Socialism Versus the Libertarian Ethic

Letter Re: A Clash of World Views--Socialism Versus the Libertarian Ethic

Mr Rawles,
I have been a survival blog reader for over a year now, and my hat is off to you, sir. "Patriots: Surviving the Coming Collapse", and the information presented on these pages have been extremely positive influences in my planning and preparations. While I have been, to this point, content to absorb the wealth of knowledge presented here, I was compelled by a recent post to submit this correspondence.

In [the letter posted on Sunday] titled "Clash of World Views”, David D. makes the claim that “We’ve had our grand experiment in deregulation and the magic of the market, and it’s now perfectly clear where it got us.” I would respectfully submit that a deregulated free market and personal responsibility are quite a bit removed from the causal factors in the current state of affairs, which is more correctly attributable to injections of “equality” and “safety nets” into what would be a self-regulating system, otherwise. Where equality is the goal, excellence is a casualty. When the incentive for achievement is removed, mediocrity and sloth are inevitable results. If excellence and success are not rewarded, but instead, the products of those efforts are forcibly redistributed by government intervention, we are enabling the parasitic existence of an exponentially growing number of non-contributing dependents. Gone, too, is the incentive to get off the dole. When receiving assistance from the charity of a neighbor, a reasonable man soon endeavors to better their condition in order to remove the requirement of outside help, and indeed, to pay back the favor in whatever way possible. When the system provides sustenance through the form of an anonymous check every month, the incentive to better one’s condition has been removed by the government “safety net”. Measures meant to protect equality and provide safety invariable hamstring the self-regulating nature of a free market, and we have, in this country, injected enough equality and safety into what started as a free market to strangle and pervert the “grand experiment” into a near unrecognizable form.

I am greatly disheartened at where we now find ourselves, so far from the intent of our founding fathers, when all men were created equal, but where they went from there was based on their own exertions, and not augmented by the social “entitlements” they were eligible for. Wise men began this endeavor in federal government with the intent to keep the entity small and out of most state affairs. With a staggering portion of the national budget now going towards entitlements, in effect, redistributing wealth, and with volumes of regulatory and mala prohibita nonsense, we are a far cry from a free market. We have long been sliding down the slippery slope into a socialist democracy where those supported by the efforts of better men have the electoral power to increase their claim to the fruits of the labor of others through votes, sympathy, and by invoking a twisted sense of social guilt. We have been legislated into chains, and each year, as our liberties are taken under the guise of stewardship, they grow heavier.

We need more people willing to take ownership of their own destiny, and fewer victims waiting for rescue. We need less regulation, more liberty, and the attendant greater personal responsibilities. Our founders meant to provide these conditions in perpetuity through the Constitution for these United States, and I truly believe that if we can undertake stripping back the perversions we have applied to their intent, this document from our past is the key to a successful future. I, for one, would welcome a world where “equality” refers to the interaction among men according to the Golden Rule, and the “safety nets” are provided by family, community, church, and charity, instead of through wasteful and overbearing government redistribution. Thanks for all you do, - D.

http://www.survivalblog.com/