthropic view, alongside other behavior he reads as proof of deep moral flaws: cruelty, greed, selfishness, indifference, violence, hypocrisy, arrogance, willful ignorance.
Misanthropes argue these flaws aren't rare or confined to extreme people or situations. Selfishness, dishonesty, cruelty, and other vices are ordinary, deeply ingrained, obvious, and widespread throughout human life and institutions, including the "ordinary vices," small daily acts of cruelty and constant minor dishonesty, not just extreme wrongdoing. For the philosophical misanthrope, these flaws are entrenched, pronounced, and ubiquitous: built into social activities, projects, institutions, and ways of life, often plainly visible, widespread across the world. Without showing the flaws are deep, obvious, and common, the misanthrope can't justify condemning humanity as a whole.
Eco-misanthropes and some feminists argue harmful traits (environmental destruction, waste, injustice, dogmatism, exploitation) are built into major social systems. Philosophical misanthropy can be driven by concern for animals, nature, or oppressed groups, and can lead to anger, activism, or despair. It criticizes humanity and its systems rather than necessarily hating every individual, and a misanthrope can still like, admire, or love particular people, especially those who resist collective failings.
Misanthropy is a product of conditions and lived experience. It shapes how someone thinks, feels, and lives, not just what they believe about humanity. Kidd identifies several common responses to a deeply negative view of human behavior, each shaped by a dominant emotion or viewpoint and a related set of actions and commitments.
Kant's "Enemy of Mankind" is ruled by hatred and disgust toward human moral failure, responding through physical violence or symbolic efforts to destroy the social institutions and ideals they see as corrupt. Kant rejects this stance because hatred denies and destroys the respect for moral dignity people deserve, even when they consistently fail morally.
Kant's "Fugitive from Mankind" withdraws from society out of fear of human cruelty and moral corruption, and fear of becoming corrupted themselves. They isolate, live off-grid, or seek secluded religious or social communities. Kant rejects this too: humans are social and moral beings, and a person may survive in isolation but cannot fully flourish or live well without human community.
The activist misanthrope sees humanity's deep moral problems and responds with disappointment, judgment, hope, and determination to change society. They dislike and condemn humanity as it currently exists, but still want it to improve and succeed, working through teaching, community building, political reform or revolution, moral example, religious preaching, or social activism to reduce cruelty and rebuild better collective conditions. Confucius fits this mold: he sought to repair society through moral education, virtuous example, respect for tradition, community, good works, and advising rulers.
Kidd cautions against assuming activism is always the answer. Buddhist thought holds that some roots of suffering and moral failure (greed, delusion, hatred, the instability of life) can't simply be eliminated through large-scale social or political action, and activism can backfire by expanding human pride, self-deception, ambition, or the pursuit of power.
The quietist misanthrope believes humanity's flaws may be too deeply rooted for large-scale change, or that grand attempts to remake society risk creating new forms of harm, domination, arrogance, and self-delusion. Rather than trying to transform the world, quietists accommodate themselves to its failures: living modestly, avoiding corrupting pursuits like status, power, and public conflict, and cultivating restraint, detachment, humility, simplicity. Zhuangzi represents this approach, rejecting political office and scholarly conflict in favor of trusted friends, modest living, and closeness to nature.
Philosophical misanthropy takes many forms: the Enemy, the Fugitive, the Activist, the Quietist. It is not simply hatred of humanity, and these aren't fixed identities; a person may oscillate between anger, withdrawal, disappointment, hope, activism, and resignation. Kidd's final point is that the central misanthropic problem isn't choosing one permanent stance, but coping with the emotionally and morally difficult movement between them. Many communists are closeted activist misanthropes who either haven't realized it or refuse to accept what they are.
The Light Triad Of Personality by Glenn Geher Ph.D.
The Light Triad Scale measures three positive personality traits: believing people are generally good, being open to people from different backgrounds, and relating to others without focusing on personal gain. It was created as a positive counterpart to the Dark Triad, the three harmful traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. People high in Dark Triad traits tend to be self-focused, manipulative, lacking concern for others, and more likely to exploit or seek revenge.
