Blog

Collectivist Ideologies: The Shared Authoritarianism of National Socialism, Marxism, Communism, and IslamismIn the landscape of political ideologies, the liberty spectrum provides a useful framework for understanding the tension between individual freedom and collective control. This spectrum positions ideologies along axes of liberty versus authoritarianism and individualism versus collectivism. At one end (right) lies individualism, which prioritizes personal autonomy, inalienable rights, and the pursuit of happiness without undue interference from the state or society. At the opposite end (left) is collectivism, where the group's needs—whether defined by class, race, nation, or religion—supersede individual rights, often enforced through centralized authority and coercive power. Collectivist systems view people not as unique entities but as members of predefined groups, leading to hierarchies of value and systemic inequality. National Socialism (Nazism), Marxism, Communism, and Islamism all fall squarely on the collectivist-authoritarian side of this spectrum, sharing a disdain for individual liberty in favor of state or communal dominance. This article explores their common collectivist traits, the harm they inflict on human relations by prioritizing group identities, and the need for reform toward a philosophy of infinite human value, as articulated in Ethical Individualism.Collectivism, as a philosophical and political orientation, subordinates the individual to the social whole, whether a state, class, race, or religious community. It manifests in ideologies that emphasize group solidarity over personal freedom, often justifying authoritarian structures to achieve purported communal goals. On the liberty spectrum, these systems cluster toward authoritarianism because they require centralized power to enforce conformity and suppress dissent. Individualism, by contrast, aligns with higher liberty, viewing society as a voluntary association of free agents. The collectivist ideologies in question—Nazism, Marxism, Communism, and Islamism—exemplify this authoritarian tilt, as they all centralize power in a vanguard or elite to impose group-based hierarchies, eroding individual rights and equality.National Socialism, or Nazism, epitomizes collectivist authoritarianism through its racial lens. Under Adolf Hitler, the Nazi regime framed society as a racial hierarchy, with "Aryans" as the superior group destined to lead a unified Volksgemeinschaft (people's community). Individuals were valued only insofar as they contributed to this racial collective; Jews, Romani people, Slavs, and others were deemed inferior "Untermenschen" (subhumans), justifying their exclusion, persecution, and extermination. This group-based judgment was enforced by a totalitarian state apparatus, including the Gestapo and SS, which centralized power to eliminate individual dissent and enforce racial purity laws like the Nuremberg Laws. Nazism rejected liberal individualism, viewing it as a threat to national unity, and instead promoted a cult of the Führer where personal rights were sacrificed for the "greater good" of the Reich.Marxism and Communism, though ostensibly opposed to Nazism, share its collectivist core through class-based groupings. Karl Marx's ideology posits history as a struggle between classes—the proletariat versus the bourgeoisie—where individuals are defined by their economic group rather than personal merits. This leads to a collectivist vision of society where private property and individual enterprise are abolished in favor of communal ownership. Communism, as the practical application of Marxism under leaders like Lenin and Stalin, centralized power in the state to enforce this classless ideal, resulting in authoritarian regimes that suppressed individual rights through purges, gulags, and forced collectivization. In Soviet Communism, for instance, dissenters were labeled "class enemies" and stripped of rights, illustrating how group identity (class affiliation) overrides individual equality. Both Marxism and Communism position themselves on the liberty spectrum's collectivist-authoritarian quadrant, prioritizing the dictatorship of the proletariat over personal freedoms.Islamism, as a radical political interpretation of Islam, extends collectivism into the religious domain. Figures like Sayyid Qutb envisioned a society where Muslims form a superior ummah (community), with non-Muslims (infidels or kuffar) relegated to inferior status. In