Cebu_4_2
10th February 2016, 11:34 AM
What's so scary about socialism?
2016 is unique, as far as presidential election years go, because one of the main contenders for the Democratic nomination is a self-described socialist. A few decades ago, the word “socialist” conjured up communism in too many people’s minds (remember the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140271694/)?) Martin Luther King Jr (http://www.biography.com/people/martin-luther-king-jr-9365086)., whose preferred form of government was what he called "democratic socialism (http://www.examiner.com/topic/socialism)" cautiously avoided the word because of its connotations, in the context of the Cold War. Today, however, people hear the word and do not wince. That explains why Bernie Sanders enjoys such support from young voters.
What is wrong with socialism? Though often well intentioned and based on genuine concern for helping the poor, socialism is misguided because it gives far too much control to the government. Both the church and the government have a role in meeting the needs of the poor and making sure they are not oppressed. However, socialism places the lion’s share of the emphasis on the government, thereby eclipsing the role of the church and of charitable organizations. Government cannot aid the poor as efficiently as the private sector can. Socialism—government using a strong arm to take from the wealthy and redistribute it to the poor—however well intentioned, simply doesn’t work. As Margaret Thatcher famously said socialism works great until you run out of other people’s money.
Socialism, which amounts to legalized theft, penalizes those who accumulate great wealth, thereby cutting out from under people their motivation to accumulate wealth. Also, it is based on the false premise that your possessions do not truly belong to you, but rather to the government. I believe that if you own something, that means it really is yours. This means you have the right to do whatever you want to with it.
In practice, the government often fails to treat people’s possessions as truly theirs. City regulations that penalize people for “derelict” property are an infringement on people’s rights. Regulations that prevent people from building whatever they feel like building on their own property is an infringement on people’s rights. Neighborhood associations that may be entered into voluntarily, which regulate the decorations people have on their houses or yards, are acceptable insofar as they remain voluntary. This is not an area the government has any business intruding into.
Regulations that prevent people from cutting down timber on their own land is an infringement of people’s rights. Tax programs that in effect take from those who have to redistribute to those who have not—socialism’s very foundation—are a violation of people’s property rights. The government should, insofar as possible, take a hands off approach to regulating what people do or don’t do with their own property.
Christian radio talk show host Sandy Rios (http://www.sandyrios.com) recently shared an illuminating illustration which helps explain socialism’s error very practically. Imagine a class that had been told to study for an upcoming final exam. Some students stayed up all night, laboring to memorize all the material. Other students hardly looked at their books. The morning of the exam, some students failed, while other students breezed through it. To “equalize” everything, the professor decided to simply give every student a C. That basically is what socialism is.
It’s easy to see how, if that became the norm, the students who at first had been pushing themselves to excel would cease to care, seeing that their work would not be rewarded. That is not at all to imply that poor people are unmotivated to work, or that they in any sense whatsoever have brought their poverty on themselves. There will always be people who have all that it takes to prosper, and make all the right choices, and yet still find themselves unable to get ahead economically due to the injustice of living in a fallen world such as ours.
Perhaps the biggest problem of all with socialism is that the more the government aids people, the more the government feels entitled to control people. Here in the U.S. the government is now helping to fund people’s health insurance. This is accompanied by the government pressuring people to make certain dietary decisions and pressuring them to not use tobacco, as if that was any of the government’s business. This is an example of the government overstepping its bounds. The government, in other words, never helps people without strings attached. In the U.S. the “strings” involve forfeiting more and more of our rights of self-determination. Socialism, wherever it has prevailed in the world, has always been accompanied by totalitarian tendencies within the government. As Barry Goldwater (http://www.libertarianquotes.net/G/Barry-Goldwater.html)once said, “Any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away.”
Christianity (http://www.examiner.com/topic/christianity) and capitalism are not synonymous, and those who try to inextricably link the two are in error. There are perhaps any number of economic systems, capitalism among them, that are compatible with the Christian work ethic.
That said, any system that denies people’s right to their own property is contrary to the Judeo-Christian worldview (http://www.christianitytoday.com). We should be keenly concerned about the plight of the poor. This goes for private citizens as well as public officials. From sincere and well-meaning socialists who are motivated to give the poor a leg help, we perhaps can learn something. It is really not a question of whether to help the poor, but how to help them. As Christians, it is our responsibility to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and take care of the sick. That is not a responsibility that we can simply defer to the government.
