words of a liberal

Note: This is the first of four posts about my exchange with Justin.
Also see Part 2, Part 3 and Part 4.

I had a lengthy exchange with a radical uber-liberal.  The truth is that he left me with enough material to last a month -- a job so big I've simply been unable to put together a single post to cover it all.

So I'm going to try something different: I'm going to start with just a single quote this guy wrote.  If you base enough stuff on incorrect premises, you can build very rational-sounding, principled arguments that are in fact complete folly.

"Justin" says:

I believe that I deserve what I earn minus what I don't need, which should be used for the mutual benefit of others in the system I live in.

I have three problems with this.  First, "need" is subjective, and it just so happens that liberalism is all about letting some elite define needs.

Second, "earning" already implies "the mutual benefit of others."  Why do you think people give you money in the first place?  If you don't want to consume your earnings, and you don't give it away to suit your own definition of needs, then the least you can do is to reinvest it to expand your ability to create even more mutual benefit.

And finally, if your model includes having only enough to meet your needs as defined by someone else, then why on earth would you ever work as hard as you can, maximizing the mutual benefit you create?  Or, to turn that around, as a liberal what's your plan for getting people to produce as much as they can to meet all of society's perceived "needs," when each individual's personal reward is destined to merely be sufficient for his own needs?

The scary question is that if liberals won't let people keep the fruit of their labor, then what do you suppose the liberal strategy is for making them work?  Answer: You don't want to know.

Comments

[Lance White]

You're right, I do not want to know. Justin should look at the bigger picture of his "needs" to realize if the government doesn't take it all, he and he alone could take that to invest in his future.

::still shaking my head::

[ConservativeLibertine]

It is scary. I happened on Hannity's TV show only for a moment last night, and a lady in the audience pretty much said the same thing. Hannity circled around for clarification. "You mean To each according to his need, and From each according to his ability?". She thought for only a second but then gave an emphatic "Yes!". Hannity told her that the phrase "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need" was a quote from Karl Marx. She didn't seem to care, or maybe she didn't know what that meant.

People bristle when they hear accusations of socialism, but there really are a lot of commies out there. And many of them don't know it. They just think they are good Nancy Pelosi democrats!

It IS freak'n scary!

[R Brown]

I for one, would really like to understand what motivates a liberal mindset. What is their end-game, their utopia? Because frankly, I just cannot comprehend how their self-destructive policies and theories play out.
How can a liberal create a 'charitable' society when everyone is forced to be a benefactor to that 'charity' anyway?

[BTW1208]

"I believe that I deserve what I earn minus what I don't need, which should be used for the mutual benefit of others in the system I live in."

If this statement is "uber-liberal", then the converse would be uber-conservative, true:

"I believe that I deserve every bit of what I earn, screw everyone else."

[hiscross]

You mean Guber, not uber right?

[John Galt]

No, BTW1208, that is how ignorant, achievement-hating liberals mischaracterize liberty.

The correct conservative position is:

"I believe that I deserve every bit of what I earn by serving (not screwing) my fellow man."

See? Nobody gets screwed after all.

Libs never give proper credit for what someone does to earn his money -- somehow you parasites always overlook the service that's already been done by the time you come around for your pound of flesh.

[Ben]

"Libs never give proper credit for what someone does to earn his money -- somehow you parasites always overlook the service that's already been done by the time you come around for your pound of flesh."

No truer statement ever uttered. When you start the discussion after the work is over, with "what to do with the money?" you have overlooked the most important part: what was produced that that money represents?