Socialism, Communism, Fascism, they are all the same in the idea that an [ahem] “enlightened” [suppress guffaw here] ruling clique should rule over all of us, justified by the same excuse used by all tyrants and all dictators of all times: It’s for “our own good”.
National socialism and international socialism are based on one tiny gang of dictators.
Among those who are sincerely interested in doing good, central planning of any category comes from a momentous hubris, albeit often unconscious hubris. They know what people should do, so they force us to do it. Claiming a majority vote is not a use of force is a cheap intellectual cop-out once we accept the reality, because all government relies on the use of force.
I once was one of those inflicted with that hubris, thinking that a Marxist revolution was the best thing for the peoples of the world. But Marxist revolutions were always ugly revolutions. But Marx’s idea of a transitional dictatorship bothered me until it broke out into “anarchism”, what libertarians would probably call “syndicalist anarchism” or “left anarchism”.
If my neighbor John Doe takes something from the other neighbor Mr. Jones and gives it to me because I need it, it is still THEFT.
It is theft whether Mr. Jones is a billionaire, millionaire, or earns more than a quarter-million dollars, or not. If he stole it, he stole it. It is still THEFT.
If neighbor John Doe organizes the neighborhood, the whole city or county, and then the state, and gets a majority vote to take something from the other neighbor Mr. Jones by force of “democracy” to give it to me, it still does not make it okay. It is still THEFT.
To such theft, I DO NOT CONSENT. No matter how much good it does me or any other neighbor.
If you do consent, you are accessory to theft, once your sin is exposed.
I gave nearly twenty years of my life to missionary work, and helping others, helping them. Against such love there is no law.
Against theft, there is: Thou shalt not steal“