Researchers created the Light Triad to test whether positive personality traits can predict prosocial behavior and positive life outcomes, the same way the Dark Triad predicts harmful or exploitative behavior. They tested the 12-item scale across four studies involving more than 1,500 people. The results supported the scale's reliability and identified three distinct traits within it: faith in humanity (believing most people are good), humanism (respecting people from all backgrounds), and Kantianism (treating people as individuals with inherent value rather than using them for personal gain). The findings describe correlations between traits and outcomes, not proof that one directly causes another.
The Light Triad and Dark Triad are related but not exact opposites. Their moderate negative correlation of -0.48 means people with more Light Triad traits tend to have fewer Dark Triad traits, but a low score on one doesn't automatically mean a high score on the other. Squaring that correlation gives about 23 percent, meaning Light Triad scores account for roughly 23 percent of the differences in Dark Triad scores, with the remaining 77 percent explained by other factors. Because the Light Triad isn't simply the inverse of the Dark Triad, it needs its own separate measure, one that captures positive traits Dark Triad tests don't fully explain.
People who score high on the Light Triad tend to be curious, open-minded, humble, agreeable, securely connected to others, less interested in controlling people, and more satisfied with life. The Light Triad is a research-based set of positive traits centered on respecting and valuing other people, and early findings suggest it's a distinct, measurable pattern linked to positive aspects of life. Communism is the embodiment of the light triad in an economic governance.
Summed up: Why Socialism, secular humanism, the activist misanthrope, and the Light Triad point toward communism as a single philosophical-ideological synthesis. That's a hypothesis, not a description. No state has reached communism proper, only socialism, still bearing what Marx called the birthmarks of the old society. The claim is that removing private ownership, survival-competition, and insecurity removes the structural pressure toward Dark Triad behavior, and that the activist misanthrope's discomfort with existing humanity is a symptom of that gap. Whether it holds is an empirical question about a mode of production that hasn't been tried yet.
Before reading any Marxism-Leninism reading list. I tell people to read Why Socialism because they need to understand the crossroads they're about to engage on starts with socialism.
Here's the TL;DR on pager summary in 1 paragraph: "Einstein argued that ordinary people, not just experts, have a moral right to judge society, and that capitalism’s private ownership and competition cause isolation, inequality, insecurity, and weakened solidarity. He called for democratic social ownership and planning of production to guarantee work, security, and education that fosters cooperation rather than egoism. I say that such socialism can move toward communism or remain compatible with certain anarchist paths, while warning against both pure centralization and unchecked decentralized opportunism." And now for the full executive summary for those who want to continue.
Einstein asked if only experts in economics and social issues should speak on socialism. I'm sure all the workers who believe people get paid a fair wage or get paid for the full value of their work, and those who think workers should be treated well and have their basic needs provided by society or at least met at an affordable rate, would say yes, unlike democratic party and other global left establishment parties. People are underpaid, overcharged, and not experts on either, but they have a strong moral and ethical sense of right and wrong. Overestimating the role of the average person is one of the biggest flaws in political science.
Economics is harder to establish general laws on because economic events are shaped by many interacting factors that cannot easily be isolated or measured separately. History and society are not shaped by economics alone. Many states began through conquest, where conquerors took land and power, made themselves the ruling class, and used religion and education to preserve class divisions and social values. We still live in a society shaped by humanity's predatory past: competition, exploitation, and domination. Because today's economics describes that system, it cannot reliably explain what a future socialist society beyond it would look like.
Science cannot by itself determine or justify ultimate moral ends, though fields like psychology can be used to influence people toward particular ends. Ethical ideals may originate with individuals or groups and then spread through voluntary persuasion or, sometimes, manipulation and coercion. Einstein ignored psychology. He answers his opening question, saying don't treat social or economic experts as the final authority on social and political questions. Science can inform decisions, but ordinary people also have a legitimate moral and ethical voice in how society is organized.
Society is in crisis, and people have become detached from or hostile toward their communities. Einstein illustrates this with someone so cynical and indifferent that he calmly questions why humanity's extinction would be a bad thing. This is both from experience and material conditions, and Ian James Kidd's four types of misanthropes and Delroy L. Paulhus and Kevin M. Williams's light and dark triad framework. Indifference to human extinction would have been rare a century earlier. Einstein saw it as a sign of personal despair, loneliness, and disconnection from society, and asked what caused this widespread isolation and whether it can be fixed.
