Basic HTML Version
rbe narion can disappear. O r it can
rurn againsr rhe individual. Ac besr,
rhis union, called "natio nalism." is
merely rhe most noble expression o f
conformiry.
In irs baser forms, rhis kind of !ove
fi nds expression
in
abject conformi cy
to
customs, practices and beliefs. " lt
is a un ion ," says Fromm, " in which
rhe individual self disappears ro a
large exrent, and where che aim is ro
belong ro che herd ." Fromm concin–
ues wi rh rhe rhoughr rhat "one can
on ly understand che power ro fear to
be differenr, rhe fea r ro be only a few
sreps away from rhe herd, if one un–
dersrands tbe deprhs of che need nor
ro be separare."
R eally " Doing Their
Own T hing" ?
Many young people (as do older
people) claim ro be individualisric
and rejecr sociery. The yourhful ex–
pression of
chis
"individualistic"
anirude may be the wearing of our–
Jandish dorhes, rhe smoking of pot.
rhe wearing of long hair.
If
one looks deeply enough, be
finds rhat such groups of people are
conforming ro their own subculrures.
They
are jusr as slavishly dependent
on rhe approbarion of rheir peer–
dominated tyranny as anyone in rhe
silent majoriry.
A human simply cannor reject
cveryone and everyrhing ro stand
alone. Neirher can a human mind
mainrain saniry in a srate of total re–
jection. The human mind cannor ex–
isr in psychological isolarion. Just as
nacure abhors a physical vacuum, che
mi nd abhors an "acceprance vac–
uum." O ne can only reject
thís
so be
can accepr
that.
A mind can survive
being rejecred by one group only if ir
can find acceprance in sorne fashion
elsewhere. An individual musr find
union and love somewhere - if only
with one orher mind.
We bumans are on a continual -
rhough ofren unspoken - campaign
to
find un ion and !ove and ro avoid
being separare. We may lavish affec–
tion on another human being. The
PlAIN TRUTH December 1972
romanricism of rhe " l can't live wi rh–
ou t you, baby" syndrome is o ne ex–
pressio n of rhis love.
Sorne people simply sray lo nely
T hey musr g rapple wirh minds rbar
periodically rhrearen ro sl ip into che
abyss of insaniry. These are the de–
pressed minds of the aged , rhe pa–
riahs, che sick and rhe unloved.
O rher humans d rown rhemselves
in org íes of accomplishment. These
people "ger resul rs' ' by being enrre–
preneurs, salcsmen, rhe besr in rhe
field . che men with a line in
Who's
IV'ho?,
rhc crearors of masterpieces.
Abiliry and tbe need to be loved
drives them ro superhuman accom–
plishment.
To accompl ish is nor wrong. Bur
ro use accomplishmenr for winning
rhe k ind of !ove thar must satisfy
perrnanenrly is ro chase rhc wind.
Today's success is tomorrow' s failure.
D uring rhe Grear D epression, for ex–
ample, many successful men com–
mitred suicide. They had used success
as a lo ve sraff ro lean on ; ir proved ro
be a broken reed.
The !ove which comes from che
approbation of humans is t ransitory.
Circurnstance curs irs power. Circum–
srance made even Napoleon a pris–
o ner on rhe island of Elba. Dearh
rook a Churchill . .For death is rhe ul–
timare barrier to a ]ove rhat can sat–
isfy permanendy. Dea rh makes life
irself impermanent.
Why People Turn to
R eligio n
And so it is tha r since time imme–
morial men have rurned ro religion in
hope of discovering rhe love rhar
really sarisfies. In religion, rhe help–
less, alone and mortal human could
find union with a superior being - a
being thac could love and prorecr
beyond rhe changing vicissi rudes of
family, friends, success, mate, na rion
and even life itsel f and wbo could ex–
plain rhe traumas of life and rran–
scend rhe Jimirs of rime wirh a love
that endured.
But religion became, as Lenin and
orhers so carefully observed, rhe
opiare of che people - a sort of spiri–
rual vodka. This world's religions
merely manipulared che very elemenrs
humans feared by casting a shadow in
fronr of che love thar really sarisfies.
The rel igious use of conformi ty, cere–
monial enrerrainmenr, orgiastic ritual,
fea r of punishmenc, depri varion and
rhe use of military power ro force ac–
ceprance ro a certain way of thi nking
blinded rnen's eyes ro rhe love rhar
sarisfies. Re ligion has seldom used or
known of rhe love rhar would real ly
sarisfy - rhe very need irs adherents
were seeking ro fu lfi ll.
Man: The Helpless Being
To understand whar chis !ove is,
we musr firsr understand ourselves.
Man is, as Fromm puts ir, "life being
aware of irself." He is aware of the
facr rhar ar one rime he was born and
rhat soon he musr die. Man knows
that he does not want ro die. He
knows himself as a separare being;
bur a being rhat is basically powerless
and alone.
"This awareness of himself as a sep–
arare enriry," says Fromm, "rhe aware–
ness of bis own shorc 1ife span.... rhe
awareness of his aloneness and sepa–
rareness, of bis helplessness before che
forces of narure and of sociery, all rhis
makes his separare, disunired exis–
rence an unbearable prison. He would
become insane could he nor liberare
himself from chis prison and reach
out, uniting himself in some form or
other with men ."
Yer chis union, rhis fusion wirh
anorher person or persons does nor
really sarisfy. The ocher person is as
weak as he is. Any !ove or ínter–
personal union wirh a human -
though a very bigh form of love -
muse be subsidiary and secondary ro
the rrue love thar sarisfies.
If human !ove is nor rhe ul timare
Jove, where rhen can we find this love
that will sarisfy?
To find rhis !ove rhac sarisfies. we
muse first undersrand whar has been
overlooked in ideas reg arding love. In
love, one assumes, by deJinirion, rhar
rhere is a un ion. The lack of union -
27