Leading up to our LPAR State Convention on April 9th, we will be posting blog posts by our guests speakers, Dr. Mary Ruwart and R. Lee. Wrights. This is the first in that series.
If there is one thing that our elected legislators are really good at it is creating flawed social programs designed, with supposedly good intentions, to improve the standard of living for some poor shmuck that cannot seem to make it on his/her own. It is little wonder that the tax burden placed upon American citizens is so great when we consider all the programs we are expected to cheerfully fund, not only at home but also abroad. The budget proposed recently by President Bush exposes an agenda that clearly advocates a socialistic vision, not only for the United States of America but for the rest of the world as well. Americans are being forced into the position of assuming responsibility for all the world’s ills and US taxpayers are being transformed into global welfare providers.
For years US citizens have been subtlety and forcibly acclimated to the idea of paying for everything from food stamps to subsidized housing to medical care in their own country, propagandized as everyone giving “their fair share” in order to make society better. As an extension of this socialistic mindset our children are taught in government schools the importance of their country’s leadership in the area of global unity which includes foreign aid, funded by taxpayers, to friendly “democratic regimes” all over the world. Yes, we are almost subliminally taught that we are indeed “our brother’s keeper” and that the population of the entire planet is comprised as one huge extended family among which everyone are brothers and sisters. We are taught that complaining about social programs that seem to fall outside the parameters of limited government is paramount to selfishness, and the offenders are often ostracized as uncaring malcontents. I mean after all, how could anyone oppose helping someone less fortunate than themselves, right?
And herein lies the problem with socialistic welfare programs whether they are national or international in scope. All such programs foster dependence upon the agency or department offering them, rather than promoting independent individual effort which results in people providing for themselves and their families. The whole concept of a government founded upon the principles of power deriving from people that act according to personal responsibility providing a safety net for every pitfall of life is counterproductive as it transforms independent individuals into society’s slaves bound by the chains of a perpetually expanding tax burden. In other words, the good little taxpayer, in blatant socialistic style, is expected to sit silently while their elected rulers decide who should give what to whom; and, how much is to be given through this system of forced benevolence. Feeling all warm and fuzzy yet?
Evidence of the addiction to government subsidies, created by the illusion of “free money” that is the poster child of all social programs, can be found in the families living in American ghettoes; as well as, in the legislatures of foreign democracies that have been in existence for decades. We are constantly reminded that if it were not for certain welfare programs acting as society’s safety net, children would drop through the cracks of society’s floorboards. And yet, after years of fighting the War on Poverty, using the socialistic weapon of redistribution of wealth, children still slip through the crevices of society, and poor families find themselves locked in poverty’s prison crafted with iron bars of fear. The fear that without institutionalized assistance they will cease to exist at all. The same argument is used to justify perpetual foreign aid for friendly regimes that are so unstable they will surely perish if not for the benevolence of the American taxpayer. Even though some of these regimes have been in power for more than half a century, we are told they will fall in horrendous wars to their enemies if we stop the flow to the teat at which they have become accustomed to suckling. How did the world continue to spin before the American government took over?
President Bush continues the trend of forcing American taxpayers into accepting the responsibility for other people’s problems in his most recent budget proposals. As pointed out in a report in the Washington Post, “… in Bush’s 2004 budget are $100 million for the State Department to advance democracy, literacy and economic opportunity in the Middle East.” In his State of the Union speech last month, President Bush told the American people that we have accepted the responsibility of educating every child in Afghanistan; and, that billions of dollars will be spent to fight the AIDS epidemic in Africa. These are just a couple of the hundreds (maybe thousands?) of social programs that will be funded by a budget that calls for spending at twice the rate of any budget ever proposed by former President Clinton. If this keeps up, you and I will soon be working full-time for the government and learning to sustain ourselves on whatever meager crumbs happen to fall from the legislative table. We will all wind up welfare cases!
The whole concept of welfare, with its foundation of wealth redistribution whether at the local level or on a global scale, is a two-edged sword. Either you are a member of society that is hooked on the handouts provided by those who see themselves as superior; or, you are one of the ones who is paying for the goodies doled out by elected officials who see you as an endless revenue source. The system is flawed from conception because the process suspends the individual’s freedom to choose where his/her money goes. Individuals should be free to decide individually how the fruit of their labor will be distributed on the basis of where they think their dollars will do the most good. No one should be forced to be benevolent in areas they find offensive.
Freedom allows the choice required to avoid the trappings of good intentions that lead to the sorrows of slavery. People will be better off all over the world if they are allowed the freedom to help each other according to their consciences without the interference and restrictions of government agencies. Benevolence never has been and never will be a government creation. Only a truly free society with open markets and individual liberty can be truly benevolent.
Originally published at Rational Review February 16, 2003.
R. Lee Wrights is a writer and political activist living in Texas. He is the co-founder and editor of the free speech online magazine Liberty For All. Contact Lee at LFAeditor@aol.com.