He says human motives and emotions are complicated, often conflicting, and cannot be reduced to simple explanations. People are both individual and social. We pursue our own needs and goals, but also seek connection, approval, and ways to help others. Our personality comes partly from inborn traits but is heavily shaped by environment and society. Even when acting independently, we rely on society for basic necessities, language, knowledge, ideas, and the work of countless people before us.
To make life better, we must recognize limits we cannot easily change, including human biology and modern conditions. Large, densely populated societies require specialized jobs and centralized production, so people and countries are no longer self-sufficient. Humanity already functions as a worldwide system of producing and consuming goods.
The modern crisis is that people depend on society but see that dependence as a threat rather than a support. This encourages selfishness, weakens community, and leaves people insecure and lonely. Humanity is dependent on the collective, like an ant in a hive. Which is why I say capitalist society pushes people toward social darwinism and egoism, typically leaning toward either Kratocracy, Spencerianism, or Stirnerism specifically, and rewards and fosters dark triad personalities. Einstein argues that life gains meaning through contributing to society. Einstein called this economic anarchy but I'm sure libertarian economics also fits.
Capitalism's main problem is its unplanned, competitive economy. Factories, land, machinery, and other productive resources are mostly privately owned, and producers collectively create wealth but compete to claim as much of it as possible within the law. Einstein defines "workers" as people who do not own productive property. Owners hire them, workers produce goods, and the owners keep those goods. Workers' pay is not based on the full value they create; it is set by their basic needs and by how much competition there is for jobs.
Capitalism concentrates wealth and power in a small number of owners who influence political parties, lawmakers, and major sources of information, making democracy less able to represent ordinary or disadvantaged people. It rests on private ownership of productive property and supposedly voluntary work contracts. Real economies include worker protections won through political struggle, but they still largely operate like capitalism underneath.
Capitalism produces for profit rather than human need. It leaves some people unemployed, makes workers fear job loss, and can turn technological progress into layoffs instead of less work for everyone. Competition and profit-seeking create waste, economic instability, and recurring depressions, while teaching people to compete and chase wealth and status, weakening their sense of social responsibility.
Society should own and plan production, guarantee everyone work and basic security, and educate people to care about others rather than glorify power and personal success. Simply planning an economy does not guarantee freedom or true socialism. A planned economy without ethics can be dangerous for humanity. Centralized power could create problems if not managed properly but the same is true for decentralized power, which makes democratic centralism idea for socialism, and Einstein said it should be democratic but that doesn't mean he was a passive pushover for the opposition, resistance, and opportunists relating to socialism.
For everyone still stuck on the indoctrination and programming you were raised with, that your community still fosters, that made you fear socialism; socialism can but isn't required to lead people to anarchism, which is why both Anarcho-Capitalism and Anarcho-Communism exist: socialism is an optional addition to anarchist and libertarian thought, which is heavily voluntarist and quid-pro-quo, decentralized specifically to prevent reining in power, allowing opportunists to run a muck. Socialism, however, is required to lead us away from fascism and toward an equitable-egalitarian communist economy and society, remember that. I'm not saying you have to move forward towards communism or backwards towards anarchism, I just hope if you choose socialism, you don't choose to stay stagnant where it's at in between the two.
What Is Secular Humanism by Phil Zuckerman Ph.D.
Religion has shaped human culture for millennia, influencing how people understand nature, morality, life, and death through belief in supernatural forces or gods. Before scientific knowledge was available, people relied on religion and magic to explain natural events, illness, fear, and existence. Those in power also used religious claims to justify their authority.
Religion can offer comfort, hope, moral guidance, and community. But religious belief and participation are declining. More people identify as atheist, agnostic, or secular, and in some countries nonbelievers now outnumber believers.
Zuckerman argues that secular humanism is a meaningful, positive alternative for those who no longer believe in religion or the supernatural. It questions supernatural claims while focusing on people's capacity for compassion, justice, problem-solving, and improving the world. It holds that people are generally capable of kindness, cooperation, fairness, and peace, despite their capacity for harm, and it values reason, science (including dialectical materialism and psychology), education, democracy, human rights, and open debate.
