- The whole of human existence has been a move towards more individual freedom. From civilization’s birth in the Neolithic Revolution (which freed us from our subsistence, cave-dwelling lifestyle and enabled us to more fully explore the powers of the mind), we have been in a steady uphill push for individual liberty. We instituted governments to protect us from each other and from our enemies, so that our individual liberties are safe. From Hammurabi’s code to the Constitution, we as Humans have constantly recognized the need to leave other people alone, to not harm one another; in other words, to not interfere with each other’s lives. Progressives claim socialism is a leap forward, but it’s actually a REGRESSION, because it puts us back at the mercy of other people, something that was the case in monarchical and feudal societies in the past.
- You anti-corporation people are saying, not that the corporation is too big for you to succeed, or that it’s too powerful for you to have a chance; you are saying that you are too stupid or lazy to compete. You have a parenthetical addition behind “I can’t”: “…so I won’t try…”
- True, the majority of individual politicians might be good, the majority of government might be noble or successful at what it attempts; if that is the case, then you must also admit that the majority of businesses are honorable and good, that the rich are good people, and that all are simply working hard to achieve success.
- The Left uses the convenient line about “Wall street versus Main Street,” and yet fail to understand the values that motivate either. They mock the values that built Main Street – Faith, Family, Community, Country – and they think that the values that built Wall Street were evil greed and a desire to steal money. They don’t understand EITHER value system.
- They want to consume the healthy for the benefit of the sick; devour the strong to lift the weak; rob the rich to provide for the poor. What they fail to realize (or refuse to) is that eventually, they will run out of the healthy, the strong, and the rich. Who, then, will pay for their ideals?
- Charity should come from supporting a man’s virtue, promise, and future, not as a subsidy for his vice, failures, and past. Charity given in guilt demeans the very person you aim to help; charity given to provide opportunity, as an investment is the ultimate good, as it recognizes the inherent worth of each individual helped.
- They want to exist in defiance of reality, as if the fact of their existence proves that they are not subject to reality.
- You have a right to your wages, but the business owner has no right to his (in the form of profits)?
- So the Constitution is a “living document,” but corporations can’t be treated like persons?
- MIRANDIZING TERRORISTS
Suppose your wife and children are kidnapped. You contact the police and, following clues, locate your wife and the man holding her hostage; your children are no where to be found. You figure out that there was an accomplice to the man you’ve located, and that the accomplice has your children. Do you mirandize the first guy, allow him to clam up and lawyer up? Or do you, acting with necessary haste (not knowing what the plan or timeline is for your children), force the guy to give you info on the whereabouts of your children? Would using physical coercion against him in any way be a moral ill?
Suppose you and your wife have $200 left at the end of each month, and my wife and I have $50. Let’s take your $200 and our $50 and invest it in the stock market. Suppose, at the end of a month, we have $500 from our investments. My wife and I take $330, and you take $170. Is this just? Would you support such a proposition? Then suppose the funds remain in the market, and after another month, you take $340 and we take $660; would you support this?
- Look at the Zimbardo and Milgram experiments: Society doesn’t bring out the best in us, groups bring out the worst. See how difficult it is for one person to stand up against an injustice in the face of a group of people who support the injustice? We naturally recognize our own individual worth, until we are forced into a group on whose acceptance we depend.
- So because People are selfish and cruel and greedy, we can’t trust them, so we should institute a socialist system, so that People will be responsible for providing for other people… ?
- Two workers, two owners. One worker is paid $7/hr for working in a factory where the owner makes $75,000 a year; is the worker exploited? The other worker is paid $100/hr for working in a factory where the owner makes $1,500,000 a year; is that worker exploited?
- “You cannot legislate the poor into freedom by legislating the wealthy out of freedom. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. 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 my dear friend, is about the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.”
~Dr. Adrian Rogers, 1931
- A man finds out about a start-up business venture whereby he could potentially increase his investment by 100% or lose it all. He chooses to invest $1 million of his own money. Based on that proposition, is he greedy? If he succeeds, and turns the $1m into $2m, is he greedy? What if he fails: is he greedy? So what claim can I make on his $1m or $2m or $10m if I had nothing to do with his acquisition of it? What is my “fair share” of his risk and profit? And if I can lay claim to part of his profit, am I also partially responsible for his loss? So if he loses his initial $1m, should I be responsible for helping him make up that loss?
- Suppose a board of directors chooses to reward the CEO of their company with a $10m bonus at the end of the year: are they greedy? Is he greedy? Suppose I wanted a raise from the $50/hr I make at work to $60/hr: am I greedy? What constitutes greed? What constitutes a “fair share”
- You are using your own morality as a pretext for telling me how to live my life. I don’t accept your premises, so why should I accept your proposals? Money is neither moral nor immoral; more money or less doesn’t make a person good or bad. At what point did working hard and reaping the benefits of that work become immoral?
- As Chesterton argued, if you don’t have the natural right to rule yourself (to live life as you see fit) how can you have the right to rule me?
TRENDING ON TOWNHALL MEDIA