In His Image: George Soros
The Global Open Society - A Contradiction of Terms?
George Soros, radical philosopher and billionaire, is intent on creating a global open society; a one-world government based on the tenet that it cannot succeed.
People are listening.
Important people; powerful people. The most frightening aspect of George Soros' agenda is that it is not motivated by his billions but by his philosophy. The man is accused of almost single-handedly destroying the economies of entire nations; he has subsidized uprisings and overthrown governments with his powerful control of the media and the financial ability to back whatever cause he chooses.
Most of what he professes to believe is diametrically opposed to itself, if that is possible. His one abiding vision is of what he calls a 'Global Open Society'. He admits that the term doesn't actually have any meaning; it is simply what is left after you shuck off all other alternatives.
His vision
To understand the irony, you must understand what the creation of a Global Open Society entails. An abolishment of national governments, one universal standard of judgment and the relinquishment of a belief in any Universal Truth. This is to be paired with complete individual freedom of choice in all matters moral, ethical or religious, as long as these are admitted to be 'choices', not 'truths'. Does he believe that the entire world can be brought into a harmonic 'society', forsaking personal interest for the common good of mankind? No. He admits this is an impossibility. In fact, he doesn't even believe the concept of a Global Open Society can be attained; but he is 'committed to the truth' of the idea (there being, of course, no actual truth).
The OSI and the OSF
In 1979, Soros founded the Open Society Fund (OSF), and the money was dedicated to opening 'closed society' countries: he avers that to have an open society, the nationals must be taught to think critically - although his social agendas play a great part in the 'educational' process. There are OSF foundations throughout twenty-five countries, all working together to further his philosophy. The Open Society Initiative(OSI) was founded in 1993, again a network of privately operated institutes involved in grant-making operations. The interests represented by this foundation include public health, independent media and education.
Soros the Philanthropist: Who Are the Beneficiaries?
In sync with Soros' intrinsic values are the PAC's and lobbying groups that receive the grants and donations. Moveon.org, a radical left-wing voter fund is one of his pet projects, as is the National Abortion Federation. Between 1998 and 2003 he donated $31 Million to non-profit pro-abortion groups; he credits his mother's membership in the Hemlock Society with his dedication to fighting for the right of people to legally kill themselves. Soros has supported the "Project on Death in America" (PDIA), whose director, Kathleen M. Foley, testified before congress on physician assisted suicide, and his foundation gives grants to "Death With Dignity, National Center", which defines itself as "...the premier educational organization dedicated to discussing physician aid in dying openly, seriously and with intellectual rigor."
Contradiction
A self-professed foe of the tenets of communism and fascism, Mr. Soros firmly holds the value of the 'common good' over individual rights and freedoms. In the Global Open Society model, citizens would be willing to make personal sacrifices for the good of society, even if they must compromise their systems of belief. He touts democracy with certain mechanisms in place to stabilize the market and redistribution of wealth. His world 'community' sounds remarkably like the Russian 'commune' ideal...
Soros' Non-Solution
Since his goal is unattainable, it will not be surprising to find that he has no 'blue-print' for this new world order (it would not be an open society if there was a blue-print is his mantra); he has never specified who, exactly would define the basic ethical and moral standard of his global enterprise or how (it being a democracy) the elected officials would be chosen.
Reading his theses is akin to watching a dragon swallowing its own tail. Everything he proposes is an impossibility; his solution to this paradox is that the Global Open Society is based on its fallibility. He has already saved himself and everyone else the trouble of argument - what we are going to do is impossible!
Ah, yes. His concept, he admits, is far too sophisticated for the 'primitive' minds of 'closed' society people. And so he continues; pouring hundreds of millions of dollars into the media, into the politician's hand and the radical left-wing ideologues cause; each one dedicated to the eradication of truth. After all, as George himself put it, "...deception may be preferable to the truth..."
