The Importance of Beliefs; D. Russell

THE IMPORTANCE OF BELIEFS A WISE MAN once said, "Those who forever keep an open mind will have a lot of garbage thrown in it." That is the theme of my brief remarks this evening to you pupils of Keith Country Day School-and to your teachers, parents, and friends who are sharing this occa sion with you. It seems to me that, increasingly, we Americans of today don't really believe deeply about anything. We seem to make a fetish about keeping an open mind on everything. As a result, the enemies of human freedom and human dignity are throwing in garbage by the bucketful. As pupils in high school and adult citizens in the busi ness and professional world, you will hear on all sides that the mark of an educated person is his toleration of opposing viewpoints. All along the line, you will be en couraged-and re-encouraged-to keep an open mind on all subjects, and to be ready always to listen to the "other side."

Dr. Russell is Professor of Economics and Chairman of the Depart ment of Economics and Business Administration at Rockford Col lege. This article is from his address at graduation ceremonies of the Keith Country Day School, Rockford, Illinois, June 8, 1961. 9 10 DEAN RUSSELL I am here this evening to question that concept of the educated man. I say flatly that no person is educated who has an open mind on, for example, the issue of human slavery. It is wrong morally, socially, and economically. It always has been wrong, and always will be wrong. My mind is totally closed on the subject. I point-blank refuse to listen to the "other side" of the question-that is, I will never listen seriously to anyone who favors human slavery. I assume that you, too, have a closed mind on the issue of slavery. If so, you can now understand the point I am trying to make when I state so strongly that tol erance and open-mindedness are frequently dangerous and destructive.

This example of slavery is, of course, too obvious to prove anything. I have used it only to establish my thesis as quickly as possible-that is, some issues are not open to rational discussion. Now let us move on to is sues that are more controversial. For example, President Kennedy has just returned from a conference with the leader of Russia and of world communism. If our President went to that con ference with an open mind on the issue of communism, he is a foolish man. But I assume that he, like me, has a totally closed mind on the subject. I assume that he is an educated person who understands that commu nism is a vile and false philosophy that can lead only to the complete loss of personal freedom and human dignity. I assume that our President went to that meet ing merely to size up the enemy, to learn as much about THE IMPORTANCE OF BELIEFS 11 him and his plans as possible, and to better prepare himself to lead the Western world in its continuing struggle with the tyrants who have enslaved more than 800 million human beings. If that was his purpose-and, again, I assume it was-the trip could prove to be of value. For while we should never have an open mind on the subject of tyranny, we should always search for bet ter ways to stop it, to defeat it, and to destroy it. True enough, the honest man may be forced to negotiate with the robber and murderer who holds a gun. But that un pleasant fact does not mean that the honest man has an open mind on the subjects of robbery and murder.

Again you may say, "The examples you have selected are too easy. Surely all of us are opposed to dictatorial communism. You still haven't proved your thesis about the danger of perpetual open-mindedness and listening to all viewpoints." I agree, but I'm not through yet. At this point, at any rate, I hope that you agree with me that only a foolish and uneducated person will keep an open mind on all subjects. Now let us explore a few is sues that are not quite as easy as the two already cited. Family Responsibilities I believe that it is the moral, social, and economic duty of every parent to provide for his children as best he can. I also believe that it is the moral, social, and eco nomic duty of every adult son and daughter to take care of his aged parents when they cannot provide for them selves. My mind is closed on the subject. I will not will12 DEAN RUSSELL ingly listen to the siren song of the welfare-staters who advocate the dishonoring of parents by turning them over to the government. Nor will I give any considera tion whatever to the sincere but misguided humanitari ans who are persuading parents to look to government to take care of their children for them.

I am convinced beyond any shadow of a doubt that the weakening of this parent-child mutual responsibility will lead steadily to the destruction of the family as a basic unit of society. And when the unity and the mu tual responsibility of the family is gone, the basic pur pose of organized society will disappear along with it. For obviously, there soon wouldn't be any individuals to concern themselves about freedom if the family unit were totally destroyed. But suppose, as seems more likely, that the family unit is not abolished but is merely cor rupted and weakened. In that case, freedom for the individual will doubtless continue to be an issue. But it will tend increasingly toward a superficial and dis torted form of freedom. That is, it will become a des perate struggle by various individuals to free themselves from slavery, rather than a fight against the idea of hu man bondage itself.

That is my belief. And as a result of it, I will not listen to any person-I will not voluntarily support any proposal or law-that will in any way undermine the moral and economic responsibility of parents for their children and of children for their parents. If you still have an open mind on this subject, per haps you have not fully considered the powerful eviTHE IMPORTANCE OF BELIEFS 13 dence that is so readily available. For example, it is not at all difficult to find families, in Rockford or any other city, where the parents look upon their children as hin drances to their pleasures. These children are generally neglected and are often abandoned. But for some per verted reason, this fact is seldom cited as an object les son of what happens when family responsibility is weak or missing. Instead, it is used as an excuse to turn over to the state all children-fortunate as well as unfortu nate-for supervision and care in many areas of our daily lives. The responsibility of the parents is auto matically taken from them. Thus family unity in general is weakened still further in a misguided approach to this sad problem of helping the victims of disrupted families.

Let the State Provide! Conversely, it is also easy to find families in which the children, in turn, recognize no responsibility whatever toward their parents. Increasingly, our solution to this equally sad problem is to demand that the state provide for all elderly persons, whether or not they have chil dren who can support them. Thus the circle has come full turn. Parents vote to have the state support their children. And, in turn, the children vote to have the government support their parents. Under this immoral concept of parenthood and of honoring one's father and mother, it is hardly surprising to observe the rapid decline of the family as the basis of our society. I t seems clear 14 DEAN RUSSELL to me that the resul t is a trend toward degradation of the parents, the absence of any real values in the chil dren, and a society that is increasingly controlled and directed by governmental authority.

