There is an understanding worthy to arrive at: that an action is ought to be done because it is the right thing to do
and not that a Supreme Being or gods or the government tells it is so.
All
are interconnected. And this is a very popularly accepted idea.
Calamity, for example, unites people together. At hours of extreme distress, the will
of
men converges to help each other out. People don't waste time waiting
for
someone, say a free-riding politician, to say what needed to be done. A
deeply seated impulse is acted out to help others. Cooperation
comes out
unpremeditated and compassion is a palpable sphere.
Out
of unending difficulties, the aim of men is to fulfill compassion
effectively. And perhaps there is no other way to signify the intent to
help others than forming an organized compassion delivery system called
Government. Social services, which aim to grant to everybody the means
to survive and improve their well-being, are in place.
Government
social services are made possible through legislation. With such, the
allocation of funds is guaranteed. However, government cannot be
separated from taxation. Government is funded by forced contributions or
taxes. And every government social program is guaranteed by taxes.
There is a statist view that the best way to fix all social problems is
to legislate
the way through it. This is to demand everybody to contribute in the
name of everybody's well-being practically to reiterate and to convince
people of the "goodness" of the popular view
that all people are interconnected. In a certain way, compassion through
government is a legislated compassion, a compassion legalized.
But,
though the intent of taking care of all people can be applauded,
government social programs have ill effects that are later on to be
seen. The intention is never wrong. What is wrong lies in the means by
which society tried to attain the goal. The problem is to be blamed
mainly on the legislation of compassion itself.
The
impulse to help others is an inherent part of human nature. However,
there is a bad taste if the act of helping others is tried to be
accomplished with government laws. Given the coercive nature of
government laws, eg. tax collection, taxpayers can only give up to a
limit. The social program is then unsustainable and is doomed to fail
and can only be extended until the threat of jail against the taxpayers
is effective. Another ill effect would be on the recipients. Constant
dole-out services would create dull minded citizens not capable of
appreciating self-worth and dignity and will eventually be consumed by a
parasitic attitude. But the worst effect worth mentioning last is that
the funds will be likely squandered and plundered by in-charge
bureaucrats.
A strong lobby for more social services would be inevitable.
People would require more from the government and other people and less
from their own selves. People would be boldly parasitic on taxes
supplied by the working class.And this would happen so easily in a
society whose people already forgot the voluntary nature of compassion.
A government-hosted compassion should be a no-no. Compassion
is to be done from inside out. Not that the government says it is so.
Not even when the gods ordered it to be done. Not even when your friends
or parents insist you to do it. But only when you feel you love doing
it because you understand that it is so and not otherwise.
