The criminal vs. the do-gooder

This may come as a complete surprise to some of you, but given the choice between a criminal and a liberal do-gooder, I much prefer the criminal to the do-gooder “humanitarian”. For the criminal is far less of a threat to free society than is the liberal do-gooder. Indeed, the well-intentioned do-gooder is often far more frightening than the malevolent criminal.

Let us examine the ways.

First of all, at least you know where you stand with a criminal, because he is generally out in the open and up front with you. Most crimes don’t involve fraud or deceit. The immoral act is often quite apparent, and the criminal doesn’t try to pretend that what he his doing is for your own good, or for the good of society as a whole, as the liberal do-gooder is very much inclined to point out to you when he raises your taxes.

When a criminal tries to rob you, for example, he does not insist that he is doing you any kind of favor. Nor does he expect you to “feel guilty” for refusing to “sacrifice” yourself for his benefit.

The liberal do-gooder, on the other hand, has this elaborate, all-pervasive and insidious ideology backing his actions: the common good, the public welfare, religious mysticism, altruism, and so forth. The liberal do-gooder plunders with ideas as much as he does with government force.

Moreover, at least you can shoot a criminal when he tries to harm you. What can you do with a liberal do-gooder who has the full backing of the state behind him?

Actually, when you really think about it, we are reaching a point where citizens cannot even protect themselves against criminals, because the liberal do-gooders want to ban all private firearm ownership and leave the state–their primary instrument of plunder–fully armed.

By sharp contrast, you don’t see the criminal class lobbying for gun control. They don’t force you to be unarmed when they try to rob you. They take their chances–almost just like anybody else.

And when the criminal robs you, it is usually a one-time affair. You are robbed once or twice in your life time. Most people never even get robbed.

The liberal do-gooder robs you all of the time, even when you sleep–taxes and government-induced inflation eating away at your life savings. And the liberal do-gooder wants to restrict your freedom in many other ways as well.

The criminal could care less if you drink beer, watch pornography, smoke cigars, load up on cholesterol, or frequent unlicensed bordellos. The criminal does not care to restrict your constitutional right to hedonism.

These are just some of the ways a criminal is less menacing, if not outright more valuable, than your typical liberal do-gooder humanitarian.