Quantcast

Redistribution as Slavery

☆astac☆~PWCM 2012/12/25 23:23:21

The idea that we should take from those who have and give to those who don't is viewed as proper and just among liberals. In fact, if you do not subscribe to redistribution ideology, you are attacked as being greedy at best and racist at worst. The problem is that income redistribution in practice promotes one of the same moral injustices found under slavery.

As Thomas Sowell put it: "Not since the days of slavery have there been so many people who feel entitled to what other people have produced as there are in the modern welfare state."

If morality is defined by private property, meaning that a person has a right, based on natural law, to their person and their possessions, and if property is generated by the productive and wealth creating behavior of a person's labor, then it follows that it is an infringement on an individual's rights to use any force (murder, theft, rape, etc) to injure or take away one's property. Using the productivity of another for one's personal gain is immoral.

We can then extrapolate from this premise. If taking the productive output of a slave and using it for another's personal gain is immoral; then taking the productive output of any worker and using it for another's gain is also immoral, no matter what race, color, gender, or socio-economic status the producer happens to be.

Logic leads us to one conclusion. A modern form of slavery has been embedded within the welfare state. And no matter how you slice it, property theft to promote a false ideology of "fairness" or advance a twisted form of "compassion" to gain power is abhorrent. It does not matter how many ribbons and bows decorate the rhetoric of "Robin Hood" redistribution, the final analysis is the promotion of servitude.

Redistributive ideology is not about a safety net for the truly needy or the necessity of government to tax in order to perform its proper functions of protecting people, property, and enforcing the rule of law. President Obama may call redistributive efforts "economic justice," or "economic rights," but in the end, using the power of the state to confiscate property is as immoral as taking the wealth created by a slave to benefit the slave owner.

Those on the left will look you straight in the eye and profess they defend liberty and property; but one need only to read the words of the president in regards to his definition of "social justice."

"I think when you spread the wealth around, it's good for everybody"

"I actually believe in redistribution"

"Spreading the wealth around is good."

'Bring about significant re-distributional change"

"Actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change"

"I do not believe that those two things -- fair distribution and economic growth -- are mutually exclusive"

"I'm not optimistic about bringing about major redistributive change through the courts"

"The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society."

"I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change."

And of course the classic lines "You didn't build that" and "those who do not pay their fair share" underline the president's belief that private property is available to be confiscated while ignoring the unalienable rights defined in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution.

By advancing the welfare state and income redistribution through class warfare, one of the basic intellectually inconsistent ironies of liberalism is exposed: the indefensible practice of trying to defend equality and the dignity of man by violating the human rights of those very people you claim to be defending. The hypocrisy of the left knows no boundaries.

Far too many Americans have shed blood to protect the sacred rights of life, liberty and property. History reminds us the Civil War's fight to end the abuse of human dignity embodied in slavery was a victory that came with a high price.

The nation's current trajectory of wealth redistribution will eventually polarize the citizenry, creating the conditions for an open conflict between the takers and the makers for the simple reason that entitlement creates resentment. Americans must find moral clarity on property rights within the framework of law and republican tradition before inevitable political and social deterioration completes its work and a violent resolution is all that remains.


Read More: http://www.americanthinker.com/2012/12/redistribut...

You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

  • robert 2012/12/25 23:30:59 (edited)
    robert
    +6
    Obama is the new slavemaster to the stupid asses who support him!!! To the rest of us he is a pariah we must get rid of..

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • Spizzzo BN-0 2013/01/02 06:21:09
    Spizzzo BN-0
    What idiocy. "The idea that we should take from those who have and give to those who don't" is the very concept of ALL government--especially that of our Founding Fathers' concept as embodied in our Constitution, where "taking" from those who have (taxes) so that those "who don't" may be helped is the very definiton of government. After all, if every individual could manage security, military defense, and international relations on their own, then no government and no taxes would be needed.

