How to Win a War; E. Lipscomb

How to Win a War En LIPSCOMB EVERY newspaper you read, every newscast you hear, gives day-to day attention to THE WAR. Authors write books about it; poli ticians issue statements· about it; and men on public platforms bring it into every presentation. It is still essentially, as it has been for more than 20 years, a massive, long-range Cold War, in terspersed with hot subsidiary en gagements intended among other things to test America's will, de plete its resources, and furnish ammunition for world-wide propa ganda. Here is an international conflict which ~~ryone agrees will deterMr. Lipscomb is Public Relations and Sales Promotion Counselor of the National Cotton Council of America. This article, slightly updated here, first appeared. in the August, 1960, FREEMAN. Events of the intervening eight years demand reconsideration of its important message. mine the nature of civilization and the conditions of human life for generations to come. From the standpoint of the United States, we must either win this war or witness the death of our nation.

In the midst of multitudinous speeches and statements, reports in print and on the air, and analy ses by politicians, military chiefs, space scientists, and the headline seeking experts who write columns and commentaries for public me dia, I must admit that I cannot come up with any very intelligent appraisal of our current status in this fateful conflict with commu nism that means national survival or servitude for us all. I can, however, tell you posi tively. how we can win it - the only way we can win it - and it is not merely by appropriating 673 674 THE FREEMAN November more billions for defense, or even by insisting that we get as much defense as we already are paying for. We can win it only by winning a second war - a decisive war that is going on inside our own boundaries. It is a war between forces which would keep us pow erful by maintaining the initia tive, the independence, and the self-respect of our individual citi zens, and forces which through ex altation of the godhood of the group would assure the economic cataclysm and accompanying ideological collapse on which our foreign enemy depends to leave us and our allies incapable of success ful resistance.

Amazingly, we tend to under emphasize the relationship be tween the intercontinental Cold War and the conflict within our own country. We have become so conscious of comparisons in mili tary strength and international influence that we fail to follow the signs and significance of our vic tories and defeats on a far more important front. We tend to be come so afraid of Moscow that we are not sufficiently afraid of Wash ington. This is the war which every ma jor communist leader has pre dicted we would lose, and in los ing it insure our national destruc tion. Marx, Lenin, Stalin, Khrushchev - all have declared again and again that this would be the pattern of our disappearance as a world power. We March Toward Insolvency I said I could not tell you much about how we are doing in the military race. I find no such prob lem in connection with the war at home. We are losing it. Let me call your attention to just three areas of evidence.

First is our overall trend. All of us know that it is definitely and rapidly in the exact direction our communist opponents have so often insisted would bring our total defeat. The trend, for example, is to ward national insolvency. We take counterfeit comfort in the fact that we are staying within a so called "temporary" Federal debt limit - a limit that recently was raised three times in one year. State and local governments search frantically for more funds - the purchasing power of our money continues to decline - key industries are undercut by in creasing inability to meet foreign competition - and thoughtful men wonder how so much domestic stability and world leadership could have been converted into so much confusion so quickly. The trend also is toward de struction of incentive.

1968 HOW TO WIN A WAR 675 A man of exceptional compe tence and ability finds that the more hours he works the less he earns per hour of effort. The investor in corporate equi ties finds that half his profits are absorbed before he sees them and that a further major portion must be surrendered after that. The factory worker finds that if he exceeds the approved rate of production, he is disciplined by his union or frowned upon by his fel lows, and that his progress de pends on the passage of time rather than on his energy, his in telligence, or the merit of his per formance. The man who works intermit tently qualifie's for public compen sation between jobs. If his earn ings are small enough, he qualifies for admission into a communal housing unit. If he stops work at 65, regardless of health and abil ity, he qualifies for social security payments. From the mental anesthesia of the television screen to the use of ever-greater leisure for the mod ern equivalents of stick-whittling and cracker-barrel-sitting, we see around us a glorification of medi ocrity and deification of the un productive which reflect loss of in tellectual ambition, decline of cru sading spirit, and decay of per sonal incentive.

