Property at the Pleasure of the State

Begging To Be Left Some Crumbs

New Zealand has a shockingly bad history of property rights. It stems, in part, from the arrogant hubris of wanting to lead the world in applying Fabian socialist doctrines--socialism without violent revolution--since the end of the nineteenth century. The political and religious culture of the country has looked to the gummint as the solution to all problems, and has welcomed the gummint expropriating property from citizens to pay for it. It's all part of the Faustian bargain.

Couple this with a strong streak of egalitarianism, where I am as good as my neighbour by dogmatic creed. In a materialistic culture (the established religion of New Zealand, where the only reality that matters is, well, matter), being "as good as my neighbour" can only be measured in a materialistic sense--that is, in terms of property. It's the only "currency" that is meaningful.

Materialistic egalitarianism creates a drive for having the same house, car, income, wide-screen TV, health care, and education as others. This leads to a universally held belief in the gummint needing to take property of some and redistribute it to others to make things more equal. Virtually without exception, all people in New Zealand believe in this doctrine--from raving greenie socialists right through to the hardest hard-core of right wing ideologues. The only debate is one of degree or extent. To all intents and purposes, New Zealand is a socialist country by the willing consent of the governed.

"So, what's the problem, then?" we hear you say. If people want it, it must be OK. It has achieved a certain legitimacy, has it not? The problems are legion. Right up at the head of the queue is an inevitable overreaching, smothering, controlling, nannying and smothering government. The arrogations of its power expand gradually and ineluctably: there is no stopping it until the State dominates everything. In the end, the government will tell us how to raise our children, how we are to eat, what we are to think, how we are to spend our time, and what level of private income and property it will tolerate. In a word, the State will progressively decide the value to be imputed to our lives.

Now, it is a truism that such a state will succeed to incompetence; grounded upon greed, envy, and theft, wrapped up in ever expanding corruptions and injustice, the fruit rots from within. Need it be this way? No, but it is inevitable as long as the established religion of secular materialistic humanism remains regnant.

Years ago we were participating in a discussion amongst Christians on creeping apostasy and unbelief amongst certain churches and Christian denominations. One of the protagonists asserted that, like his whiskey, he preferred getting Unbelief straight. Rather the wolf, than the wolf in sheep's clothing. This is a fair point.

There is something sneaky and dirty about a so-called "property rights" political party such as National speaking out of both sides of its mouth. It continues to borrow over $250m per week to keep the government afloat and sustain its egalitarianistic redistribution of wealth. But, of course, it is politically unpalatable to pay for this largesse by putting taxes up. So, it prefers to push the burden and expropriation out into the future. Our children, many yet unborn, will have to pay for it. They will come into the world in debt--born into slavery to the self-indulgence and self-gratifying covetousness and envy of our generation. For the rest of their lives they will have to pay for our indulgence. Slavery indeed.

By "moving to the centre" John Key and his National hucksters have become more than Labour-lite. At least Labour had the "courage" of its socialist convictions and was prepared to tax "rich pricks" to fund its egalitarian madness. Key and his mob have cowardly decided that they would rather tax the silent, the yet unborn, for they can't vote.

But egalitarianism and Fabian socialism is the established religion that grips the hearts and minds of almost all in the country. So, all governments in the foreseeable future will continue to act in disregard of the freedom rights of individuals, will continue to expropriate and steal, and will continue to appeal to envy to garner popular support.

Bring back Helen Clark and Michael Cullen. At least with them we got the poison straight up. There was a modicum of integrity there, non?