Blame the Republicans… – EPautos

The truth is often uncomfortable. Here is one of them: the reason why the country is about to tip over – to tip over into open socialism, a country where everything planned and so on checked by the people who control the government – ​​because the Republicans wanted it that way.

Of course, that’s not what Republicans say they want. They always say they want “less” or “limited” government. Republicans have apparently never read Lysander Spooner, who explained why “limited” government is always unlimited government. Because how do you “limit” what you have already accepted?

Principles could help – but Republicans never had that. Instead, they have rationalizations.

For example, they never oppose taxes as such. That is, they do not oppose the use of the legalized power of government to take people’s money and lock them up or even kill them – legally – if they try to defend themselves against legalized, violent robberies – as if the money taken from people is less than what the left would take or it is used for purposes that Republicans consider worthwhile to force people to pay “their fair share” for funding. That is, they have the same principles as socialists. That is why Republicans always lose to socialists. Always trying to explain how they manage socialism more efficient.

Never said socialism is immoral.

A great example of this is the Republican proposals to “restore” the socialist takeover of what used to be a free market in health care – instead of end the socialist takeover of what used to be a free-market health care system.

Republicans do not disagree in principle with the principle that government (that is, the busybodies who control the government apparatus) has a “role” to play in “managing” (that is, controlling) the previously free (because voluntary) interactions between individuals and doctors.

How then would such Republicans in principle argument against the government placing itself between the individual and his doctor?

They can’t. And so they don’t.

In the same way, most Republicans support mandatory auto insurance. In other words, they support using government power to force people who drive cars to pay the auto insurance mafia for damages they didn’t cause – because they power cause. And because – so the socialist argument goes – if they cause damage and they have no insurance, then “society” will have to pay.

Of course, the only reason that “society” – and that simply means other people – has to pay is because the government makes other people who did not cause the damage pay for the damage caused by others for whom they have somehow become “responsible.”

A principled argument against socialism would be: hold individuals responsible for the damage they cause. she do not cause or harm people who have not caused harm.

Republicans rarely, if ever, use arguments like that. And that’s why we have socialized medicine. That’s why people have to buy health insurance even if they don’t want it or need it. Because—I bet you saw this coming—they power passing on costs to ‘society’ if they become ill or injured and are not ‘insured’.

It’s also why it’s likely that socialists will succeed in forcing people who want to own a gun to buy insurance as a condition of owning a gun. Assuming they’re even allowed to own one. Because they power use the weapon in a reckless or criminal manner and someone could suffer damage and then (yes, here we go again) “society” will have to pay for it.

Another example is social security – more precisely, socialist uncertainty. The system invented by socialists when they were still posing as “Democrats” to force people to “contribute” money to fund the “pensions” of people who are too old to work and do not have the means to pay their basic living expenses.

The people who ‘contribute’ are made just as dependent as those who ‘contribute’. receivedThe worker who is forced to pay while he works is less able to save and invest what he earns, so that he take care of oneself retired. And so he becomes dependent on younger workers to fund his “benefits” when he becomes too old to work – and lacks the means to provide for his own needs, as he was forced to “contribute” 15 percent of all his earnings to “help” those who were too old to work while he was still young enough to work.

Republicans rarely, if ever, question the underlying socialist principle of this intergenerational wealth transfer system. They are terrified of telling the truth about Social Security because most Americans now depend on socialism and would resent the idea that socialism is destructive and immoral.

And that is why socialist insecurity persists and spreads like an aggressive cancer, eating away everyone’s wealth while increasing the power of those who control the government apparatus on which a large and ever-growing part of the population depends.

The longer this agreement continues, the more socialism becomes the accepted basis for all discussion. And so, for all practical purposes, the country is already a socialist country. There is almost nothing left for individual judgment beyond the most trivial things, such as what to eat for breakfast—and even that requires more socialism than most Americans realize. The government allows that you have milk… that is pasteurized and homogenized and FDA approved. If you raise a cow and sell unpasteurized milk to people who want it, you’re going to have bulletproof vests and heavily armed thugs sent after you.

There is no hope of defeating socialism until people stand up to its principles by socialism.

How it is applied is superficial. What matters is that it is applied. Once that happens, it is very difficult to prevent its wider application, because it is much harder to object coherently to its wider application except on the basis of superficialities. The principle of the thing must always be identified – and rejected. Even when – special when – the socialism being discussed seems (to some) like something that would benefit “society”.

In reality, society iis existentially threatened by socialism in any form and no matter how superficial it may seem. Because if an individual is no longer free to go about his business because of harm, someone else says that he power cause – or because others have caused them – he is no longer free. He is chained to others. Just as an individual who must give up a “fair share” of what he has worked for, a slaveThe . rank his slavery does not change the fact by his slavery.

Society – in the sense of once, before the word was corrupted by socialists – is made impossible by socialism. Because people are no longer free to participate in society with others, each as he sees fit. Instead, a “society” that views the individual as a bee in a hive. One of many. All under the control of a few – or even just one.

Brought to you by Republicans – who either don’t understand the existential threat that socialism poses – or want the same things as the socialists they claim to be fighting.

. . .

If you like it here, please consider supporting EPautos.