AZspot AZspot

blue bits. red rocks.
Sunday 1 March 2009

Let’s move on with an observation that, in effect, shatters the underlying principle on which conservatives base their position. Let’s ask the conservative, would you refuse to share some of your wealth to feed a starving child? Of course, nobody is monster enough to insist that property rights are more important than the life of an innocent child. And that admission pulls the rug out from underneath the conservative’s claim that property rights are sacred. This example establishes that property rights must be subordinated to some sense of basic human decency. So the issue here is not any sacred principle, but drawing a line between two principles. Where should we draw that line? How much money should a wealthy person surrender to provide food, clothing, shelter, and education to a poor person? We have already established that the answer is not “zero”. And since the idea of taking money from the rich and giving it to the poor constitutes socialism, we come to the conclusion that all non-monstrous conservatives have already accepted the principle of socialism. “Garsh, I thought I was just writin’ stuff, but now it turns out that I’ve been writing prose all my life!” Yes, even Rush Limbaugh, I would guess, is a socialist. Chris Crawford

A GNT creation ©2007–2011