THE GREATER GOOD ACCORDING TO WHOM?

 

Why is it that it always seems to come out in the end, some liberal wag spouts off to justify taking private property as “serving the greater good” when in fact they are just rationalizing some self serving scheme? I’m sure that the same kind of logic could have been used to justify the actions of any feudal lord or slave master from history. The whole notion that we as citizens should be secure in our persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated etc. is contrary to the liberal’s progressive mind. The framers of the Constitution fresh off the battle for independence came together and defined private property and ones right to it. They stated clearly that your property constituted not only your possessions but also included the ownership of your work product. It is one of the most important driving forces behind the exponential growth of the American economy. The Soviet Union and other communist nations never figured out that people would work harder to succeed if they got to keep the rewards of their work. I have seen firsthand the worker apathy that is the long term result in former communist countries. We as a nation took a fresh approach; the land could belong to the common man and could, as his possession, be handed down to his family. The rapid development of rail and freeway systems made eminent domain taking of private property seem less “wrong” as rail and roads needed to go through for the good of all. Once the veil of private property rights had been pierced it became easier and easier to justify taking private property in the name of doing the greater good. I was reading an article last week about a farm that had been taken from the owner by a local town council using eminent domain in the hope of attracting a big box store. It turns out that some of the same town council had prior knowledge of the big box company’s decision not to locate on the property and used the opportunity to buy the land from the town for little or nothing after the deal fell through. Amazingly the new owners had the plans for a new development ready to go at the time of the acquisition and tried to contend in court that it had only been a contingency plan. The court intervened in the plan and stopped the development. The land sits empty to this day as the court failed to restore ownership to the deeded landowner.

There are an endless stream of Federal, State and local elected or appointed officials ready to determine what constitutes the “greater good” for the rest of us. I believe the standard of proof should be difficult in the extreme and that fair compensation should be determined as a multiple of market value. The system of determining fair compensation as it stands is a bad joke. Much of the time the value of the “fair” compensation is arrived at by the same people that are benefitting from the theft of the personal property.

I for one find that any time I hear someone say that it is necessary for the “greater good” I want to scream, according to whom? Who is it that decides which choice serves the greater good? If liberals are involved you can bet it will involve taking private property and making it public at best and serving their own selfish interests at worst.