Furthest Right


If you want to win votes, propose wealth redistribution. There are always few rich, and few truly happy people, so to the lonely and discontented voter your words will be like a balm for the soul.

Except of course that much like heroin, “once is not enough.” Soon more is needed, and the one-time-fix of borrowing money from those evil rich people becomes a daily deed. And then the money dries up.

Right now, America and Europe are divided between two forces. The pre-1789 rightists want natural selection, where the best rise. The post-1789 leftists want wealth redistribution, so that everyone is accepted regardless of their competence, character or contributions.

When you feel the world has ground you down and done you wrong, you want a golden ticket to acceptance and so this appeals to you. Instead of being forced to prove yourself and make yourself join, society is obligated to bring you into its fold.

For 222 years, and increasingly in the 65 years since the end of the second world war, liberalism has dominated political discourse. Even our conservatives are shades of liberal. But discontent has been growing.

Even before the most recent economic crash, people have been expressing discontent about the direction in which the USA has been going. These are not all the alienated types, either. They’re well-adjusted, successful and distrust our future.

Our own FBI mentioned corruption as a huge problem. Illegal immigration gutted the hospital system in the south. Government ballooned in size, as did regulations, creating a huge protected class of people — a new elite — who benefited from knowing the Byzantine bends of those legal mazes.

The liberals won’t admit it, but this is what wealth redistribution looks like.

We take wealth from the independent and competent, and give it to a group of people we are “morally” obligated to support. The result is a net loss for the competent, and a win for the incompetent, who increase their rate of reproduction to match.

If we want to live in a first-world nation again, we should consider a new kind of wealth redistribution: take it from our new elites, and transfer it to those who actually contribute something and actually are competent.

This method has worked since the dawn of time. Whatever you have, take the best and make more of it, and the next generation will be even better. It is Darwinism in its purest form.

We can do this easily in America:

  • Bust unions. Unions are monopolies that force employers to subsidize the incompetent along with the competent. Quality declines as aresult.
  • Remove welfare. Job insurance is no problem. But paying people to stay unemployed creates a permanent parasite caste.
  • Erase anti-discrimination. HUD, Affirmative action, and equal opportunity “seem” good because they are well-intentioned. Instead they multiply cost and strengthen government.
  • Obliterate non-essentials. Our government should have one mission: protect and nurture the nation through its most competent. The anti-drug programs, drug counseling, child protection, health education, diversity, etc. are a drain on that purpose and should be removed.

These are not radical changes, but they all have a single purpose: create a system like nature where the best rise to the top, take more resources than others, and use those resources to make society more productive as a whole.

Our mania for wealth redistribution started with the birth of liberalism in the French Revolution in 1789. The result has been that we pay the incompetent to be incompetent, and take that money from the competent, who then are not able to fix our problems for us.

Instead we should look toward creating truly great outcomes that we could not envision before, and create a new elite based on that ability. Such an action is forward-looking and increases the well-being of everyone.

If we change course now, and re-distribute wealth to those who will do great things with it, we stand a chance of not following other civilizations down the sad path to third-world status. That’s not popular yet, but as we see the grim alternative, it’s growing on us.

Tags: ,

Share on FacebookShare on RedditTweet about this on TwitterShare on LinkedIn