Harris’ fake notion of freedom would restrict us to her activist dictatorship

Recently, Kamala Harris has been emphasizing the importance of freedom. Along with Tim Walz, they are devising a campaign strategy to challenge the Republicans’ hold on the “freedom” concept, a label that the GOP has claimed since the Reagan era.

Historically, American freedom has been about the sanctity of personal liberty and the avoidance of intrusive big government.

Harris is skillfully redefining the term to represent a more activist government and an expanded entitlement state.

According to her, freedom means the ability “to get ahead,” “to be safe from gun violence,” “to control your own body,” and to have the “sacred right to vote.”

Her running mate has also embraced this narrative.

When Republicans talk about freedom, Walz argues, they are promoting a government that invades personal spaces, pollutes the environment, and allows exploitation of the disadvantaged by banks.

It’s clear that no reasonable person would support any of that.

Many Americans believe abortion is a personal choice, especially in the early stages of pregnancy. However, this further underscores that an overreaching government undermines personal freedom.

Throughout history, tyranny and evil have thrived due to excessive government power, not insufficient control.

Since its inception, freedom in America has been about the right to make individual choices.

In this context, Harris and Walz can be seen as challenging freedom, with poor track records on personal liberty.

For instance, they oppose the growing school choice movement that allows families to select the most suitable school for their children.

Shouldn’t freedom entail equal access to excellent education for everyone?

Harris promises “freedom from gun violence,” yet cities under progressive Democratic leadership, including Chicago, Detroit, Minneapolis, and San Francisco (Harris’s hometown), have higher crime rates and fatal shootings despite strict gun laws.

She stands against a common-sense bill blocked by Senate Democrats requiring proof of citizenship to vote in federal elections, diminishing the “sacred right to vote.”

On the topic of freedom, Harris advocates for regulations that would phase out gas-powered cars, restricting the right to choose the preferred vehicle.

She also supports bans or limitations on various products, from lightbulbs to air conditioners to gas stoves, interfering with individual choices.

Furthermore, Harris backs the “PRO Act,” a policy mandating workers to join unions involuntarily or risk losing their jobs.

How does this align with the concept of freedom?

Advocating for Medicare for All, Harris’s stance raises questions about the freedom to choose and retain personal healthcare plans.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, Harris and Walz endorsed stringent lockdowns on schools, businesses, and churches, despite evidence suggesting these restrictions were ineffective. This infringed on individuals’ rights to operate businesses, attend religious services, earn wages, and ensure children receive education.

Both supported mandatory COVID vaccinations, undermining the idea of “freedom over your own body.”

Harris proposes higher business and estate tax rates, including taxing unrealized capital gains, infringing on the right to retain personal finances and pass savings to future generations.

At her rallies, Harris plays “Freedom” by Beyoncé, whose lyrics raise questions about the current state of freedom amid escalating government spending, debt, and declining worker wages.

The upcoming election may hinge on whether Americans believe big government leads to freedom or realize it propels us towards servitude.

Stephen Moore, a visiting fellow at the Heritage Foundation and an economic advisor to the Trump campaign, shared these insights.