#individual development

Liberalism knows nothing of the personality, it knows only of the individual, which represents the degradation and almost the caricature of the personality; and with its egalitarian and levelling ideology, it destroys the very possibility for the person, the very possibility that the individual might have value.

This is why in relation to modern civilization we should speak not of 'active civilization' but of a restless and neurotic one. As compensation for 'work,' and a reaction against the strain of a life that has been reduced to a vain acting and producing, Classical otium (Idleness) --- contemplation, silence, the state of calm and pause allowing one to return to oneself and find oneself again ---- is foreign to modern man. No: all he knows is 'distraction' (the literal meaning of which is 'dispersion'), he looks for sensations, for new tensions and new stimuli --- almost as psychic narcotics. Anything, as long as he can escape from himself, isolated from the noise of the outside world and his 'neighbor.' Hence the radio, television, cinema, cruises, the frenzy of sports or political rallies in a regime of the masses, the need to hear things, to chase after the latest, or most sensational, news, 'supporters' of all kinds, and so on. Every expedient seems to have been diabolically brought into play in order to destroy any kind of genuine inner life, to prevent any internal defense of one's personality, so that, almost like an artificially galvanized being, the individual will let himself be swept away by the collective current, which -- naturally, according to the famous 'meaning of history' ---moves forward according to an unlimited progress.

Individuality, when it commits itself to the objective element in putting itself into a deed, does of course risk being altered and perverted. But what settles the character of the deed is just this: whether the deed is an actual being that endures, or whether it is merely a fancied performance, that in itself is nothing at all, and passes away.

The being of Spirit cannot in any case be taken as something fixed and immovable. Man is free; it is admitted that the original being consists merely of dispositions, about which a man is free to do much as he wishes, or which require favorable circumstances for their development, i.e. an original being of spirit is equally well to be spoken of as a being that does not exist qua being.

The oath of a sovereign is totally different than swearing on some abstraction, like the constitution. The ethics of 'service' assume, in the monarchical regime, a particular dignity: to see in service to the state and to the sovereign an honor and a privilege, not paid employment. There is no need to mention that special prominence that all of this has in the official corps. The sense of responsibility, free dedication, active impersonality, fidelity and honor find in the monarchical climate the natural soil for their development.

Individual Development Plan For Self-Improvement

Moving From Concept to Execution: Implementing Developmental Growth Opportunities at Work