02-18-2012
Permalink
The Hammock
|
Subject: Wealth Redistribution, By Any Other Name, Is Still
Slavery
Recently, Florida's Republican Representative, Allen West, gave a
speech in Congress
where he stated:
|
Our party firmly believes in the safety net. We reject the
idea of the safety net becoming a hammock.
[T]he Democratic appetite for ever-increasing redistributionary
handouts is in fact the most insidious form of slavery
remaining in the world today, and it does not promote economic
freedom.
|
Michael J. Hurd has written an excellent piece on West's statements
titled,
The
Self-Imposed Slavery of the Redistribution State, and I highly
recommend that everyone first listen to West's short speech and then
read Hurd's article in full. Rather than duplicate his analysis, I
will just quote a few passages:
|
Becoming a hammock? Rep. West, that ship has sailed.
A majority of Americans now depend on some form of government
handouts. This includes rich whites as much as anyone else.
These handouts include mortgage subsidies, farm subsidies,
essentially permanent unemployment benefits, corporate
bailouts, union favors, medical care, Medicare, Social
Security, ObamaCare and a host of other goodies as far as
the eye can see.
West is fatally wrong when he makes a distinction between the
government "safety net" rather than a hammock. Whether
government provides a "safety net" or a "hammock," in either
case it's at the expense of people who are forced to provide it.
America, once the land of the free and the home of the ruggedly
individualistic, is now a middle class, government-benefit
entitlement society. America is the land of Big Babies.
Unfortunately, Republicans like Allen West enable the problem
by engaging in the pretense that there's any difference between
a government "safety net" or "hammock."
Government can force us to make hammocks or nets for others
deemed deserving. But either way, it's still slavery.
|
In fact, West gets his analogy completely wrong. Redistributive
entitlements are neither a safety net, protecting us in times
of emergency, nor are they a hammock, affording us with a life
of leisure. They are more akin to a fishing net, which
indiscriminately sweep us all into its trap, robbing every person of
their freedom and independence. Those on the receiving end of the
distribution become dependent beggars (Hurd's "Big Babies")
whose survival rests in the hands of a government that supports them
in exchange for their compliance and their vote. Those on the supply
end of the chain are forcibly relieved of the product of their efforts
while their actions are severely restricted through regulations. The
concept of the autonomous individual with the liberty to pursue their
own definition of happiness, while accepting responsibility for their
own life, is nowhere to be found. The American dream is dead.
On January 22, 2010, Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute informed us
that the Federal government's "Catalog
of Federal Domestic Assistance" (CFDA) had reached the milestone of
2,000 different subsidy programs for individuals, businesses, or state
and local governments. I have previously reported on this a number of
time,
here,
here,
and
here.
However, taking another look today reveals that the number of programs
now stands at 2,199. This means that during the past two years, 100
new programs continued to be added each year — more than eight
new programs every month!
This is the means by which your wealth is being redistributed to
others. And remember, we elected a Republican majority in the House
in 2010 — the place where all spending bills originate. Yet,
there has been no decrease in government spending, no reduction in
taxes, and no slowdown in the creation of these programs. Because,
as Hurd points out in his article, the GOP is every bit as committed
to the philosophy of the welfare state as are the Democrats —
which means that Republicans are every bit as committed to our
subjugation.
We know all too well where President ("I do think at a certain
point you've made enough money") Obama stands on wealth
redistribution and entitlements. Now listen to the other GOP
candidates. With the exception of Ron Paul who advocates the
phase-out and eventual elimination of these programs, Romney,
Gingrich and Santorum are all staunch advocates of entitlements.
They may pay lip service during their campaigning to "restructuring"
or "reducing" these programs, but they are in no way advocating
that they are wrong in principle. And this means that they do not
believe, in principle, that your life is your own, to do with as
you see fit.
So every time you hear a politician speak about welfare, or
entitlements, or bailouts, or financial assistance, or the needs of
others, just stop and substitute in the word "slavery".
Because that is the unstated implication that they hope you will
never recognize. And freeing yourself from this slavery is the
most important reason for engaging in today's battle for serious
government reform.
|
