Socialism is Evil Walter Williams
Posted 08-06-2012 at 08:25 PM by whogo
According to Marxist doctrine, socialism is a stage of society between capitalism and communism where private ownership and control over property are eliminated. The essence of socialism is the attenuation and ultimate abolition of private property rights. Attacks on private property include, but are not limited to, confiscating the rightful property of one person and giving it to another to whom it doesn't belong. When this is done privately, we call it theft. When it's done collectively, we use euphemisms: income transfers or redistribution.
It's not just left-wingers and Democrats who call for and admire socialism but right-wingers and Republicans as well.
Republicans and right-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to farmers, banks, airlines and other failing businesses. Democrats and left-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to poor people, cities and artists. Both agree on taking one American's earnings to give to another; they simply differ on the recipients. This kind of congressional activity constitutes at least two-thirds of the federal budget.
Regardless of the purpose, such behavior is immoral. It's a reduced form of slavery. After all, what is the essence of slavery? It's the forceful use of one person to serve the purposes of another person. When Congress, through the tax code, takes the earnings of one person and turns around to give it to another person in the forms of prescription drugs, Social Security, food stamps, farm subsidies or airline bailouts, it is forcibly using one person to serve the purposes of another.
It's not just left-wingers and Democrats who call for and admire socialism but right-wingers and Republicans as well.
Republicans and right-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to farmers, banks, airlines and other failing businesses. Democrats and left-wingers support taking the earnings of one American and giving them to poor people, cities and artists. Both agree on taking one American's earnings to give to another; they simply differ on the recipients. This kind of congressional activity constitutes at least two-thirds of the federal budget.
Regardless of the purpose, such behavior is immoral. It's a reduced form of slavery. After all, what is the essence of slavery? It's the forceful use of one person to serve the purposes of another person. When Congress, through the tax code, takes the earnings of one person and turns around to give it to another person in the forms of prescription drugs, Social Security, food stamps, farm subsidies or airline bailouts, it is forcibly using one person to serve the purposes of another.
Total Comments 1
Comments
-
Posing taxes as evidence of slavery is merely displaying a profound ignorance of what it means to live in a modern governed society. To ameliorate the worst effects of economic inequities and all that it implies is not a bad thing, but the use of taxes to ameliorate the effects of a failed capitalism (bank bailouts, QE, etc) is countering the notion of a democracy and all that IT implies. That is equal to an inverted socialism wherein the aggregate wealth is confiscated to the benefit of a minority interest.
On socialism: no "ism" is pure in it's practical application, on that note it's safe to say that our particular type of social construct with regard to politics is the result of a kind of socio/economic reality that evolved quite naturally from a kind of capitalism that failed to adhere to it's classical form. Hybrid forms of free enterprise coupled with an obligatory tax structure has been the norm in western capitalism for quite a while.
The fact of our current economic situation not being a thing that benefits the many only speaks to the notion of power trumping democracy and little else. In that regard socialism, communism, statism, and capitalism, have all failed man simply for the reason that powerful men, and not the mass of citizenry, run things in the pursuit of their own self interest, and most often to the detriment of the low men.Posted 03-18-2015 at 11:18 AM by jertheber
