Generally, within any cultural context, if one asserts anything too far outside of the widely held belief system of that context, he will be ignored or dismissed by most and ridiculed by some. Typical critics will not bother justifying themselves, thinking there is no need for what they consider to be the self-evident.
Generally, within any cultural context, if one asserts anything too far outside of the widely held belief system of that context, he will be ignored or dismissed by most and ridiculed by some. Typical critics will not bother justifying themselves, thinking there is no need for what they consider to be the self-evident.
Consider for example, the broader and widely held belief that it is socially beneficial for government to coerce taxpayers via their police powers into being involuntary supporters of scientific and medical research, i.e., welfare for PhD’s. I know the latter truthful phrasing has already turned off many and brought up thoughts of “crackpot” in some. Unfortunately, it gets worse. If one would assert that not only is this not socially beneficial, but immoral, few would take it seriously or even try to understand for a microsecond a line of thought in that direction.
However, here is a very brief indication why a very few in fact do consider most government funded research and every other Socialistic function improper and immoral violations of individual rights, and therefore improper functions of government.
In society one can acquire values (money, food, clothing, services, relationships, etc.) from others by (1) voluntary, mutually acceptable peaceful trade of value for value, or (2) involuntary taking values from others by initiating or threatening force, aka crime from local perpetrators or foreign invaders.
All proper government functions should relate to a mutual defense against (2). If government engages in (2), it becomes more dangerous than a criminal, because it should be the institution formed explicitly to have overwhelming defensive power only. When the government redistributes man-made values and benefits - education, healthcare, research grants, food, etc., it must first take these values involuntarily from those who earned them, as would a criminal. Individual rights are sanctions of and defense of peaceful behavior only. There are no rights to goods that require other human beings to produce them. A right to man-made goods, regardless of one’s actions, such as doing nothing, equals the right to force others to provide them, aka enslave them. Taking resources involuntarily from some in society in order to give to others is a form of crime.
Generally, within any cultural context, if one asserts anything too far outside of the widely held belief system of that context, he will be ignored or dismissed by most and ridiculed by some. Typical critics will not bother justifying themselves, thinking there is no need for what they consider to be the self-evident.
Consider for example, the broader and widely held belief that it is socially beneficial for government to coerce taxpayers via their police powers into being involuntary supporters of scientific and medical research, i.e., welfare for PhD’s. I know the latter truthful phrasing has already turned off many and brought up thoughts of “crackpot” in some. Unfortunately, it gets worse. If one would assert that not only is this not socially beneficial, but immoral, few would take it seriously or even try to understand for a microsecond a line of thought in that direction.
However, here is a very brief indication why a very few in fact do consider most government funded research and every other Socialistic function improper and immoral violations of individual rights, and therefore improper functions of government.
In society one can acquire values (money, food, clothing, services, relationships, etc.) from others by (1) voluntary, mutually acceptable peaceful trade of value for value, or (2) involuntary taking values from others by initiating or threatening force, aka crime from local perpetrators or foreign invaders.
All proper government functions should relate to a mutual defense against (2). If government engages in (2), it becomes more dangerous than a criminal, because it should be the institution formed explicitly to have overwhelming defensive power only. When the government redistributes man-made values and benefits - education, healthcare, research grants, food, etc., it must first take these values involuntarily from those who earned them, as would a criminal. Individual rights are sanctions of and defense of peaceful behavior only. There are no rights to goods that require other human beings to produce them. A right to man-made goods, regardless of one’s actions, such as doing nothing, equals the right to force others to provide them, aka enslave them. Taking resources involuntarily from some in society in order to give to others is a form of crime.