Islamist regimes or movements, such as those inspired by the Muslim Brotherhood or ISIS, centralized authority—often a caliphate or sharia-enforcing state—imposes group hierarchies, granting Muslims greater rights while discriminating against non-believers, women, and minorities through laws on dhimmi status or apostasy. This collectivism mirrors the authoritarianism of the other ideologies, as individual rights are subordinated to religious conformity, enforced by entities like morality police or jihadist militias. Radical Islamism thus views people through a communal religious prism, denying universal equality in favor of divine hierarchy.These ideologies' emphasis on group identity inflicts profound harm on human relations. By categorizing individuals into superior and inferior groups—racial (Nazism), class (Marxism/Communism), or religious (Islamism)—they foster division, hatred, and violence. Nazism's racial collectives led to the Holocaust, where millions were murdered based on group affiliation rather than individual actions. Marxism and Communism's class warfare resulted in famines, executions, and cultural revolutions that killed tens of millions, treating people as expendable units in a collective struggle. Islamism's religious groupings have fueled terrorism, sectarian conflicts, and oppression, where non-conformists face death or subjugation. This collective judgment erodes trust, as interactions are filtered through stereotypes, leading to dehumanization and perpetual conflict. Such systems deny the intrinsic equality of all humans, as proclaimed in the US Declaration of Independence: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights." By prioritizing groups over individuals, these ideologies violate this foundational principle, justifying inequality and authoritarian control.“Collectivism means the subjugation of the individual to a group—whether to a race, class or state does not matter. Collectivism holds that man must be chained to collective action and collective thought for the sake of what is called ‘the common good.’” — Ayn RandThe harm extends beyond immediate violence to the suppression of individual potential. In collectivist-authoritarian systems, personal initiative is stifled by state mandates, innovation is curtailed by conformity, and diversity of thought is punished as disloyalty. This not only hampers societal progress but also inflicts psychological damage, as individuals internalize group-based worth, leading to self-hatred or aggression toward "others."To mitigate these dangers, these ideologies must be reformed to embrace the reality of infinite value in every human being, as described in Ethical Individualism by Rabbi Russell McAlmond. This philosophy posits that each person is infinitely unique—an irreplaceable combination of experiences and perceptions—rendering group judgments invalid and harmful. Ethical Individualism calls for interactions based on mutual respect and individual assessment, rejecting collectivist hierarchies in favor of win-win relations. Reforming Nazism's remnants (e.g., neo-Nazism) would mean dismantling racial collectives for universal humanism; Marxism and Communism could evolve by prioritizing voluntary cooperation over forced class warfare; Islamism might moderate by emphasizing personal faith over imposed superiority.“Collectivism holds that the individual has no rights, that his life and work belong to the group... and that the group may sacrifice him at its own whim to its own interests. The only way to implement a doctrine of that kind is by means of force—and statism has always been the political corollary of collectivism.” — Ayn Rand&nbsp;Aligning with Ethical Individualism shifts these ideologies toward the individualistic-liberty end of the spectrum on the right, fostering societies where equality is not a group privilege but an individual birthright. In conclusion, National Socialism, Marxism, Communism, and Islamism are united by their collectivist-authoritarian nature, viewing people through divisive group lenses that harm human relations and contradict the equality espoused in the US Declaration of Independence. On the liberty spectrum, they represent a retreat from individual freedom into coercive communalism. Reform through Ethical Individualism offers a path forward, affirming the infinite value of each person and promoting relations built on dignity rather than division. Only by transcending collectivism can humanity achieve true equality and peace.

