Many people may wonder how a nation founded on liberty, and
      with a government whose purpose was to preserve that liberty,
      could turn into the socialist-democracy we have today. The
      onslaught of socialist programs and huge government bureaucracy is
      enabled by and intertwined with our current system of taxation.

            As originally adopted, the U.S. Constitution allowed for
      three ways in which the federal government could fund itself:
      Tariffs, Duties, and Excise (sales) taxes. However, in 1913 the
      16th amendment to the constitution allowed the federal government
      to tax INCOMES, both individual and corporate. It was this one act
      which opened up the floodgates for socialism and huge government
      bureaucracy.
            Prior to this amendment, the permissible forms of taxation
      bore the same burden on everyone. Tariffs and sales taxes affected
      everyone equally. However, the income tax allowed the government
      to tax people differently, affecting some more than others.
            During the depression, politicians realized they could win
      elections by promising entitlements. How would these programs be
      paid for? By taxing the higher-income minority of the country at
      very high rates while simultaneously taxing the lower-to-middle
      income majority little or nothing at all. Since those who pay the
      tab are in the minority, it is safe to say that they will be
      unable to stop the process. With this method, the government
      became a tool of wealth redistribution, taking from those who have
      to give to those who have not.
 

      This type of system has continued to this day. Tax the high
      income minority 70% while taxing yourself little or nothing at
      all. Elect someone who will tax someone else while promising you,
      or some deserving soul, something "free" from the government: free
      healthcare, free daycare, and various other entitlements.
      Socialism works in America and elsewhere simply because those  who
      supposedly "benefit" outweigh those that have to pay for it.
 

            Shortly after the American Revolution, Alexander Tytler
      warned that "A democracy can not exist as a permanent form of
      government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they
      can vote themselves largesse from the Public Treasury . . . with
      the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal
      policy."

            The founders warned us against this inevitability. That is
      why they prevented direct forms of taxation, such as the income
      tax, which enable wealth distribution by taxing people at
      different rates.

            A complimentary fact, and one that many Americans marvel at,
      is that the ownership of property (real estate) was originally a
      requirement for voting in elections. While I am not necessarily
      advocating this position, the reasoning behind this can be found
      by looking at the writings of the time.
            One of the main justifications given by the Founders for
      property requirements in voting was that propertyless people would
      tend to vote to violate the natural rights, and particularly the
      property rights, of others. Thus the Massachusetts Convention
      explained the property requirements in that state's1780
      Constitution in terms of suspending the right to vote of those who
      will pay less regard to the rights of property because they have
      nothing to lose. Those who accept government's free offers have
      nothing to lose and everything to gain. And, in a bit of prophesy,
      John Dickinson stated bluntly at the Constitutional Convention,
      "Property requirements are a necessary defense against the
      dangerous influence of those multitudes without property and
      without principle, with which our country will in time abound."

            Can anything be done to reverse the current path of
      escalating socialism? Unfortunately I am not optimistic. The key
      is to get the public to recognize the concept that people who Earn
      an income should be allowed to Keep that income. That to take what
      is earned is to act unjustly. People will also have to realize
      that this theft will not be a panacea for all of society's
      problems, but instead serve only to burden the society and empower
      the state.
            Many people may point to the legend of Robin Hood as a model
      of the socialist cause, with his credo "Take from the rich and
      give to the poor". However, it is interesting to note that the
      rich targeted by Robin hood were the rich of the government who
      had earned their wealth unjustly; who took the money earned by the
      people through unjust taxation. In fact, Robin Hood took the
      unearned wealth and returned it to those who had earned it. In
      fact, Robin Hood is a model for the justice of letting those who
      Earn wealth Keep it, and fighting against the unjust taking of
      wealth by corrupt governments.

            The difficulty of combating the politics of wealth
      distribution has been recognized for centuries. Before the time of
      Christ, Socrates recognized "You must redistribute wealth and
      power and privileges, taking from some individuals and groups and
      giving to others. If you follow this policy you will always have
      many allies and few enemies". (Plato's "Republic", Book IV).
            Fortunately though, Athenians realized the wrongs of a
      "parent-state". Socrates : "...would you not agree that a man
      shows himself to be base and ill educated if he feels compelled to
      surrender the care and custody of his own body and soul to others,
      who then become his masters and judges because he is unable to
      master and judge himself?"  Glaucon: "I agree. That is the most
      shameful thing of all." (Plato's "Republic", Book III).

            Can the tide of socialism in the world be turned? Whatever
      the outcome, it is sure to be a long and uphill battle. I am
      convinced that the surest course is the creation of a new
      libertarian state, whereby there might be at least one nation on
      earth free from the spectre and injustice of socialism and
      excessive taxation.