They have no problem with sharing or compassion (so they say). Sharing sandwiches isn't socialism, to them.
BUT: They are against others FORCING them to share or to be, evil of evils, ALTRUISTIC. Most right-libs I've debated online and in real life (hey, I am in TX, home of Ron Paul, & it happens more often than I'd like) claim to be THE most generous, good-hearted souls prvately. They love to help out the poor and donate to charity and give guys on street corners a few bucks. But they bristle at the idea someone else - THE GOVERNMENT -- should FORCE them to be "generous" to others. That should remain squarely in the realm of private caprice and whim, up to the individual conscience of the benefactor, & NOT forced through taxation.
Believe it or not, I have been in social work classes where many folks training to be social workers felt the same fucking way! Social workers of the future - scary. Those were some contentious social work classes. Sometimes it seemed like me and the professor were the only ones arguing for taxation for unemployment, Social Security, etc. Everyone else was enamored with voluntarism, and seemed to want a "welfare statement" that was a network of voluntary charities and food pantries and churches. No state-guaranteed help, just the private caprice of individuals.
-B.
Chris Doss wrote:
"Have you ever noticed how bizarrely obsessed libertarians are with theft? It's like there were no other sins."
B. <docile_body at yahoo.com> wrote:
"According to our conservative/right-lib keyboard warrior friends, sharing sandwiches is not socialism. That's just voluntaristically being a nice person, which they have no problem with. Socialism is when the govt. comes along and FORCES you to share yor sandwich, whether you want to share it or not."