America, Destiny (15)
America, Example (2)
America, Faith in (2)
America, Future (7)
America, Heritage (49)
America, History (40)
America, a Choice Land (4)
Bill of Rights (6)
Book of Mormon (2)
Central Planning (3)
Checks and Balances (3)
Citizenship, Dissent (2)
Civil War (2)
Class Warfare (2)
False Concepts (1)
Federalist Papers (75)
Free Agency (41)
Free Market (5)
Freedom of Speech (1)
Freedom, History (1)
Freedom, Loss of (54)
Freedom, Price of (1)
Freedom, Religious (16)
Freedom, Restoration of (2)
Freedom, Threats to (6)
Government, Benefits of (1)
Government, Dictatorship (2)
Government, Domestic Policy (2)
Government, Downfall (12)
Government, Forms of (8)
Government, Good (11)
Government, Ideal (9)
Government, Limited (12)
Government, Loss of Freedom (16)
Government, Oppression (2)
Government, Power (12)
Government, Purpose (2)
Government, Spending (14)
Government, Threats to (4)
Government, Tyranny (7)
Government, Vertical Separation (7)
Government, Wealth Transfer (11)
Heavenly Interest in
Human Events (33)
Income Tax (2)
Individual, Improvement (4)
Involuntary Servitude (1)
Law, Respect For (15)
Legal Plunder (12)
Mass Media (2)
Politics, International (14)
Private Property (5)
Public Duty (3)
Right to Life (1)
Rights, Self Defense (8)
Secret Combinations (1)
Self Control (3)
Social Programs (2)
Term Limits (1)
US Constitution (32)
US Constitution, Amendments (5)
US Constitution, Defend (11)
US Constitution, Inspired (20)
US Constitution, Threats to (5)
United Nations (1)
United Order (7)
War, Revolutionary War (3)
Topic: Socialism, Matches 25 quotes.
Last Monday morning, October third, the Premier of Soviet Russia threatened that if the United Nations does not reorganize as he demands, the communist bloc will rely on their own strength to block us. He also threatened to ignore the United Nations peace-making machinery unless the Secretary General of the United Nations resign, and his position, that is, the Secretarys position, be replaced by a communist-styled, three-man presidium armed with veto powers.
Who is this man who presumes to tell the United Nations what to do? He is a man who rejects the divinity of Jesus Christ and denies the existence of God, who is imbued with the false philosophy of Karl Marx, whose aim in life was to dethrone God and destroy capitalism. He is a follower of Lenin, who said, I want children to hate their parents who are not communists. The followers of these men, to gain their ends, resort to all sorts of stratagems, maneuvers, illegal methods, evasions, and subterfuges. This atheistic attitude, and the advice to hate others, even ones own family, is just the opposite of the spirit of love as manifest and taught by the Savior. In sessions in another part of the United States are men who believe as I have indicated and who are willing to resort to any subterfuge, any scheme, that will further their ends to dethrone God.
Source: President David O. McKay
October 1960 General Conference
Topics: Communism; Socialism; United Nations
The Economic Power To Dissent
The simple truth is that individuals can be free to choose between what they consider as right or wrong only where they are economically independent of the government. A socialist government has the power to make dissent impossible by discriminating against unwelcome religious and ideological groups and denying them all the material implements that are required for the propagation and the practice of their convictions. The one-party system, the political principle of socialist rule, implies also the one-religion and one-morality system. A socialist government has at its disposal means that can be used for the attainment of rigorous conformity in every regard, Gleichschaltung as the Nazis called it. Historians have pointed out what an important role in the Reformation was played by the printing press. But what chances would the reformers have had, if all the printing presses had been operated by the governments headed by Charles V of Germany and the Valois kings of France? And, for that matter, what chances would Marx have had under a system in which all the means of communication had been in the hands of the governments?
Whoever wants freedom of conscience must abhor socialism. Of course, freedom enables a man not only to do the good things but also to do the wrong things. But no moral value can be ascribed to an action, however good, that has been performed under the pressure of an omnipotent government.
Source: Ludwig von Mises
Essays on Liberty, Vol 7, pp. 48-9.
Topics: Citizenship, Dissent; Freedom; Socialism
Thursday, 14.I attended a second lecture on Socialism... I said I did not believe the doctrine.
Source: Joseph Smith
History of the Church, Vol.6, Ch.2, p.33
Evils of Debt
Let us never forget that today we are in the biggest battle ever staged. Our opponent is socialismthe Welfare Stateand the penalty of failure is enslavement. We must keep keep strong spiritually, morally and economically as individuals, families, communities and as a nation. Only in this course is safety.
Stewardship, not conspicuous consumption, Is the proper relationship of man to material wealth.
There may never be a more favorable time than now for most people to get their financial house in order so far as debt is concerned.
Yes, let us live within our income. Let us pay as we go. Let us pay thy debt, and live! Let us heed the counsel of the leadership of the Church. Get out of debt!
