Yesterday, September 11th, Obama made a speech to the nation claiming the significance and meaning of the day is "community service".
Take a moment to ponder: what exactly is the meaning of "community service", and is it really the reason so many American citizens helped others during the event 8 years ago?
To "serve" means "work for or be a servant to", "do duty", "devote (part of) one's life or efforts to" another person.
Is this what was the help about? Were those who helped saw themselves as servants of the ones under the ruins? Did they see it as their duty to selflessly serve the men in need?
I don't think so. Those people were proud, not humble. They saw themselves as soldiers, not as servants.
"Community service" and what was going on there that day and in the days that followed were complete opposites.
Those people who helped others did not do so because they thought their duty is to sacrifice their lives so that others may live. I believe they did not do it out of moral duty, but out of a spiritual, selfish reason - they valued the lives of the kind of people under the ruins, who shared their values and the American love of freedom.
They were angry at the terrorist attack which stood directly against what America is stands for, and by helping others they were fighting for and reaffirming their own spiritual values.
This was not service to the state or the "community". It was devotion to their own ideals and values.
This is a very important distinction to understand: If someone is doing something for someone else, it could have two opposite meanings. The "Stalin" meaning of "you are not important, live for the greater good", and the American generosity.
If both are "doing something for someone else", what is the distinction between the two?
It is this distinction that Obama wants people to lose. He wants to take the second meaning of genuine generosity and replace it with the "Stalin" meaning of "live for others".
He wants to scare people that if they don't agree to his idea of "community service" that they are not generous, when in fact generosity and "community service" are complete opposite.
Generosity is an extension of one's spiritual values toward another human being who shares them. It is those spiritual values that allow a man to truly value human life, and thus see them as worthy to preserve.
The man whose sole value is to sacrifice his life for the "community" is incapable of valuing human life.
When I help someone, I do so because their own well being is a selfish value to me. I do so because I see in them the spiritual values I respect and have in me: integrity, courage, determination, honesty.
Does Stalin ever helped anyone? He talked a lot about "service of the greater good", "service to other men", "service to the state" - Did he ever help another soul?
His kind is a void. He has no spiritual values. Human life means nothing to him. This, is the meaning of true selflessness, of "community service", of living for someone else.
Yes, the help is extended to someone else, but the reason is not selfless service, but pride, justice and profound individuality.
Keep in mind this important distinction: Selfless service or selfish generosity? The two could not be further apart.