Paradox of Common Good

In violent times
You shouldn't have to sell your soul
In black and white
They really, really ought to know
--Tears for Fears

Tom DiLorenzo discusses the farce of 'the common good' in lieu of recent dicta from Pope Francis. In the political context, the common good implies unanimity. There is no such thing as unanimity in politics--or in life for that matter where diversity is axiomatic. If everyone agreed on a course of action, then there would be no need for government coercion. There would be no need for government to enforce the common good.

Politics is better viewed as activities seeking to benefit some at the expense of others--of using force rather than personal effort and voluntary cooperation to get what one wants.

DiLorenzo observed that the common good concept can be traced to Jean-Jacques Rousseau, whose The Social Contract (1762) and other works provided a foundation for the intellectual development of communism. Rousseau argued that the common good was something that only the elite in society could recognize. This special knowledge gave the elite the right to impose their will on all others.

So, the common good is known only to a few. And it requires force in order to implement.

Quite the paradox.