    "Redistribution" is a NECESSARY part of ANY government in the real world. That is what taxes do, by definition.
  • Cat 2012/12/29 05:10:59
    Cat
    +1
    What you say makes sense until I ask myself this question: How is it right for a man to pay himself millions or billions of dollars per year who works no harder than his loyal full-time worker making 45,000 dollars per year, who also has his livelihood and family's well being at stake in the success of the same company?
  • bettyboop 2012/12/28 16:05:56
    bettyboop
    +1
    Certainly there are those who have worked all their lives and paid into the system, that deserve social security, and there are those who are actually disabled to the point of not being able to work. The problem is we have a lot of con artist who latch on and use every excuse in the book to keep their benefits coming. There is blame from the top down. Yes jobs are harder to come by and no I do not want people to starve. There needs to be a system put in place for those who get benefits, that are not elderly or disabled, that makes them want to seek gainful employment, or at least gives those who ever had any, their pride back. I say put them to work, let them earn their benefits. Send them out to do trash clean up, or work at nursing homes, work at our schools, assist with projects that build and repair homes for those who need it. They could serve at soup kitchens, or recycle centers. Those who can, should work.
  • texasred 2012/12/28 03:28:58
    texasred
    +2
    Control... It's about control with Obama.
  • John Galt jr or Ron/jon 2012/12/27 18:36:50
    John Galt jr or Ron/jon
    +2
    Walmart is the country's number one employer, so why is it not also slavery, that several people, make millions from Walmart every year while the people working there can barely get by, adding to the working poor?
  • texasred John Ga... 2012/12/28 03:27:22
    texasred
    +1
    Get over it.

    The Ultimate pro-WalMart Article
    http://mises.org/daily/2219

    Defending a Vilified Wal-Mart
    http://www.nysun.com/business...
  • John Ga... texasred 2012/12/28 04:26:34 (edited)
    John Galt jr or Ron/jon
    +1
    Your propaganda didn't answer my question, "Is it fair, that seven people each make millions a year for giving 2.2 million people jobs that pay so low that most of them are qualified for food stamps?

    Here is other other side
    Walmart is the perfect example of corporate evil in the works. Critics of Wal-Mart call the homespun stuff a fraud, a calculated strategy to put a human face on a relentlessly profit-minded corporation. They were built upon patriotism, be American buy American was their mantra. Look around today's Wal-mart and see if you can find anything that was made in America. Now after beating down and putting out of business all it's major competitors WalMart has move into Super Stores so they can compete against grocery stores as well.
    I have noticed where ever Walmart exists, there seems to be a Salvation Army or Goodwill Store. I guess that's so that the businessmen that were driven out, have some place affordable to shop. Yet we are still plowing down forests and using up valuable farm land to create the empty store fronts of the future... So why are these giant corporations not using the old spaces? Because more often than not the cost of remodeling or tearing down the old facilities is too expensive. So the so called planners blindly go along with the creation of future slums.
  • Kiosk Kid John Ga... 2012/12/28 18:24:42 (edited)
    Kiosk Kid
    +2
    Let me explain it to you. Some people aren't worth much. They have little productivity.


    DETROIT (WWJ) – According to a new report, 47 percent of Detroiters are ”functionally illiterate.” The alarming new statistics were released by the Detroit Regional Workforce Fund on Wednesday.

    WWJ Newsradio 950 spoke with the Fund’s Director, Karen Tyler-Ruiz, who explained exactly what this means.

    “Not able to fill out basic forms, for getting a job — those types of basic everyday (things). Reading a prescription; what’s on the bottle, how many you should take… just your basic everyday tasks,” she said.

    http://detroit.cbslocal.com/2...

    They are usually dumbed down with Marxist propaganda from union teachers.
  • John Ga... Kiosk Kid 2012/12/28 21:37:36 (edited)
    John Galt jr or Ron/jon
    +2
    I attribute that to a total failure of the school system
    attribute total failure school

    http://webstation19.8k.com/ed...
  • User De... John Ga... 2012/12/28 22:40:29
    User Deactivated
    +3
    Ah, the progressive, socialist school system that has turned out to be an utterly abysmal failure?
  • John Ga... User De... 2012/12/29 00:07:39
    John Galt jr or Ron/jon
    +1
    government policy fix it till it's broken
  • Kiosk Kid John Ga... 2012/12/29 00:16:40 (edited)
    Kiosk Kid
    +2
    Yes, union controlled schools are a failure. In Nebraska we don't have union controlled schools. Therefore, our schools teach something useful.

