Posted on 11/22/2002 2:28:42 PM PST by rwfok
Republican economist and author Walter Williams told a group of Oklahomans on Thursday that the United States is headed toward totalitarianism. Williams, a nationally syndicated columnist and occasional substitute host for radio personality Rush Limbaugh, spoke at a noon luncheon at the National Cowboy and Western Heritage Museum. His presentation was sponsored by the Oklahoma Council of Public Affairs.
Williams discussed the decline of capitalism and expansion of government. He compared government taxing and spending to theft and rape.
"As time goes by, you and I own less and less of our most valuable property -- namely ourselves and the fruits of our labor," Williams said. "We do not decide how the fruits of our labor will be used. Someone else makes that decision."
Williams, an economics professor at George Mason University, acknowledged the need for government to provide national defense, police services and a few other limited roles, but said most government spending is a publicly sponsored armed robbery.
"Both acts involve taking the property of one person and giving it to another to whom it does not belong," Williams said. "The only way the American government can give a person a dollar is -- through threats, intimidation and coercion -- to take that money from somebody else. Just because you vote to take someone's property doesn't make it right."
Williams said the United States became the richest nation in the world because it was founded on the free enterprise system. That status has led many Americans to give up their freedoms to stamp out social problems, Williams said.
"Free enterprise in our country is threatened today not because of its failure but because of its success," Williams said. "In the name of other ideas ... we have abandoned many personal liberties. The ultimate end to this process is totalitarianism."
Williams said the slow growth of the federal government through increased taxation is taking away liberties bit by bit.
Williams said he would like to see government put a limit on spending.
Well fill my pond and call me Donald.
Thanks,
You're welcome.
BTW, why shouldn't I check in?
It seems that you all(Libertarians) are in a snit with your recent crushing defeat with the pro-drug intiatives.
The crushing defeats of your pet intiatives in the recent elections gives me hope that socialist #1, Hillary, and Libertarian friend, George Soros, with his support and money can only go so far.
Thanks for not disappointing me.
Tell the gang just how long you've been a government employee.
He calls himself 'conservative', but never really seems to have any problem with whatever big government scheme comes down the pipe so longs as whoever sponsors it has an "R" on their T-shrit.
So it boils down to this. On one side you have people like Professor Williams, Milton Friedman, and the like. On the other side you have folks like Dane and Kevin Curry.
For the intelligent folks around here, it takes about 2 heartbeats to decide what side to come down on.
Regards,
L
I have, but it seems that Professor Williams recently, has decided to go down the Buchanan/Tancredo route.
Hyperbole to the extreme, for the sake of keeping the miniscule hyperbolic element "happy".
JMO, if you follow Lurker's Libertarian "I am an island and all other opinions be damned", a person is damned to a life of obscurity, while the oppositions dogma(democrats) is enforced.
Those who don't learn from history are damned to repeat it.
Ross Perot being the most recent historical fact of the above addage.
At one point Jesus' deciples came to him complaining that his words were hard on their ears. Personally I found some of Williams' words regarding trade hard on my ears in years past and I had to think them through carefully and with difficulty I came to agree with him. Not suggesting that you must agree but I would not dismiss him lightly.
Regarding the seccession matter he does not say the South was superior in all things and defends them acordingly. His agruement is that they had the legal right to secede. It is a constitutional matter not a cultural one.
I would imagine that he thinks that trade exists between individuals and not between governments, so this would be another area where he thinks the government should play a limited or even nonexistent role. ???
The only time I listen to Limbaugh is when he's not there. Informants let me know when a Williams gig is on. His yard stick is liberty and all things must be measured against it. A sound test.
No I can't. He is my superior and I am an ignoramus. He talks about this a lot on the radio if you can catch him when he's on. Also economics is not my forte and I can think things through in my head during the day but I do not articulate them well, particularly extemporaneously. I will say this though, the so called shipping of our jobs overseas did not seem wise to me as our people need to have work. Back in the day I was leaning towards the Buchanan idea of slapping high tariffs on products from countries where their workers were not on par with ours and using a tit-for-tat approach to others' high tariffs on our products to similar products like Japans high tariffs on our cars. Both Williams and Thomas Sowell were free traders (not necessarily in the managed trade that the Pubs and Dems forge though). Since I have such a high regard for the proven knowledge and logic of both these men I had to reconsider.
Williams would say things like just because someone else has a broken leg that doesn't mean that you should break yours to be equal or fair. Or just because the Japanese have to pay $18 for a mellon doesn't mean we should have to. And liberty means freedom of contract and association and we should be able to do business with whom we please. There is much more but I draw blanks at the moment.
Our government has placed a heavy burden on business with all the regulations. Some of the safety and environmental mandates are severe and quite costly. Frivolous law suits and unions have all combined to put us at a disadvantage. Since the market place sets the price for merchandise some manufactures can not pass on all these costs so they either go overseas for cheaper labor or they stay here and go out of business. Those that do stay here are at a disadvantage to imports that do not have the burdens of the US government built into the price. The consumer loses if he is forced to pay a high tariff just to make it fair. If a low tariff is in place then our companies and workers are hurt because they consumer will choose the cheaper product. We are not hurt so much by free trade but rather by socialism at home. But even on a so called level playing field some products can be produced cheaper elsewhere. The harsh reality is that progress has costs and sometimes they hurt but people are resilient and industrious and figure out other goods or services to produce if what they previously did becomes untenable. As I thought about these things and more I realized that freedom and progress are not to be feared but the heavy hand of government should be condemned and hopefully lifted. I didn't answer your question well but as stated it is beyond me to do so. Hope this was some help though.
I gotta agree with you, Dane.
Ol' Walter just doesn't seem to have the attention span to deal with the implications of our enormous National Debt.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.