The trend also is toward perpetual programs of private life by public plan. Again and again we have seen the whole sorry story of political paternalism paraded before us the design for the nursemaid state - the plan for government by fairy godmother - the promise of heaven-on-earth through ballots cast on Capitol Hill. We are famil iar with the philosophy that the answer to every difficulty is more legislation or larger figures in ap propriations bills - that all we need to do is turn over our prob lems, our pay checks, and our in dependence to political agents, and everything we should have will be provided. The trend, then - the trend toward national insolvency, toward destruction of personal incentive, toward accomplished but unadmit ted socialization and regimenta tion - this is a major reason for serious, even desperate, concern over our home-front war for sur vival. A Vested Interest in Conflict A second reason is one we do not hear much about. It is the ex tent of our vested interest in a high level of international tension, and in the waste and extravagance that accompany it. The connection between our posture of prosperity and a continuation of Russian sword-rattling is so obvious that I 676 THE FREEMAN November have wondered at times why the coyotes of the Kremlin do not seri 0usly array themselves in sheep's clothing, agree to drastic disarma ment, abandonment of any form of aggression, and establishment of an international atmosphere of peace and serenity. Certainly I can think of no quicker or surer way in which they could' throw us into the financial tizzy and tail spin they so greatly desire,.

Think about these vested inter ests for a moment. The most powerful, perhaps, is the interest of our bureaucracy - the hundreds of thousands of officials and clerks required to give away billions of dollars, prepare multitudinous pro grams, and operate all manner of red tape in the much-maligned name of defense. In a wholly re laxed atmosphere, what would hap pen to military aid for our allies, the bulging State Department, the Office of Civil Defense, and the most extensive "peacetime" fight ing establishment we have ever sought to maintain? Half the Fed eral budget, more than half our Federal employees, and arguments for all manner of Federal sub sidies would no longer be justified. Think of industry - the con tracts for airplanes, missile parts, guns, and equipment - the con tracts for military construction, housing units, and a multibillion dollar highway system promoted in the name of defense mobility the contracts for building ships and submarines, and even for sirens in every city.

Think of labor - the political de mands of the unemployed - the quick absorption or bankruptcy of public compensation funds - wage scales no longer buttressed by high-priced military buying. The point here, however, is not to speculate on possibilities, but to express the conviction that the tremendous vested interest of in fluential and important American groups in the maintenance of in ternational tension - and the part which that interest plays in giv ing our economy a hue of rosiness - is a second reason for concern on the domestic front. Matching Our Words with Deeds A third and tremendously sig nificant reason why I say we are losing the home war is that prac tically nobody is fighting wholly, sincerely, and unreservedly on the side of the forces that would keep us strong. Our defense is depend ent largely on men and groups who either fight on one side one day and the other the next, or who fight with one hand while accept ing bribes from the opposition with the other. Since such divided loyalty invites defeat, I want to explain exactly what I mean.

If you will ask around, you will 1968 HOW TO WIN A WAR 677 find that practically everybody is opposed to national insolvency, to destruction of incentive, and to political domination of private and economic life. You will find that he is opposed to pre-emptive stat ism, and to the fiscal irresponsi bility that can bring it upon us. At least he will say he is, and the chances are he really is - except the part that applies to his own community or puts a few tempo rary extra dollars into his personal pocket. I can cite you illustration after illustration, and you can add more from your own experience, of the howls that go up when a man faces the specific application, to his own pocketbook, of the very principles of national strength to which he claims allegiance. Try to close a military installa tion because of the economies which can be made by consolidat ing it with one in another area try/ to cut a subsidy of any kind try to eliminate the expense of Federal involvement in real estate mortgages, or pork-barrel proj ects, or loans at less than cost try even to merge two offices in the same city if the merger reduces payrolls . . . and you will hear screams from sources that range from corporation heads and bank presidents to the lowliest tenants of public apartments, depending on who is personally touched.

I would like to make a state ment here which I want you to correct, if I am wrong. I do not know of a single businessmen's or ganization, of any kind, which customarily passes resolutions on public policies, whose record will not reveal support for programs or proj ects which are part of our trend toward defeat. Here, then, are three reasons for solid conviction that as of this moment we are losing, and losing at a fearsome pace, the second war - the domestic war - on which the outcome of the Cold War de pends: (1) the trend toward ex actly the conditions which our mortal enemies have predicted would bring our defeat; (2) the vested interest of large and influ ential groups in the perpetuation of international tension; (3) the absence of sincere, honest, whole hearted support for the simple principles and practical policies that would keep us strong. The War Inside Each of Us The most vital question which confronts us, however, is not that of losses already sustained in this second war, or even the question of our current status, but the all decisive question, "Can we win it ?"