    However, my point was that some people are only capable of making a few dollars an hour. It is not Walmart's fault, it is Marxist Liberals fault because the problem of literacy exist in every large city and they are all controlled by Liberal Democrats.
  • texasred John Ga... 2012/12/29 01:57:52
    texasred
    +1
    They have a job and insurance coverage. Even their part time people have insurance coverage. If they want to make millions a year, figure out a way to do so. Other people do.
  • Louisa - Enemy of the State 2012/12/27 17:32:01
    Louisa - Enemy of the State
    +1
    We are the only nation in the world who has redistributed wealth both within and outside of our borders. How much more 'redistributing' can we do!! It's ironic that 'we' are 'here' when our ancestors had to forage for food, learn to use fire and do virtually everything for themselves! But it's almost 2013 and some of us can't get off our lazy asses and provide for themselves and their family.
  • santa6642 2012/12/27 02:07:11
    santa6642
    Yes correct, any time you take from those who work to get ahead and give it to thoses that are to lazy to work , you are makeing Slaves of the majority to satisfy the few
  • Soundstorm 2012/12/27 01:42:19
    Soundstorm
    Obama will soon have us all toiling for his bureaucratic plantation.
  • Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆ 2012/12/26 22:57:50
    Temlakos~POTL~PWCM~JLA~☆
    +1
    Either that, or it's a bill of attainder against the "haves."
  • Burnjuan 2012/12/26 21:40:32
    Burnjuan
    Greed and oppression are good for you then.
  • TopShelf® (oyo) 2012/12/26 17:04:37
    TopShelf® (oyo)
    taxation itself is pretty much redistribution.
    rebecca hall
    ...mmmmm,rebecca hall! ;)
  • Tordgaard 2012/12/26 14:56:57
    Tordgaard
    We ought not stop the genuine entitlements to citizens who have earned their social security or Medicare - or to citizens who have real disabilities. That comes from taxes and it does seem equitable that we should all have the same tax rate based on a percent of income.

    Having said that, we should stop our current welfare system. Temporary help (due to a catastrophic illness or natural disaster) is humane and understandable but we cannot continue to be providing benefits to people who make welfare their life's support or who are not even here legally.
  • Tasine 2012/12/26 14:52:33
    Tasine
    +3
    WOW! Just WOW! A great article, one of the most complete dissections of redistribution I have ever read. Too bad this isn't taught in schools. In this way the government owns all of us, those being stolen from and those being sentenced to a life of dependency.
  • Jim Tasine 2012/12/26 21:49:34
    Jim
    The article is based on a false representation and set of assumptions. It falsely argues that Redistribution is code for taking from the Bourgeoisie and transferring to the working class and poor. Thereby deliberately distracting you from the MASSIVE transfer of wealth UPWARDS to the Top 1% and especially the Top 0.1%

    "Redistribution" is an argument popular with the Elites and Plutocrats who find it all too easy to enlist the gullible Petit Bourgeoisie to take up their cause and fight their wars. Both political and imperial wars.
  • Tasine Jim 2012/12/27 14:27:57
    Tasine
    What simpletons Progressives are!
  • mk, Smartass Oracle 2012/12/26 13:40:02
  • sbtbill 2012/12/26 11:45:42
    sbtbill
    +1
    Just what labor did someone like Mitt Romney engage in? It would seem these private equity guys make their money by stealing other peoples labor and redistributing the profits to themselves.

    Just what labor to the big oil barons engage in. It would seem they make their money by gouging the rest of us and redistributing our earnings to their own profits?

    Why is it all right for Walmart to follow a policy of taking our tax dollars to subsidize their employee's health care?

    Why is it you righties say it is all right to redistribute income from the bottom up but not from the top down?
  • beavith1 sbtbill 2012/12/26 18:15:25
    beavith1
    venture capital is not what you portray it as.

    ownership/management of an oil company is not what you think it is.

