- Author: Pedro Tellería
- Date: October 09, 2025
- Web: PedroTelleria.com
- Thought Capsules: Liberal Thought
For centuries, slavery was a visible stain on human history. Men and women chained, stripped of their time and lives, forced to serve others under threat of punishment. We look back in horror: “What barbarity!” we say. But are we really so far from that reality today?
Today, no iron chains are needed to take over someone’s life. Another mechanism is enough: money. Or rather, the systematic confiscation of the fruits of another’s effort.
1. Time is life. Money is its reflection.
Think for a moment about what money really is. Not bills or digital numbers, but what they represent. Every euro, every dollar, is a fraction of our life. It is time spent learning, working, overcoming challenges, adding value. It is the result of sleepless nights, problems solved, and voluntary sacrifices.
So, when someone takes a significant part of that money, they are not just taking “things.” They are taking part of our life. If out of every 100 we create, 40, 60, or even 80 are seized by others—almost always under the threat of law or social morality—aren’t we talking, at least in part, about a new form of slavery?
This is not rhetorical exaggeration. It is simple logic: if I work to gain my freedom and my money, and someone else keeps it (claiming “higher reasons”), that time is no longer mine. In that percentage, I am being forced to hand over part of my life.
2. The myth of redistribution “for the common good”
The great argument of our age is “Redistribution.” The State, we are told, takes our money to help the less fortunate, the weak, the unlucky. In theory, the intention is noble. But the essential question is: can the “common good” justify any means?
History shows us that the worst atrocities have been committed in the name of good. The problem is not just philosophical—it is practical. By giving political or bureaucratic elites the power to decide what “the good” is, we also give them ownership over our lives. And inevitably, that elite ends up serving itself before serving the supposed beneficiaries.
And what about those who, by choice, decide not to produce, not to work, not to save? Freedom means, by definition, the right to choose. If someone prefers leisure, relaxation, or contemplation, so be it. But freedom comes with responsibility. Choosing not to work should not grant anyone the automatic right to live off the effort of others.
3. Solidarity cannot be mandatory
The great moral trap of Collectivism (often labeled Communism, Socialism, Social Democracy, Christian Democracy…) is confusing solidarity with legal obligation. We are told that without the State, society would turn selfish and cruel. But historical evidence shows the opposite: humans are naturally empathetic. We cooperated and helped one another long before welfare systems existed.
When the State forcibly absorbs and redistributes our capacity to help, it not only dilutes personal responsibility, it also reduces the resources available for genuine solidarity. We can no longer help those we want, how we want. We can’t build strong community ties. Everyone becomes a “forced donor” and an anonymous recipient. Genuine altruism fades, replaced by the cold machinery of the State.
4. Necessary exceptions: the truly dependent
This is not about denying protection to those who cannot care for themselves: children, the elderly, the sick, the disabled. Here, social responsibility is unquestionable. But that does not justify treating the mass of productive citizens as an inexhaustible resource to fund any chosen lifestyle.
And even here, the real question is: wouldn’t it be more humane, efficient, and fair to let help flow directly, without intermediaries, from personal and community responsibility?
5. Conclusion: Are you the owner of your life?
The question we must ask is uncomfortable but urgent: Are you truly the owner of your time? Or are you only managing the part the State allows you to keep?
True freedom exists only when we are responsible for the consequences of our own choices. Solidarity, to be virtuous, must be voluntary. When generosity is imposed, it becomes slavery. And modern slavery—the one dressed in good intentions—may be harder to fight than the old kind.
Perhaps it is time to face history head-on, and ask ourselves whether we want to remain “slaves with smartphones”… or start reclaiming control over our own lives.