The Dartmouth Beacon

Marxist communism asserts atheism. There is no God, no spiritual world, no afterlife, only the physical here-andnow.

Hence religion is the opiate of the masses; religion deludes the poor into believing they can be happy without wealth. It lulls them into a contentedness with the nothing they have. Wealth is something; it is substantial. It is wealth that will give them true contentedness.

Hence material redistribution justifies the death of millions. Workers of all nations, unite. Kill anyone who does not support the total redistribution. All things will be held in common, so you, peasant, will have all that stuff you’ve always wanted. You will finally be happy.

Capitalism, on the other hand, makes no assumptions about the value of wealth. It merely restricts self-interest (we would say sublimates, but this word is apparently archaic) so as to prevent its most harmful effects. One cannot pursue wealth by theft or lies or force or threat of force. But what if one chooses not to pursue wealth? A monk might retire to the countryside and in his asceticism seek God. Others won’t provide for him, of course. But neither will they stop him.

Communism killed the monks.

Marx and Lenin and Stalin and Engels and Mao all believed in money. And the socialists of today believe in money just as strongly. They believe the economy is some pyramid the people must be forced to build. The people will thank you some day, when they’re sharing the glory in some faraway time. They will thank you for your coercion.

Take for example a (surprisingly) common argument in favor of the death tax: if the wealthy can pass on all their belongings to their offspring, then their offspring will have no incentive to work. Hence, by taxing the wealthy upon their death, their children will work harder to make their own money and will improve the economy.

It’s a five-year plan.

But what is lost with such a single-minded materialistic drive? Perhaps freedom. Five-year plans show little respect for mutual consent.

As it turns out, classical liberalism somehow allows for better economies anyway. Something about people working harder when they keep what they earn. But the booming economy is only a happy coincidence. Conservatives and their opponents alike should remember this. Classical liberalism is not about supercharging the economy. It is not a utopian dream, like that of communism. We are not making the new, perfect society.

No. Classical liberalism’s first promise is simple: government
restricts itself to guaranteeing mutual consent while the individual pursues heaven on his own dime.