True enough, we employ the democratic mechanism to legalize this abandonment of our moral and family re sponsibilities. But this does not make the results any the better. It is just as immoral-and just as destructive of society-to vote our responsibilities away as it is to throw them away. Even the communist leaders of Russia, who began by totally rejecting the family unit as the basis of their society, soon discovered that the results were disastrous. While the communist concepts of law and morality are still a distortion of reality, perhaps it is significant to observe that the concept of the family unit was eventu ally reinstated in Russia. rrWould You Let The11'l Stiarve?" Now many of you may agree with the general thesis that I have here advocated, but add, "Yes, but the state must at least guarantee the bare necessities of life to everyone-food, clothing, education, housing, and so on.

For after all, there are many children and old people who literally cannot provide for themselves and who have no one to provide for them. Would you let them starve, Professor Russell?" My answer is clear. uNo, I will not stand by and watch my neighbor starve. I will not tolerate a situation in THE IMPORTANCE OF BELIEFS 15 which children have no chance for an education. I will not knowingly permit a human being to die for lack of minimum medical care. I will do what I can to help them with my own time and my own money." Please observe the pronouns I have used-I and mine. I use those pronouns proudly. I will not demean them -nor the sentiment behind them-by saying what "we" should do in this area of personal responsibility. You will, of course, do what seems to you right. And doubt less, you already have your own methods of fulfilling whatever moral responsibility you accept in this area.

For what it is worth, here is my own particular ap proach to this ever-present problem of aiding my less f.ortunate and less capable fellow man. First, I shall provide as well as I can for my own children, for my own parents, for my own family. Then I will do the best I can for my immediate neighbors who are in need. When that task exceeds my limited resources -as it does-I shall ask for your help. And I am con fident that you will give it. On the community level, I will answer the plea of my church and various other voluntary agencies that are dedicated to helping the des titute and the less fortunate. I will also give due con sideration to the appeals of other voluntary agencies that are dedicated to helping unfortunate persons on the state, national, and international levels. But never will I turn to government for help in these areas. I will never join the sincere but misguided enemies of human dignity who think of themselves as good citi zens and moral persons when they vote to take from 16 DEAN RUSSELL you your money to be used for some humanitarian pur pose that they think is good. I will never do it because I am convinced that this procedure cannot be of lasting value to anyone and cannot provide a lasting solution to any problem in this area. In fact, it is clear to me that governmental solutions to these problems, generally create two new and more difficult problems for every one seemingly solved.

I believe that any measure by government to make parents less responsible for their children-or children less responsible for the welfare of their parents-is an other step in the direction of tyranny and the destruc tion of a moral society. If it continues from the cradle to the grave, it will make us only things to be manipu lated, instead of persons to be respected. Thus I no longer pay any attention whatever to the dozens of dif fering viewpoints on the other side of this issue. I have listened to most of them in the past, I have studied many of them carefully, I have given much thought to their general promise and performance-and I have rejected them all as basically unsound. Thus I no longer have an open mind on the. subject. If I listen at all, it is merely to try to discover some way to convince the per sons who advance these ideas that their seemingly hu manitarian proposals are basically evil and are destruc tive of the very thing they profess. to want.

Now let's stop a moment and consider what I have said. Obviously I believe the thesis I have advanced here this evening; else I would not have submitted it to you. Is the validity of the thesis automatically proved merely THE IMPORTANCE OF BELIEFS 17 because I believe it? Not in the least! An idea is good or bad on its own merits; my belief in it does not make it either true or false. Do you believe it? I do not know. But this much I do know. If you forever keep an open mind on the subject, the battle will be lost by default. You won't count, one way or the other. So I urge you to examine it, to think about it, and then to accept it or reject it. This does not mean, of course, that you can never thereafter examine new evidence, if such is discovered. It means only that you can then devote your time and thoughts to addi tional issues and ideas that also need your attention. If you accept this idea of personal responsibility, however, it will also mean that the enemies of liberty and dig nity will then have one less open mind to throw garbage into.

It is important that each of us believe positively in something. In fact, as we discovered in Korea, beliefs are vital. The Chinese communists had considerable suc cess in converting to their beliefs a certain segment among the captured American prisoners. But the evi dence is clear that the Americans who went over to the other side had no deep beliefs in anything-God, family, country, or whatever. Thus their defection was not sur prising. And I am convinced that this general lack of any positive belief is primarily responsible for our continu ing losses in the "cold war" with the socialists, at home and abroad. For example, in this nation we used to believe firmly in a personal God. But he isn't so popular anymore.

18 DEAN RUSSELL In this country we used to believe that the penniless immigrant and the poor boy from the farm could work themselves up to the top in the companies that employed them. That idea merely produces a cynical smile among the vast majority today. We used to believe that our nation was the best and greatest in the world. But today, we spend a great deal of time apologizing for existing. Only a few years ago, most Americans believed that every person was responsible for himself and his family -and that charity should provide for the unfortunate few who just couldn't make the grade-and that a sub sidy from government was a disgrace to be avoided at almost any cost. That belief is now almost totally dead in America. When we had strong beliefs and convictions, we were a growing people and a great nation. We knew where we were going and what we wanted. Today we don't. But the enemy does. The communists and socialists-at home as well as abroad-have strong beliefs and convictions.

They know what they want and how to get it. And they are winning-not because their beliefs are good and true, but because so many of us who have not yet accepted the socialist philosophy don't really have strong beliefs and convictions to the contrary. Thus we can't possibly win-for the simple reason that we aren't fighting for anything. Think about it. Yes, even pray about it. The issue is not merely important; it is vital.