Merriam Webster defines charity as “generosity and helpfulness especially toward the needy or suffering.” Many triumph charity as the height of what’s good, but of what good or use is charity to an egoist? Charity for an egoist is a means to help those one values who are in need or suffering. It’s a virtue insofar as one values those one helps, and they are good people. Charity isn’t done in the sense that altruists or Christian conceive of the notion, e.g. turning the other cheek or in penance of guilt. Nor is charity a fundamental virtue, as it is so often in altruistic ethics, which many place it at the center of ethics as such. Instead, as charity is a virtue, it must be a derivative of more fundamental virtues.
The need for charity arises as the cruelties of the world arise, and these deprivations strike the people around us. People are of intense and rewarding value to a person. We can think of a world without other people and find how unpleasant it would be. When people help us, we tend to have a personal warmth and gratitude towards them, even when that help is paid. They make our lives better, both materially and spiritually. A good person makes the whole world better as they reflect and propagate the actions that make our lives pleasant and successful. These are spiritual values that warm and affirm us spiritually and consequently make our material existence better.
It is often that people presume an egoist simply wants to be locked away and hoard what goods he has for his material benefit, often depicting him as rotting from within, spiritually, in the process. However, rotting from within is self-defeating, and it is easy to presume that a person can gain greater pleasure and good for oneself by offering what wealth they have to a person one enjoys the existence of. A person who reflects our spiritual values is often a reflection of us, and charity provides an affirmation and insurance of that reflection of values that an egoist would share. By definition, things that are good ought exist, as well. To withhold cheaply in the face of an agent that is moral and in need is to leave the good and righteousness in need; this dissolves spiritual values in petty or immoral desires. One needs spiritual values, because these are what deeply guide us through the world.
Why does an egoist engage in charity? The motivating factors for an egoist’s charity are love of life, love of people, concern for one’s own well-being in such undesirable conditions, empathy, propagation of the good, and the propagation of good people and spiritual values. These are chief reasons why an egoist would give charity. However, there are likely many more.
However, charity for an egoist, Objectivist, isn’t a ubiquitous or blank check. The Christian ethic of ever-giving charity and turning the other cheek isn’t supported. It is primarily good people that one gives to, not evil. People aren’t deemed worthy of charity other than by what good they as a person reflect. There was no help or charity for the Nazis in World War II. They were killed. Giving charitable donations to a person who is malicious or bad is tantamount to a propagation of malice or evil, as people are the propagators of good and evil. The person hasn’t earned the deference or benefit. They make the world worse, not better. They make it worse for you, not better. The benefit of the good is what charity is for an egoist.
Charity isn’t for helping all, self abrogation, or wealth distribution for an Objectivist. It is given as an awareness of the harm of the lack of charity received and to alleviate suffering. A person doesn’t donate to hurricane victims because their wealth makes them guilty of an infraction. Rather, a person donates to hurricane victims because the loss has left people of value and good in a state of destitution. Your wealth isn’t a guilt, but it is, instead, a good. It would be a guilt to ignore a person in suffering, given that person is good.
As well, charity isn’t a major virtue in Objectivism. Rationality, honesty, independence, integrity, productiveness, pride, and justice are major virtues. These provide fundamental guides to human action, whereas charity would be a secondary concern and a derivative of these more fundamental virtues. The Objectivist virtues make a person a functional agent in the first place, absent any presence of any other person. They’re descriptors of proper behavior and action as such. They are first ordinal behaviors. They subsume all action in our existential state, as such.
As such, charity isn’t possible without foundational virtues. Without rationality, one cannot properly define charity or operate it consistently, with full causal consideration and follow through. Without productiveness, you won’t have anything to give and wouldn’t endeavor through the charity process. Without integrity, there is no guarantee any active charity will be engaged or any step would be followed through. Without honesty, there’s no reason to believe any of the charitable are charitable or that any step of the charitable process is communicated accurately in any sense. Without justice, the charity has no anchor for giving to those who would need it or deserve it; one would just as well have a charity for the richest man in the world or an axe murderer. Without pride, there’s no love of the work and consideration of its value and righteousness. Without independence, there’s no reason for the charity to be judged according to the standard of those participating it; it might as well be subordinated to any stray individual or group that would inject its own requirements and desires.
None of this precludes charity being a virtue. Charity is simply not a foundational or fundamental virtue. Helping other people can be as or more objectively beneficial to you as working harder or effectively at a job. Both can be seen as clear objective virtues for a selfish person.
Charity is often misunderstood in relation to egoists, as an ethic that places it at the center of existence predominates the ethical landscape. However, the love of others is important to an egoist, as is the continued well-being of good people. To sacrifice that for minor values would ultimately be an abrogation of egoism itself.