An Editorial

By Jon Christian Ryter

Looking At Utopia ThroughThe Eyes of Social Justice

Subj: Balint Vazsonyi is a name that most Americans don't recognize. Aside from the fact that he is a Hungarian born historian and world renowned concert pianist, he is the Director of the Center for the American Founding and is a contributing op-ed writer for The Washington Times.

Last year Vazsonyi wrote a book that barely anyone noticed. It was entitled America's 30 Year War. Regnery published it. Few people read it. That's a shame since it is one of the best books I've ever read. Vazsonyi views America through the eyes of someone who has experienced the horrors of both fascism and communism, and draws comparisons that will startle every America who is watching the government of the United States enact the same types of legislation that fostered both political systems.

"The essence of communism," Vazsonyi writes on page 58 of his book, "is the rearing of children by the village." America, of course, was introduced to the village concept by Hillary Rodham Clinton in her own book, It Takes A Village. Communism purports to be the most humanitarian effort in the history of mankind: a laudable effort to rid the world of sickness, hunger, racial bigotry, hate and poverty in every form. We need to be able to erase from our minds, the utopians tell us, visions of starving children in 3rd world countries, or in the bomb and missile torn areas of the Balkans. We can accomplish this, we are told, only by reaching out for the purest form of socialism that exists today. In the communist world, we are told (although the phrase used today is "the New World Order," there will be no poverty, no sickness, no bigotry, and no hunger because there will be no difference in the standards of living between the various nation-states of the soon coming global federation. There will be no great income disparity between the worker and the manager, and there will be no golden parachutes or million dollar bonuses for the corporate executive. All men, we are assured, will be equal.

No man will own two houses as long as homeless people curl up in doorways or huddle over steam vents to keep warm during subzero winter nights. No one will be denied critical medical assistance while others can afford the luxury of elective surgery to rid themselves of a few ugly pounds off the hips or buttocks, or to augment breasts that are either too small or too large.

Ah...'tis a perfect world, this Utopia.

Or is it?

Utopia will be a world in which social justice will reign.

Man, who is never content with his lot, has been seeking social justice for decades. It is a myth that does not exist, yet it attracts mankind like moths to a light in the night. The concept of social justice has intoxicated man because, in principle, it is pure utopianism. It avenges all wrongs and rescues civilized man from himself. It awakens man's social conscience and enfranchises the disenfranchised. All members of the community, in the pure utopian society, enjoy precisely the same attributes, possessions, and good fortune. Karl Marx envisioned it. Lenin implemented it in a contemporary political setting, and Josef Stalin perverted it into the nightmare that the world today knows as communism.

According to Vazsonyi, the advocates of social justice insist that in order to demonstrate social conscience, a person must resolve to eliminate poverty, suffering, and most of all, they must eliminate the differences between people. Vazsonyi points out that emphasis is on the word "eliminate,: since it is peculiar to the thinking of the utopians. Then he asks what are the implications? Nothing more, we reply, than a consensus on what the word "eliminate" means.

To Americans, poverty means not having adequate shelter; not having enough to eat; not having adequate clothing to protect oneself against he elements. That is poverty to an American. But, as Vazsonyi points out, poverty is a relative term, based on where you live and what luxuries either you or your neighbors possess. In Albania or Zaire, he points out, the "poor" of America would be considered to be well off. In the United States, the man who spends his life on welfare because he refuses to work for less than he can get from the State views the working man with a mortgage and two cars with envy because he possesses more. The working stiff with the mortgage views the plant manager as a rich man because he lives in a better home and drives a better car. Poverty is, indeed, relative. Poverty in some form or another, will always exist as long as there are any political or economic differences between men--and those distinctions will always exist because even in the utopian world promised by those who seek to create world government there will always be at least two classes of people--the ruled and the rulers.

Social justice is a myth created by the wealthy transnational bankers and industrialists who seek to control the world, and who now stand poised at the doorway to Utopia, key in hand. Their journey has been long and arduous, taking all of 100 years, but victory is now in sight and the utopians are eager to claim their prize--all of the nations of the world, and in them, all of the land and all of the possessions within those lands.

In medieval days, man was chattel property. He was owned by the wealthy lord who owned the land upon which he toiled. He was human capital...a possession, just as cattle and sheep are possessions. Just as your pet cat or dog is a possession that belongs to you. he had no rights not specifically granted to him by his master, the landowner. There was no government, other than the law of the landowner. He held the power of life and death in his hand. The was no other "court of last appeals."

Freedom from the bonds of servitude was hard-fought and won only with the shed blood of those who were held in bondage. The first victory (of sorts) occurred with the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. While the Magna Carta did not free the commoner from the steel grip of the propertied barons (it freed only the feudal barons form the steel grip of the English monarchy), the tenets of the Magna Carta "...no freeman shall be arrested or imprisoned...unless by the lawful judgment of his peers" became the backbone of constitutional law, and would be used by Oliver Cromwell in 1648 during the second English Civil War (between the royalists and the commoners, who were called "roundheads.") The roundheads put King Charles on trial and, on January 20, 1649, after they won the civil war, they beheaded Charles for his crimes at Whitehall.

Although the French had not yet had their own revolution, and most of the remaining European monarchies flourished until the end of World War I, the age of serfdom died with King Charles of England. For the first time in the 5,000 years of recorded history, man was free from the shackles of servitude. Freedom is, you see, of fairly recent vintage.

But the freedom offered by the recently freed was conditioned on the whims of the new governments. Freedom was still not viewed as an inherent right. The oligarchy that arose in these new political structures, used to being controlled, wanted to control. And, control they did. Man had the freedom to think, but not to act. Freedom without liberty is hollow. The government of these new "democratic" states were as supreme as the monarchies they had overthrown. Nothing really changed except who wrote the laws and who controlled their enforcement.

In search of genuine freedom, men sought the promised liberty of the New World. In the American colonies, with few restrictions, all men were viewed as equal in mind, thought and deed. While class distinctions still existed, the poorest of men were equal to the wealthiest landowners in the eyes of the law.

When the Constitution was ratified in 1787 that equality was encased in constitutional law. The commonest of men stood equal to the government itself. Freedom, true freedom--an inherent right under God, did exist, and that right was the bedrock of the American Republic. (Of course, if God does not exist, then that right is temporal.) Men, craving freedom, came to America in droves. No where else in the world has this type of freedom ever existed before or since.

Put into place was a bulwark of failsafes to safeguard the people from their government, to make certain that at no time could the government ever steal from the people their God- given right to freedom. However, in creating these safeguards (which include the 2nd Amendment to make sure the people were always better armed than their government) the Founding Fathers failed to take the people themselves into consideration.

On the last day of his presidency, Dwight D. Eisenhower warned the American people to watch out for those in the military/ industrial complex. He should have warned the people to watch out for one another. Among us are those who believe that a static society is better than a dynamic one, and that social justice is preferred over the rule of law. In their idyllic world, someone must have the authority to determine what you should be allowed to own in terms of real wealth and property, and that they should also be able to tell you what you may not own as well (i.e., too large of a savings account when there are people without money; or two homes when there are homeless people on the streets); and that they should have the power to take form you what you are not using to make those assets available to those who have less than you. Social justice demands that you be punished for conspicuous consumption if you have too much. (Strangely enough, however, social justice does not demand equity from the overlords at the top of the power pyramid...only those in the middle. (Such confiscation of wealth comes in the form of taxation. We are all consciously aware of this form of "legal" robbery--particularly throughout the Clinton years. Clinton, as you recall, enacted the most punitive tax structure in the history of mankind...and made it retroactive in order to tax the prosperity America enjoyed during the Bush years.

As the politically-correct elitists in the Clinton Administration flood us with a barrage of images of world poverty and tell us it is our duty to be the humanitarians of the world, they reach into our pockets and savings accounts and steal the wealth earned by the sweat of our brows and put away for the lean years in our old age. We now stand condemned in the court of global opinion, and guilty in our own minds after being told, so many times, that have so much and those in the poor nations have so little. Social justice demands that America sacrifice some of its affluence to elevate the standards of living of those who, for so long, have been deprived. And, while we stand silently by as the utopians rob our cities of the industries that made us strong, we hear the utopian choir sing the praises of social justice for the disenfranchised as they disenfranchise America.

And standing behind the utopian choir is our own President, assuring us, as he helps the globalists rape America of its political greatness and its military and industrial strength, that he feels our pain and anguish.

Americans, who for so long have held out their outstretched hands to Washington, asking--no, demanding--gratuities from the State as a reward for electing those who are now determined to destroy that which they swore to protect, now see the outstretched hands of the world and realize that its own pockets are now overtaxed and empty. As America wonders where its sons and daughters will be employed in the next decade, they still stand idly by as the exodus of entire industries from the United States continues unabated. Social justice demands their silence, and they are compliant. You still have too much, the utopians tell America. Look at these pictures of poverty in the world. See how little they have. It is your fault. Just be thankful that war has not touched your shores in a hundred years.

Tomorrow, social justice will prevail. The rule of law will die. And, in those death throes, America will witness the death of the Republic. A new reality will be born form the ashes of today's prosperity. Equality will find be achieved. All men will be equal.

World government will be established. A booming world economy will flourish briefly. War will cease for an even briefer period of time as Israel agrees to lay down its arms and accept the terms of the peace treaty that is forced upon it by the transnational bankers and industrialists who have cut a deal with the Arab world in exchange for their cooperation in the formation of the New World Order. For seven glorious years, prosperity will appear to reign. The industries stolen form America, Europe, and Japan will churn out new products that the new consumers of the emerging nations will flock to buy with incomes from the jobs generated in those former industrial nation plants and factories. The global stock market will reach dizzying heights and the money barons will spend their days in their counting houses computing their new found wealth. But halfway through that period of prosperity, the world will turn on the Jews and the tenets of social justice will begin to unravel. The stock markets of the world will suddenly crash. The economy of the New World Order will flounder and collapse, and the merchant millionaires of Utopia will cry in dismay as their wealth vanishes overnight.

And then, the end will come.

Mankind will reach its Waterloo in the Valley of Jezreel on the plains of Meggido. At that time, the rule of law will return.

The judge and jury will be the Son of God, Jesus Christ. His courtroom will be just outside the East Gate of Jerusalem. From that spot, the pits of Hell will open for the world to see, and the judgment of mankind will begin.

Today, the harvest of souls must begin in earnest. Have you spoken yet to those unsaved friends and loved ones you cherish? Tomorrow, you say? Are you certain there will be a tomorrow? Why not call them tonight. May God have mercy on America.

Go there

Questions? E-mail Jon here