Collectivist Ideologies Are Harmful for Human Relations

In an world marked by division, polarization, and collective judgments, Rabbi Russell McAlmond's philosophy of Ethical Individualism offers a profound antidote rooted in the recognition of human uniqueness. As articulated in his book Ethical Individualism: A Human Relational Philosophy and various writings, this approach posits that every human being is infinitely unique—an irreplaceable mosaic of experiences, perceptions, and inner life that no other person, past, present, or future, can replicate. This uniqueness forms the ethical foundation for treating others with respect and equality, while firmly opposing "group judgmentalism," the practice of evaluating individuals based on collective labels rather than their personal character.At the core of Ethical Individualism is the assertion that no two human beings are identical, even in cases of apparent similarity. Identical twins, for instance, may share genetic material and external resemblances, but their inner worlds diverge irreconcilably. Each person experiences reality through a singular lens shaped by personal history, emotions, thoughts, and interpretations. As McAlmond describes, every individual is a "distinct mosaic of experiences," not reducible to stereotypes tied to race, religion, nationality, politics, or any other group affiliation. This internal subjectivity ensures that thoughts, feelings, and moral reflections remain profoundly personal. While humans can share common values—such as compassion, justice, or honesty—or adhere to similar moral systems, no one can think exactly alike. The private realm of the mind, where consciousness unfolds uniquely for each person, renders perfect duplication impossible.This infinite uniqueness has far-reaching ethical implications. It undermines any attempt to judge human beings collectively. Group judgmentalism, McAlmond argues, falsely assumes that members of a category—be it ethnic, ideological, or social—all think, act, and possess character in uniform ways. Such assumptions ignore the reality that groups are mere collections of diverse individuals, each with their own multifaceted identities and agency. Judging someone primarily by their group membership denies their individuality, reducing a complex person to a simplistic label. This deindividuation, as McAlmond terms it, strips away recognition of personal uniqueness, fostering dehumanization. When people are viewed not as "I and Thou"—to borrow Martin Buber's phrase—but as interchangeable parts of a collective "it," their humanity diminishes in the eyes of others.The consequences of this dehumanization are severe and well-documented in human history. By erasing individual distinctions, group judgmentalism enables prejudice, discrimination, and violence. It allows societies to justify harm against entire categories of people, portraying them as monolithic threats or inferiors rather than unique beings deserving respect. McAlmond warns that this process can spiral into destruction, as seen in genocides, wars, and systemic oppressions where victims are dehumanized to facilitate atrocity. In everyday contexts, it manifests in stereotyping, scapegoating, and division, eroding trust and symbiotic relationships essential for human harmony.Ethical Individualism counters this by advocating a relational philosophy grounded in equality and respect for individuality. Drawing from Jewish principles like "Love your neighbor" (interpreted as respect) and universal human dignity, McAlmond calls for approaching every encounter with the understanding that each person holds equal intrinsic value. No hierarchy exists based on group traits; instead, a "horizontal line of equality" connects all humans. Judgment should focus on individual character and actions, not collective attributions. This fosters trust, reconciliation, and mutual benefit, aligning with ethical relations in the 21st century.In conclusion, Rabbi Russell McAlmond's Ethical Individualism illuminates the infinite uniqueness of each human being as a moral imperative. By affirming that our inner experiences render us incomparable, it dismantles the foundations of group judgmentalism and its attendant dehumanization. Embracing this philosophy not only honors the singular worth of every person but also paves the way for a more compassionate, peaceful society—one where individuals are seen, respected, and valued for who they truly are, beyond any label. In a world tempted by division, this reminder of our profound individuality offers hope for genuine human connection.

Infinite Value of Uniqueness

3d render, infinity symbol, neon light, loop, ultraviolet spectrum, quantum energy, pink blue violet glowing line, string, abstract background

