For ages, mankind has dreamed of a perfect world. A place without problems. The ultimate paradise where everyone is happy, satisfied and content. If only it were possible for man to create such a place; a world without suffering or strife where everything and everyone operated in perfect harmonious balance.

Oh, wouldn’t it be wonderful if we could create such a paradise on Earth? The Socialist Utopian myth begins and ends with this premise. Today, we delve into the many aspects of why this dream will perpetually fail and why it continues to persist.

Utopia– The word utopia was coined in Greek by Sir Thomas More for his 1516 book Utopia, describing a fictional island society in the Atlantic Ocean. The word comes from the Greek: οὐ (“not”) and τόπος (“place”) and means “no place”. The English homophone eutopia, derived from the Greek εὖ (“good” or “well”) and τόπος (“place”), means “good place”. This, because of the identical pronunciation of “utopia” and “eutopia”, gives rise to a double meaning.

The very first notions of a “utopian society” can be traced back to Plato, and perhaps his most famous writing, The Republic. Ironically, it pontificates on the concept of a society ruled by philosopher-kings. Socrates along with various Athenians and foreigners discuss the meaning of justice and examine whether or not the just man is happier than the unjust man. When you research this stuff, it is almost uncanny at how similar to form it runs with today’s Democrat vision under Obama and Company. But Socrates or Plato, Obama ain’t.

Make no mistake, the idea of Utopianism is not unique to liberals. Ayn Rand, for instance, longs for a “capitalist utopia.” However, utopia has become ubiquitous in mainstream liberal thought. How could something of such fantasy become so mainstream in political thought? Well, we have one Karl Marx to thank for that. You see, Marx denounced earlier forms of Socialism as “utopian” and rejected them. It is through this refinement of liberal thought, the fantasy of utopia is separated from practical application of ideas and philosophies. Most liberals will admit it’s impossible to achieve true utopia. Their ambition is simply to nudge society closer to it. The problem is, they are nudging us closer to something that is a fantasy, which does not exist.

Wouldn’t it be wonderful if we lived in a world made of chocolate?

Of course we can dream of such a fantasy, we can even make movies about it. However, can you imagine if a segment of society actually believed that we could achieve some degree of this dream? What if it became their political objective to nudge us ever-closer to a world made of chocolate? Well, we would have all sorts of real and practical problems with that. What about people who are allergic to chocolate? How could we grow plant life and vegetation to sustain the ecosystem? What happens to all the dogs who die if they eat chocolate? What about obesity and diabetes? Ever try to operate a car on chocolate? The list of problems become endless. Such is always the case when you chase after fantasy.

Still, the liberals are headstrong into this notion of socialist utopia; a world where capitalism and industrialization take a back seat to humanity and ecology. Where all the injustices in the world are rectified. No more starving people, no more poor people, no more suffering. Regardless of how marvelous such a world may sound, it is no more possible than a world made of chocolate. And the more we attempt to embark on a path to such a fantasy, the more inherent problems arise. Real world, real time problems.

Our nation is $17 trillion in the hole and that’s not the worst of it. We have another $95 trillion in future liabilities still outstanding. This number grows by hundreds of billions, if not trillions, each and every year; as liberals continue to chase the fantasy of utopia. Believing, in their heart of hearts, that they are somehow making a difference. While we can look at the poverty numbers from 60 years ago and see they have hardly changed at all, liberals presume it’s because we haven’t done enough. And that’s the other problem with chasing a fantasy, you can never do enough because you’re never going to achieve it.

Most, if not all liberal socialist utopianism, is done in the name of good. But what do-gooders often fail to realize is, most good in the world is not done in the name of good. Humans are highly self-serving individuals. Rare are the exceptions of selfless human examples. Even the most humanitarian efforts will sometimes have a self-serving component. It may be a spiritual component; where a religious person helps others in order to please or obey God. It may be vanity; helping others in order to appear benevolent and compassionate to others. More often than not, it is because of sheer capitalism and bottom line.

It is good that New Yorkers can go their favorite restaurant and sit down to order a nice steak dinner, is it not?

Well how did this “good” happen? Did the cattle rancher in Texas feel a sense of Utopianism and make the personal sacrifices to ensure New Yorkers have their steaks? Of course not. Did the restaurant owner feel compelled by Utopianism to serve New Yorkers steak out of a sense of good? Of course not. These people acted on self-serving principles like most people. As a result, good happened.

The problems with Utopianism is not that it isn’t noble or well intended, it’s just that it’s impossible. As a practical matter, it simply does not work. Like Obamacare.

Not to pick on Obama, his Utopian vision is just the latest in a long line of failed liberal follies into the fantasy of chasing the impossible dream. Che Guevara, whom we often see emblazoned on some youthful protesters shirt, had the Utopian dream of land redistribution in Guatemala. This was supposed to free Guatemalan peasants from the tyranny of capitalist exploitation. Hundreds of thousands of acres belonging to mostly US corporate interests, were confiscated and redistributed years ago. Oh, he is a hero to liberals, but what are the results of his vision? Are the people of Guatemala better off? You see any news stories about the vibrant Guatemalan government bailing out failing European countries or sending billions in aid to areas devastated by disaster? Nope!

Chairman Mao, another liberal Utopian icon. His vision was a society devoid of capitalistic profit, where everyone contributed and shared equally in the fruits of labor. Result: 70 million dead Chinese. This sort of unfortunate thing seems to happen whenever the Utopian dream crumbles. Let us all hope an pray the same fate doesn’t befall our own country, as the liberals begin to discover Utopianism has failed, yet again.