Rather than relying on prayer or wishful thinking, secular humanists rely on human ability, evidence, science, medicine, effective social policy, and democracy to solve social problems through ethical research and informed decision-making. Morality, in this view, means reducing harm, helping the vulnerable, and promoting well-being, fairness, honesty, empathy, and compassion, treating others as you'd want to be treated.
Secular humanists believe life is finite and that people create their own meaning. Rather than dwell on unanswerable questions about existence, they focus on living well, helping others, protecting nature, and defending human rights. Secular humanism promises no afterlife, no miracles, no simple rulebook. It offers a realistic approach to life, grounded in human experience and care for others.
While socialism flirts with secular humanism, reading communist theory, especially Marxist-Leninist theory, makes clear that communism is secular humanism.
Philosophical Misanthropy by Ian James Kidd
Environmental, political, economic, and moral crises, meaning material conditions and lived experience, have led many people to criticize humanity. Some advocate ending human reproduction; others call for radically smaller, simpler, more sustainable ways of living.
Misanthropy is the moral condemnation of humanity, human civilization, or dominant human ways of life. It's commonly associated with hatred, disgust, isolation, or violence toward people, which can make life unhappy and destructive. Kidd argues philosophical misanthropy doesn't have to mean any of that. It can instead involve anger, bitterness, disappointment, sadness, resignation, or hope for humanity to improve. People can acknowledge humanity's serious flaws without becoming hateful, violent, or hopeless. From a dialectical-materialist and psychological perspective, a particular variant of misanthropy is compatible with communism, since human behavior is shaped by material conditions and social institutions, both of which can be changed.
Philosophers rarely discuss misanthropy directly, and it's often confused with pessimism or nihilism. Pessimism sees life or the world as fundamentally bleak because of suffering, absurdity, or meaninglessness; misanthropy focuses specifically on humanity's moral flaws. A person can believe life is meaningless without believing humans are morally terrible.
Philosopher David E. Cooper points to humanity's widespread mistreatment of animals as evidence for a misanthropic view, alongside other behavior he reads as proof of deep moral flaws: cruelty, greed, selfishness, indifference, violence, hypocrisy, arrogance, willful ignorance.
Misanthropes argue these flaws aren't rare or confined to extreme people or situations. Selfishness, dishonesty, cruelty, and other vices are ordinary, deeply ingrained, obvious, and widespread throughout human life and institutions, including the "ordinary vices," small daily acts of cruelty and constant minor dishonesty, not just extreme wrongdoing. For the philosophical misanthrope, these flaws are entrenched, pronounced, and ubiquitous: built into social activities, projects, institutions, and ways of life, often plainly visible, widespread across the world. Without showing the flaws are deep, obvious, and common, the misanthrope can't justify condemning humanity as a whole.
Eco-misanthropes and some feminists argue harmful traits (environmental destruction, waste, injustice, dogmatism, exploitation) are built into major social systems. Philosophical misanthropy can be driven by concern for animals, nature, or oppressed groups, and can lead to anger, activism, or despair. It criticizes humanity and its systems rather than necessarily hating every individual, and a misanthrope can still like, admire, or love particular people, especially those who resist collective failings.
Misanthropy is a product of conditions and lived experience. It shapes how someone thinks, feels, and lives, not just what they believe about humanity. Kidd identifies several common responses to a deeply negative view of human behavior, each shaped by a dominant emotion or viewpoint and a related set of actions and commitments.
Kant's "Enemy of Mankind" is ruled by hatred and disgust toward human moral failure, responding through physical violence or symbolic efforts to destroy the social institutions and ideals they see as corrupt. Kant rejects this stance because hatred denies and destroys the respect for moral dignity people deserve, even when they consistently fail morally.
Kant's "Fugitive from Mankind" withdraws from society out of fear of human cruelty and moral corruption, and fear of becoming corrupted themselves. They isolate, live off-grid, or seek secluded religious or social communities. Kant rejects this too: humans are social and moral beings, and a person may survive in isolation but cannot fully flourish or live well without human community.