If we can, and if we do - if we are truly victorious here - we will defeat foreign communists and 678 THE FREEMAN November international gangsters on any front they choose, be it military, economic, diplomatic, ideological, or what you please. We will con found the hopes and contradict the prophecies of our enemies, and earn the respect and admiration of our friends. How, then, can we win this sec ond war? We can win it, and win it only, if you and I and others like us can win still another war a third war. It is the "val' which each one of us must fight inside himself. Here is a war where it is im possible for you or me to be spec tators or bystanders. It is impos sible even to be neutral, for we ourselves are the battleground. Our decisions, and ours only, will determine the outcome. Arrayed on one front in this personal war is a tremendous force of animal inclinations and natural desires - the appeal of im mediate benefits, business advan tages, or personal profits from po litical programs. Here also is the power of inertia. Here is reluc tance to get involved. Here is temptation to kid ourselves into believing that just one man doesn't make any difference - or that because we don't get a direct dole or handout every month we are not a part of the problem or even that we and our fellow Americans are somehow immune to the age-old and unchangeable law of cause and effect.

On the other side are our con science, our judgment, and our knowledge that throughout all his tory no nation has ever survived which continued much farther than we already have come down the road we are traveling. Neither I nor any other man can tell you how you are coming along with your own personal war. I can, however, tell you how you can win it, and in winning it achieve personal invincibility which no amount of legislation can bring, and no amount of persecution by either fellow-citizens or outsiders can overthrow. Practice W hat We Believe First, you can practice what you profess to believe. You can apply in private and business life the principles you publicly es pouse. Three out of every four average Americans, when asked about the principles they support, will give the answers which you and I know to be right. Among businessmen, the figure is more likely to be four out of four.

Hence, I say that the first battle you and I must \vin is to practice \vhat we profess to believe. To do otherwise means not only to lose our personal war, but through our hypocrisy to influence others to lose theirs also. Just as the tem1968 HOW TO WIN A WAR 679 perance lecturer who gets drunk is a greater liability to his cause than is the admitted barfly, so the businessman who preaches free enterprise while he participates in programs of political intervention is a greater liability than the ad mitted socialist. You can join the WCTU, vote for prohibition, circulate resolu tions to close liquor stores, and wear a tall black hat and swallow tailed coat complete with cane, but your neighbor still will not think you believe in temperance if he sees you staggering around your yard or patio at cocktail time. You cannot convince him that you are opposed to statism if you sup port resolutions calling for Fed eral funds for local projects, or make him think you believe in in dividual freedom and independ ence if you expect Washington to underwrite, directly or indirectly, your personal or business risks.

Unless you and I are willing to fight and win this very first battle, all three of the wars I have men tioned are already lost as far as we personally are concerned. We Can Help Those Around Us The second thing you can do is to initiate, in your own particular area of influence and knowledge be it large or small-a conscious effort to help those about you to win their personal wars also. You and I may not be able to do a thing about the personal wars of people in distant places. We may not be able to help everyone in our own state, or even our home town. But there is not one of us who cannot be effective, both by example and by precept, among the people we see and talk to every day. How much good will you be able to do individually? I do not know, but I know that neither you nor I nor any other man on earth can do anything except individually. I further know that we cannot wash out our responsibility with a sig nature on a bank check, when our brains and talents and personali ties are more important than our money. And I know still further that if you will work among those about you with the aggressive, in telligent, result-getting leadership which is you at your best - if you ,vill work with the same crusading spirit, the fire and the zeal, the loyalty and drive which you know to be typical of a dedicated com munist - you will be amazed at what you can do, and you will be amazed at how overwhelming will be your own inner victory.

How many of us will have to win our personal wars - in order to win the bigger war on the national front, and in turn the Cold War itself? The answer to that depends on 680 THE FREEMAN November the completeness of our personal victories and the amount of en thusiasm with which that conquest inspires us. Not many are needed if we are sufficiently on fire. Karl Marx, one man, was a misan thropic ne'er-do-well. Saint Paul was a puny epileptic or otherwise physically handicapped man. Hit ler was a psychopathic paper hanger in Austria. Certainly no reader of these words would consider himself inferior to any of them - or to any of the twelve whom Christ himself assembled before these became dedicated men. Perhaps we cannot match them in dedication, but the degree to which we succeed will determine the number who are needed. Personal Victories Needed Here, then, is our war - a war that is going to decide the nature of civilization, and the conditions of human life for generations to come. I have broken it into three parts, but for you and me it is not in reality three ,vars. It is one war.