To the editor:
Would you like to live in a nation where everyone receives excellent health care at an affordable cost? Where all people have well-paying jobs? Where every child can reach his potential? Where women receive equal pay for equal work? Where there is no income inequality?
I would not want to live in such a horrible country. It would be a utopia, an imaginary place where everything is perfect.
The first problem with a utopia is that it requires a belief in a messiah, a semi-divine individual possessing a supernatural ability to solve all problems. Belief in a political messiah presupposes the existence of an infallible leader. Tyranny is based on unquestioning obedience to an autocrat considered infallible. Woe to the unbelieving.
The 2016 presidential campaign is based on two debatable premises. The first is that the purpose of government is to improve the economy, and the second is that the ultimate goal of government is social justice.
Although economic progress ands social justice are important and desirable, one can base society’s ultimate goals on other things. The English political theorist John Locke in the late 17th century (Second Treatise on Civil Government) wrote that the purpose of government is the preservation of peoples’ “lives, liberties, and estates”, i.e., property. Our Declaration of Independence (1776), which is based on John Locke, states that “unalienable rights” are “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” Happiness is, therefore, property ownership. Notice an important distinction. It is the “pursuit of happiness “and not happiness per se that is the right.
It should be pointed out that the Declaration of Independence is not law; our constitution is. The constitution has six goals listed in its preamble: union, justice, tranquility, defense, welfare, and liberty. It appears that this year’s candidates are concentrating mostly on welfare.
Rick Sirvint
Rindge