C.S. Lewis wrote, “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron’s cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Today, we celebrate our political and economic freedom and independence, as a country and as individuals, while some people argue we have to give up everything we have due to the threat of climate change along with the perception of income inequality. However, none of these exigent concerns pose the same existential threat as does the manifestation of a populist political ideology that puts socialism in a favorable light.
This has come about because the planned march through our institutions has created a breach in our foundations that are dependent upon and rooted in the concept of limited government. To say that a socialist government in control of our economy is antithetical to our birthright to freedom would be an understatement.
Ronald Reagan warned of the socialist/communist tyrants as “openly and publicly declaring that the only morality they recognize is what will further their cause, meaning they reserve the right to commit any crime, to lie, to cheat.” What does that mean here in America today?
Constitutional scholar Rob Natelson writes that socialism always fails because central planners don’t have the information necessary to run an economy. When they fail, they seek scapegoats to blame. Today’s scapegoats are the “1 percent,” “Wall Street,” the petroleum industry, the gun lobby, deplorables and white males. Inevitably, instead of owning up to their failures, they would rather gain enough power to either ruin or even kill the scapegoats.
Columnist Stephen Greenhut writes, “The left would have us believe that poverty is only about a lack of money rather than a lack of skills, proper work habits, or life choices.” Meanwhile, they infer that the rich gained wealth not by risk and innovation, but by exploitation, oppression, greed and rapacity.
Our founding fathers considered unalienable the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Accordingly, our national ethos has always been rooted in equal opportunity, not equal outcomes. Socialism is oppositive in that socialism is dependent upon the success of class warfare to obtain equal outcomes, however unfair and unethical. Hence, Winston Churchill observed that “the inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of blessings; the inherent virtue of socialism is the equal sharing of miseries.”
The politicians promoting socialism as a means to “equality” seek to make enemies of our fellow citizens using one of the deadliest sins of all, envy. The stoking of the fires of class envy promotes class warfare, enabling them to seize control, all the while claiming the moral high ground.
They are able to take the so-called moral high ground, in part, because we ignored Martin Luther King, who warned that “The church must be reminded that it is not the master or the servant of the state, but rather the conscience of the state. It must be the guide and critic of the state, and never its tool. If the church does not recapture its prophetic zeal, it will become an irrelevant social club without moral or spiritual authority.”
Mr. Greenhut, in discussing the book “The Morality of Capitalism” by Tom Palmer, reminds us that “capitalism rests upon a rejection of the ethics of loot and grab, the means by which most wealth has been acquired in other economic and political systems.” Ergo, some of the richest people in this world are the despots and tyrants of socialist and totalitarian regimes.