I really do wonder if Ludwigvanquixote
is the same poster as charliehall. An investigation should be undertaken. First of all, fascism is a Statist political system that is characterized by totalitarianism. According to the economists Ludwig Von Mises and F.A. Hayek, fascistic regimes seek a collusion between big government and big business, with the result that in Fascist Italy, businessmen had a degree of control over state policy, and the state had a degree of control over the economy. Using this mechanism, fascists were able to fix prices, determine the level of wages, and put up barriers to entry in important markets (so as to give their business allies the power to form monopolies). High tariffs were placed on imports for the protection of the Big Brother State. These policies exercised state control over the means of production. This is just like how FDR (Y”S) and his wife believed that the Great Depression required big government policies and “benevolnet dictatorship.” Fascism is NOT Free Market Fiscal Restraint and Little Government. It is Statism and the unholy alliance between big government and big business; the Libertarian Movement and the Tea Party advocate AGAINST Big Government and Big Business, while Obama’s policies are the epitome of what can be considered Fascistic/Statist- TARP, a $787 Billion Stimulus Bill aimed at protecting Obama’s cronies- members of his green energy cabal, including the big business corporations General Electric (which owns NBC and the leftist MSNBC, which constantly attacks Republicans, with the lesbian Maddow and Keith Olbermann), Duke Energy, NextEra Energy, Exelon, and Honeywell. GE continually receives taxpayer dollars for its various programs, as a recipient of the liberal bailout and stimulus spending.
The Tea Party opposes welfare to big business, just as it opposes the Big State and the Welfare State. They want fiscal responsibility and the federal government to stay out of spcial welfare programs.
Your quotes on caring for the orphans and widows is a cliche, and shows a Torah comprehension no greater than that of Obama, who erroneously believes that the pasuk on Kayin and Hevel (Am I my brother’s keeper?) refers to supporting the social welfare state.
Judaism demands that we care for each other on a human-human level in the mitzvah of tzedakah and maaser, not by supporting a welfare state where we lose our income to government taxation.
The Rambam states that the highest form of tzedakah is when you give a person the tools to be self-sufficient. That is the hallmark of an economy which promotes entrepreneurship and small businesses, the type of society the Tea Party wants. This is in line with the old adage that if you give a man a fish you feed him for a day, but if you teach him how to fish, you feed him for a lifetime. Otherwise, you keep people in a state of servitude to the state, in which they are not self-sufficient, but rely on the state for their survival.
To quote Yoel Bainerman, “The Torah never denies man a basic human condition- such as the desire to work, prosper, and provide the highest standard of living possible for their family. The Jewish sages recognized that denying private property and the substitution of it with centralized planned economies for the decision process of the market- leads ultimately to immorality and injustice. So the Jewish view in this matter cannot be regarded as synonymous with socialism or economic polices which deny private property.”
Jewish law views the giving of interest-free loans as an act of charity to break the poverty cycle, to prevent descent into poverty. Although giving of an interest free loan as an obligatory requirement rather than an act of voluntary philanthropy- this in no way implies a waiver of rights of the creditor to receive payment of his loan or absolve the debtor from his obligations. Even if the lender is wealthy and the borrower poor the debtor has to meet his obligations- even at the cost of losing all his property. To do otherwise would saddle the lender with all the social an economic problems of the borrower. The requirement to repay the loan is based on the concept that people have obligations as well as rights- a consideration often blurred in modern welfare economics.
There is also no philosophical basis in Judaism for taxation being used as a means of redistributing income. Nor can taxation be confiscatory of wealth, arbitrary or discriminatory. In Judaism, taxation is a manifestation of the concept of the rights of the community and of less fortunate individuals in the property of all other individuals. It is a moral and ethical imperative- not as a punishment on the wealthy for being successful in their economic endeavors, which is how the left views the creation of capital.
Is this all evil to you?
Is the Jewish understanding of economics evil to you, chas ve shalom? Is R’ Dovid Cohen, a highly respected posek, evil to you, chas ve shalom, because he argues that there is an anti-tax basis in halacha?
I may think you are misguided, but not evil. But you have made it clear that you believe that 21% of Jewish Americans are evil, because they are Republicans (most of these voters are frum).
Do you also know what vile, disgusting, nivul peh it is to call a Republican a t*bag?
Becaause this poster seems to copy verbatim from Soncino-style translations of the Gemara, I strongly believe that this ludwig fellow can be a fraud from Anthony Weiner’s campaign or from any other host of liberal politicians up for a vote tomorrow. He is a liar and an ignoramus who should study some economics and learn some Gemara and Halacha. His hashkafos are way off.
Do you think that the Anti-Israel Democrats are tzaddikim? Baalei mishkav zachor, anti-semites like Jesse Jackson and Hillary RodHam Clinton (remember, Ham is NOT Kosher), Black Panthers I(who did engage in voter intimidation, complete with baseball bats in 2008), Bill Ayres, Convicted terrorists, militants, radical leftists, Weatherman Underground, etc., are all Tzaddikim to you? You have a perverted and Korach-style way of looking at the world.
Juat because someone puts on a uniform for historical pruposes does not make them adherents to an ideology. I participated in reenactments for money one summer, and had to wear a Red Coat. Does that make me an adherent to the ideology of King George III? Now, I believe John Iott was foolish for doing so as someone in politics, but that is another story.
I truly think you ought to be investigated- you are either a goy, a gentile intruder, or a secular non-Jewish Jew, perhaps an adherent to the false ideologies of the Reform, Conservative, or Weissian schools of thought.