Reading

The State, throughout its history, has led a process of the socialization of human relationships. In its heretical desire to kill God and take His place, every government has tried to erase the person's charitable contribution. Love, according to the leftists, cannot be the reason for helping one's neighbor; disadvantaged people have a right to coerce the rest of society in order to improve their status. Solidarity, thus, is no longer an issue of charity and has turned into a monopoly of “social justice.”

Sanctions impose the value system of the aggressor country on the population of the other, regardless of their feelings on the matter. By passing sanctions against countries because of human rights violations we are essentially saying that we think your right to say what you want about your government trumps your right to eat. Therefore, we won’t sell you food or buy your products until your government gives you such rights as we deem necessary for you to live freely. Obviously, if given a choice between the Bill of Rights or a bowl of rice, most starving people will choose the latter. Yet this is exactly the choice we are denying them when we impose economic sanctions.

But could America exist without an income tax? The idea seems radical, yet in truth America did just fine without a federal income tax for the first 126 years of her history. Prior to 1913, the government operated with revenues raised through tariffs, excise taxes, and property taxes, without ever touching a worker's paycheck. Even today, individual income taxes account for only approximately one-third of federal revenue. Eliminating one-third of the proposed 2007 budget would still leave federal spending at roughly $1.8 trillion – a sum greater than the budget just 6 years ago in 2000! Does anyone seriously believe we could not find ways to cut spending back to 2000 levels?