The activist misanthrope sees humanity's deep moral problems and responds with disappointment, judgment, hope, and determination to change society. They dislike and condemn humanity as it currently exists, but still want it to improve and succeed, working through teaching, community building, political reform or revolution, moral example, religious preaching, or social activism to reduce cruelty and rebuild better collective conditions. Confucius fits this mold: he sought to repair society through moral education, virtuous example, respect for tradition, community, good works, and advising rulers.
Kidd cautions against assuming activism is always the answer. Buddhist thought holds that some roots of suffering and moral failure (greed, delusion, hatred, the instability of life) can't simply be eliminated through large-scale social or political action, and activism can backfire by expanding human pride, self-deception, ambition, or the pursuit of power.
The quietist misanthrope believes humanity's flaws may be too deeply rooted for large-scale change, or that grand attempts to remake society risk creating new forms of harm, domination, arrogance, and self-delusion. Rather than trying to transform the world, quietists accommodate themselves to its failures: living modestly, avoiding corrupting pursuits like status, power, and public conflict, and cultivating restraint, detachment, humility, simplicity. Zhuangzi represents this approach, rejecting political office and scholarly conflict in favor of trusted friends, modest living, and closeness to nature.
Philosophical misanthropy takes many forms: the Enemy, the Fugitive, the Activist, the Quietist. It is not simply hatred of humanity, and these aren't fixed identities; a person may oscillate between anger, withdrawal, disappointment, hope, activism, and resignation. Kidd's final point is that the central misanthropic problem isn't choosing one permanent stance, but coping with the emotionally and morally difficult movement between them. Many communists are closeted activist misanthropes who either haven't realized it or refuse to accept what they are.
The Light Triad Of Personality by Glenn Geher Ph.D.
The Light Triad Scale measures three positive personality traits: believing people are generally good, being open to people from different backgrounds, and relating to others without focusing on personal gain. It was created as a positive counterpart to the Dark Triad, the three harmful traits of narcissism, Machiavellianism, and psychopathy. People high in Dark Triad traits tend to be self-focused, manipulative, lacking concern for others, and more likely to exploit or seek revenge.
Researchers created the Light Triad to test whether positive personality traits can predict prosocial behavior and positive life outcomes, the same way the Dark Triad predicts harmful or exploitative behavior. They tested the 12-item scale across four studies involving more than 1,500 people. The results supported the scale's reliability and identified three distinct traits within it: faith in humanity (believing most people are good), humanism (respecting people from all backgrounds), and Kantianism (treating people as individuals with inherent value rather than using them for personal gain). The findings describe correlations between traits and outcomes, not proof that one directly causes another.
The Light Triad and Dark Triad are related but not exact opposites. Their moderate negative correlation of -0.48 means people with more Light Triad traits tend to have fewer Dark Triad traits, but a low score on one doesn't automatically mean a high score on the other. Squaring that correlation gives about 23 percent, meaning Light Triad scores account for roughly 23 percent of the differences in Dark Triad scores, with the remaining 77 percent explained by other factors. Because the Light Triad isn't simply the inverse of the Dark Triad, it needs its own separate measure, one that captures positive traits Dark Triad tests don't fully explain.
People who score high on the Light Triad tend to be curious, open-minded, humble, agreeable, securely connected to others, less interested in controlling people, and more satisfied with life. The Light Triad is a research-based set of positive traits centered on respecting and valuing other people, and early findings suggest it's a distinct, measurable pattern linked to positive aspects of life. Communism is the embodiment of the light triad in an economic governance.
Summed up: Why Socialism, secular humanism, the activist misanthrope, and the Light Triad point toward communism as a single philosophical-ideological synthesis. That's a hypothesis, not a description. No state has reached communism proper, only socialism, still bearing what Marx called the birthmarks of the old society. The claim is that removing private ownership, survival-competition, and insecurity removes the structural pressure toward Dark Triad behavior, and that the activist misanthrope's discomfort with existing humanity is a symptom of that gap. Whether it holds is an empirical question about a mode of production that hasn't been tried yet.
Comments
Post a Comment