In the pursuit of true human equality, few principles are as foundational and protective as the recognition that every human being possesses infinite intrinsic value. This idea lies at the heart of Ethical Individualism, a philosophical framework that emphasizes the unique moral worth of each individual while grounding ethical action in personal insight and respect for others. The Center for Human Equality holds this principle as an axiom to be a bulwark against division, superiority claims, and the dehumanization that has plagued history. At its core, Ethical Individualism asserts that the value of a human life is not measurable, comparative, or hierarchical. It is infinite. Infinity, in this context, is not a mere mathematical abstraction but a profound ethical truth: no human being can be valued more or less than another because their worth transcends finite scales. Just as infinity cannot be doubled, halved, or ranked—∞ + 1 remains ∞, and ∞ cannot be greater than another ∞—so too the inherent dignity of each person defies quantification or comparison. Every individual, regardless of race, religion, ideology, nationality, ability, or background, holds this same boundless value simply by virtue of being human.This infinite equality has critical implications for ideologies and religions. Any system that claims its adherents possess superior value—or that outsiders hold lesser worth—inherently violates this principle. Such assertions create artificial hierarchies, elevating one group while devaluing others. They transform human beings into categories: "chosen" versus "unworthy," "pure" versus "impure," "enlightened" versus "inferior." Ethical Individualism rejects this outright, insisting that no doctrine, no matter how fervently believed, can justly assign differential human value. To do so is to deny the infinity that defines our shared humanity. History bears tragic witness to the consequences of ignoring this truth. The Nazi regime's ideology of Aryan supremacy provides one of the starkest examples. By proclaiming "Aryan blood" as inherently superior, the Nazis elevated a fictional racial hierarchy above the infinite value of every individual. Jews and countless others were deemed subhuman, their lives finite and expendable in service to a supposed master race. This violation of equality led to the Holocaust and World War II—horrific tragedies that claimed millions of lives and scarred the world indelibly. It was not mere prejudice but a deliberate devaluation of human worth that enabled such atrocities. Similar patterns recur across history: colonial empires justifying enslavement and exploitation by portraying indigenous peoples as "savages" of lesser value; religious conquests or inquisitions framing non-believers as damned and disposable; caste systems or ethnic cleansings rooted in claims of innate superiority. In each case, the root evil is the same: abandoning infinite equality for finite rankings. These ideologies promise belonging or purpose to their followers but at the unimaginable cost of dehumanizing others, paving the way for oppression, genocide, and war. Ethical Individualism offers a antidote that puts everyone on the same level of worth.&nbsp;By affirming the infinite value of every person, it dismantles the foundation of such hierarchies. No religion can claim its members are "better" humans; no ideology can assert its proponents are worth more. Differences in beliefs, cultures, or practices are acknowledged and even celebrated under this view, but they never alter the equal, infinite worth of individuals. This principle fosters genuine respect: we engage with others as equals, recognizing their unique perspectives while upholding universal dignity.In practice, embracing infinite human value transforms society. It demands policies and attitudes that protect the vulnerable without pitting groups against one another. It encourages dialogue across divides, knowing no one's worth is negotiable. And it empowers individuals to act ethically from personal conviction, secure in the knowledge that their actions honor the boundless dignity in themselves and others.The Center for Human Equality stands as a beacon in this endeavor, advocating for a world where infinite value is not just theorized but lived. By rooting our efforts in Ethical Individualism's core tenet of equal, infinite worth, we safeguard humanity from the tragedies born of hierarchy. In a finite world of resources and conflicts, this infinite principle reminds us: every human life is priceless, irreplaceable, and equally sacred. Let us commit to it unwaveringly, for in doing so, we build a future free from the horrors of devaluation.

