The Washington Times reports that Republican plans for a 10 percent
tax cut are “not flying.” Not to worry, though. Sen. Trent Lott says he
still finds the 10 percent cut “attractive,” but “the main point is
anytime we can have a discussion about tax cuts we should put in place,
I am happy.”

I beg to differ. We need to step back from this discussion and stop
being manipulated. We are dealing with a classic instance of “bait and
switch.” The crypto-socialist Republicans in the leadership are first
baiting us with Reagan-style across-the-board tax cuts that really put
at least some money back under the control of people themselves, and
then then saying cheerfully “but any kind of tax cut will be fine.”

Before you know it, they have turned to Clinton-style “targeted” tax
cuts, which are aimed at fastening the shackles of government more
firmly around us, and putting the strings of government control more
firmly upon us.

What do I mean by “crypto-socialist”? It’s actually quite simple. I
mean hidden socialism. The basic principle of socialism is government
control and domination of society. Things which tend in that direction
are socialist by nature. Things which tend to return power,
responsibility and control to people themselves — as individuals, in
their businesses, and in their families and communities — are what
oppose socialism and promote the agenda of self-government.

Many so-called conservatives today put forth policies which, when
examined, turn out to contribute to the consolidation of government
control and domination of the society. Whether it be targeted tax cuts,
educational approaches that emphasize government dictation of standards,
or other encroachments on our liberty, these policies are socialist in
principle even when “conservatives” or “Republicans” propose them.

Broad-based tax cuts at least have the advantage of leaving in
hands control over more of their own money. Such tax cuts are not the
ultimate solution to the threat our liberty faces from the current
system of taxation. The ultimate solution is to abolish the income tax
and replace it with a system based on sales taxes. A national sales tax
would respect the fact that people earn the money and should have
control over 100 percent of it, and the government shouldn’t have a
pre-emptive claim to any. But if you can’t get there right now, a
Reagan-style tax cut is a move in the right direction, at least giving
people more of the control they ought to have over their own money.

Targeted tax cuts are a move in the wrong direction. They take money
out of people’s pockets, and then give it back to them on the condition
that they accept the government’s dictates as to how that money should
be used. This actually consolidates government control over people’s
lives. Republican supporters of targeted tax cuts, whether they call
themselves moderates or conservatives, are really acting like socialists

in disguise. Targeted tax cuts achieve the socialist objective in a
particularly insidious way, because they make us partners in our own
subjection. And to add insult to injury, they use our own hard-earned
money to bribe us into this slavery.

Now admittedly, on the Democrat side they have been more overt about
it. They are fairly open about their agenda of taking our money from
us in order to put together government institutions that control our
lives. This does have the virtue of being an open, clear,
straightforward enslavement of the citizens — socialism pure and

The Republican crypto-socialists are more devious. They pretend that
they actually want to give us something. Who wouldn’t want a tax cut?
But then when we examine the real body of the policy, it turns out to be

socialist in nature because it serves the socialist objective, which is
government control. And to that extent, “conservative” proponents of
such policies are misleading us. They are hiding a socialist agenda in
what they hope will be the appealing guise of tax cut language that will

fool us into giving it our support.

One of the questions that I fear faces us in American politics these
days is the possibility that both parties, or at least the leadership in

both parties, serves the agenda of government control and domination.
It appears that to the extent the Republicans professed for a long time
not to serve that agenda, it was because they did not feel they had
sufficient control of the key elements of the apparatus of power. When
they got control of the Congress, they started to identify more with the

interests of government itself. And now, for instance, they are doing
things like proposing big boosts in federal education spending over the
next five years, thereby consolidating the role of the federal
establishment in education. Such moves totally repudiate the agenda
that they professed to stand for as they courted our votes and we moved
them into majority status in the Congress.

The true opposition in American politics appears to be between the
socialists and the crypto-socialists. And this isn’t much of a choice,
is it? It is between the socialists who are open about their espousal
of government control and power, and the socialists who are hidden in
their allegiance to that principle, and try to put some other face on
it. They are serving the socialist principle, but they are putting
conservative clothes on the grotesque body of socialism to try to hide
from us what is really going on.

Republican National Committee Chairman Jim Nicholson warned
Republican presidential candidates this week not to criticize fellow
Republicans, but to focus instead on liberals. If we intend to help the
Republican Party find its voice as a champion of liberty and
self-government, we will have to take half of that advice, and ignore
the other half. Let us indeed concentrate the fire of our argument on
the liberals whose policies invite us down the road to socialist
tyranny. But when Republicans, even “conservatives,” propose to us the
road of socialist tax policy, hoping to distract us with the “tax cut”
label, let’s call them what they are — crypto-socialists and threats to
the American way of life. If Jim Nicholson doesn’t like it, too bad.

Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.