Trending
Many confuse the Welfare State with Socialism. Some confuse the Welfare State and Socialism with charity.
Nobody is more confused about these definitions than the new generation of self-proclaimed Socialists.
Charity involves voluntary assistance without expectation of repayment. Jesus admonished his followers (Matthew 6) to never announce their charity in public. This separates charity from the politics of "free stuff".
Charity might require reciprocation. Biblically, food was provided for the poor by leaving 10% of the crops unharvested in the fields where recipients could glean it by their own labor. The ancients knew that there was no such thing as a "free lunch." We could use that ancient wisdom today.
When people pull their own weight, charity (or intervention) is only needed for disabled people. However, only people who are prosperous can offer charity to others. Hence, rugged individualism and prosperity are the ultimate social good.
Socialism requires abolition of all private property and wealth under the pretense of the "collective" (see DSA website). Hence, charity is not possible under Socialism because individuals cannot own anything to contribute to others.
The Welfare State is distinct from its Socialist cousin because it does not instantly abolish private property. But the Welfare State depends on the future confiscation of private property and labor by the Government.
The Welfare State -- like Socialism -- is simply government-sponsored extortion where the worker has no say in how the fruits of his labor will be utilized. Both Socialism and the Welfare State are the antithesis of charity because they are based on compulsion.
A good example of the Welfare State was Sweden, whose "humanitarian" objectives could never be met because their Welfare State (ironically) crippled their economy. Not surprisingly, Sweden had the highest suicide rate in the West - though less than in Socialist countries - not even counting the political murders.
The incentives of the Welfare State - like the incentives of Socialism - pervert the moral fabric of society by destroying the individual's willingness and ability to produce. History is our witness.
Sweden dumped the Welfare State in the 1990s. They reduced regulation and privatized most of Social Security, Healthcare and Public Education. They re-introduced free market competition and allowed productive people to prosper.
Hence, referring to Sweden as "Democratic Socialism" is pure nonsense. Sweden was never Socialist, and they democratically voted to end the big Welfare State in a dramatic example of self-rescue. Swedes now have more economic freedom than Americans in many ways. (See Johann Norberg: "Sweden-Lessons for America").
The U.S. instituted its own Welfare State starting with the New Deal and Great Society programs. The U.S. Welfare State is not as crippling as Sweden's was, but we have not yet "self-rescued" by curtailing it, and we continue to endure its consequences. Research by Thomas Sowell (and many others) demonstrates the continuing social and economic damage done to Americans by the entitlement mentality of the Welfare State.
Our Welfare State continues to waste trillions of taxpayer dollars and allows tens of millions of able-bodied people to dodge their moral responsibilities to pull their own weight. The Welfare State feeds crime and drugs and invariably creates a sense of entitlement on the part of those who contribute nothing to the general good.
Advocates of Socialism and the Welfare State ignore an obvious reality: A person can only benefit society if he produces more than he consumes. But Socialism and the Welfare State invariably undermine the individual's incentive to produce the things on which civilization depends.
A person can prosper in a free market only if he serves his community by producing what people want at a price they can afford. Rugged individualism and entrepreneurism are necessary for the economy to benefit the greatest number of people. Economic freedom is our best defense against poverty. Socialism guarantees poverty.
Hence, the moral choice for individuals is self-sufficiency and to never be a burden on others -- to act like an adult, not a dependent child. The moral choice for a society is to remove the chains from individuals and allow them to achieve according to their ambition -- from which everyone benefits.
The immoral choice for the individual is to become dependent and to claim victimhood instead of claiming adulthood. The immoral choice for society is to subsidize individual immorality through the entitlements of the Welfare State.
America initially became prosperous because we did not have the Welfare State, but we are now endangered by the parasitic consequences of it - including drugs, crime, and our $39 Trillion debt. But Socialism will be the final nail in our coffin.
Americans will succeed only if we resist the siren song of Socialism and the Welfare State that lures our ships onto the rocks of economic and societal ruin.
History offers no exceptions.
Michael Dee is a Silver Creek resident and Scott Axelson resides in Jamestown.