State-Run Programs for the Poor, or Individual Responsibility for Helping Those in Need?

The following debate originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “Paying Taxes Will NEVER Qualify as Giving to “Charity””

Rayn: Wake up to the illegitimacy of coercion!

"It's amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people yourself is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness. People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered. If we're compassionate, we'll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint." - Penn Jillette

“It’s amazing to me how many people think that voting to have the government give poor people money is compassion. Helping poor and suffering people yourself is compassion. Voting for our government to use guns to give money to help poor and suffering people is immoral self-righteous bullying laziness. People need to be fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered. If we’re compassionate, we’ll help them, but you get no moral credit for forcing other people to do what you think is right. There is great joy in helping people, but no joy in doing it at gunpoint.” – Penn Jillette

Brian K.: But for the people in need of being fed, medicated, educated, clothed, and sheltered it’s all the same. Self-righteous joy and moral credit (kind of defeats the purpose of altruism) is a luxury. I think their immediate needs are greater than leaving it to the chance of charity and some generous volunteers.

Rayn: Hmm… I have a quick question for you, Brian. Have you ever been one of the “people in need” that you refer to? Well, I have – and, I can say for certain that the various forms of assistance out there in this world are not “all the same,” as you claim. This is true no matter how dire the individual situation at hand. And, forcing an apathetic public to finance a corrupt, soulless institution (whether the “State,” or otherwise), purely in the HOPE and FAITH that a lack of direct concern for (and interest in) the ACTUAL welfare of others will miraculously translate into anything other than systemic ABUSE, NEGLECT, AND FRAUD… Those individuals are living in a PURE FANTASY LAND!

My experiences have long ago opened my eyes to the fact that those hired by the State to “aid” the needy not only loath the poor and destitute, but also actively seek to punish, demean, degrade, demoralize, and strip the dignity of those they are duty-bound to assist. State aid for the poor is nothing more than a rotten fraud, and a dismal failure – giving the apathetic an excuse not to help those in need (nor, to lift so much as a finger, or to get their own hands dirty, for that matter), and the sadly misinformed, yet good-intentioned, a reason not to act!

(Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

The Coercive Nature of Statism

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Statism Is Slavery,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

"Statism: ideas so good they have to be mandatory" (artwork by Bastiat Institute)

“Statism: ideas so good they have to be mandatory” (artwork by Bastiat Institute)

My Commentary: No need for reason when you possess a legal monopoly on violence!

Should “Good Ideas” Be Mandatory, or Is Such Coercion Just Another Form of Slavery?

The following debate originally took place on my Facebook wall, upon my post, “Good Ideas Don’t Require Force!“…

Rayn: Apparently, the authoritarians among us will continue to arrogantly force their “great ideas” upon us, because REASON and CONSENT are not as important to them as BLIND FAITH and COMPLIANCE!

It’s time for Individuals to wake up, and reject ALL FORMS OF COERCION as illegitimate!

"Good ideas don't require force"

“Good ideas don’t require force”

Jonas A.: That’s right! No “brown” nosing to get us to work for free!  😛

Brian K.: That assumes most people would be smart enough to recognize the good ideas.
“We must view with profound respect the infinite capacity of the human mind to resist the introduction of useful knowledge.”
Thomas R. Lounsbury

Genaire: Brian how would we measure ones intelligence… an iq test? I know several people that would do extremely well on an iq test yet would be unable to survive without the aide of others. I also know several people in school that consider themselves to be very intelligent yet have not tested this intelligence outside the sheltered environment of a classroom. Then one has to ask himself what overlord would one place in charge of determining this said intelligence the government? I know of governments that deemed unintelligent people worthy of extermination. In a free society however one does not have to worry themself about those arrogant few who deem themselves intelligent enough to decide what a good or bad idea may or may not be.

(Click Here to Continue Reading This Post)

Good Ideas Don’t Require Force!

As I scrolled through my Facebook news feed, I discovered the following artwork here, being shared by the page, “Statism Is Slavery,” and originally posted it to my own wall, along with commentary…

"Good ideas don't require force"

“Good ideas don’t require force”

My Commentary: Apparently, the authoritarians among us will continue to arrogantly force their “great ideas” upon us, because REASON and CONSENT are not as important to them as BLIND FAITH and COMPLIANCE!

It’s time for Individuals to wake up, and reject ALL FORMS OF COERCION as illegitimate!

Voting is Coercive, and Should Not Be Taken as Proof of Consent

The following correspondence originally took place upon my Facebook wall, after I posted artwork being shared by the page, “Stateless Sweets“…

Rayn:

"Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results."

“Insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”

Steve L.: The average American doesn’t have much power to influence their government. Use what power you have carefully.

“When people put their ballots in the boxes, they are, by that act, inoculated against the feeling that the government is not theirs. They then accept, in some measure, that its errors are their errors, its aberrations their aberrations, that any revolt will be against them. It’s a remarkably shrewd and rather conservative arrangement when one thinks of it.” ~ John Kenneth Galbraith, The Age of Uncertainty (1977), Chapter 12, p. 330.

Rayn: “In truth, in the case of individuals, their actual voting is not to be taken as proof of consent, even for the time being. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, without his consent having even been asked a man finds himself environed by a government that he cannot resist; a government that forces him to pay money, render service, and forego the exercise of many of his natural rights, under peril of weighty punishments. He sees, too, that other men practice this tyranny over him by the use of the ballot. He sees further, that, if he will but use the ballot himself, he has some chance of relieving himself from this tyranny of others, by subjecting them to his own. In short, he finds himself, without his consent, so situated that, if he use the ballot, he MAY become a master; if he does not use it, he MUST become a slave. And he has NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE than these two. In self-defence, he attempts the former. His case is analogous to that of a man who has been forced into battle, where he must either kill others, or be killed himself. Because, to save his own life in battle, a man takes the lives of his opponents, it is not to be inferred that the battle is one of his own choosing. Neither in contests with the ballot – which is a mere substitute for a bullet – because, as his only chance of self-preservation, a man uses a ballot, is it to be inferred that the contest is one into which he voluntarily entered; that he voluntarily set up all his own natural rights, as a stake against those of others, to be lost or won by the mere power of numbers. On the contrary, it is to be considered that, in an exigency into which he had been forced by others, and in which no other means of self-defence offered, he, as a matter of necessity, used the only one that was left to him.” – Lysander Spooner, 1867

The Jones Plantation: