What Freedom Means; D. Russell

WHA T FREEDOM MEANS MORE MONEY is being spent today than ever before to sell "freedom and the American way of life." Literally, hun dreds of millions of dollars are spent every year on this project, at home and abroad. In my opinion, almost all of it is wasted, including both governmental and private expendi tures. The primary reason for this is that the persons who are conducting these sales campaigns seem to think that freedom is a tangible product. Thus it is hardly surpris ing that they try to sell freedom in exactly the same way that has proved so successful in selling soap. But freedom is not a product; it is an idea-an ab stract, hard-to-understand, and generally unpopular idea. Since freedom is not a product, it cannot be bought or sold. With that in mind, examine the central theme of these advertisements and campaigns for freedom and the American way. You will usually find the promise that "freedom will provide you with more bathtubs and auto mobiles than communism will."

From the Rockford [Illinois] Morning Star, July 23, 1961. 399 400 DEAN RUSSELL That statement is true enough, but it hardly inspires men's souls. While I enjoy bathtubs and automobiles (and own two of each), I am not willing to die for them. If necessary, however, I am willing to die for free dom. Since I will not give up my life for an automatic dishwasher or central heating, just what is this abstract idea of freedom that I find so precious? The Kind of Freedom the Founders Sought Perhaps a logical starting point for our discussion would be to examine again the concept of freedom for which the founders of this nation were willing to sacri fice all of their material wealth, and their lives, too. Read their letters and speeches and books-the ministers, statesmen, farmers, merchants, lawyers, and others who advocated and led our revolution for freedom. You will be hard put to find any promise that freedom will bring to its defenders a higher level of material living. (It will, but that is a mere by-product.) Our forefathers who fought for freedom never claimed that it would provide more buggies and wagons than socialism would. (It did, but that is merely one of the results of freedom, not freedom itself.) True enough, the founders of this nation believed firmly that private ownership of property undergirds freedom. And all of them said so, loudly and clearly.

Thus, of course, they were willing to fight for that, too. But note that they fought for the right of ownership (the abstract idea) rather than for the property itself.

WHAT FREEDOM MEANS 401 They fought for the right of a person to go into busi ness for himself-if he wanted to, and if he could earn, borrow, or inherit the necessary capital. They fought for the right of any person to hire any other person to work for him, on terms mutually agreed to by both individuals. They fought for what is perhaps the key to all free dom-the right of a person to quit his job for any reason whatever, and to try to find another one. They fought also for the equal right of an employer to fire any em ployee he chooses to fire, and for any logical or illogical reason he may have. Realists like Franklin and Madison were well aware that the one right cannot long exist in the absence of the other. Above all, they fought to keep their own government (their own duly elected officials) out of their personal and business affairs. They fought to preserve the right (the chance, the possibility) of any person to become a millionaire or a pauper-as ability and luck might deter mine. They fought to preserve the precious right of per sons to love their fellow men and to be charitable to them, if they choose to do so. In short, they fought for the abstract idea that is freedom-that is, the "exemption from necessity, in choice and action."

Can you imagine our "Voice of America" trying to explain that nonmaterial and abstract idea to the "un committed nations of Asia and Africa"? I can't, for two reasons. First, we Americans don't believe in freedom any more; we would rather have government-guaranteed se402 DEAN RUSSELL curi ty. Second, even if we did believe in it, the Africans (and Europeans and Americans and Asia tics) wouldn't understand such an abstract idea of personal responsi bility anyway. Thus, since we no longer have an abstract ideal to offer them, we try to sell them the only thing we seem to have left-material rewards like the tangible money payments from compulsory social security. We rhapsodize about our public housing developments and hydroelectric dams that all of us are forced to pay for, and that can actually be photographed and shown to the leaders of the new nations as examples of what they should do. We pridefully recount the actual jobs that are guaranteed or provided by governmental decree.

And so on through all of the realities and promises of material benefits that underlie our compulsory social programs. We talk about sacrifice but vote for more subsidies and material benefits. We Americans have so lost our way that it should have surprised no one when our leaders actually appointed a committee to try to find for us some acceptable national purpose! As could have been predicted, of course they failed miserably. Even so, per haps we can draw some comfort from the fact that our leaders at least realize that something is missing. This emphasis on government-guaranteed material possessions may now well be the "American way of life" (just as it has always been the communist way of life), but it most definitely is not freedom. That disappeared with the advent of the words "compulsory, forced, gov ernmental decree," and so on. Freedom (choice) for the WHAT FREEDOM MEANS 403 farmer really disappeared when he accepted those first Hfree' seeds from government; the present controls over what and how much he may grow followed automati cally. Freedom (exemption from necessity) for employees disappeared with the Wagner Act (and its successors) that permits and encourages labor leaders to force them to join a union against their wishes. Freedom (choice in action) disappeared for all of us when the government first compelled us to pay tribute to its alleged insurance scheme whereby everybody is promised that he can live at the expense of everybody else. And so on and so on through the thousands of other material schemes that compel peaceful persons to participate against their wishes.

We Fly False Colors Today we are trying to sell these compulsory material aspects of our society under the fraudulent label of free dom. The communists will continue to beat us at this game for two reasons. First, they can (and do) outprom ise us in material benefits. Second, and by far the most important, the communists understand that men prefer to fight for abstract ideals that appeal to their souls instead of their bellies. Thus, though they have no in tention whatever of fulfilling their promises, the com munists speak of the abstract ideals of brotherhood, peace, equality, dignity, and so on. Meanwhile, we Amer icans keep yapping about material bathtubs, automo biles, soap, guaranteed jobs, compulsory social security, 404 DEAN RUSSELL and federal aid to state and local governments. Can you find anything worth fighting and dying for in any of them? If my political leaders decide that it is necessary for me to man my machine gun again "to fight for free dom," I'll do it. But let them clearly understand that I'll be fighting for an abstract idea and ideal-freedom; the right to be responsible for my own welfare; to suffer the consequences, good or bad, that result from my own choices; to go unemployed if no one wants to hire me; to go hungry if no person or church or charitable organ ization will give me bread; to associate with anyone who cares to associate with me, and for any good or bad rea son that appeals to either of us; to worship God, or not, as I please; to teach my children that freedom automati cally disappears when the government applies compul sions against peaceful persons; and above all, to hold to my conviction that freedom is more precious than any ma terial benefit-yea, even more precious than life itself.