> a situation where simple "free choice" is made a mockery of. I'm not so sure. "Free choice" today as defined by those on the left is "free to make choices in

> a situation where simple "free choice" is made a mockery of. I'm not so sure. "Free choice" today as defined by those on the left is "free to make choices independent of constraints imposed by personal capacity or personal resources", whereas it has historically been interpreted as "free to make choices independent of constraints imposed by other humans". The problem with the former definition of free choice is that it requires encroaching on the latter definition of free choice. If you have two people that are equally poor, both are equal in terms of having free choice under both definitions. If one of those people becomes wealthy, they continue to be equal under the latter definition of free choice, but are unequal under the former definition even though nothing has changed in the circumstances of the one that became neither richer nor poorer than he was previously.