    Walmart's 'rights' aren't being discussed as any sort of 'redistribution'.

    bad analogies, bill.

    taking from those that have to give to those that need is the basic tenet of marxist communism.
  • sbtbill beavith1 2012/12/27 20:56:07
    sbtbill
    Venture capitalism is investing in a company in hopes of building it into something. What the Romney style leveraged buy outs do is not venture capitalism. It is finding an under valued company with a good credit rating buying it pulling the money out and selling the hulk. Romney did it on a large scale, but I've seen it on small local scales as well. Once with a day care center and once attempted with a laundromat a business partner of mine owned. Fortunately I was able to stop the second or I'd have ended up with the rat for a partner.

    Yes, Walmart's policies fit with this topic. A company that follows policies that 1) gets sales tax exemptions to build and thus gets an ability to undersell it's competition is a redistribution problem. 2) A company that hires people and shows them how to sign up for Medicaid is a redistribution problem. What you get is this large national company bankrupting smaller locals who have to play by the rules it violates.

    I run a small cosmetics internet sales company. I have to deal with several larger companies that specialize in selling across state lines. That usually gives them a 7 1/2% price advantage over locals because they do not collect sales tax. I have to be honest and say I benefit from that scam, too, but I advocate collecting sales tax across state lines and advertise in state.
  • beavith1 sbtbill 2012/12/30 06:25:05
    beavith1
    +1
    that was the way that the democrats portrayed venture capital. you left out the start up funding and 'euthanization' function.

    sales tax exemptions? Walmart? they might get local property tax exemptions, but that's the zero sum game that towns and cities play.

    its not much different than watching the three stooges climb a ladder.

    those Walmart jobs that help people join medicaid? those are jobs that Obama counts in his 'saved or created' fantasy number. the money saved by Walmart's customers, that want to preserve their scarce currency for other purposes, stays with those people to buy other things. if the locals can't compete as well as some other company, and you, as a customer of Walmart, are better off, who are you to determine if one option of the other is better?

    as i tell many democrats, its not your money.

    what you do is no scam. you're making money on the inefficiency margin between gov'ts.
  • teigan 2012/12/26 07:58:06
    teigan
    +2
    Great article, thanks for posting it.
  • Jazzyjimmy56 2012/12/26 06:48:09
    Jazzyjimmy56
    +3
    Nice article, however, it will not go over well with the leftists, liberals or progressives.
  • A Founding Father 2012/12/26 06:14:47
    A Founding Father
    +1
    Another long winded and delusion of propaganda. In the past thrity years, under the programs we called "Reaganomics" (deregulated banks, deregulated brokerages, ignoring
    frauds and worthless "securities" sold to unsuspecting investors, outright pillage and theft)
    more than $27 Trillion of net worth was taken from America's middle class citizens by the deregulated banks, brokers, and billionaires who played in the game. Clawing back some of this wealth and returning it to those who once owned it, you describe as "Redistribution" sounds like a means of "Justice", of forcing those who took the wealth by faudulent and abusive means to surrender some of it back to where it belongs. Such may avoid yet another means of readjusting after such plunders, as the French, Russian, Chinese, and others have found more expedient and effective than a slow process we might endure.
  • urwutuis 2012/12/26 06:01:48
    urwutuis
    +3
    What ever happened to the idea of America being fair.. When did fair become bad and greed become good?
    When

    You see unions as driving up costs but not excessive salaries.
    How about the 90,000 lobbyists at 90 grand a pop that spend $2 million a day?
    Are they makers or takers?

    Isn't it obvious that our current monetary and economic system isn't working?
    Isn't it obvious that the tax cuts didn't have the desired effect?
    Isn't it redistribution when those who make the most pay the least?
    Isn't it obvious corporations own the gov?
    How can you ignore the dangers of such a concentration of wealth?
    Isn't this exactly what caused the fall of Rome and the French revolution?

    You talk about the makers and the takers, what does Wall St. make?
    What do hedge fund managers produce?
    You don't think a CEO making 1000 times the average worker's pay creates resentment?

