Liberalism is about sharing other people’s wealth, not your own. I thought you knew that.
Liberalism is about sharing other people’s wealth, not your own. I thought you knew that.
Exactly, as meaning a presumed elite morally superior class taking - not encouraging volitional giving - what other's merited and rightfully owned (but not their own wealth) and giving it (in order for the liberals to obtain power) to those who did not and often would not, or at least did not take the risks and engage in the patient effort to attain the benefits which the liberals see are manifestations of unjust inequality.
And usually not even under the pretense of mercy, but as a right, as a form of social justice, as if the providers were oppressors who must be forced to increasingly divest of what they earned - regardless of how much lawful labor was involved - in order to serve justice in the eyes of the liberal mind.
Which burdens the producers and eventually if successful, works toward all having a share in poverty and are subservient to the liberal elites.
Thus my question addressed the duplicity of liberal D. C., for if they really were faithful to the "share the wealth" demand that they want to impose on others, then D.C. would not have a heavily skewed bipolar income distribution.
But going back to what I said about sharing other people’s wealth and not your own, this and the victim-entitlement mentality is from Hell, having begun with the devil as seen in his presuming to occupy God's throne, (Is. 14:14) and essentially telling Eve God needed to share the wealth. (Gn. 3)
Yet we are to volitionally share what we have in our judgment as to where it will benefit, and serve the Lord according to the grace given, for "unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required" in the sense that we are to obey ( Luke 12:48)