A big, unwieldy government, controlled by right-leaning politicians is no better than a big government controlled by left-leaning politicians. What America needs is better—and fewer—laws. The government increasingly micromanaging people’s lives, the endless multiplication of government regulations—all of this is indicative of a degenerate society. As Thomas Jefferson is quoted to have said: “That government is best which governs least.”
http://www.examiner.com/article/what-s-so-scary-about-socialism
2016 is unique, as far as presidential election years go, because one of the main contenders for the Democratic nomination is a self-described socialist. A few decades ago, the word “socialist” conjured up communism in too many people’s minds (remember the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (http://www.amazon.com/dp/0140271694/)?) Martin Luther King Jr (http://www.biography.com/people/martin-luther-king-jr-9365086)., whose preferred form of government was what he called "democratic socialism (http://www.examiner.com/topic/socialism)" cautiously avoided the word because of its connotations, in the context of the Cold War. Today, however, people hear the word and do not wince. That explains why Bernie Sanders enjoys such support from young voters.
What is wrong with socialism? Though often well intentioned and based on genuine concern for helping the poor, socialism is misguided because it gives far too much control to the government. Both the church and the government have a role in meeting the needs of the poor and making sure they are not oppressed. However, socialism places the lion’s share of the emphasis on the government, thereby eclipsing the role of the church and of charitable organizations. Government cannot aid the poor as efficiently as the private sector can. Socialism—government using a strong arm to take from the wealthy and redistribute it to the poor—however well intentioned, simply doesn’t work. As Margaret Thatcher famously said socialism works great until you run out of other people’s money.
Socialism, which amounts to legalized theft, penalizes those who accumulate great wealth, thereby cutting out from under people their motivation to accumulate wealth. Also, it is based on the false premise that your possessions do not truly belong to you, but rather to the government. I believe that if you own something, that means it really is yours. This means you have the right to do whatever you want to with it.
In practice, the government often fails to treat people’s possessions as truly theirs. City regulations that penalize people for “derelict” property are an infringement on people’s rights. Regulations that prevent people from building whatever they feel like building on their own property is an infringement on people’s rights. Neighborhood associations that may be entered into voluntarily, which regulate the decorations people have on their houses or yards, are acceptable insofar as they remain voluntary. This is not an area the government has any business intruding into.
Regulations that prevent people from cutting down timber on their own land is an infringement of people’s rights. Tax programs that in effect take from those who have to redistribute to those who have not—socialism’s very foundation—are a violation of people’s property rights. The government should, insofar as possible, take a hands off approach to regulating what people do or don’t do with their own property.
Christian radio talk show host Sandy Rios (http://www.sandyrios.com) recently shared an illuminating illustration which helps explain socialism’s error very practically. Imagine a class that had been told to study for an upcoming final exam. Some students stayed up all night, laboring to memorize all the material. Other students hardly looked at their books. The morning of the exam, some students failed, while other students breezed through it. To “equalize” everything, the professor decided to simply give every student a C. That basically is what socialism is.
It’s easy to see how, if that became the norm, the students who at first had been pushing themselves to excel would cease to care, seeing that their work would not be rewarded. That is not at all to imply that poor people are unmotivated to work, or that they in any sense whatsoever have brought their poverty on themselves. There will always be people who have all that it takes to prosper, and make all the right choices, and yet still find themselves unable to get ahead economically due to the injustice of living in a fallen world such as ours.
Perhaps the biggest problem of all with socialism is that the more the government aids people, the more the government feels entitled to control people. Here in the U.S. the government is now helping to fund people’s health insurance. This is accompanied by the government pressuring people to make certain dietary decisions and pressuring them to not use tobacco, as if that was any of the government’s business. This is an example of the government overstepping its bounds. The government, in other words, never helps people without strings attached. In the U.S. the “strings” involve forfeiting more and more of our rights of self-determination. Socialism, wherever it has prevailed in the world, has always been accompanied by totalitarian tendencies within the government. As Barry Goldwater (http://www.libertarianquotes.net/G/Barry-Goldwater.html)once said, “Any government big enough to give you everything you want is big enough to take it all away.”
Christianity (http://www.examiner.com/topic/christianity) and capitalism are not synonymous, and those who try to inextricably link the two are in error. There are perhaps any number of economic systems, capitalism among them, that are compatible with the Christian work ethic.
That said, any system that denies people’s right to their own property is contrary to the Judeo-Christian worldview (http://www.christianitytoday.com). We should be keenly concerned about the plight of the poor. This goes for private citizens as well as public officials. From sincere and well-meaning socialists who are motivated to give the poor a leg help, we perhaps can learn something. It is really not a question of whether to help the poor, but how to help them. As Christians, it is our responsibility to clothe the naked, feed the hungry, and take care of the sick. That is not a responsibility that we can simply defer to the government.
A big, unwieldy government, controlled by right-leaning politicians is no better than a big government controlled by left-leaning politicians. What America needs is better—and fewer—laws. The government increasingly micromanaging people’s lives, the endless multiplication of government regulations—all of this is indicative of a degenerate society. As Thomas Jefferson is quoted to have said: “That government is best which governs least.”
http://www.examiner.com/article/what-s-so-scary-about-socialism