The Greatest of These Is Justice
John Hanna
[Reprinted from Land and Freedom,
September-October 1940]
The Georgeist movement was distinguished in its early years by the
Crusade of the Anti-Poverty Societies under the leadership of Henry
George and Father McGlynn. The emphasis was placed on the demands for
Justice in the affairs of men. The establishment of Justice would, it
was claimed, abolish involuntary poverty and would obtain for all men
equal opportunity to work and to achieve. This Crusade kindled a flame
in the hearts of many a flame which may be less brilliant now, but is
still steady and strong. However much men may differ in their opinions
and methods in advancing the reform, its supporters are impelled by
the same noble motive.
There has developed considerable divergence of opinion about the
proper method of advancing the movement, as well as much
hair-splitting discussion regarding the Law of Rent and the Nature of
Interest. Such discussions may be of some value and may afford some
intellectual play, but are to be regretted when they absorb energy
which might be devoted to the advancement of the primary purpose. The
danger is that the whole movement may be divided and its vigor lost in
factional adherence to non-essentials, in the same way that the
Christian Church has been split and its effectiveness impaired by its
division into sects ; some emphasizing one interpretation, some
another, apparently forgetting, in their doctrinal zeal, that the real
purpose of religion is to bring men to "deal justly, to love
mercy and to walk humbly with their God" that they "may have
Life and have it more abundantly." Such divergences are an
example of the human tendency to let doctrine overshadow principle. A
divided force is a weaker force which must give comfort to those who
are interested in keeping things as they are.
If there is any basis for universal appeal in the effort to abolish
the present system of taxation, it is in the direction of establishing
Justice in the relations of man to man, and man to society. Most of us
will agree that when this is accomplished many of the evils from which
humanity is suffering will disappear or be materially lessened and
many of the vexing questions in which so many confused and broken
threads have been woven will unravel themselves.
Our critics are fond of asking, Pilate-like, "What is Justice?"
Without attempting any academic definition, let us abolish the very
flagrant injustice in the present system of taxation, and Justice will
show herself and men will know her as they know the air they breathe
without knowing anything about its component parts of oxygen and
nitrogen.
We know that industry, enterprise and labor are taxed and hampered by
the present system. We know that ownership of land confers the
privilege of collecting rent for the use of land. We know that the
presence of population and the services that are consequently supplied
by the population are the factors which create the land value or
ground rent whichever term you may prefer. These are facts which to
state provoke the question: Would it not be in the interest of Justice
to take this ground rent to pay for the services which the population
renders; thus having the community collect its own earnings and leave
to capital and labor their own earnings?
Thus it will be seen that Justice is the very core of the whole
matter, the supremely vital nerve center from which radiate impulses
for good or evil, as Justice is accorded or denied. Sometimes one
wishes that we could recapture the fervor of the Anti-Poverty Crusade
which was, in great degree, directed not only against poverty in
material things but the greater poverty of mind and spirit which is
the natural offspring of injustice everywhere; blighting and
distorting human life. The appeal was for the abolition of poverty,
not by any man-made scheme of pension or welfare relief with all their
attendant evils of indolence and loss of self-respect and bureaucratic
regulation, but by recognizing man's fundamental natural rights on a
basis of Justice to all.
Let us unite in the attack on the injustice of the present system,
each in. his own way! If we cannot have uniformity of method we can
maintain the force which comes of unity. Even some who do not go all
the way with us are still doing valuable work in exposing the errors
of the present system. To approach the subject by way of Science is
good. To approach from the standpoint of Business is good. To approach
by way of Ethics is good; so long as the fundamental error is shown
and the Justice of the proposed remedy proclaimed. One may search the
pages of history and find no great reform accomplished by
philosophical or scientific argument, but when mankind has been moved
by the plea for justice an irresistible motive force is set into
action. Science and Philosophy serve as governor and fly-wheel for
emotional force but they do not drive. Many who are left cold by the
intricacies of fiscal or scientific argument will warm up to the
demands of Justice.
The advocate of Justice may have high regard for scientific deduction
and for empirical knowledge, but if he finds primarily that a proposal
is just, that its denial results in distortion of the social fabric,
in an aristocracy of wealth, in blighted and stunted lives he is
content to make his decision on the basis of Justice leaving the
subtleties of economic speculation to those who enjoy them; to say
with Emerson "Whoever fights, whoever falls, Justice conquers
evermore."
To paraphrase St. Paul: And now abideth Science, Pragmatism, Justice
but the greatest of these is Justice.
|