|
We are the only site on the web devoted exclusively to intellectual conservatism. We find the most intriguing information and bring it together on one page for you.
Home |
|
The Dark Lord Soros
What is embodied George Soros is the morphed spirit of the philosopher Karl Popper, who fostered and defined a politico-economic theory called Open Society.
|
|
Billionaire and ideologue George Soros, who came out of disembodied obscurity to popular recognition by vowing to unseat President Bush, is the sort of evil whose very presence should turn our stomachs. As in the Lord of the Rings, in which Sauron begins to manifest himself as his power is threatened, Soros has come out of hiding in order to amass his armies to stop the spread of capitalism.
We start with the recognition of our own fallibility, which extends not only to our mental constructs but also to our institutions. What is imperfect can be improved, by a process of trial and error. The open society not only allows this process but actually encourages it, by insisting on freedom of expression and protecting dissent. The open society offers a vista of limitless progress. In this respect it has an affinity with the scientific method. But science has at its disposal objective criteria--namely the facts by which the process may be judged. Unfortunately, in human affairs the facts do not provide reliable criteria of truth, yet we need some generally agreed-upon standards by which the process of trial and error can be judged. All cultures and religions offer such standards; the open society cannot do without them. The innovation in an open society is that whereas most cultures and religions regard their own values as absolute, an open society, which is aware of many cultures and religions, must regard its own shared values as a matter of debate and choice.
"Open" here is cunningly used as a synonym for "free," but we are not talking about freedom at all. Freedom of thought is a good thing, says Soros, as long as it is in the context of this worldwide system he is proposing, and freedom of religion is a lovely idea if religion remains an innocuous presence only. By Soros' own words, it is easy to discover how secularism and world order are inseparable ideals. Contrast this to the Founders' belief that freedom of thought can only exist in the context of liberty. Freedom of religion is encouraged, not quelled, and is certainly not divorced from the process of self-governance. The government cannot impel religious thought, of course, but it should never try to stop it either.
The Declaration of Independence may be taken as a pretty good approximation of the principles of an open society, but instead of claiming that those principles are self-evident, we ought to say that they are consistent with our fallibility. Could the recognition of our imperfect understanding serve to establish the open society as a desirable form of social organization? I believe it could, although there are formidable difficulties in the way. We must promote a belief in our own fallibility to the status that we normally confer on a belief in ultimate truth. But if ultimate truth is not attainable, how can we accept our fallibility as ultimate truth?
These may be the most audacious remarks I have ever read. Some of the greatest words of liberty ever penned must now be revamped? Read between the lines: The Dark Lord Soros wants to throw God out of his proposed earthly paradise. The core theme of the Declaration --
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
-- cannot stand within an Open Society, because it is inherently spiritual. "Self-evident" means that something is obvious within the soul to any rational human being. We are still trying to actuate the remarkable thoughts of our Founders, and have gone through tribulation to get as far as we have got, but now the forces of Mordor (call them MoveOn.orc if you like) are on the rise. The message is that we must embrace relativism, the contradictory notion that "nothing is true" is the only truth. In Soros' words: "[T]hat our understanding is imperfect & we must accept & as an article of faith."
Although I have made a fortune in the financial markets, I now fear that the untrammeled intensification of laissez-faire capitalism and the spread of market values into all areas of life is endangering our open and democratic society. The main enemy of the open society, I believe, is no longer the communist but the capitalist threat.
How convenient for him, to use capitalism for his own ends, and, once achieved, oppose similar opportunity for others! But this is all very subversive. Open Society is the latest version of the utopian dream, and this time it has a democratic face. It is, in fact, the natural progression of the "progressive" party, which embraces democratic socialism, i.e., democracy within a socialistic framework. This can only lead to global welfare and statist control, a system that is openly hostile to laissez-faire capitalism, to religious truth, and to any attempt to find freedom outside the boundaries of the state. In such an environment, individualism is necessarily suspect; says Soros:
I contend that an open society may also be threatened from the opposite direction--from excessive individualism. Too much competition and too little cooperation can cause intolerable inequities and instability.
Are we seeing signs of this push toward one-world government today? How about the gospel-like assumption that we must not act to defend our land except under the aegis of the U.N.? How about the cries of foul against our refusal to accept the juris-impudence of the International Court? How about Kyoto as a doctrine? How about the anarchistic protests against open global trade?
|
eorge Soros could not have more clearly enunciated the lethal danger that he and John Kerry and the clintons and the rest of his leftist cabal pose for America. 