Nemo me impune lacessit

No one provokes me with impunity


No Title of Nobility shall be granted by the United States: And no Person holding any Office of Profit or Trust under them, shall, without the Consent of the Congress, accept of any present, Emolument, Office, or Title, of any kind whatever, from any King, Prince, or foreign State.

Article 1, Section 9, Constitution of the United States

If this is the law of the land...why in a republic (little r) and as republicans, do we allow mere POLITICIANS to the right to use a "title of office" for the rest of their lives as if it were de facto a patent of nobility. Because, as republicans, this should NOT be the case...just saying...

The Vail Spot's Amazon Store

Tuesday, June 22, 2010

Is Socialism Evil?

The great science fiction writer, Jerry Pournelle has an excellent blog posting on socialism.  I try to link to writers/blogs who say something with more elloquence than here's what I think is his money quote: 
I do believe that socialism is entirely antithetical to the Constitution of 1789 as Amended. For a very long time the Supreme Court of the United States believed that as well. Now the Court is divided on the subject. A majority of the Congress is held by a party that doesn't purport to believe in socialism, but which elects a leadership that enacts laws based on the socialist philosophy. Government ought to take care of people. Government should spread the wealth around. You are entitled to benefits not because of your virtues, and the wealthy are obligated to pay for your entitlements. It's their duty and your right.

Is it malice to believe that? I would say a great many of the academics in these United States believe it, and many more do not dare dispute it because those who do believe it make it dangerous for anyone in academia to dispute the consensus. Are they all malicious? They certainly believe that those who oppose them are malicious.

And of course it's not all that clear cut to begin with. Most of those who voted for Obama didn't believe that he believed all the tenets of academic Liberal Socialist Democracy. Are all those who voted for him malicious? Is it malice to be seduced into hoping that Hope and Change were real, especially given the past history of the Creeps who were in charge?
Liberal Socialism is wrongheaded. I think its end results are terrible. It's also seductive. Most Liberals I know believe they have good intentions, and that so long as they have good intentions they cannot be called malicious or evil.

I believe that the upcoming election is the most important election in decades, and that its effects will be felt for decades to come. What's at stake are the very principles of this nation. Surely that's clear enough? Clearly I believe that those who voted in this government were mistaken. I want those people back on our side.
 While I do think that society as a whole has an obligation to take care of those who are unable to do so for themselves, I do not believe that I have the obligation to take care of those who are too lazy to do so.  I have worked hard all of my life and I have never taken from the public trough.  When I've needed assistance of any sort, I has sought such from charities.  It's not government's place to provide me with a "living".  All government should do, is secure the borders (ours REFUSES TO DO SO) and to "provide for the common defense," ensure that busisness remains honest, and to collect enough taxes to ensure the above...not to provide for those who refuse to work.

In America, we have a number of rights...but what we don't have as a basic right, it to take from those who work, and give to those who refuse to do so...

No comments: