The author of the following is unknown.
“Socialism is a philosophy of failure,
the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy,
its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery..”
— Winston Churchill
These are possibly the 5 best sentences you’ll ever read: Unfortunately, most voters don’t know this.
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity, by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work, because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Dr. Hurd’s comments.
This makes me think about the moral and the practical. The idiots who promote socialism claim to have morality on their side. The idiots who try to stop socialism constantly concede this point. When you see Mitt Romney bow his head in shame when running up against Obama this fall, remember this point. Obama will lecture Romney (or any other opponent) on the immorality of even half or mild doses of capitalism, the most any Republican ever proposes. Socialists always win not because they’re right, but because they have the illusion of “rightness” on their side. Nobody plays this game better than Obama. That’s the sole reason he got this far.
But might does not make right. Theft does not make right. Pretense and deceit do not make right. As the statements above imply, socialism is all of these things.
Socialism depends on your unwillingness to ask the obvious: By what right do people with brute power take from some and give to others? What good is there in this, and what good can come of it?
It doesn’t matter whether that brute power comes from an outright dictatorship, or a majority vote of 51 percent. Either way, it’s force.
When you steal from the rich to give to the less rich, you can claim to have virtue on your side. You can claim to equate redistribution by force with kindness and generosity. But they’re not the same thing. If somebody asks you for a donation, you’re free to say no. You’re free to say no with no consequences of any kind. When a government official says you must hand over 20, 40 or 75 percent of your income “for the sake of others,” you enjoy no such freedom. You say no at the cost of your freedom.
Socialist principles are the ones which obliterate morality. There is no morality where force is involved. As Ayn Rand wrote, morality ends where a gun begins. It’s the truth and nobody disputes it, not outside political contexts. If your neighbor points a gun at you because she’s short on cash and needs money, you’d be outraged and call the police. When a politician threatens you with jail for not handing money over to his constituents, you applaud it as virtuous. If you’re part of the majority, you keep on voting for it.
Government redistribution, to whatever degree and however it’s brought about, is nothing more than force and tyranny. The people who do it, and who support it, are not arguing with anything I’m saying here. What they’re counting on is for you not to notice, not to care, and — most of all — not to say it.