This is an excellent article and should be read.

On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 12:30 AM, M.A. Johnson <[email protected]> wrote:

>
> *Socialism Is Cruel
> *by Bill Butler
>
> Many today view socialism as the kindest and gentlest method of organizing
> civilized society. Dyed-in-the-wool socialists are referred to as "bleeding
> hearts" because of the popular perception that they possess heightened
> empathy for the downtrodden. The sellers of socialism – whether left-wing 
> Fabian
> socialists <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fabian_socialism> or right-wing 
> revolutionary
> socialists <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Socialism> – always
> peddle their theory as the best means for society to provide a social
> "safety net" for those who are left behind by the ravages of the free
> market. The truth, however, is that socialism is incalculably cruel and
> particularly cruel to those it attempts to benefit.
>
> Socialism as a political philosophy was best summarized William Graham
> Sumner in his 1883 "Forgotten Man" 
> essay<http://www.swarthmore.edu/SocSci/rbannis1/AIH19th/Sumner.Forgotten.html>
> :
>
>  As soon as A observes something which seems to him to be wrong, from
> which X is suffering, A talks it over with B, and A and B then propose to
> get a law passed to remedy the evil and help X. Their law always proposes to
> determine what C Shall do for X or, in the better case, what A, B and C
> shall do for X…What I want to do is to look up C …I call him the Forgotten
> Man…He is the man who is never thought of. He is the victim of the reformer,
> social speculator, and philanthropist, and I hope to show you before I get
> through that he deserves your notice both for his character and for the many
> burdens which are laid upon him.
>
> Although Sumner and his followers, including Henry 
> Hazlitt<http://www.mises.org/store/Economics-in-One-Lesson-P33.aspx?AFID=14>and
>  other Austrian economists, correctly point to C as a victim of A and B's
> social engineering, they fail to recognize that it is really X who is most
> victimized. This is because the only thing that is taken from C is property,
> which can be replaced, while the theft from X is of things dearer that can
> never be replaced – X's time and social utility. This is because in a
> perfectly free market everyone is "doing" things that they love to "do" and
> receiving receipts from the market – for the moment, dollars – for their
> service to the market. Spending our most valuable and ever-depleting
> resource – time – doing the things that we love to do, is the key to
> happiness and success. If you doubt this, find the increasingly rare person
> who is so happy with their job that they say "I would to this job for free."
> If you ask this person what they most like to "do," you will find that their
> job involves doing the things that they most like to do. These people have
> found their niche, their place in the market. When A and B decide to employ
> X or direct X to behave in ways that they, not X, desire, they are wasting
> X's time, social utility and thus wasting X's life.
>
> For example, when A and B (e.g. President Elect Obama and the socialist
> Congress) see the temporary condition of X's unemployment, A and B seek to
> "fix" the problem by employing X to "do" something that A and B deem
> socially desirable – e.g. installing a nationwide system of high-speed
> internet. A and B sell the program as a benevolent means of providing X with
> work and further point out that the new system will also help disadvantaged
> Y who does not presently have access to the internet. A and B do not tell C,
> D, E or anyone else in the alphabet population that, because A and B have
> caused the new system to be created, A and B will inherit the power to
> regulate the most powerful means of communication and education in the
> history of mankind. This comes later, after the entire alphabet population
> has overcome its giddiness over the new "free" internet. When civil
> libertarians who supported the charitable internet project object to A and
> B's obtrusive regulation and monitoring, A and B or their successors claim
> that they "paid for it" and so have the power to regulate it. If anyone else
> in the alphabet has the temerity to challenge A and B's good intentions, J,
> a judge appointed by A and approved by B, dutifully agrees with A and B.
>
> But what about poor X? X is an honest man and yearns to do the work of a
> carpenter, building and improving permanent structures. He was sitting in
> the unemployment line hoping and praying that someone in need of an honest
> carpenter would hire him. Meanwhile, R, a real-estate investor who has
> acquired several foreclosed properties in a beaten-down part of town, is in
> need of an honest carpenter who he can hire to repair and refurbish his
> properties and prepare them for resale. R wants to employ X and hire X to do
> what he loves to do – carpentry. The problem is that A and B also want to
> employ X but hire him to do what they want him to do – lay cable. In this
> competition for X's labor, R is at a distinct disadvantage. R, unlike A and
> B, does not have the power to tax and thus coerce others to pay for his
> endeavor and further does not have the power to finance his operation by
> selling below-market debt to CB, A and B's central bank. In short, A and B
> can literally print X's wages and coerce others to pay for their endeavor
> while R must use his own finite capital.
>
> Given A and B's bidding advantage, when X looks at his options, the thing
> that he loves to do – carpentry – pays much less than the cable installation
> job. Because there is no real market demand for the job, A and B must set
> the wage price at a level that will cause X to abandon his dream of doing
> carpentry. X has three little x's mouths to feed and so takes the
> higher-paying job laying cable. Poor X spends eight years of his life doing
> something that he does not like to do and something the market is not
> demanding from him – climbing telephone poles, snipping coaxial cable, etc.
> At the end of the eight years, X has died from overeating, abusing alcohol
> and the health problems that result from his Faustian 
> bargain<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faustian_Bargain>.
> R? Well R's houses sit vacant or are shoddily repaired and refurbished
> because A and B have stolen X from R and forced R to hire people that are
> not as qualified as X. A and B point to the shiny new cable lines and pat
> themselves on the back for repairing the "market failure" and for providing
> internet access to millions that did not have it before. A and B then turn
> their attention to R. They excoriate R for being a slumlord that profits
> from shoddily repaired homes. A and B decide to "do something" about the
> problem and decide to expand their power to condemn and redevelop private
> property. The economic bubble from the internet construction has now burst,
> forcing X's son, little x, on the unemployment lines. Little x loves to lay
> cable. A and B want him to be a carpenter. And so it goes.
>
> And what if X likes to lay cable (or build cars) and the free market offers
> no jobs laying cable? Aren't A and B doing a public good by employing X to
> do what he loves to do? No. The market is not static and neither is any
> single individual. The most challenging part of all of our lives is managing
> transitions – matching what we like to do with what the market wants from
> us. If the market will no longer pay X to lay cable, we do X no favor by
> employing him to do something that is economically obsolete. A and B are
> still wasting X's time and therefore his life if they employ him to do
> something that the market is not demanding. X the individual must search his
> skill set and identify other things he likes to do and match them with
> market demand. When he does this he serves the market and builds real
> self-worth. The decision over what X does with his life is therefore a
> decision that only X can make. A and B do incalculable violence to X and the
> free market when they misdirect his labor and compel him to do things that
> he does not love to do.
>
> Cruel, isn't it?
>
> http://www.lewrockwell.com/butler-b/butler-b10.html
> >
>


-- 
*~@):~{>

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to