HAVING PROBLEMS VIEWING THE SITE? GET FIREFOX! | A NOTE ON ADVERTISING

   

The seductive lure of Socialism

"It is not considered sufficient that the law should be just;it must be philanthropic.Nor its sufficient that the law should guarantee to every citizen the free and inoffensive use of his faculties for physical,intellectual and moral self improvement.Instead it is demanded that the law should directly extend,welfare,education and morality throughout the nation.
This is the seductive lure of socialism.These two uses of the law are in direct contradiction to each other.A citizen can not at the same time be free and not free." F.Bastiat (The Law)

output

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Government is not compassion

Column: Government is Not Compassion
http://www.strike-the-roo...

[excerpt:]

The single most damaging error of the modern age is the misperception of government as an agency of compassion. As a replacement for the "divine right of kings," this misperception has, for those in power, been an astonishing success. For the rest of mankind, it has frequently been a disaster beyond imagining.

Government is nothing more than structured, widespread coercion, and the idea that it can implement compassion for us by force is simply a vile and cunning lie. It is cunning because people are primed and willing, even desperate, to believe it. It is vile because government allows, facilitates, and encourages mass murder, widespread torture, needless famine, and every form of tyranny. No other tool than coercive government does this.

Everything people truly want and need can be provided without government coercion--and the market is far better at providing it. For instance, Yugo vs. Toyota. Bread lines (or starvation) vs. any American supermarket. Not a tough choice, one would think.

[end excerpt]

Government is Not Compassion, part II
http://www.strike-the-roo...

[excerpt:]

Is coercive government a necessary evil? Or merely an ancient one?

And if the latter, why are we still confused about it?

Every argument in favor of government -- any kind of coercive government -- is utterly demolished by government's frequent mass murders and other crimes throughout history, which continue in the present day. Lesser reasons for turning from coercive government are powerful also; for example, whatever government does, it does badly, wastefully, and expensively. Coercive government is a centralized, top-down, authoritarian approach, fundamentally at odds with the decentralized, chaotic, bottom-up emergent system of human society.

Still, the utilitarian argument pales to insignificance next to the stunning, irrefutable, jaw-dropping fact of repeated, epic mass murder.

Nobody would support a system that even occasionally did that.

Would they?

To my way of thinking

the government CAN give us everything we want---by getting out of our lives to the bare minimum of the Constitution. Remove all tax incentives, because most taxing would be gone. Then our charity would come back, our self-reliance would return, our ingenuity would increase, our entrepreneurship would solve problems, we would be happy and free and out of this nightmare that feels like we are in bondage. Not to mention that HAARP, GWEN etc. are going to physically eliminate our world. WE ALL need to get a grip on that immediately.

Nice quote.

Most people, where I work, think the government should fix and provide everything they want. Not just school stuff, or work tools, but personal items. Many of them get so upset when they cannot have what they want. We are becoming a nation of spoiled children. The government is mommy and daddy, nurturing or punishing, whatever the moment calls for.