Infinite Value of Human Life

In an increasingly interconnected world, the persistence of prejudice and division remains one of humanity's greatest challenges. At the Center for Human Equality (CHE), we confront these issues head-on by promoting Ethical Individualism—a human relational philosophy that recognizes the infinite value and uniqueness of every human being. Central to our mission is exposing and dismantling Groupism, a pervasive form of judgmentalism that evaluates and condemns individuals not on their own merits, actions, or character, but solely based on their perceived membership in a group. Groupism manifests in statements such as "all Jews are evil people," "all Christians are homophobic," "all whites are privileged," or any blanket generalization that paints an entire category of people—whether defined by ethnicity, religion, nationality, gender, or ideology—with the same brush. This reductive thinking ignores the vast diversity of thought, experience, and behavior within any group, replacing nuanced understanding with immoral stereotypes.Groupism operates through a destructive progression known as the three "D's": Dehumanization, Deindividuation, and Destruction. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Each stage builds on the previous, eroding human relations and paving the way for escalating harm. Understanding these stages is essential to combating Groupism and fostering a society rooted in Ethical Individualism.The First "D": DehumanizationDehumanization is the foundational step of Groupism. When we categorize people into groups and assign moral judgments to the group as a whole, we inevitably strip away their humanity. By judging individuals primarily—or exclusively—through the lens of group membership, we deny their humanity since all human beings are unique. A person ceases to be seen as a unique being with their own dreams, struggles, virtues, and flaws; instead, they become a mere representative of a collective label. This process lowers the perceived value of every human being in the targeted group. Rather than recognizing the infinite worth inherent in each person—a core tenet of Ethical Individualism—Groupism reduces them to interchangeable parts of a monolith, often portrayed as inferior, threatening, or morally defective. Historical examples abound: propaganda depicting certain ethnic groups as "rats" or "subhuman" during genocides, or contemporary rhetoric that labels entire political or religious communities as inherently evil.Dehumanization poisons human relations by creating an "us versus them" divide, where empathy is withheld because the "other" is no longer viewed as fully human. It justifies discrimination, exclusion, and indifference to suffering, all while eroding the moral foundation that should guide interactions between individuals.The Second "D": DeindividuationDeindividuation follows inevitably from dehumanization. Once a group has been dehumanized, the uniqueness of every human being within it is erased. Individuals are no longer seen as distinct persons but as faceless embodiments of the group's supposed traits. This loss of individuality—deindividuation—completes the transformation of people into abstractions.In this stage, personal accountability and personal redemption become impossible in the eyes of the Groupist (racist, antisemite).&nbsp;A person's good deeds, growth, or divergence from stereotypes are dismissed as exceptions or deceptions. The individual is submerged into the group identity, their voice silenced, and their agency denied. This not only harms the targeted individuals, whose humanity is obliterated, but also distorts the perpetrator's perception, fostering a worldview built on falsehoods rather than reality.Deindividuation deepens relational harm by making genuine connection impossible. How can one form meaningful bonds, collaborate, or resolve conflicts with someone who is not seen as a singular, irreplaceable person? Ethical Individualism counters this by insisting that every interaction be grounded in recognizing the other's infinite value and unique essence, allowing for authentic understanding and mutual respect.The Third "D": DestructionThe furthest and most tragic extent of Groupism is Destruction—the active or passive endorsement of harm against members of the group simply because of their membership. When individuals have been fully dehumanized and deindividuated, their lives lose protective moral weight. Destruction can range from social ostracism and economic sabotage to violence and, in extreme cases, murder or genocide.History bears grim witness: the Holocaust, the Rwandan genocide, the Armenian genocide, and countless other atrocities began with Groupist rhetoric that dehumanized and deindividuated entire populations, making their destruction seem justifiable or even necessary. In milder but still damaging forms, Destruction appears in hate crimes, mob violence, or policies that systematically disadvantage groups while ignoring individual circumstances.This final "D" represents the ultimate failure of human relations. Where Ethical Individualism teaches that every human life possesses infinite value—deserving of protection, nurture, and celebration—Groupism's progression culminates in treating certain lives as expendable.Toward a Better Path: Embracing Ethical IndividualismThe three "D's" of Groupism illustrate a clear trajectory: from judgmental categorization to the erosion of humanity, and ultimately to relational and physical destruction. To halt this cycle, we must reject Groupism in all its forms and embrace Ethical Individualism.By committing to see and judge each person as an individual—with infinite inherent value—we restore dignity, foster empathy, and build stronger, more harmonious relations. The Center for Human Equality calls on all people to examine their own thinking, challenge group-based judgments, and engage with others as unique human beings. Only through this conscious shift can we create a world where human relations are elevated, not eroded, and where the infinite worth of every individual is upheld as the guiding principle of all societies.