    Americans work longer hours for less pay than most of the industrialized world. Real wages in the US haven't even kept up with inflation for the last 35 years.
    Only one group has seen an increase in wealth over the last 30 years.
    A 275% increase.

    How can you possibly come to the conclusion that civil programs are the problem and ignore corporate welfare at almost 3 times the cost?
    Oh wait. Now I remember. You also th...






    What ever happened to the idea of America being fair.. When did fair become bad and greed become good?
    When

    You see unions as driving up costs but not excessive salaries.
    How about the 90,000 lobbyists at 90 grand a pop that spend $2 million a day?
    Are they makers or takers?

    Isn't it obvious that our current monetary and economic system isn't working?
    Isn't it obvious that the tax cuts didn't have the desired effect?
    Isn't it redistribution when those who make the most pay the least?
    Isn't it obvious corporations own the gov?
    How can you ignore the dangers of such a concentration of wealth?
    Isn't this exactly what caused the fall of Rome and the French revolution?

    You talk about the makers and the takers, what does Wall St. make?
    What do hedge fund managers produce?
    You don't think a CEO making 1000 times the average worker's pay creates resentment?

    Americans work longer hours for less pay than most of the industrialized world. Real wages in the US haven't even kept up with inflation for the last 35 years.
    Only one group has seen an increase in wealth over the last 30 years.
    A 275% increase.

    How can you possibly come to the conclusion that civil programs are the problem and ignore corporate welfare at almost 3 times the cost?
    Oh wait. Now I remember. You also think the market produces the best product for the best price. Hasn't anyone ever actually thought that through?
    The market guarantees you will get neither.
    Then there's the crazy notion that cutting capital gains produces jobs. Who came up with that screwy idea? Has a company ever expanded because it had more money?
    It only grows to meet demand. Give more money to the top and it goes into an account. Give it to the other 90% and it gets spent.

    How can you ignore the fact that the majority of Americans are already debt slaves and half the country is at or near the poverty line?

    I don't understand why it's not obvious that you are supporting the new world order and global dominance by the financial elite. You hated the bailouts but want to give those that took them even more. They're walking off with another bag of stolen cash and the only thing you want to know is if they need help getting in their car.
    (more)
  • fish urwutuis 2012/12/26 06:44:19
    fish
    +4
    Define fair? The problem with fairness is that it is a point of view. What is fair to you may be unfair to someone else. It is a poor measuring stick as it is subjective and open to wide interpretation. Fairness is an open door, an invitation to corruption and abuse. The road to hell is paved with good intentions. Much of what you say is true, but be careful. There are many 1st generation rich people who busted their butts to get where they are. We see people like Paris Hilton and think that most rich people are like that. We see the dicks on Wall Street getting away with unethical business practices that threaten the entire banking industry, yet the government still does nothing. I tell you these people are the exception and not the rule. The thing is, wealth rarely survives multiple generations because the lazy offspring usually piss away their inheritance because they never learned the value of a dollar. Ask yourself, what happens to a country, an economy when all the entrepenears stop taking risks, stop creating and growing business because it is simply no longer profitable to do so?
  • urwutuis fish 2012/12/26 08:47:54
  • Tasine fish 2012/12/26 14:57:03
    Tasine
    +1
    "what happens to a country, an economy when all the entrepenears stop taking risks, stop creating and growing business because it is simply no longer profitable to do so?"

    It becomes exactly what America is experiencing today! For the reasons you enumerated.
  • beavith1 Tasine 2012/12/26 18:18:18
    beavith1
    +1
    exactly!
  • ☆astac☆... urwutuis 2012/12/26 14:48:09
    ☆astac☆~PWCM
    +2
    Progressives destroyed America being fair
  • urwutuis ☆astac☆... 2012/12/26 18:34:07
  • Tasine urwutuis 2012/12/26 14:55:18
    Tasine
    In your world, exactly WHO decides what is fair, and on what basis is that person judging? Government is not, should NOT be in the business of determining FAIRNESS.
  • urwutuis Tasine 2012/12/26 18:34:49
    urwutuis
    Who do you think determines fairness now?
    .

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

News & Politics

2014/12/21 00:28:32

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals