"From the fact that all ideologies are of equal value, that all ideologies are mere fictions, the modern relativist infers that everybody has the right to create for himself his own ideology and to attempt to enforce it with all the energy of which he is capable." These words of Benito Mussolini reflect the attitude of might-makes-right. The brutal Italian dictator created his own ideology that the individual is nothing and the state, the collective body under his command, is everything. To the extent that the individual helps the state attain its goals, he is useful. To the extent the individual has his own goals, he is expendable and a danger to the state.
The modern environmental movement has taken that powerful lesson from Il Duce. They have made up their own ideology and have embedded themselves in a state apparatus to enforce it with ever-increasing energy. The ideology is that the environment is sacred, that human activity is a blight on that environment, and that their rights as environmental saviors trump any individual's rights as citizen, property owner, or human.
Some high-profile cases periodically make the news, and indeed, there is a case pending before the Supreme Court testing whether the abusiveness of activists in government agencies will be tolerated. In Sackett vs. EPA, the Sackett family in Idaho was building a home on their property in a housing development when the EPA issued them a compliance order to stop construction and restore the land to its natural state. The government is imposing a fine of $37,500 for every day that the property is not brought back to its original condition, a bill apparently upward of $40 million due to the length of the suit and appeals process. The Sacketts had no opportunity to challenge the EPA's presumption that the property was wetlands and that they have violated the Clean Water Act. The issue being decided is the right to judicial review of compliance orders, but the more important issue is whether the government has the right to interfere with private property when the use of that property does not interfere with any other person's right to enjoy his or her own property. Whichever way the court rules in this case or any other case is immaterial to what is right. A law or regulation which violates the rights of individuals is not valid or even good.
The concern with the Clean Water Act is pollution of the waterways in America. That concern is good. Pollution, however, is a property-rights issue, not a social issue. Nobody has the right to destroy or damage the property of another. Any person who destroys the property of another, whether by pollution, by violent acts, or by preventing the quiet enjoyment of the property must restore that property or pay restitution for the value lost. The present regime is a violation of property rights under the fascist assumption that the presumed good of society or the environment is a higher good than the rights of the individual.
The number of such cases is growing, and not just in far-away places. Local people are being intimidated by arrogant, abusive agents of the state into consenting to gross violations of their rights, with little ability to contest a ruling and no compensation for the de facto taking of their property, even though they must continue paying taxes on it. It is extremely expensive to take a government agency to court, and most people cannot even consider it, because it would bankrupt them. Fortunately there are organizations which are championing property rights and helping to defend people from abusive agencies, politicians, and laws.
Mussolini worshiped power, as all dictators do. His power came from violence, force, intimidation, and from keeping the people alarmed and afraid. His ideology allowed him to see people not as humans, not as sacred lives, not as individuals with unalienable rights, but rather as useful tools to facilitate his grand vision of being the soul, the conscience, and the destiny of the people. Environmental fascists, many of whom now occupy important positions within the EPA and state environmental agencies, have a grand plan. Your rights don't fit into that plan. Their ideologies make no allowance for your ownership of property. It is time for people to awaken from apathy, to recognize the state of affairs in which we find ourselves, and support each other and those organizations which defend our unalienable rights, those not given by government, and which cannot be taken away by it.
Dan McLaughlin is a columnist for The Post-Journal. Contact him at danmcl999@roadrunner.com. Visit www.aboutfreedom.org for more columns and information on freedom and limited government.