The Three "D's" of Groupism

the three symbols of Judaism, Christianity and Islam

The Center for Human Equality (CHE) is dedicated to the fundamental principle that every human being possesses inherent and infinite value. This core belief underpins our advocacy for universal human dignity, respect, and equality across all divisions—be they cultural, ethnic, national, or religious. In a world marked by diversity of thought and belief, CHE affirms the importance of spiritual and philosophical traditions that guide billions of people in their search for meaning, ethics, and community. However, we hold a clear and principled position on what constitutes a legitimate world religion: one that upholds the equality of all human beings and rejects any doctrine that diminishes the status of others.At the heart of CHE's viewpoint is the conviction that no religion can claim legitimacy if it inherently views certain human beings as lesser in status or value compared to others. True spiritual traditions must recognize the equal worth of every individual, regardless of their background, beliefs, or affiliations. This equality is not relative or conditional; for CHE, the value of each human life is infinite—a profound and unchanging truth that transcends differences and demands mutual respect.Central to this position is the rejection of any religious framework that endorses violence, murder, or harm against individuals simply because they are not members of that faith. History has shown that doctrines justifying such acts—whether through explicit calls to aggression or through interpretations that dehumanize outsiders—undermine the very essence of human coexistence. CHE firmly believes that any tradition promoting or tolerating such views forfeits its claim to being a genuine path toward enlightenment, peace, or divine purpose. Violence in the name of faith contradicts the universal imperative to preserve and honor human life.Instead, CHE celebrates and recognizes as legitimate those world religions and spiritual paths grounded in principles of universal love, compassion, and equality. Traditions that teach "love your neighbor as yourself," or equivalent precepts affirming the shared humanity of all people, align with our vision of a just world. These include calls to treat every person with respect, to extend empathy beyond one's own group, and to view all humans as equally deserving of dignity and rights. Such teachings foster harmony, reduce suffering, and build societies where differences enrich rather than divide.It is essential to emphasize that this position is not an attack on any particular religion or its adherents. CHE does not seek to judge individual believers, many of whom interpret their faiths in ways that emphasize peace, inclusion, and love. Nor do we advocate for the suppression of diverse beliefs. On the contrary, we staunchly support freedom of religion for all peaceful traditions worldwide. This freedom is a cornerstone of human rights, allowing individuals and communities to practice their convictions without fear, provided those practices do not infringe upon the equal rights and safety of others.In conclusion, the Center for Human Equality envisions a global community where spiritual traditions serve as forces for unity and elevation, not division or subjugation. By prioritizing infinite human value and equality, we believe religions can contribute profoundly to a more compassionate world. CHE invites dialogue with all who share this commitment to universal dignity, working together to ensure that faith inspires the best in humanity rather than its worst. This official position reflects our unwavering dedication to human equality in all its forms.