Source: Ezra Taft Benson
BYU - 1962
Topics: Debt; Socialism
Plain and Simple Issue
The plain and simple issue now facing us in America is freedom or slavery.
Our real enemies are communism and its running mate, socialism....
And never forget for one moment that communism and socialism are state slavery.
...the paths we are following, if we move forward thereon, will inevitably lead us to socialism or communism, and these two are as like as two peas in a pod in their ultimate effect upon our liberties....
This country faces ahead enough trouble to bring us to our knees in humble honest prayer to God for the help which He alone can give to save us....
Do not think that all these usurpations, intimidations, and impositions are being done to us through inadvertency or mistake, the whole course is deliberately planned and carried out; its purpose is to destroy the Constitution and our Constitutional government...
We have largely lost the conflict so far waged. But there is time to win the final victory, if we can sense our danger, and fight.
Source: J. Reuben Clark
Deseret News, Church Section, Sept. 25, 1949, pp. 2, 15.
As quoted in General Conference, April 1963
Topics: Communism; Freedom, Loss of; Socialism
Three Systems of Plunder
The sincerity of those who advocate protectionism, socialism, and communism is not here questioned. Any writer who would do that must be influenced by a political spirit or a political fear. It is to be pointed out, however, that protectionism, socialism, and communism are basically the same plant in three different stages of its growth. All that can be said is that legal plunder is more visible in communism because it is complete plunder; and in protectionism because the plunder is limited to specific groups and industries. 4 Thus it follows that, of the three systems, socialism is the vaguest, the most indecisive, and, consequently, the most sincere stage of development.
But sincere or insincere, the intentions of persons are not here under question. In fact, I have already said that legal plunder is based partially on philanthropy, even though it is a false philanthropy.
Source: Frederic Bastiat
Topics: Communism; Law; Legal Plunder; Socialism
A Confusion of Terms
Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all.
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.
Source: Frederic Bastiat
Topics: Education; Socialism
The Influence of Socialist Writers
How did politicians ever come to believe this weird idea that the law could be made to produce what it does not containthe wealth, science, and religion that, in a positive sense, constitute prosperity? Is it due to the influence of our modern writers on public affairs?
Present-day writersespecially those of the socialist school of thoughtbase their various theories upon one common hypothesis: They divide mankind into two parts. People in generalwith the exception of the writer himselffrom the first group. The writer, all alone, forms the second and most important group. Surely this is the weirdest and most conceited notion that ever entered a human brain!
In fact, these writers on public affairs begin by supposing that people have within themselves no means of discernment; no motivation to action. The writers assume that people are inert matter, passive particles, motionless atoms, at best a kind of vegetation indifferent to its own manner of existence. They assume that people are susceptible to being shaped-by the will and hand of another person-into an infinite variety of forms, more or less symmetrical, artistic, and perfected.
Moreover, not one of these writers on governmental affairs hesitates to imagine that he himselfunder the title of organizer, discoverer, legislator, or founderis this will and hand, this universal motivating force, this creative power whose sublime mission is to mold these scattered materials-persons-into a society.
These socialist writers look upon people in the same manner that the gardener views his trees. Just as the gardener capriciously shapes the trees into pyramids, parasols, cubes, vases, fans, and other forms, just so does the socialist writer whimsically shape human beings into groups, series, centers, sub-centers, honeycombs, labor corps, and other variations. And just as the gardener needs axes, pruning hooks, saws, and shears to shape his trees, just so does the socialist writer need the force that he can find only in law to shape human beings. For this purpose, he devises tariff laws, tax laws, relief laws, and school laws.
Source: Frederic Bastiat
The Socialists Wish to Play God
Socialists look upon people as raw material to be formed into social combinations. This is so true that, if by chance, the socialists have any doubts about the success of these combinations, they will demand that a small portion of mankind be set aside to experiment upon. The popular idea of trying all systems is well known. And one socialist leader has been known seriously to demand that the Constituent Assembly give him a small district with all its inhabitants, to try his experiments upon.
In the same manner, an inventor makes a model before he constructs the full-sized machine; the chemist wastes some chemicalsthe farmer wastes some seeds and landto try out an idea.
But what a difference there is between the gardener and his trees, between the inventor and his machine, between the chemist and his elements, between the farmer and his seeds! And in all sincerity, the socialist thinks that there is the same difference between him and mankind!
It is no wonder that the writers of the nineteenth century look upon society as an artificial creation of the legislators genius. This ideathe fruit of classical educationhas taken possession of all the intellectuals and famous writers of our country. To these intellectuals and writers, the relationship between persons and the legislator appears to be the same as the relationship between the clay and the potter.
Moreover, even where they have consented to recognize a principle of action in the heart of manand a principle of discernment in mans intellectthey have considered these gifts from God to be fatal gifts. They have thought that persons, under the impulse of these two gifts, would fatally tend to ruin themselves. They assume that if the legislators left persons free to follow their own inclinations, they would arrive at atheism instead of religion, ignorance instead of knowledge, poverty instead of production and exchange.
Source: Frederic Bastiat