Defining Justice; M. Da Vee

Nature does not produce a state of equal ity. No two people have the same physical or mental abilities. Add to the equation the free willof the individual either to utilize the talents that God has rationed-or to squander them-and economic equality be comes a goal that is incompatible with the right to property. To correct nature's "imperfections," the socialist looks to the state to employ the leveling power of the law. Socialists assume that economic inequality in and of itself constitutes economic injustice. They re gard wealth acquired through risk, toil, and Mr. Da Vee is a freelance writer living in Mon terey, Californ~a. fortunately, they won't do either one, be cause doing so would reduce their power. Hikingthe minimumwage was neither fair nor efficient. But then, so what else is new? Yet again, politicians are crying crocodile tears over the plight of workers, blaming the private sector for the consequences of their own failed policies. D sweat to be ill-gotten gain if it is "exces sive." Therefore justice must be imposed, or rather, inflicted by the state upon society through positive laws.

Positive laws are tyrannical. One individ ual's rights-whether they be life, liberty, or property-must be sacrificed by the state in order to fulfill the positive rights of another. For example, if housing is consid ered a "right," then the state will have to confiscate wealth (property) from those who have provided shelter for themselves in order to house those who have not. This is done under the banner of justice, when justice is defined as equality. In The Law, French economist Frederic Bastiat wrote: "'The purpose of the law is to cause justice to reign' is not a rigorously accurate statement. It ought to be stated that the purpose of the law is to prevent injustice from reigning. In fact, it is injustice, instead of justice, that has an existence of its own. Justice is achieved only when injustice is absent." True justice is realized when our lives, and property are secure, and we are free to express our thoughts without fear of retribution. Just laws are negative in nature; they exist to thwart the violation of our natural rights. Government ought to be the collec tive organization-that is, the exten sion-of the individual's right of self defense, and its purpose to protect our lives, liberties, and property.

Socialism's allure lies in its deceptive appeal to become part of a noble cause-to create a utopian society where every indi vidual is free from want. Yet a job, home, education, medical care, and standard of living, are not "rights." They are things that may be gained in proportion to the effort and ingenuity spent in acquiring them-in a free society. Socialists are skilled at manipulating lan guage in order to advance their ideology. A movement that claims to seek economic justice is much more palatable to the Amer ican public than one which openly seeks the advance of socialism. Americans love jus tice, but most-especially politicians-will not admit to being socialists. Instead they will describe themselves as "liberals" or DEFINING JUSTICE 567 "progressives. " These are deliberately de ceptive labels designed to make socialists appear to be operating from a moral high ground. For, to oppose a liberal implies that you seek to constrain-when in fact just the opposite is true. It is the modern liberal who views government as a tool to engineer society and control our lives. To oppose a progressive implies that you are "back wards" and an obstacle to progress. And to oppose "economic justice" as it is defined by liberals/progressives, is to favor injus tice.

Economic justice is not realized when we are equal, it is realized when we are free to own property and order its direction. Wealth redistribution by the state is nothing more than legalized economic injustice. Government that tramples the property rights of its citizens makes itself their ad versary, and will eventually collapse or face insurrection. A government that exists to protect personal liberty and property rests upon a firm foundation-the allegiance of those it governs. D ThlSocialCritic Had enoughof the liberalbiasin the popularnewsmedia?Had enoughof "donating" an increasingamountofwhatyou earnto supportinefficient,bloatedsocialprograms? Had enoughof watchingour culturedegeneratebeforeyoureyes? Do you feel like a strangerin an increasinglystrangeland? If you answered"yes"to any of the above questions,then you will be interestedin a bold, intelligentnewmagazine,TheSocialCrific.No, youwon't find "inside-the-Beltway"

gossip in this magazine.What you willfind is vital social and political commentaryby great social criticssuch as WilliamWatkins,Jr. of The Freemanand Dr. CharlesBaird, DirectorofThe SmithCenterfor PrivateEnterpriseStudies.The SocialCritic-a vitalcon servativeresourcenow in bookstoresacrossNorthAmerica. http://www.socialcritic.com ---~troduc~rYO~r~4%Offth~~sstandprice.--One-year(six issues)subscription:$18.00 Pleasemake checkor money Two-yearsubscription:$ 34.00(19% off the newsstandprice) orderpayableto: The Social Critic Name ---Mail to: The SocialCritic Address 31121 MissionBlvd., Suite301 City State__ Zip __ Hayward,CA 94544 THEFREEMAN IDEASON LIBERTY The Economic Costs of Sexual Harassment by Elizabeth Larson S exual harassment is "subtle rape," or so says psychologist John Gottman. Judging from the millions of dollars U.S. companies are being forced to spend to combat sexual harassment, American men have apparently become subtle rapists and sexual predators on a scale unimaginable even to the most vocal feminists of a decade or two ago.