Our Position on World Religions

Fyodor Dostoevsky never met Russell McAlmond, yet Crime and Punishment (1866) functions as the longest, most harrowing proof of McAlmond’s three infinite axioms that a novelist has ever written. Raskolnikov begins the book as the living embodiment of every ideology that has ever justified mass murder. By the end, broken and reborn in a Siberian prison, he has stumbled—without philosophical language—into the very same moral fortress McAlmond would articulate a century and a half later:Every human life has infinite value.&nbsp; Every human life has infinite uniqueness.&nbsp; Every human life has infinite mystery. The entire 550-page novel is nothing less than the slow, agonizing demonstration that any mind which denies these three truths will be destroyed from within long before the state ever lays a hand on it.We present the evidence in the order Raskolnikov himself experiences it.The Collapse of Finite Value (Denial → Acceptance of Infinite Value)Raskolnikov’s “extraordinary man” article explicitly ranks human lives on a sliding scale. Alyona the pawnbroker is a “louse”; her death can be offset against the future good he will do with her money. Napoleon sent hundreds of thousands to die, yet history calls him great; therefore one old woman is a trivial arithmetic price. The moment he swings the axe, the theory explodes. Lizaveta—innocent, harmless, mentally disabled—walks in. She was never part of the equation, yet she is now dead. Raskolnikov immediately understands, in his body before his mind, that no calculus can make this right. Why? Because something in him already knows her life was infinite in value. The rest of the book is the unbearable friction between his theory (lives are finite and rankable) and his conscience (every life is infinite and therefore unweighable).His fever, nightmares, and eventual confession are not neurotic overreactions; they are the only sane responses once infinite value reasserts itself. When he finally kisses the earth and confesses in the novel has brought him exactly to McAlmond’s first axiom: no future good, no historical mission, no personal genius can ever justify the deliberate subtraction of even one infinite life.The Collapse of Categorization (Denial → Acceptance of Infinite <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Uniqueness)<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Raskolnikov needs Alyona to be a type: “a louse,” “a harmful old woman,” “a parasite who sucks the life out of the poor.” Only by reducing her to a category can he kill her. The same logic later justifies killing Lizaveta: she is merely “collateral damage,” an interchangeable specimen of the helpless masses he claims to champion. Yet every actual encounter he has with human beings defeats this reductionism. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Marmeladov is not “a drunken civil servant”; he is an unrepeatable tragedy. Sonya is not “a prostitute”; she is a singular incarnation of sacrificial love. Even the murdered Alyona, once dead, refuses to stay a louse—she haunts him with her concrete, irreplaceable humanity. By the epilogue in Siberia, <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Raskolnikov is surrounded by convicts whom society has labeled “criminals,” yet he slowly perceives each one as infinitely unique. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">The turning point comes when he realizes that the dirt under Sonya’s feet outside the prison window is more precious than all his former theories, because it has touched the feet of one unrepeatable, infinitely unique person.<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">That is the precise moment he accepts McAlmond’s second axiom.<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">The Collapse of Total Knowledge (Denial → Acceptance of Infinite Mystery)<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">The most chilling aspect of Raskolnikov’s theory is his presumption of godlike knowledge. He believes he has seen through the façade of morality and understood the secret laws of history. Porfiry Petrovich terrifies him not with threats but with gentle irony: “Who in Russia does not consider himself a Napoleon nowadays?” Porfiry knows the danger lies in the delusion of omniscience.Raskolnikov’s torment reaches its peak when he realizes he does not even understand himself. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">If he cannot fathom his own motives—vanity? pity? intellectual pride? genuine altruism?—how dare he claim to have fathomed Alyona, Lizaveta, or the future of mankind?<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">The final surrender beneath the Siberian sky is the surrender of the fantasy of total knowledge. He falls at Sonya’s feet not because he now has a better theory, but because he finally admits that every human being—including the “louse” he murdered and the saint who loves him—remains an infinite mystery. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">That admission of humility is McAlmond’s third axiom lived out in tears.<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Siberia as the Birthplace of Ethical Individualism<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">Dostoevsky ends the novel with a sentence that sounds almost like a direct quotation from McAlmond, even though it was written seventy years before McAlmond was born:“Here a new story begins, the story of the gradual renewal of a man, the story of his gradual regeneration, of his passing from one world into another, of his acquaintance with a new, hitherto completely unknown reality.”<span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">That “new, hitherto completely unknown reality” has a precise philosophical name today: Ethical Individualism. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">It is the world in which no life can be ranked, no life can be reduced to its label, and no life can ever be presumed fully known. Raskolnikov reaches it not by reading a treatise but by living the refutation of every treatise he once wrote. His eight years in Siberia are not the real punishment; they are the quiet classroom where the three infinite axioms finally sink in. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">The real punishment was the six months he spent as a faithful disciple of the Napoleon theory. Dostoevsky and McAlmond therefore arrive at the identical destination by opposite routes. One descends into the abyss and climbs out carrying the three infinities as the only truths that survived the fire. <span style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);" data-mce-style="font-family: inherit; font-size: calc(18px * var(--body-fontSize, 1)); font-style: var(--body-fontStyle, normal);">McAlmond begins with the three infinities as self-evident axioms and shows they make the abyss impossible in the first place. Between them they leave us with a single, non-negotiable moral law: once you grant that every human being is infinite in value, infinite in uniqueness, and infinite in mystery, the door to every crime—and every punishment greater than Siberia—slams shut forever.

Blog

Collectivist Ideologies Are Harmful for Human Relations

Infinite Value of Uniqueness

Infinite Value of Human Life

The Three "D's" of Groupism

Our Position on World Religions

"Crime and Punishment"