Freedom Versus Compulsion

John Stossel writes today about an interview that he conducted with Michael Moore. He methodically picks apart Moore's arguments about government. He also gives a lesson in spotting the insidious presumptions of people like Moore.

I interviewed Michael Moore recently for an upcoming "20/20" special on health care. It's refreshing to interview a leftist who proudly admits he's a leftist. He told me that government should provide "food care" as well as health care and that big government would work if only the right people were in charge.

Moore added, "I watch your show and I know where you are coming from. … "

He knows I defend limited government, so he tried to explain why I was wrong. He began in a revealing way:

"I gotta believe that, even though I know you're very much for the individual determining his own destiny, you also have a heart."

Notice his smuggled premise in the words "even though." In Moore's mind, someone who favors individual freedom doesn't care about his fellow human beings. If I have a heart, it's in spite of my belief in freedom and autonomy for everyone.

Doesn't it stand to reason that someone who wants everyone to be free of tyranny does so partly because he cares about others? Wishing freedom to one's fellow human beings strikes me as a sign of benevolence. But Moore and the left don't see it that way.

Stossel is at his best in this one. I heartily recommend reading the whole thing. Moore makes several points which Stossel easily knocks apart. The point is that the collection of taxes is, as Stossel points out, compulsion. But Stossel freely gives about 25% of his income to charity because charities do a much better job of taking care of the needs of those less fortunate than government does. Compulsory redistribution of wealth will not, as Moore attempts to imply, get you into Heaven. There is no salvation in paying taxes.