Elizabeth Warren is a socialist of the Marxist flavor and this very obviously has a massive distorting effect on her economic understanding of things. In response to the Contraception Mandate decision today, Warren expressed her disapproval in the following tweet:
Can’t believe we live in a world where we’d even consider letting big corps deny women access to basic care based on vague moral objections.
— Elizabeth Warren (@elizabethforma) June 30, 2014
Let’s look at this. Warren assumes that a “big corp” is denying women access to something. There is no proof of this; that is, there is no proof offered that there is a product out there that women are seeking to use and a big corporation is physically preventing these women from making the purchase. The product in question, which of course is not at all “basic care,” is currently available for purchase by these women and there is no evidence that the big corporation is somehow blockading them from going to the store, putting the product in their cart, and buying it. Warren’s tweet, like the statements of all progressivists on this matter, is especially deceitful.
In reality, the “big corporation,” which is actually an emotional phrase which could have been written as “corporation,” is refusing to purchase the product for its employees, which is perfectly within its rights, regardless of the “objections.” They could just as well “object” on the basis that they don’t feel it. The corporation is no more “denying” access to “basic care” than they are “denying” access to food, clothing, water, housing, friends, movie tickets, Starbucks coffee, cell phones, or toothpaste. To refrain from buying something for someone is not the equivalent of “denying access.” No one needs to apologize for “denying access” to one’s neighbor because he is refusing to purchase him Tylenol.
Now, as for the “vague moral objections,” we should first point out that Hobby Lobby has never been “vague.” They have been clear. They have been blunt and they have been direct. We are all interested in seeing Warren’s metrics for what constitutes “vague” and how we are supposed to express our objections in a way that satisfies her. What is more important however, is that fact that property owners should not need to “prove their case” in order to not be forced to purchase a product for someone else. It is a ridiculous and frightening assumption when people need approved justifications for spending or withholding their money as they see fit.
But since Warren is obviously in despair that she lives in this world, we ought to consider the implications of her tweet: what world does she desire? She desires a world where the State can threaten violence against a company if they do not spend their money in the way that Warren et al desire. She envisions a world in which legal sanctions, which by necessity are backed up ultimately with aggression, can be applied to those companies whose desires do not match up with those “in charge.” This is authoritarianism in its raw and unadulterated form. But this is the argument that the Progressivist Statists are making against Hobby Lobby.