That's true and I agree. It was more a rhetorical question than anything, but you've expanded on it considerably and to its advantage.
Given that most of human history has been pre-industrial, I might go so far as to say that being a "selfish asshole" would detract from that individual's ability to pass on his or her genes. Only relatively recently have we lived in groups which weren't mostly if not entirely kin-based. Being a selfish asshole and increasing your own short-term fitness decreases that of the entire group, most if not all of whom are your close kin and pass on the same genes that you possess.
There's no necessity for a social sanction against freeloading, although most cultures have developed one, as you said, for the good of the group.
As an interesting aside, this is also the argument for a genetic component of homosexuality - homosexual and non-reproducing adults increase the resources available for child-rearing, while retaining the ability to reproduce in case of disaster. The presence of contributing adults enhances group fitness just as the presence of freeloading adults detracts from it.
I might also hypothesize, through no authority but my own, that dyed-in-the wool freeloaders, lacking empathy and being unreceptive to social coercion, would be poor child-rearers. This is all guesswork, of course, but the canonical freeloader, the psychopath, tends to have seriously disadvantaged children through neglect. (The college-based libertarian, on the other hand, usually does fine when he or she grows up). So it's entirely possible that the selfish dooms him or herself, not personally, but through successive generations.
Selfishness tends to be a good short-term strategy, and altruism a good long-term one. Of course, selfishness and altruism are both suicidal in the extreme (freeloaders decrease group fitness, while giving away all the fruits of your labours without making any provision for your own survival makes equally poor sense).
However, Christopher's definition of altruism seems to include any sharing/collective behaviour period. Which is his problem, I suppose, because many of those behaviours are net advantages, not disadvantages, to the individual. One might surmise that his objections are chiefly ideological, rather than practical, and he doesn't really care about nitty-gritty academic discussions on substance. Or he's a troll bent on arousing violent passions through specious argument.
If anyone cares to hold the bets, I'll put money up that he is, in fact, a troll, rather than a genuine ideologue or politically-minded individual.
It's certainly made for an interesting weekend on LBO-Talk - perhaps I should modify the archiver to run more often.
(And for anyone that hasn't noticed, nuance.dhs.org has been up since last Thursday. Thank you, DHS.)
Marco
,--------------------------------------------------------------------------.
> Marco Anglesio | There is no premature anti-fascism. <
> mpa at the-wire.com | --Ernest Hemingway <
> http://www.the-wire.com/~mpa | <
`--------------------------------------------------------------------------'